A Scripture-Rale to the Lords Table, Part

A Scripture-Rale to the Lords Table · Part

p. 88Anſwer to the Second Sermon.

FIrſt, As to his Preface, he ſaith, He is forced to ſerve in more words then enough.

We beleeve it true, for it were better we dare ſay he had ſaid nothing; And p. 89for his Prayer, That if his Book grieve any of the Lords little Ones (as we beleeve it doth thouſands) that the Lord would blot out his Sermon and his ſin.

Anſ. Amen.

The firſt Objection he undertakes to anſwer, is, This doctrine will take the uſe of the keys and leave us no diſcipline.

To this he anſwers, 1. By way of conceſſion, He grants a Diſcipline, and that the want of it is to be bewailed, and yet hath a ſalvo a new one indeed, for this by anſwering that the Objection goes upon falſe ſurmiſes about excommunication.

It ſurmiſeth (ſaith he) Church-diſcipline to lie in a ſuſpenſion from the Sacrament, &c.

For if that be the end of it, what is this but to gratifie a prophane perſon in keeping him from the Sacrament, who never intended or never cared to come thither? To this purpoſe he ſpeaks.

Anſ. No, Will not prophane Perſons come? This is a large extenſion of charity; there are we fear hundreds of Congregations, may we not ſay thouſands? which cohſiſt of little elſe, and yet through cuſtome, if they have not the p. 90Communion once a year, and ſo go to play in their beſt cloathes afterwards, they will think themſelves greatly wronged.

Briefly, That this is one end of Church-Diſcipline, to preſerve the honour of Chriſt and purity of his Ordinances, we do with all godly Writers upon this Subject, aſſent, and not only in reference to reforming the offender, as p. 32. he himſelf implyeth; It excludeth them from the fellowſhip of the Saints, whoſe fellowſhip is chiefly in this Ordinance, and therefore cal'd the Communion, that ſo the fellowſhip of Saints may not be like the fellowſhip of the children of the devil.

This inſinuates alſo No prophaning of this Ordinance more then the other, But Sir, was not there more care taken to prevent the profaning the Paſſeover under the Law, then the other ordinary worſhip, the hearing of the Law expounded, &c.

Were not the Corinthians in a ſpeciall manner puniſhed for the prophaning of the Lords Supper; ſaith Pareus on 1 Cor. 11.20. on theſe words, This is not to eat the Lords Supper: Adeò tenera res eſt, p. 91Sacramentum; Non levitèr adulterant, ſed deſtruuut, &c, foreign It is not to eat the Lords Supper; 'Tis to deſtroy and make void the very nature of the Ordinance, when ſo polluted by a prophane regardleſſe mixture.

Pag. 33. Saith he [It ſuppoſeth a near eſſentiall relation between this Excommunication and communion;] And ſo goeth on to refell it, which we need not repeat.

Anſ. There is no ſuch thing ſuppoſed in the Objection, Excommunication hath a relation of ſubſerviency to the communion, though not eſſentiall, but to the well-being of it, that holy things be not proſtituted nor given forth to ſuch as Chriſt never intended them, viz. his prophane enemies, or ſuch who refuſe his yoke, being called upon to profeſſe ſubjection to it.

But he brings in one objecting: Is it not a heavy caſe that we have no diſcipline? True, ſaith he, yea, 'tis true, that when Jeſus Chriſt hath given power to his Churches to reform and exerciſe diſcipline, they caſt the want of it upon the Magiſtrate, and doe nothing towards it.

p. 92But what then, ſaith he, Shall we have no worſhip?

Anſ. No pure worſhip in this Ordinance, but ſuch as God and his holy people abhorre.

The ſecond Objection he undertakes to anſwer is, viz. That the moſt of men are wholly unfit, and not capable of this Ordinance, and not able to prepare and examine themſelves, therefore no free Admiſſion. There is (ſaith he) a manifeſt weakneſſe in this arguing from mens diſability to their duty: He conceits as to the Churches part, who can but look to an outward capacity, and inſtanceth in Judas, &c.

Anſ. But Sir, as eaſily as you huſh up this Argument, 'Tis more to be conſidered and laid to heart, how unfit the moſt people are, having never had the preaching of the Goſpel with them in its power, in many places, nor were ever rightly ordered and conſtituted into a Goſpel-Church-ſtate, by a profeſſed ſubjection to the Goſpel, and giving up themſelves to the Lord, and ſo joyning together to walk in the fellowſhip of the Goſpel, as we have ſhewed, which however men may skin over, we verily p. 93beleeve the Lord will in his time manifeſt to be a holy truth.

Now as to his anſwer, That 'tis a manifeſt weakneſſe to argue from mens unability to their duty.

This hath been anſwered and cleared; 'Tis not every mans duty to come to the Sacrament, as we have diſtinguiſhed, unleſſe ſo and ſo prepared and qualified; Unability to prepare themſelves is a ſufficient reaſon to themſelves to refrain, and to the Church to keep them off: And whereas he ſaith, The Church is only to look to an outward capacity; Very true, if an outward capacity be rightly defined: But groſſe ignorance and living in open known ſins, and reviling of godlineſſe, is not an outward capacity; Which all along his Book upon his grounds, the meer name of a Chriſtian, though never ſo vile, is his outward capacity.

Next as to the Peoples part he anſwers 3. things.

1. There's no duty a naturall man can do rightly, nor hear, nor pray, therefore let him do nothing, let him have a Writ of eaſe for all, &c. This is his firſt in ſubſtance.

p. 94Repl. Firſt, Then it ſeems a naturall man ſo underſtood to be by himſelf and the Church, may come to the Lords Supper; Whereas M^r Humphreys well knows none but profeſſing Saints in a judgement of charity were ever admitted; if they be rightfully within the pale of the Church, they ought to be ſo eſteemed, nothing to the contrary appearing; but to make the ſame latitude of Prayer and the Word, with the Lords Supper, (the former for converting this of the Sacrament only to ſuch as are ſuppoſed to be converted in the Judgement of the Church) is a monſtrous Solceciſme, Meer Heathens are allowed and invited to come to the one, never to the other; Now he is pleaſed to call this kinde of arguing againſt his judgement in this thing, Beating the air with a Feather.

Sir, Thoſe pillars of truth, that holy men have erected by the good hand of God againſt their looſe aiery tenet will ſtand, and be glorious in the eyes of the Lord and his people, when yours ſhall be for a hiſſing unto both. Is the Ordinance of Parliament enumerating abundance of ſcandalous. crimes with advice had with the Aſſembly of Divines to p. 95debarre perſons from the Lords Supper, nothing but beating the air with a feather?

2. His ſecond Anſwer, He would have every man do what he can, &c.

Anſw. Right, If a poor ſoul tender up himſelf to the Lord and his people, and complain of his weakneſs, and profeſs to do what by grace he is able, Who doubts of ſuch a mans fitneſs?

His third Anſwer is, Stating of a poor humbled ſinner heavy laden with ſin, laying hold of the promiſe, &c. As if any body ſcrupled ſuch a one, but inviteth them with all tenderneſs; what's this to a ſtubborn, ignorant, impenitent ſinner, that comes cuſtomarily, and returns to his ſin; and will not come near his Miniſter to be inſtructed in private, but revileth him, if holy, as the moſt do?

The third Objection, But is not the Ordinance taken in vain againſt the third Commandment?

To this he Anſwers, He grants, on the Receivers part, but not on the Admitters, he is to do his duty, and leave the ſucceſſe to God.

Anſw. This is the Queſtion begg'd, we deny it the Admitters duty, if the p. 96perſons are ſcandalous, they are to keep the Sanctuary of the Lord from defiling; which duty being a minor Excommunication, is ſuppoſed in the greater Excommunication put into the hands of Church-Officers, being one of the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven committed unto them.

2. This duty is ſuppoſed, in keeping our ſelves pure from the blood of all men.

3. In our duty of fidelity to the myſteries of God.

4. In duty of fidelity to the peoples ſouls. His inſtances in Chriſts preaching of the Goſpel, inviting all, hath been anſwered; He never invited all to the Lords Supper, nor did the Apoſtles till in Church-fellowſhip; if he account all the people of England fit in the condition they are, to be continued in the Fellowſhip of the Church, and no need of Reformation and drawing in ſuch that will come under Diſcipline to a cloſer union and order in the Goſpel; then he not only pleads for this Free-Admiſſion, but ſtrikes indeed at the very root of all Reformation, which the truth is, this licentious principle ſufficiently doth.

p. 97The third Objection he would Anſwer is, Holy things to holy men.

Now the Anſwer he here gives diſcovers the minde of the Authour more then any:

He diſtinguiſheth of holineſs, Outward, Inward: He ſaith, Outward holineſſe conſiſts in bare profeſſion, and name of Chriſtians, and ſo are Saints by calling: That of inward holineſs we need not mention.

Repl. We reply to him, That bare profeſſion and name of Chriſtian is not enough to denominate Saints by Calling; even a whole Nation of people may take up the Name of Chriſtian, and profeſſion, from the Magiſtrates ſevere Law: As all the people of England did in the ſeveral former changes, and were commanded to hear the Service-Book, and to Receive once a year; theſe are not like Saints by calling; which is, when upon the preaching of the Goſpel to them, and the Call of it, they willingly profeſs to anſwer the Call of the Goſpel, and to give obedience to it.

2. Such as are ſtiled, 1 Cor. 1.2. Called to be Saints, or Saints by calling, are alſo ſaid to be ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus. p. 98Paul in a judgement of charity, eſteemed the Church of Corinth to be ſuch; for he writes to the Church of God at Corinth. Now will M^r Humfreys dare in his moſt extenſive charity to call ſuch who have taken up the Name of Chriſtian, and profeſſion upon a ſlender account, the Lord knoweth, ſuch as are men affectedly ignorant, common ſwearers, unclean, revilers, prophaners of the Sabbath, to be ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus? Beſides, Sir, Is not knowledge and converſation required to make up viſible Saints, as well as bare profeſſion, and the Name of Chriſtian?2 Tim. 2.19.2 Tim 2:19 Let every one that nameth the Name of Chriſt depart from iniquity. Rom. 1.18Rom 1:18Is not this to hold the truth in unrighteouſneſs?Tit. 1.16.Titus 1:16 To profeſs to know God, but in works deny him? Oh how doth this kinde of arguing nuzzle poor creatures in their wofull condition, and heighten the wicked in their wickedneſs? ſay they, they are Saints by calling, they make profeſſion, and have the Name of Chriſtians, and in hell they curſe Miniſters eternally for thus deluding them: Nay do not the moſt of people hate, yea many profeſs to hate the very name of Profeſſion, and the very name of Saints, and moſt will p. 99ſay They are not to be Saints on earth, but in heaven; Is this ſufficient outward holineſs?

But ſaith he, A viſible Ordinance to a viſible Church.

That's true, If this viſible Church be rightly conſtituted and ordered; but if it be miſerably corrupted, and abound with all iniquity, as the moſt do; If the Lords ſervants ſhall labour to keep up ſuch corruptions, as this opinion doth, we may tremble whether the Lord will not even root out this viſible Church and profeſſion; as he threatens us often ſeverely in his Word.

He further brings in an objection, viz. Do we not hereby make our ſelves one with the wicked with whom we joyn; and can we have communion with Chriſt and Belial?

He anſwereth by way of conceſſion, We do and muſt be one with all that joyn in the ſame profeſſion, as members of the ſame viſible Church, we are not one with them in their evil courſes, we diſclaim them wholly in the impiety of their converſations, &c.

Anſw. What kinde of joyning together in profeſſion our Parochiall Churches p. 100have had, we will not now further debate: All come to Church, and, as he ſaith, we may go to Church with all (wherein he bath gratified the ignorant with a corrupt notion) and few have any further notion of a Church, then the place they went in, nor what duties are required of Church-members one to another, and the Lord knoweth, and tis too apparent, there is no practiſe of them.

2. But Sir, for the ſanctified ones of Chriſt Jeſus to joyn as one body in Church-fellowſhip with haters of godlineſs, the power of it, Is it not to make themſelves one body with the wicked and unclean? 1 Cor. 10.17, 18. though they make profeſſion, yet being wicked, Is not this to joyn as one body with the wicked? Bare profeſſion doth not take away their wickedneſs; now is not this a great abomination to make up ſuch a body to Jeſus Chriſt? Lord, theſe members are good enough for thee, though corrupt and abominable: Beſides, are not ſuch members to be cut off, even chiefly for this reaſon, that Chriſts body ſhould not appear with the members of Satan?

p. 1013. Is not there a duty in Matth. 18. charged upon every Church-member to reprove his brother, ſo upon all the Churches by Paul, and is not every Church-member guilty of his brothers ſin, who doth not his duty in this thing?1 Theſ. 5.14, &c. 2 Theſ. 3.15.1 Thess 5:142 Thess 3:15 ſpecially when they are to come together in this great Ordinance? But that indeed he pleads for, is for every one to look to himſelf (though a hint to the contrary in the cloſe) as he ſpeaks before; for regard to othere he much ſleights it; no matter for Chriſts honour in his worſhip or thy Brothers ſoul, every body ſave one if he can: A true note of formality.

4. But, Sir, farther, are we not partakers of the impieties of the wicked in this thing, in communicating with them? Is it not an impiety for men in ungodlineſs to communicate? If then we communicate with them, we communicate in their impieties, ſpecially ſince a command of Chriſt lieth upon every Communicant to labour the preventing his impiety, which doing not, they come to the Ordinance with ſinne upon their ſouls.

But, ſaith he, I will go with the wickedeſt p. 102man alive to Church, but not to the Alehouſe.

Anſw. His going to Church we have ſpoken to: But, Sir, if you allow the wickededſt man alive to be in your Church truly ſo called, whereof you are a Paſtor, and joyn with him, and give him this Ordinance without particular admonition of him, not joyning with the better to keep him off; we tremble to conceive that the Lords hand will be upon you, and ſuch that make ſo ſlight of it.

As to what he urgeth out of Auſtin, his remiſneſs (though otherwiſe a pretious witneſs of the Lord) in point of Church-Cenſures, is not approved by the Godly Learned; we will therefore take notice of his Scriptures.

The firſt Scripture is Joh. 15.2. Every branch in me that beareth not fruit; he ſhould adde what follows, foreign, he takes it away. Grant it be meant of Chriſts power at the laſt day, yet when ſuch a branch ſhall bring forth curſed fruit, or appear to bring forth no good fruit at all, and ſo appear not to be of Chriſts planting, he is to be cut off by the Church, as he allows by his Excommunication; p. 103or elſe what will he make of that Ordinance?

2. M^r Goodwins Interpretation of this Scripture, in his Treatiſe of Growth, will ſalve it, if there were any difficulty in it, who reades it thus. Every branch that brings forth not fruit in men; and this, ſaith he, the Syriack Tranſlation makes for alſo; though they do ſome good, yet it is not fruit, becauſe not in Jeſus Chriſt; which may well allude to ſuch Profeſſors who bring ſome kinde of fruit in profeſſion and moral converſation, but yet have no root in Chriſt; and for ſuch the Church proceeds not againſt, if they are duly taken into the Church, till their unſoundneſs appears by outward practiſe; and though Chriſt doth not expreſly give forth command to the Church, to cut off viſibly unſound branches here, tis enough he doth in other places.

His ſecond Scripture is 2 Pet. 2.1. There are ſome that deny the Lord that bought them.

Anſw. Yea ſuch in the words immediatly going before as bring in damnable hereſies: Now though ſuch did thus apoſtatize, that were received into the p. 104Church, as bought by Chriſt (which is meant by their denying the Lord that bought them) muſt they be continued and admitted to the Lords Supper? then this is the argument, Such as bring in damnable hereſies, and deny Chriſt, may and ought to be admitted to the Lords Supper: It ſeems Turciſm and Chriſtianity may well enough mix with M^r Humfreys his good leave: We had thought at leaſt Hereticks were to be rejected by 1 Titus 3.10.

His next Scripture is Heb. 10.29. compared with 2.9. & 2 Cor. 5.14. There are ſome that are ſanctified with the blood they trample upon, &c.

Anſw. From hence he would argue, Tramplers on the blood of Chriſt may come; How tender is M^r H. of his Saviours blood?

But, ſaith he, they are ſaid to be ſanctified, though tramplers.

Anſw. That is, they were externally ſanctified or ſet apart in Baptiſm, but now by their Apoſtaſie and falling off from Chriſtianity, they did ſlight and ſcorn the blood of Chriſt, as a common thing, not worthy to be owned; Now what's this to his purpoſe? 'Tis ſaid, p. 105they had forſaken the Aſſemblies of the Church, v. 25. therefore they did not come to the Lords Supper; but were, indeed, ſuch as had ſinned againſt the holy Ghoſt.

But yet tender M^r Humfrey is pleaſed to ſtile theſe branches of Chriſt, though ungodly Profeſſors: It ſeems with him, ungodly Profeſſors, renouncers of the faith, tramplers upon the blood of Chriſt, Apoſtates, damnable Heretiques, muſt be in a viſible eſteem, branches of Chriſt, and ſo admitted to all Church-Priviledges, even the choiceſt, the Seal of Chriſts Supper; for M^r H. puts up an abſolute plea for them: What can a man more ſtrongly plead for the kingdom of the devil then this? We beleeve his prophane party will be here aſhamed of him. Yet the confidence of the man is ſuch, that he cries Victory to himſelf and followers, upon this moſt abſurd and abominable arguing, and abuſing the holy Word of God: Obſerve Reader, he puts the ſtreſſe of his cauſe mainly upon it: If thou art ſo blinde, ſenſleſſe, and mad to beleeve him, he tels thee the matter is ended on his ſide.

And further, That an outward hiſtorical p. 106faith gives an outward Church right to the elements.

Anſw. We deny it, if it appear to be but an hiſtorical faith, by an ungodly life.

The fourth Objection he undertakes to anſwer is, The Seal is ſet to a blank, if all be admitted.

He Anſwers firſt by opening how the Sacramentis a Seal, Not of our faith, but of the Covenant on Gods part. Now, ſaith he, the Covenant and Seal remain firm, and all the unbelief in the world, cannot make it of no effect.

Anſw. 1. The Scripture ſaith, that Circumciſion to Abraham was the Seal of the righteouſneſſe of faith, Rom. 4.11.

2. If it be the Seal of the Covenant on Gods part, as of one party being agreed, yet if a ſoul do not accept of, and agree to the terms of it, it is but as a blank to him, there being not a mutual aſtipulation and agreement on both parts, and ſo ſuch a ſoul hath no good by it: If by this he would encourage a poor trembling ſoul, who doubts of his faith, he may make uſe of it, 'tis not of ſuch we here diſpute of.

But he puts the Objection forward, p. 107viz. Were it not abſurd for a man to ſet his Seal, where there hath been no agreement and tranſactions before? ſo do unregenerate men, who come to the Sacrament without that ſolemn giving up the ſoul to God, as he ought who enters into Covenant with him.

To this he Anſwers, That there are too many come abſurdly and wickedly, &c. Now, ſaith he, Though the receiver fail on his part in his ſolemn mutual engagement (whereof he is to repent) yet as for the Miniſter and Church there is a true ſeal to a true Copy, &c.

Anſw. Now we reply to him, There is a true Seal to a true Copy, but not to be delivered to rebels, unleſſe they come profeſſing humbly to accept the terms of it: Here is the thing we ſtick at, we require, and ſo we verily beleeve doth the Lord, that the Receiver ought ſolemnly to profeſſe and give up himſelf to God, and enter into Covenant with him before he be admitted by them to the Seal of it, if the perſon do not this in ſincerity, let him look to that; but that he do it is the Churches part to require of him, without which we beleeve he cannot fully acquit the Church as he p. 108undertake to do, p. 47. And without this, inſtead of (nothing) being out of order (as he ſpeaks) there is hardly any thing in order: Now if the receiver do this, the Miniſter and Church receive him in the judgement of Love, as a regenerate perſon; and ſo they do not ſin in offering the Sacrament as a Seal on Gods part.

But, ſaith he, The Sacrament ſeals generally the truth of the Covenant freely to all, engaging them unto it, and the intereſt and benefits of it to every ſingle perſon upon the terms, conditions, tenour of the Goſpel.

Anſw. With this notion, which he ſaith hath layn as an Embryon a long time, he profeſſeth himſelf and another piercing Godly man to be converted with it: We ſhall not judge them in this their converſion, but take boldneſs from the deceit we have learned in our own hearts, That 'tis no hard matter to get diſtinctions to pacifie the conſcience in a troubleſom work, as the practiſe of Reformation is: We anſwer, the blood of Chriſt ſeals the Covenant of God, but when tis offered in the ſign of it, the Sacrament, it is to ſuch perſons, who p. 109accept of the Covenant upon the terms and conditions of it (as himſelf ſpeaks) and of the blood of Chriſt thereby ſignified, and it ſeals to none but to them who have communion with the blood of Chriſt, 1 Cor. 10.16. therefore it doth not generally ſeal to all. The Sacrament is not ſaid to ſeal the Covenant to all; tis the Seal of the Covenant, but it ſeals it to none but to the Believer, who is to engage unto it, firſt, Sincerely, as to his own intereſt in it. Secondly, Profeſſedly and explicitly, as to the Churches ſatiſfaction: To ſeal any thing to a perſon, implies a reciprocall agreement. We humbly take leave to ſay, that as he profeſſeth his greateſt ſatisfaction in this argument, his greateſt miſtake lies in it, in confounding of things that ought to be diſtinguiſhed.

We ſay, the tender of the Covenant is firſt in the preaching of the Goſpel, upon which beleevers profeſſe to own and accept of, and enter into it, (not by a meer tacit coming) which having done before the Lord and the Church, then, as the Sacrament ſhall be adminiſtred, the Seal is annexed to it, and a beleever receives the blood of Chriſt p. 110Jeſus as a Seal of Gods promiſes in the remiſſion of his ſins, and ſo to every covenanting perſon (profeſſing to do ſo) the Covenant is offered and ſealed to him, and to none other.

Now in ſtead of this, we conceive through the whole Treatiſe M^r H. would have a Sacrament, which (being the Seal of the Covenant) is to be tendered to all, be they what they will, without any previous act of the Receivers, either confeſſion, profeſſion or covenanting with or before the Church, which was never the way of the Goſpel in admiſſion of Church-members, and ſo it holds the ſame in the uſe of the Supper, when though baptized they have never given any account of themſelves, or are profane in their lives.

Further, he urgeth his ſubtile Syllogiſm to analyſe the whole argument,

The Covenant, ſaith he, means thus, He that beleeveth ſhall be ſaved: adde, I beleeve, ergo I ſhall be ſaved. Now, ſaith he, the Sacrament ſeals to the major, not to the minor, to Gods own Word, not to ours.

Anſw. Firſt, The major or firſt propoſition is rather a conditionall promiſe p. 111of the Covenant, then the Covenant it ſelf; and ſo the Sacrament ſeals conditionally. But without theſe quirks, If the Sacrament ſeal to every Beleever, then if I adde, But I am a Beleever, then it ſeals to me: and though the Scripture do not ſpeak of any particular man, who is a Beleever, yet in ſuch a Syllogiſm it it ſpeaks as fully, and even as ſatisfyingly to a poor ſoul as if it did: Sir, the Sacrament ſeals the truth of mercy and grace and life to poor ſouls that come rightly to it, and not to abſtracted propoſitions and notions, with which you puzzle weak people.

Again, ſtick to the propoſition as really applyed, the Sacrament ſeals to this, He that beleeveth ſhall be ſaved, and the Sacrament confirms it to him, then let none but ſuch as ſhall be charitably judged Beleevers profeſſing faith and obedience be admitted to it.

Obj. 5. The fifth Objection he undertakes to Anſwer,Pag. 49. viz. The Covenant belongs not to all, therefore the ſeals neither.

To this he Anſwers, by diſtinguiſhing of the Covenant, ſometimes taken for the abſolute promiſes, &c. ſometimes for the p. 112tenour of the Goſpel in Gods revealed will, and ſo it runs on theſe terms, Whoſoever beleeves ſhall be ſaved, and whether this belongs to all, tis no queſtion.

Anſw. Tis true, ſalvation belongs to all in the tender of it, as himſelf ſaith in the next page; The conditional Covenant is tendred in the word, and ſealed to in the Sacrament: Now as the Covenant is tendred in the Word, if ſouls profeſſe to accept of the tender of it, and to Covenant with him, then 'tis ſeald in the Sacrament. The Sacrament is a Seal between God and the Beleever, and ſuppoſeth beleeving, intended to Seal mercy to profeſſing covenanting Beleevers, and upon that ſcore the Church doth adminiſter it, receiving them as ſuch.

Next, he declareth his own practiſe, That he ſhews his hearers the conditions of the Covenant, ſuch that accept of them, there the Seal of God is ready, let them put to their hands and ſeals, &c. This the import.

But Sir, Is it not more proper, orderly, and ſatisfying, that ſuch perſons upon the tender of the Covenant, ſhould declare and profeſſe to own and enter into p. 113the Covenant of God? Muſt all be done in a huddle the ſame hour, and the people be as mutes in this great concernment? Would it not be for the honour of Jeſus Chriſt, that people with their own mouths confeſſe him, according to the meaſure God hath given them, more for the ſatisfaction of the Miniſter and Church, yea, and for the comfort of the Profeſſour, then thus hand over head to deal in this weighty matter? Specially ſince this was never had from the people of England, as we have before opened, who are ſo ſetled in a corrupt, formall, cuſtomary way in the uſe of this Ordinance, for the moſt part, That talk you of Covenant and Seal, and what you will, They muſt have the Communion, though to the great prejudice of their ſouls; And 'tis from theſe ſad corruptions, by the iniquity of former and preſent times; As the London Miniſters declare in their Plea for Church-Government; That ſuch a Profeſſion and triall is firſt to be had of every perſon; ſeeing the abuſe of this Ordinance was formerly and horribly prophane.

In the cloſe (ſaith he) This Sacrament doth more properly belong to him p. 114who is not yet in Covenant with God, ſuppoſing now he reſolves to enter into Covenant with him.

This is a ſtrange doctrine, and we verily beleeve never ſtarted before, Here is ſtill the ſame confuſion; But Sir, In this Ordinance doth not the Church (for here we deal with it upon this account, which is the Churches and Miniſters duty in this Ordinance) ſuppoſe every receiver in Covenant before, firſt as tendred into it in Baptiſm, and ſecondly, as requiring a perſonall owning and profeſſing of the Covenant and the conditions of it (which was ever the practice of the Primitive Churches, as hath been urged) and ſo adminiſter the Lords Supper to them?

2. How doth he here confound the order and even make void the care of the Church in this matter.

Concerning the tender and offer of it, we have already ſpoken; We aſſert there ought to be a previous profeſſion of acceptation of the tender and offer by every ſoul, before the ſeal is adminiſtred to him, or elſe all order and purity will be deſtroyed.

And therefore we conclude this, that p. 115the Covenant belongs not to all, ſo as to have it ſealed unto them, unleſſe they firſt viſibly profeſſe to own it and accept of it before the Church; The former neglect of which cauſeth now a requiring of it of every perſon, or elſe godly men ſee not how Reformation will be attained to.

But he produceth a Reply to his former anſwer; viz. What right doth this give him to the Covenant?

He anſwers with the main ſcope of every Argument he produceth; As the Sacrament is a ſhewing forth of Chriſt with a tender of the Covenant in his bloud, there is an open, free, generall right to it for all that will come into Chriſt.

We anſwer, The Sacrament is a ſhewing forth of Chriſt with a tender, &c. But to whom? To profeſſing beleevers that have been orderly received into the Church upon the Goſpel preached to them? And for ſuch as profeſſe before to come into Chriſt and ſubject to diſcipline, and whoſe converſations do not deny it, at leaſt profeſſing ſerious repentance for the ſins they have lived in; which he grants to be the duty of every receiver, as to his own conſcience, in his p. 116former anſwer, p. 50. But this we aſſert to be needfull to be profeſſed as to the ſatisfaction of the Church; Due reſpect and tenderneſſe being had to the modeſty of any and to particulars.

But he further diſtinguiſheth of a right of coming, There's a right of obligation and a right of priviledge; for the right of obligation in the Miniſters offer of Chriſt freely, and the Peoples receiving him on his own terms, I do avouch an univerſall right.

Anſ, This is true in a ſenſe, ſo order be obſerved; If indeed a people receive Chriſt on his own terms (as he ſpeaks) and profeſſe to do ſo, then an obligation in the Miniſter to give the Sacrament; And the people being in their own conſciences, in ſome good meaſure ſatisfied, they came ſincerely before the Lord, having examined their own hearts, there's a right of obligation upon them alſo to come.

But if he mean an abſolute obligation of all to come, we deny it, unleſſe he is ahle to examine himielf, and doth ſo; and profeſſeth to the Church to take Chriſt on his own terms, and his converſation doth not deny it.

p. 117Next he brings in an humble ſoul afraid of his own unworthineſs, yet comes reſolving to give up himſelf to the Lord, &c.

We ſay, An humble ſoul will come to his or her Miniſter, and profeſſe to doe ſo; And we wonder he ſhould put the caſe of humbled ſouls who are to be invited and encouraged; We here diſpute againſt him concerning the obſtinately ignorant, ſuperſtitious Formaliſts, and the prophane, who for the moſt part ſcorn at Reformation and Diſcipline; Of ſuch we ſay they have no right to come till humbled, and profeſſe to be ſo, nor is't the Miniſters duty, but ſin to receive them, ſpecially ſeeing he may prevent it if he will do his duty.

The Text he uſeth further to prove an univerſall right to every Ordinance, is Iſa. 66.23. viz. And it ſhall come to paſs that from one new Moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, ſhall all fleſh come to worſhip before the Lord.

Anſ. Sure this is little for his purpoſe; We could anſwer, That many eminent Divines do underſtand this New Heavens and Earth in this Chapter of the New Hieruſalem in Heaven: But we inſiſt not p. 118upon it: Grant it be meant of worſhip in the Church-Militant; What can be gathered from it but that All Fleſh, that is, ſome of all Nations ſhall ſubject to Goſpel-worſhip, (for we preſume he doth not underſtand it of every individuall ſoul:) But ſure it ſhall be in Chriſts order, ſpecially in the later times, when Chriſt ſhall come as a Refiner of of his worſhip and people, yea, of the ſons of Levi in a ſpeciall manner, that they ſhall offer up pleaſant offerings to the Lord, Mal. 3. That all ſorts of prophane perſons, no evidence of a change, ſhall come into the Lords Temple, and prophane the holy things of Chriſt, is not in the leaſt meaſure there meant, but the contrary; firſt orderly received into the fellowſhip of the Church, and then, if not ſcandalous, the ſealing Ordinance of the Supper.

The ſixth Objection he would refell is, viz. The Sacrament is not a converting Ordinance; we preach to all to convert them, but we may adminiſter only to the regenerate to confirm them;

To this he anſwers, That he acknowledgeth Divines have uſually ſo ſtated it; Baptiſm for Initiation, the Supper for Confirmation, p. 119attributing our new birth to the former, &c. Now (ſaith he) I take a grant of the one to be a ſufficient medium to prove the other.

Anſ. But Sir, you well know, that the Baptized in the Goſpel declared viſible converſion before they were baptized; He that beleeves (that is of grown years) ſhall be baptized; and the ſame reaſon of this Ordinance alſo in this reſpect. How he takes the conceſſion of one to be a grant of the other, we know not.

Pag. 55. Aye but (ſaith he) 'tis true of the ſame perſons, but as for others not yet converted, and humbly coming hither for converſion, there's no Scripture nor reaſon to the contrary, but he may be converted by it.

We anſwer, To come humbly for converſion to this Ordinance, ſuppoſeth converſion begun, and ſo that ſoul comes for further converſion, which is one right uſe of this Ordinance; And whereas he ſaith, there's no Scripture nor reaſon to the contrary; We ſay there's both; 'Tis enough the Lord hath made no promiſe to it for converſion.

And that it was alwaies uſed by ſuch who were ſuppoſed to be converted; p. 120The fellowſhip of the Saints; as we will preſently ſhew; and ſo ought it now only to be uſed.

He repeats his former argument, that the Sacrament is a viſible word holding forth Chriſt and the Covenant to the ſight, therefore converting, as the Goſpel doing the ſame to the hearing.

Anſ. Which thing is only aſſerted, but not proved, but by improper alluſins.

The Centurions beleeving by ſeeing Chriſt only on the Croſſe.

We anſwer, This was miraculous and extraordinary, not in the way of an Ordinance, which is the thing in queſtion; With this Argument the Papiſts pleade for Crucifixes.

2. Contemplation of the Creature-Sacrifices.

Anſ. That reſts to be proved; Beſides, we deny not but any may be preſent to ſee the celebration of the Supper, if that may do them good.

3. Sight of Miracles, &c.

Anſ. Theſe were ordained by Chriſt to work faith, He hath not proved the Sacrament is ſo: Ordinarily Faith comes by hearing, Rom. 10.14. and not by ſeeing; p. 121'Tis not good arguing what Chriſt is able to do, to what he hath made no promiſe to do. And to proſtitute this holy Ordinance upon this account, and ſo to go out of Chriſts way and method (in reference to what he is able or may do) is not warrautable.

This Argument was devis'd to chear up ſuch ſouls who are a little affected at the Lords Supper, who know little what converſion means; By this Argument known oppoſers of Truth and Purity ought to be invited to come for their converſion.

Beſides, M^r Humphreys nor any other, we humbly conceive, ought to admit or contrive any in the fellowſhip of his Church, but whom in a judgement of charity he ſuppoſeth converted, or hath no reaſon to conclude the contrary.

But let us examine his Argument, which he cals all the world to anſwer, viz. To ſhew forth the death of Chriſt is the means of converſion, but the Sacrament is a ſhewing forth the death of Chriſt, 1 Cor. 11.26.

Anſ. 'Tis true in the preaching of the Goſpel, the ſhewing forth of Chriſts p. 122death is a means of converſion, but not in the Lords Supper, where 'tis only held forth, and ſhewed forth to ſuppoſed Beleevers; If it be converting in this Ordinance, the Apoſtles then did not uſe all the means of grace for converſion, They ſhould have celebrated the Supper at every Sermon, and have bid the people, Come and eat, for here alſo the death of Chriſt is ſhewed forth to convert you, which he will never finde practiſed; If he ſay, The firſt Churches did every Lords day celebrate the Supper; That was among ſuch as were eſteemed Saints, already converted (as all within the Church are ſuppoſed in a charitable judgement) and in Chriſts order; Away with theſe Fallacies.

But this he would prove further from the words of Juſtitution, Take and eat, [Take for ſuch as have not Chriſt, and eat for ſuch as have already received him.

Anſ. A benè compoſitis ad malè diviſa; We take this very unſuitable to the parts of the Authour; We preſume a diſtinction never heard of before; As it hath no appearance of ground, ſo we beleeve it not conſiderable with the weakeſt.

p. 123If this had been the ſenſe, why had not Chriſt and the Apoſtles ſaid to Unbeleevers Take, and to Beleevers Eat: This taking, is the putting forth and exerciſing faiuh before wrought; which we ſtill ſay this Ordinance ſuppoſeth, till he ſhall prove the contrary.

He puts two or three caſes, A morall man coming and doing his beſt to prepare himſelf, and ſo comes, Do we think to ſuch a man this Ordinance is fruitleſſe? Then God help us.

But that is not enough to prove it is not, Yea (ſaith he) ſhall not his examination, Prayers, Confeſſion, Meditation, be conducing?

Briefly, Theſe are not like the acts of a morall man, Examination of Repentance and Faith, ſuppoſeth a beginning of both; And when Miniſters call upon morall men to examine themſelves in point of Repentance, the Spirit works by it if that ſoul really do it; yet we ſay, that if all theſe be but the acts of a moral man, there's no promiſe for his receiving good by this Ordinance; This is a good Argument to keep his rich Neighbours in peace: Hab. 1.15, 16. ſhews it an old trade.

p. 1242. He puts the caſe of a poor humble Beleever, that comes hither to meet with Chriſt.

Anſ. We wonder at this caſe, the Queſtion being not about ſuch, being out of queſtion by all, but ſuch ought and are invited to come, to receive ſtrength and comfort by this Ordinance: ſo the two Diſciples of Emmaus, which he inſtanceth in, they were profeſſing Diſciples, and no queſtion, converted before, though but weak.

He brings in a reply of ſuch as oppoſe him in this; Although a man may be converted at, it is not by the Sacrament, it is occaſionally, but not intentionally a converting Ordinance.

To this he Anſwers, This being undeniably granted of our oppoſites, the matter is upon the point yielded, All It may be's, all occaſions muſt be taken for our ſalvation.

Anſw. When godly men ſay a man may be converted at the Lords Supper, but not by it, &c. We conceive they mean ſpecially by the Sermon or exhortation before it, where all may be preſent; And if he be then converted, it will be meet for him to ſtay till another p. 125opportunity, that he may have a more ſpiritual diſcerning of that Ordinance: M^r Humfreys knows converſion uſually begins with conviction of ſinne, and though the ſeed of faith may be then ſown, yet it acts little at firſt; Chriſt not uſually giving a view of himſelf in a promiſe at the firſt conviction; In ſuch a ſtrait a poor trembling ſoul will ſcarce venture to come.

But granting him as much as he would have, his It may be, the point is not therefore yielded as he would perſwade his Reader and himſelf: The queſtion is not, as hath been alledged, What God can do, or what may be, but of the revealed will of God, and the ordinary way of his diſpenſation of grace, which muſt be our rule to walk by.

He would further back this argument with three conſiderations, wholly, as his confidence leads him, To root out this ſubtlety, which the ſpirit of errour hath inſinuated.

Anſw. This ſpirit of errour as he vainly boaſteth, will appear a ſpirit of truth and holineſs in the Lords ſervants, when his deluſions and profane aſſertions will ſtink in the noſtrils of the Saints, as it already, p. 126bleſſed be God, doth; The clouds of holy Witneſſes we might alleadge againſt him, might cauſe him to bluſh at ſuch an arrogant paſſage.

But,Pag. 59. ſaith he, The Sacraments and all Ordinances are primarily means of grace, it is but in a remote ſenſe they are means of converſion or confirmation.

Anſ. Now what a rooting out of this ſubtlety is here? Upon what Scripture doth he bottom his vain diſtinction? We ſay, All Ordinances are means of grace, but according to Chriſts order and inſtitution, The Word for converting grace, The Word and Sacrament alſo for confirming; and ſo they were ordained and ever uſed by Chriſt and the Apoſtles.

Next, he diſtinguiſheth of converſion, 1. Outward, from heatheniſm to the profeſſion of Chriſt, we do not ſtand to ſay the Sacrament is ſuch a converting Ordinance. 2. True inward converſion wrought by the Word, not from any active power it hath in it ſelf, but per modum objecti, &c. as an inſtrument uſed by the Spirit, ſo the Sacrament, &c.

This is the ſubſtance of the ſecond.

Anſ. He intends by this to prove that if it may occaſionally, though not intentionally p. 127convert, then all may come to it.

1. To his diſtinction of converſion we Anſwer, That all that are converted by the Word, and ſo received into the Church, are ſuppoſed to be truly converted, and ſo have this Ordinance adminiſtred to them; and therefore this deſtroyes all he hath ſaid in this particular: If it may be inſtrumental to inward effectual converſion, why may not his It may be, reach as well to Pagans, as thoſe Hypocrites in the Church? And to this he adds, We do not ſtand to ſay it ought, and let it be imagined, &c. As if he had a minde to it; for indeed it will as naturally follow, if he anſwer, No, it ought not, becauſe Sacraments are only for ſuch as are within the Church; then ſure he more faſtens what he pretends in this reaſon to root out, for none are to be received or continued in the Church, but ſuch as are viſible Saints, ſuppoſed to be converted; as himſelf hath granted; and ſo by conſequence 'tis not intended a converting Ordinance, but for the Communion of Saints.

And whereas he ſaith, The Spirit works by the Sacrament, as by the Word, p. 128by way of an inſtrument: and ſo if the Sacrament do occaſionally convert, 'tis enough; It hath been anſwered, that this converſion at the Sacrament, which ſome godly men aſſert, is meant, not preciſely of the Sacrament, but of Prayer, Preaching, Exhortation, &c. Beſidcs the word is intentionally, by the revealed will of God, an inſtrument of converſion, and ſo an Inſtitution of Chriſt, but this of the Sacrament is not yet, nor we verily beleeve ever will, be proved to be ſo.

3. He follows this, as if he had gained much by this conceſſion of Occaſionally converting, wherein we fear he wilfully miſtakes godly men; who ever mean it only of the concomitant duties at it, &c. And ſo he frames to himſelf a diſtinction of principall and ſubordinate intention of converſion; The Sacrament hath a ſubordinate intention, &c.

But, Sir, who grants you this diſtinction that are contrary to your judgement, That the Sacrament hath a ſubordinate intention of converſion, &c. We know of none ſuch who ſpeak of it, as occaſionally converting do not imply it, occaſionally and intentionally are not ſubordinate p. 129but diſtinct; beſides, Godly men, as hath been ſhew'd, do not ſpeak of the Sacrament preciſely, when they ſo ſpeak; yet how the man pleaſeth himſelf with his own creature and fancy, and laughs upon it exceedingly! p. 61, 62.

He further urgeth, Prayer is not ſo primarily converting, therefore by this rule prayer may alſo be exeluded.

Anſ. We need anſwer no further to this, he frames a ſhadow and fights againſt it; He takes that granted to him, which no judicious Divine we know allows him: We ſay Prayer is ſubordinatly converting, but we deny and leave him to prove, ad graecas Calendas, that the Sacrament is. We might here reenforce M^r Gileſpyes twenty Arguments to prove the Sacrament not converting, which he will anſwer at the ſame time; but we intend briefneſs.

The next he Anſwers to is, But unregenerate men are dead in ſin, ſhall we give bread to the dead? men muſt be firſt born, living, before they can feed.

To this he Anſwers, If we could conceive any ſuch bread as would fetch life in a dead man, we would give it him; Now, ſaies Chriſt, Joh. 6.33. I am the bread of life, &c.

p. 130Anſ. This is to beg the queſtion, That the Sacrameut is ordain'd to fetch life in a dead man; yea, ſaith he, Chriſt is the Bread of Life, Here he gratifies the Papiſts (as well as the poor, ignorant, and prophane people of the Nation) who underſtand that Bread in Joh. 6. to be of Sacramentall bread, which ſound Divines ſtill oppoſe; Chriſt as offered in the Sacrament is not Bread to beget life, his bare aſſertion doth not prove it; His parallell between Aqua vitae and Calix vitae, is not worth notice; Or if it were, we beleeve M. Humphreys doth not know of any Aqua vitae that will beget life in a dead man, though it may revive where life is remaining. The ſame we ſay of the Cup as an ordained means where Chriſt is offered.

As to the matter of Judas which he again replys to, we have ſpoken already; And we ſhould be too tedious to urge all, What godly men have ſaid for Judas not receiving the Sacrament.

1. How unlikely it is that the Lord ſhould ſay to Judas (whom he cals the Son of Perdition, and a devil) This is my body which was broken for thee, and this is my bloud which was ſhed for the remiſſion p. 131of thy ſins, and Thou ſhalt drink with me in my Fathers Kingdom; All which he ſpake to Judas as to the reſt, if he were one.

2. But ſhould we grant he ate, ſure M^r Humphreys gains little to his cauſe; Judas was not yet convinced before the Church of the fact, having not yet committed it; If he ſhould have been kept off upon the fear that he might commit it, Peter might have been as well kept off as he, for he in Chriſts knowledge was to commit a ſcandalous offence alſo.

3. Neither will it in the leaſt meaſure warrant the admitting of all ſorts now; Judas was a perſon that preached and profeſſed Chriſt, and for a time forſook the world to follow him, was no ſcoffer or reviler at the power of godlineſſe, and had given no open ſcandall to his Brethren; We wiſh it could be ſaid ſo of all ſuch as cry for Free Admiſſion upon this ground.

The eighth Objection he would anſwer to, is, Ʋnworthy Receivers are guilty of Chriſts bloud, and eat their damnation, therefore we muſt not allow a Free Admiſſion.

To this he anſwers, 1. As to the Churches p. 132part. 2. As to the Receivers, &c.

For the Churches part, this cannot any way concern them. There is a generall Command, Do this, Every man is to examine himſelf, and he receives damnation foreign, to himſelf, they receive not ours.

Anſw. 1. His verily beleeve doth not prove it doth not concern the Church; The Church is concern'd to keep her ſelf from pollution and ruine, both which are brought upon it by this vile practiſe; If the Church, both Officers and Members, do not their utmoſt to prevent a manifeſtly impenitent ſinner from coming to this Ordinance, they are guilty of his ſin, as hath been proved; We are (ſaith Zanchy) violaters of charity and guilty of iniquity,Lib. 1. Ep. p. 26. to ſuffer men to damn themſelves with the Sacrament, which we might ſuſpend from them.

2. Such a levity is the way to bring upon Miniſters the puniſhment of Eli, the ſin being much like it.

3. Is it nothing to a Miniſter to ſee a people he is ſent to ſave, in Gods hand, eating and drinking damnation to themſelves? Chryſoſtome proteſted, he had rather give his body to a Murderer, then the Sacrament to a ſcandalous perſon; p. 133And Calvin, that he would rather put his hand into the fire, &c.

But to his reaſon, ſaith he, There is a generall command, Do this.

Anſ. We wonder he will ſo inconſiderately call it a generall command, when he knows 'twas ſpoken only to the 12. that ate with him.

Oh but ſaith he, Let him examine himſelf, and he damns himſelf, not another.

Anſ. It doth not follow, that becauſe every perſon coming is bound to examine himſelf, therefore no body elſe is, Though he receives damnation to himſelf, yet it doth not thence follow, that others have not a hand in forwarding his damnation, if they do not their duty to prevent it; Though a man murdering himſelf is chiefly guilty of the fact, yet it follows not but thoſe are in a meaſure guilty who prevent him not when 'tis in their power; Every man ſhall give an account of himſelf to God, yet their bloud will I require at thy hands, ſaith the Lord.

Why ſhould God ſay, Be ready to give an account of the hope that is in thee, if no body have power to require it of him?

p. 134We verlly beleeve M^r Humfreys himſelf doth not conceive thoſe words of ſelf-examining ſpoken excluſively; who doubts (unleſſe ſuch as are prophane ſcorners) but that a Miniſter is to take all occaſions to examine the people he is ſent to, for their further edification, ſpecially when they have been lull'd in ignorance before? 'Tis indeed a looſe and prophane aſſertion, That poor ignorant creatures and prophane wretches muſt come in a cuſtomary way to the diſhonour of Chriſt, to their own damnation, without repentance; And yet the admitters no way, no, not any way, as he maintaineth, concerned in it.

'Tis the note of a godly minde to urge Scripture to ſuch ends for which God ordained them, as this, to preſſe ſelf-examination, not as to make void all private reproof, admonition, and diſcipline, contrary to other Scriptures; Wo to the Land if all were of this looſe judgement; Let all people damn themſelves at pleaſure by Sacraments, it concerns no body, neither Miniſters nor people.

What godly man doth not ſee but this ſhift is put into the head of carnall perſons p. 135by the devil and his factors; to keep them in ſecurity, they never intending to examine themſelves, nor are indeed able, and ſo will not ſuffer any man elſe to do it; It concerns none but himſelf, ſaith M^r Humfreys.

2. This ſelf-examination may have reference to others judgement of them, viz. That though the Elders of Corinth did unduly admit them, they were not to reſt on their judgement of them, but to examine themſelves; which only can prevent that judgement of God ſpoken of 1 Corinth. 11.31. And the judging of themſelvos there may alſo referre to the Churches judging, as good Authors conceive.

3. If Perſons have been duly received and confirm'd into the Church, then 'tis ſuppoſed they give ſufficient ſatisfaction in point of knowledge, and ſo that part of examination by the Elderſhip or Church, which is now called for in our times, as to knowledge, would ceaſe; But it is the ignorance of people is now moſt complained of, and ſo examination in this reſpect more required, becauſe there hath been ſufficient means of knowledge but in few places.

p. 136But M^r Humfreys would prevent what we have anſwered by fore-ſtalling the Objection, If another ſhould be taking a Cup of poyſon, ſhall not we be partakers of his bloud if we do not hinder or forbid him, &c.

Anſ. But alas how poorly he wipes it of? What a rattle hath he got to ſtill conſcience?

Saith he, We have no quùm poſſit, that is, no power to hinder, &c.

Anſ. What if he had?

1. Doth he not abſolutely pleade that all are to come, and it concerns no body, no way, to keep them off?

2. But ſuppoſe he would, this will not ſerve the turn; To whom are the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven left, to keep off, and caſt out primarily, but to a particular Church? If your people will not ſubmit to diſcipline, to Chriſts yoke, they are not fit for Sacraments; In a word, That Goſpel which declares their receiving to be a damnable ſin, and enjoyns all miniſteriall care to prevent ſin, and ſave mens ſouls, doth eo ipſo, command you to put them back, and to put your Church into Chriſts order that you may do it; No Goſpel-practiſe puts a p. 137neceſſity upon any man to ſin.

Next, He wonders Any religious man ſhould call the Sacrament a cup of poyſon ſeeing it is a cup of bleſſing: If it prove death to any, 'tis ſinne takes an occaſion, &c.

Anſ. Sir, What religious man doth call it a Cup of poyſon, in any other ſenſe then you your ſelf do, that is, as ſin taking occaſion makes it ſo? Why will you gratifie men of corrupt mindes with ſuch forgeries, to make them hate their Miniſters more?

He re-enforceth his conſtant Argument, God is able to make it a cup of bleſſing, &c.

Anſ. That's not the Query what God is able to do (as hath been anſwered) but what God hath ordain'd for ſuch and ſuch an end, and what he hath promis'd to do; And ſo he hath not ordain'd nor promis'd this Sacrament to be a Cup of bleſſing to an unbeleever, or the worſt, as he ſtiles it.

Let us act (ſaith he) with charïtable thoughts, and leave the ſucceſſe to God.

Anſ. But Sir, you muſt have ground and rule for your charity; That profane ignorant perſons are Chriſts Diſciples, is p. 138a groundleſſe charity; Beſides, what do you talk of charity in your apprehenſions of all that come, ſeeing you aſſert all are to come whether converted or not converted, and the Miniſter nor Church is not to conſider of it?

His compariſon between Preaching the Word and adminiſtring the Sacrament, hath been refelled; 'Tis true Paul preacht in every place, though the Word was a ſavour of death to ſome; but Sir, he did not adminiſter the Supper in every place, but only to profeſſing Saints joyned together in the fellowſhip of the Goſpel; And to adminiſter it to others is not to make this Ordinance a ſweet ſavour, but a loathing to the zealous and holy God.

2. He comes to the Receivers part, leſſening the unworthy Receivers ſin, when 'twere his duty to be aggravating and bewailing it: he ſaith,

There is a double duty, A Principall, Do this; An Acceſſory, Examine; If he fails in examining himſelf, and is not prepared, he is to come, &c.

Anſ. 1. He well enough knows, but that he would blinde poor ſouls, That Do this was ſpoken to Diſciples of Chriſts p. 139Family, not to all; that as oft as they do it, they do it in remembrance of Chriſts death, Doth it follow therefore that every one is to do it? A Maſter of a Feaſt bids all at his Table eat, all that are preſent, doth he therefore bid all the Town eat?

2. That which he cals an acceſſory duty, let a man Examine, is the ground of his coming, A limitation of the duty, without which none ought to come; but he urgeth further,

Thoſe dreadfull expreſſions of being guilty of Chriſts bloud, and eating damnation, are not to affright any from coming, &c. No? Not any man? What not an Idolater? an inceſtuous perſon, a hater of the godly with whom he pretends to communicate as one body? Not one that keeps a Brothell-houſe, nor a witch, nor a reviler, &c. Sir, In this your prophane Proſelytes are aſhamed of you; They will tell you this is larger then 'twas in their old free prophane daies; Then the Miniſter was us'd to pronounce by way of threatning, If any of you he a Blaſphemer of God, a hinderer or ſlanderer of his Word, an Adulterer, or be in malice or envy, or in any other grievous crime, bewail your p. 140ſin, and come not to this holy Table; Mark it Reader, Bewail it, and Come not: but ſaith the Patron of thy ſin M^r H. However come.

But Sir, In earneſt, Do you conceive thoſe dreadfull judgements threatned are not to affright prophane perſons? When a prophane perſon hears grievous judgements threatned to ſuch a practice, ought not that perſon to refrain it? No, he ſaith, he ought to prepare himſelf; That's true, but the Queſtion is, If he finde himſelf not prepared, yet hearing ſuch judgements threatned, Whether he ought to come, M^r H. ſaith, He dare not ſay he ought not.

What's this but to encourage poor creatures to ruſh boldly upon ſinne and judgement, which the body of the people of this Nation have long done in a moſt abominable manner?

And yet now they muſt be clapt on the back for it, and they are taught by M^r H. they ought to come however, and 'tis the Miniſters duty to receive them; How little hath he conſidered how the people of this Nation are hardened by cuſtome to come prophanely? And let Miniſters pronounce a thouſand judgements p. 141to unworthy coming, yet it hath been their cuſtome to come, to have a communion and new clothes, and be merry at Eaſter, Therefore have it they will, or the Miniſter ſhall rue it if it be in their power; ſpecially ſince 'tis duty to come though drunk in that moment; as Free Admiſſion alloweth.

His aſſertion is backt with three Queries &c.

1. He diſtinguiſheth between the Act of receiving and the unworthineſſe of it, the Act is good, though the manner be evil, &c.

Anſ. So may the Act of murder be ſaid to be good, as 'tis an action, or any other vile action, becauſe it hath being, and ſo good in a Metaphyficall ſenſe, which we will not puzzle our Reader with, ſpeaking chiefly to the deceived people; Know Reader, the Scripture cals it damnable ſin, to come unworthily, and be not flattered into ſin, by ſuch unſound niceties; There's no morall good in the coming, God hates thee in thy coming, thou bring'ſt greater ſin upon thy ſoul if thou comeſt unworthily. Ah how are poor ignorant ſouls ſtrengthned by this reaſon? they beleeve there's p. 142ſome good, and they do ſome good in coming, and this makes amends for much prophaneſſe.

He may indeed ſay as much for the fouleſt ſin in the world, T he act is good, as it hath being, but the ſinne is in the manner; Eating and drinking ſimply conſidered at the Sacrament is not ſin, but ignorance and unworthineſſe makes it ſo.

But, ſaith he, There's unworthineſſe upon a Perſon if he do not come, p. 71.

Anſw. But not ſo great; To be unworthy and come in that unworthineſſe to a holy action (which the Word ſtiles damnable) is an aggravation of it, and a greater ſin, and an abominable mocking of God and defiling his Ordinances.

His ſecond Query is, Whether receiving the Sacrament be otherwiſe damnable then hearing and praying, which he concludes is not, &c.

Anſ. Though to pray and hear in a carnall manner be great ſins, yet unworthineſſe of Receiving is greater; which thoſe dreadfull Expreſſions in 1 Cor. 11. do witneſſe; beſide there lie abſolute commands upon every one to p. 143hear and pray, Rev. 13.9. If any man have an ear to hear let him hear, Jer. 10.25. The action of receiving is of a more tender and holy nature, and the ſin of prophaning it greater: So that if a prophane perſon refrains to come, he ſinnes leſſe; though this doth not at all excuſe his continuing in prophaneſſe.

But he helps himſelf with a diſtinction, whereby he pretends to ſalve all: There's a preſumptuous prophane way of coming to an Ordinance, or a Chriſtian coming in conformity to God, &c.

Anſ. Here's a skinning ſoul-flattering plaiſter for the Enemies of Reformation; It's a ſweet bit for the devil to keep up rotten formality: Sir, Doth not he come in a prophane preſumptuous way, who comes but in an outward Conformity? Doth not the moſt prophane wretch do ſo? and thinks he doth enough, and covers many ſins by it, he will tell you he comes in a conformity to Gods worſhip; How many Scriptures might we give him, and we preſume not unknown to him, where the Lord expreſſeth his abhorrency of ſuch worſhip; See Iſa. 1.11. & 66.5. Jer. 6.7. Chapt. &c. The people there came before God as his p. 144people, in ſuch waies of worſhip as he appointed; But they came but in an outward conformity, therefore (ſaith the Lord) 'tis an abomination to me, an iniquity, my ſoul hateth it, &c.

Therefore this is a diſtinction abhorred of the Lord; whoever comes in a meer outward conformity, comes in a preſumptuous prophane way.

His third Query, Whether an unregenerate man conceiving himſelf not worthy, muſt never come to the Sacrament, &c.

He anſwers, Herein my thoughts are apt to run comparatively on the word.

Anſ. An unregenerate perſon finding himſelf ſuch, is not, as ſuch, to come, 'twas not ordained for his good; Not to ſow the firſt ſeed of his new birth, but to ſtrengthen it; 2. We deny to be the ſame reaſon of coming to the Word and Sacrament, for though he hath been and is an unworthy hearer, yet he is to go, becauſe the Word preached is ordained for converſion, but not the Sacrament, which is for the Communion of Saints; whereas he ſaith, 'tis a means of grace, 'tis a fallacy, 'tis not a means of the firſt grace.

He ſpeaks in the cloſe of a ſoul laying p. 145to heart the horrour of his ſinne in being guilty of Chriſts Bloud, and ſo to come.

This is true, and granted, If he doth lay it to heart, and profeſſe to do ſo, then the Church doth encourage him to come.

But we ſay, This horrour of his ſin is wrought by the preaching of the Word, not by the Act of receiving; And we beleeve a ſoul made ſenſible of this dreadfull guilt in his frequent former comings, will tremble to come at that inſtant, though he is afterwards upon the profeſſion of his ſin to be encouraged; 'twill not hurt him to lie under theſe humblings; yea, if a poor creature ſhall doubt of his regeneration, and ſo open his condition to the Miniſter or the godly people, he is to be encouraged if any appearance of regeneration in a charitable judgement be upon him.

But ſaith he: If coming unworthily makes a man guilty of Chriſts bloud, how much more ſhall open refuſing it, that tramples upon it in this Ordinance?

Anſ. Briefly, By continuing in ſinne and coming to this Ordinance, there's a more abominable trampling under foot p. 146the bloud of Chriſt, becauſe they make it an unclean thing, Heb. 10.29. by continuing in their uncleanneſſe, and ſo trampling upon and deſpiſing the ends of Chriſts bloud, purity and holineſſe; It matters not which is preciſely the greater ſin, 'tis enough to make a prophane wretch to tremble, that in coming unworthily he becomes guilty of the Lords bloud, &c. So to make him refrain.

The ninth Objection againſt his judgement, which he brings on to anſwer, is, The Ordinance is polluted if all be admitted.

He grants it; To the unworthy Receivers, to whom all things are unclean, but not to the Admitters unleſſe the unworthy are convicted.

Anſ. But Sir, What if the Miniſter and the reſt of the Admitters do not their duty to convict an ignorant or a prophane perſon, but ſuffer him to come; When they have power and command from Chriſt, as they are a Church, to do ſo, is it not then both Miniſters and Peoples ſin? We dare averre, the Lord will require it of them without their Repentance, or elſe Mat. 18. ſtands for a p. 147blank, and Chriſt will never take an account of it.

But though this duty be not performed by them, yet they may come fearleſly, as M^r Humfreys conceives, No more ſcruple, ſaith he, then if the cloth be not clean enough on the table.

Anſ. Satis profanè, an expreſſion unworthy a Chriſtian (that we may not flatter him) and an abhorring to the Lords people: That a godly ſoul ſeeing a company of profane wretches, enemies to godlineſs (as what Congregation abounds not with ſuch?) come to this holy myſtery, and though he doth not his duty by private admonition and labouring their conviction, yet he is no more to be troubled to ſee the blood of his Saviour made an unclean thing, then for an unclean cloth.

Now Reader, thou feeſt this Author in his own ſhape: His profane Proſelytes ſure will ſay he hath ſtretcht conſcience a little too much for them here.

But he will venture to prove it: In the Law, ſaith he, there was a diſtinction of the clean and unclean, which otherwiſe would defile their Saorifices, and the Temple; But no ſuch thing now in the Goſpel, &c.

p. 148Anſw. This is the ſubſtance of his anſwer; We Reply; It hath been already proved by us, that the Jews were kept off from the Sacrifices and Paſſeover, as well for Moral uncleanneſs, as Ceremonial,Joh. 9.22. & 12.42. Ezra 10.11.John 9:22John 12:42Ezra 10:11 and that the Ceremoniall uncleanneſs was a type of the uncleanneſs of ſin under the Goſpel.

Beſides, Was God ſo zealous of his worſhip, and the prophaning of it then, that unclean perſons were to be cut off, and is there no profaning the holy myſteries of the Lord Jeſus now? Nor no care to be taken that unclean perſons be not ſuffered to defile them? What a curſed proſtitution of the holy things of God is this? But, ſaith he, There is nothing unclean to us now.

Anſw. Aye but there are things that are too holy for the unclean now, as this holy myſtery is.

But to prove there is nothing unclean now, he urgeth Ro. 14.14. I know I am perſwaded there is nothing unclean of it ſelf.

Anſ. Sir, you know well enough that Paul ſpeaks there of meats, to the ſatiſfaction of the weak Jews, who took ſome meats ſtill to be accounted unclean under the Goſpel; But now he convinceth p. 149them ther's nothing, no meat to be accounted unclean.

What's this to his purpoſe to prove there is no polluting the holy Ordinance of the Lords Supper? unleſſe he will make no difference between common meat, and the Lords Supper; which the truth is, his Free Admiſſion doth not; This is his argument:

No meat is now unclean, legall uncleanneſs being taken off, therefore all may come to the Lords Supper; no polluting of it, or at it.

That of Peters viſion is like it; Jews and Gentiles are to have the Goſpel preached, therefore no man is defiled by communicating with a wicked perſon, though he take no care for the prevention of him.

He goes on and urgeth, Now in the Goſpel All's free, we are to have free Ordinances.

Anſ. But, Sir, In Chriſts way, The Goſpel preached freely to all, but the ſeals of it to profeſſing Saints.

He breaks off with a ſharp exhortation to the godly Miniſters and people, thus; My Brethren, there are ſome touches of the Law and ſuperſtition on you, p. 150you know what a ſacred thing was made of the Communion Table when the rayl was about it; Now I pray think how you refine and ſpiritualize your old ſuperſtition, by putting a ſpiritual rayl about the Sacrament, when you debarre poor ſinners for coming hither: Let us take heed, there will be ſomething of the Phariſee in theſe ſpiritual proud hearts of men.

Anſ. The Lord rebuke him for this cenſorious ſarcaſm; We look upon this diſcovery as the juſt hand of God upon him.

Tis the language of the formall, lukewarm, profane Miniſters and people againſt the godly party; Oh, ſay they, this is their ſpiritual pride and Phariſaiſme: This paſſage is nuts for them.

2. 'Tis very baſe (to ſay no more) for a Miniſter to caſt ſuch dirt upon the fair unblemiſht memories of ſelf-denying Saints, who are now fallen aſleep in the Lord; who ſuffered deprivations, baniſhments, impriſonments, upon this very ſcore chiefly, that they would not adminiſter Sacraments to all: And now, ſaith this Pamphleter, as their perſecutors did, 'Twas their ſpiritual pride; As they damnd the power of Religion to be p. 151ſuch, and as the Lukewarm, Anti-reforming party do: Yea doth he not caſt this upon the Wiſdom of Parliament, the Reverend Aſſembly of Divines, yea all the moſt Learned and Godly Reformers both Antient and Modern, as ever the Church of Chriſt hath been bleſt with: This cenſorious man hath written upon them all, Phariſaiſm, and ſpiritual Pride; becauſe every mans conſcience is not ſo eaſie, large, and wide as his own, about the ſanctifying the Lords Name in this Ordinance.

Oh but ſaith he, 'Tis ſuperſtition too, as bad as the rayl about the Communion Table.

Anſ. The truth is, he is fitter to be admoniſht, to go weep and howl in private all his daies, for this and other (ſuch) curſed aſſertions, then to have an anſwer given to them; were not thouſands of ſouls even like to periſh and be hardened in ſin by them? Sir, Doth that Idolatrous practice of erecting Altars, and railing them about as holy, run parallel with the practice of a conſcientious Miniſter, who trembleth that poor ſouls ſhould eat damnation, and he not labour to prevent it? And as to your rayl, The p. 152Diſcipline of Chriſts Churches was wont to be ſtiled the rayl or fence of them, to preſerve this holy Ordinance from pollution: If you get not ſuch a rayl Chriſt may root out you and your Church (ſuch as it is) ere you are aware.

Sir, Inſtead of this Caveat to the godly Miniſters who plead for and practice Reformation in the uſe of this Ordinance; May you tremble at a ſpirit of Apoſtacy from it, which begins ſadly to ſteal upon too too many who have formerly with great zeal contended for it, and that you nor they be not given up of God to greater deluſions and abominations then theſe.

A little to ſalve the buſineſſe, he brings in the reply of the godly to his former argument, But are we not faulty and partake of other mens ſinnes if we do not our beſt to have the leaven purged out, &c.

He Anſwers,Pag. 79. There are ſeveral duties of a Chriſtian, To pray, receive, to admoniſh his, to rebuke the faulty, to tell the Church, if it be in a capacity: if we neglect we are guilty, and defiled; What then? we muſt labour after a Church-Eſtabliſhment, &c.

p. 153Anſ. Is not this to grant in effect what we contend for, That 'tis every Communicants ſin if he do not admoniſh a perſon coming prophanely to this Ordinance, and he becomes guilty if he neglect it? If rebuking the faulty as to all ſin, be a duty, then 'tis ſo in this particular; for he that hinders not another from ſin according to his duty and power, is guilty of that ſin, and the duty M^r Humfreys hath confeſt, yea all commanders, commenders, conſentors, connivers, councellors, concealers, excuſers of other mens ſins, are guilty of them, of which M^r Humfreys is one, and all that plead for Free Admiſſion.

He limits the duty of telling the Church, ſaith he, If the Church be in a capacity to hear.

Then 'tis granted the Church ought to be in a capacity to hear: If he means by this capacity, A Church enjoying all Officers, whoſe fault is it that you have them not? Who is to chooſe them but your Church? If they be not fit to chooſe they are not fit for Sacraments, as hath been ſhewed, we mean as to a good part of them; but we conceive the Church it ſelf, as diſtinguiſht from its p. 154Officers, is in a capacity to hear, and ought to be told by a conſcientious member, or elſe he will not quit the guilt mentioned, ſay M^r Humfreys what he will.

3. He grants we ſhould labour after a Church-eſtabliſhment: This we truſt will juſtifie our practiſe, in doing our duties in it (by M^r Humfreys own principles) and ſo will ſtop the mouths of thoſe of his minde againſt our practice, which, with our ſelves, we cannot ſee, after much ſeeking the Lord for direction, how it can be attained to, but by calling upon ſuch as will ſubmit to the Diſcipline of Mat. 18. with us, and ſo being joyned together, and chooſing Officers, there ariſeth a Church-eſtabliſhment by the power of the Goſpel: We wiſh M^r Humfreys had ſpent his time and paper he beſtowed in maintaining promiſcuous Free Admiſſion, in ſtirring up Miniſters to preſs on to ſuch a Churcheſtabliſhment, and not in hardning people in ſin and ignorance.

But he further urgeth, Muſt we in the mean while have no Sacrament?

Anſ. Better ſure, after a patient waiting upon ſouls for embracing the Goſpel, p. 155to begin with Church-eſtabliſhment, and then to adminiſter the Supper, without ſo much diſhonour to Jeſus Chriſt, and endangering of ſouls, in promiſcuous admiſſion.

2. Further, M^r Humfreys by his mean while, implies that in an exigency there ought to be Free Admiſſion, rather then no Sacraments: Though we conceive that doth not abſolutely take away the guilt, yet we could wiſh that he had ſo ſtated the queſtion, and not to preſs his Free Admiſſion abſolutely upon Miniſters and people, and that 'tis their ſin not to allow it.

But, ſaith he, The neglect of this duty of admonition, is the ſin by it ſelf, the coming is our duty.

Anſ. Here is a fine nicety to skin over a ſin: Sir, If a Godly man do not admoniſh a wicked man coming, that ſo he may profeſs his repentance to the Church, or be kept off, ſuch a one comes to the Sacrament with guilt upon him, for he hath not performed a concomitant duty in coming; and ſo his want of admonition is a ſin in reference to his coming.

Aye but ſaith he, Becauſe the leaven p. 156is not purged out, muſt there be no lump?

Yea, but ſuch a lump as is totally leavened and defiled for want of this duty, and therefore ought to become a new lump, 1 Cor. 5.7.

The next reply brought againſt his argument is, Are not all ignorant and ſcandalous perſons ſwine and dogs, to be rejected, and ſo kept off from pearls, &c.

1. He anſwers, I dare not ſay, though I ſee what intereſt lies at ſtake, which may ſoon fancy a Chriſtian conveniency into a divine neceſſity.

Anſw. What though you dare not ſay ſo? 'tis enough that Jeſus Chriſt himſelf ſaith ſo, Mat. 7.6. he cals them dogs, and commands that holy things be not given them, and this of the Lords Supper is to be eſteemed the holieſt. What Intereſt he means we do not rightly know; but we well know Free Admiſſion ſtands well with the intereſt of carnal eaſe, friendſhip of ungodly men, and profit; but keeping off doth not.

And Sir, 'tis not only Chriſtian conveniency to keep off ſuch, but a poſitive command of Chriſt in that Scripture. To his five reaſons,

p. 1571. We deny your proofs to aſſure the contrary, 'tis gratis dictum, as we hope is cleared.

2. He placeth a great diſtance between unfitneſs to come unto the Sacrament, and being excluded.

Anſw. If a perſon be not fit to come, and his unfitneſs viſible, he ought to be excluded, and ſo kept from ſin: Though you put a great diſtance between them, they ought to go together.

3. He urgeth, The keeping off any cannot be pretended to in our un- Elder'd Congregations.

Anſw. This we beleeve gave the occaſion to this Diſcourſe; and upon this ſcore, we fear many go on to ſin againſt light: But doth not this imply that if Congregations were Elderd then there ought to be keeping off, and ſo Free Admiſſion vaniſheth, and not to be peremptorily preſt?

2. But, Sir, ſtill whoſe fault is it that theſe are not Elderd Congregations? ſure the Miniſters and Churches own, as hath been alledged: Who are to chooſe the Elders? certainly the Church; or let it be proved the contrary; But the major part, you will ſay, is corrupt and not fit p. 158to chooſe? Then ſure not fit to be admitted to ſealing Ordinances, as hath been hinted. People that fear the Lord can diſcern of ſuch perſons who are moſt godly, grave, and wiſe, and ſo fitted for Church-Officers.

This is a moſt generally received truth, That every particular Congregation hath power in it ſelf to reform it ſelf according to what ſhall be practicable by them.

There is nothing alledged againſt this but the expectation of a Civil ſanction; what weight or authority will that adde to Chriſts Ordinance? which obligeth the conſcience without humane authority; ſuch a ſanction or humane law may make men hypocritically ſubmit, but will not adde to real Reformation. Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, ſaith the Lord by the Prophet, Zach. 9.6. We have ſpoke to this in the Preface: We will take leave to alledge what D^r Jewell in his Epiſtle concerning the Councel of Trent, annexed in the cloſe of that Hiſtory; which is applicable to the preſent caſe: Miniſters alleadging there can be no Church-Reformation, without a Civil ſanction and Law from p. 159Authority, though they protect godly men in their duty.

The Councel of Trent alleadged, There was no Reformation to be attempted in England without a General Councel; To which the Doctor replies, pag. 858. Is it not lawfull for any of us to beleeve in Chriſt, to profeſſe the Goſpel, to ſerve God aright, to fly ſuperſtition and Idolatry, except they will be pleaſed to give us leave? &c. In the following page, Muſt we therefore ſit idle, expecting how theſe Fathers will handle the matter? Muſt we hold our hands together and do nothing? Further, I will require, ſaith the Lord, their blood at thy hands: If any ſhall put his hand to the plough and look back, and be ſolicitous what others think, and expect the authority of a General Councel, and hide the Lords treaſure, in the mean while he ſhall hear this, Oh evil and faithleſſe ſervant, take him away and caſt him into utter darkneſſe. Suffer, ſaith Chriſt, the dead to bury the dead, but follow thou me. In humane Counſels it is the part of a wiſe man to expect the judgment and conſent of men, but in matters divine, Gods Word is all in all, the which ſo ſoon as a godly man hath received, he preſently yieldeth p. 160and ſubmitteth himſelf, he is not wavering nor expecting others: He underſtandeth that he is not bound to give ear to the Pope or Councel, but to the will of God, whoſe voice is to be obeyed though all men ſay nay. The Prophet Elias preſently obeyed Gods voice, though he thought he was alone. Abraham being warned of God went out of Chaldea. Lot went out of Sodom, &c. Go, ſaith the Angel, out of the midſt of her, and partake not of her ſins, leaſt you taſt of her plagues: He ſaith not, Expect a Synod of Biſhops. If at the firſt Chriſt and his Apoſtles had ſtayd for a Councell, when had their ſound gone up unto all Lands? &c.

Pag. 860. For we know that the Spirit of God is tied neither to places nor to numbers of men. Tell it to the Church, ſaith Chriſt, ☞not to the whole Church ſpread over the whole world, but to a particular, which may eaſily meet in one place: Whereſoever, ſaith he, two or three ſhall be gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midſt of them: When Paul would reform the Churches of the Corinthians and of the Galatians, he did not command them to expect a General Councel, but only wrote unto them, that what errour ſoever or p. 161vice was among them, themſelves ſhould preſently cut it off.

Now we humbly conceive what this Reverend Authour ſaith of a General Councel, is in this caſe applicable to Magiſtrates; As the Churches of Corinth and Galatia were not to ſtay for a Councel, as to the Reforming their Churches, ſo neither for an Edict from the Magiſtrate; The Lord will require the blood of ſuch as periſh for want of Reformation, at our hands. In matters divine, ſaith he, Gods Word muſt be obeyed, though All men ſay nay.

Now ſay ſome, If the Magiſtrate would give us authority, we would ſet about this practice; Sure this will not ſerve the turn before the bar of the Lord, however it may quiet conſcience for a time. We verily beleeve, did we look more to Chriſt, and leſſe to men, the Goſpel would have its courſe more freely.

But to return to M^r Humfreys, ſaith he, Men may be Dogs and Swine either in the courſe of their life, or in the publique eſteem of the Church, we look to them as they are in the Churches eſteem.

Anſ. Briefly, This is but a rotten ſalve; As if 'twere to be ſatisfaction enough p. 162to a godly Miniſter, what a company of ignorant and carnall people ſhall think one of another; ſay they, We were all us'd to come at Eaſter, why be we not all fit now?

2, If by the Church he mean the Officers, it doth not come to his caſe; But were it ſo, that a known ſcandalous perſon ſhould be otherwiſe eſteem'd by them, yet the Miniſter having uſed all other waies of remedy, be is not to ſin from other mens judgements.

5. Saith he, To ſpeak particularly concerning the ignorant, I dare not judge ſo rigorouſly; the 5. of Heb. 2. comes near my heart, &c.

Anſw. We wiſh other Scriptures did alſo, that concern his duty in this caſe: 'Tis true, Jeſus Chriſt can have compaſſion on the ignorant, and ſuch as are out of the way, as that Heb. 5. ſpeaketh; But then he teacheth them, gives his Spirit to them, and brings them into the way, as Prov. 1.22, 23. We allow his diſtinction of ignorance, and that to the weakly ignorant inſtruction is to be given; but how much affected obſtinate ignorance is to be found with ſuch as ruſh upon Sacraments? And to admit p. 163ſuch was farre from Chriſts minde in that Scripture, being to encourage poor ignorant ſouls to come to be taught by him, and after to tender themſelves to Sacraments, and to be encouraged to do ſo.

Further he ſaith, For the ſcandalous we know there muſt be admonition firſt twice or thrice, Mat. 18.15, 16. and then if they continue obſtinate, to be excommunicated, &c.

Anſw. Why is not this courſe taken? If it ought to be, why is not the beſt expedient uſed for ſuch an order? And if this ought to be, how will Free Admiſſion of all without exception (ſeeing this Ordinance, as he ſaith, is converting) ſtand with his Excommunication? Should any be kept from converting Ordinances?

But, ſaith he, I cannot finde that this Excommunication is in reference meerly to this Sacrament.

Anſw. Granted; There are other ends, but your meerly implies this is one, viz. to keep ſcandalous perſons from the Sacrament; If from Chriſtian communion in general, as you ſpeak, then from the choiceſt part of it, which conſiſts p. 164in the Communion of Saints in this Ordinance.

The laſt Objection he undertakes to anſwer, is raiſed from the Texts that are alleadged for a ſeparation from wicked perſons, &c.

To theſe he anſwers, firſt in the general, That there ought to be a ſeparation from the ſins and evil courſes of wicked men, and from their common familiarity, but not from the Sacrament, unleſſe in caſe of Excommunication, &c.

Anſ. To this we Anſwer,

1. As to a particular perſon, ſuppoſe I am of ſuch a Congregation (and that too only by habitation, never by any expreſſe joyning in ſuch a communion) where ſuch corruptions do abound, that it is even impoſſible for men to admoniſh all, or if I tell it to the Miniſter or Church, I ſhall be reproached for it, (as we need not travell farre to finde ſuch caſes) and I have with great patience waited for Reformation and a Church-Eſtabliſhment according to God, what obligation is upon me from God or man, but that I may ſeparate from the Congregation, for the eaſe and comfort of my own Conſcience?

p. 1652. What if a Congregation be ſo leavend with cuſtomary ignorance and profaneneſs, and ſcoffing at holineſſe (as 'tis too too eaſie to finde ſuch, nay where may one finde better in the ſtate they are now in) and a godly Preacher comes to this people, and a few godly own him; Muſt this Preacher and few godly be enforced to communicate with ſuch (after due means uſed for the inſtruction of the reſt) or may they not withdraw from the reſt who are ſcoffers at godlineſs? ſure we beleeve God and Angels, and Saints will juſtifie ſuch a ſeparation in this Ordinance, and to draw into a cloſer communion to practiſe diſcipline among themſelves; ſpecially when ſuch a Congregation was never orderly united and joynted together by a free ſubmiſſion to the Goſpel; having in moſt places never enjoy'd it in the power of it, which conſideration, indeed, wipes off many objections.

Now to his Scriptures, he firſt ſaith that Epheſ. 5.11. 1 Cor. 10.20, 21. are meant only of ſeparation from ſinfull courſes and common familiarity.

Anſw. To that of the Epheſians, Have no fellowſhip with the unfruitfull works of p. 166darkneſſe, but rather reprove them.

Now therefore if we muſt not be partakers with wicked men in a wicked action, as v. 7. and muſt have no fellowſhip with them, then not Church-fellowſhip, if I can help it; ſpecially in this Ordinance of the Supper, in which a wicked man is converſant, as to himſelf, in an unfruitfull work; and if I by my partaking with him encourage him (as I do) I have fellowſhip with a wicked man in an unfruitfull work of his, ſpecially if I do not reprove him. Can M^r Humfreys conceive, that Paul forbidding any fellowſhip with wicked men, gave them an allowance to let them profane the Sacrament with them? It founds harſh and incongruous.

To that of the 1 Corinth. 10.21, 22. I would not ye ſhould have fellowſhip with devils, ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of devils.

Anſ. Grant it, Paul reproves their eating at Idol feaſts, as hath been ſhewed, yet if wicked men come to the Lords Supper in a profane manner, demonſtrating themſelves to be but of Satans kingdom, and preſently after receiving, they return to Satans worſhip in ſports and p. 167playes, and abetted profanneſs, ſure it is juſtifiable for ſuch as fear God to ſeparate from them, ſpecially when they long reſiſt and ſcoff at the power of the word; and if the godly continue to communicate with ſuch, 'tis little better then fellowſhip with devils, &c. The ſame may be ſaid of 2 Cor. 7. Though the wife is to abide with her husband, it doth not follow but that ſhe may ſeparate from him as to Church-Communion.

He conceives three more Scriptures may, haply, as he ſpeaks, he underſtood only of ſeparating from mens evil courſes; he ſaith but haply, firſt as to Jer. 15.19. If thou return, then will I bring thee again, and thou ſhalt ſtand before me; and if thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou ſhalt be as my mouth: let them return unto thee, &c.

We aſſert this is meant of Church-Reformation, and not only of ſeparating from ſinfull courſes in their lives. Jeremiah was ſent to convince, preach down, and reform publique abuſes in Gods worſhip; The wicked ſcorned and perſecuted him, therefore Jeremiah (as every zealous Preacher ought) was p. 168commanded to be as Gods mouth unto them, and thoſe he did convert he was to ſeparate them as the precious from the vile; which very fully points at and warrants ſuch a ſeparation we plead for: For any to ſay, that the precious is meant of words or things, and not of perſons, is very weak; for the Lord ſaith, Let them return, which muſt be meant of perſons.

The next of 2 Theſ. 3.6. Withdraw from every brother that walketh diſorderly, &c. is alſo meant of withdrawing as to Church-Communion, as is clear by the following words: At v. 12. Paul commands and exhorts the diſorderly: At the 14^th, he exhorteth the Church, that if ſuch diſorderly perſons will not obey, then the Church is to have no company with them, that they may be aſhamed; which Learned men generally underſtand as to Church-ſociety: Excommunicating or withdrawing being both for that end, as one, that the diſorderly perſon may be aſhamed and humbled, &c.

So of Rev. 2.6. The hating of the deeds of the Nicolaitans, no queſtion implies, ſeparation from them in Communion: p. 169Sure M^r Humfreys will not allow Chriſtianity and their hereſies to conſiſt.

There are other Scriptures which he ſaith do only reſpect common familiarity, and not a ſeparation as to Church-Communion.

The firſt is, 1 Cor. 5.9. Have no company with fornicators, &c. which M^r Humfreys will have to be only of common familiarity, not as to Church-Communion.

No? Muſt not known fornicatours (for of ſuch it muſt be meant) be caſt out of the Church, if they continue obſtinate? Who then muſt be caſt out? The ſame rule he gives of Covetous, Idolaters, Railers, Drunkards, Extortioners; where the force of the argument, as Learned M^r Dickson on the place well obſerves, is this; Paul, ſaith he, had wrot to them before, not to keep company, nor to eat with ſuch (which ſtrongly implies their non-communion) therefore much more ought they to caſt out from among themſelves that inceſtuous perſon, which is the caſe he argues: Now how many covetous, drunkards, revilers and extortioners are to be found p. 170in moſt Congregations, open revilers of the Preacher, if godly and zealous, and of the godly; to which may be added many other ſinnes of as high a nature: Now ſuppoſe the greater party ſhall be ſuch (as it may eaſily be ſuppoſed in moſt Congregations) who ſhall Excommunicate them? being ſeveral hundreds in ſome places? 'Twere a vain thing to undertake it; therefore the leſſer party muſt withdraw, and labour to draw others after them, or elſe the Apoſtles command muſt utterly be waved.

That of 2 Theſſ. 3.14. hath been opened: As to Rom. 16.17. of avoiding ſuch as make diviſions: 'Tis clear, as moſt Interpreters, for exerciſing Diſcipline on them; To avoid a man, is to look upon him as caſt out.

The ſame may be ſaid, as M^r Cotton ſtrongly argues from that Scripture, 2 Tim. 3.5. From ſuch turn away, which no queſtion points at non-communion, for M^r Humfreys himſelf will ſure allow, that the ſins enumerated in the former verſes, deſerve it.

So of John 2.10, 11. Sure he will not have ſuch as deny the doctrine of Chriſt to be continued in the Church, and come p. 171to Sacraments, for of ſuch John there ſpeaks.

As for Prov. 22.24, 25. viz. Make no friendſhip with an angry man, &c. We finde not uſually preſſed in this caſe; and yet a furious man (as the wiſe man there cals him) is not fit to be accounted in Chriſts family; if it appear reigningly upon him, and cauſe him to break out into other ſins, as uſually it doth.

His laſt is Titus 3.10. Reject an heretique.

Anſ. Is this only of common familiarity too? Then heretiques muſt alſo it ſeems be continued.

Now he concludes, All theſe Scriptures forbid us wicked familiarity in their ſins, not a bare accompanying in Gods Ordinances.

Anſ. We acknowledge it in the converting Ordinances of prayer and preaching, but not in Sacraments, and in full Church-Communion; The truth is, tis a ridiculous thing to conceive that the Apoſtle ſhould command not to keep company with, to avoid, to turn away from, to reject ſuch as are rightfully (as M^r Humfrays would prove) continued in p. 172the fellowſhip of the Church; for indeed the Apoſtle would fully contradict himſelf in other Scriptures, if he ſhould, where he bids all the members have the ſame care one of another, 1. Cor. 12.25. To love as Brethren, To be as one brotherhood, 1 Pet. 2.17. To exhort; To comfort one another, which implies all ſweet and open familiarity together; Now how can this be if they muſt reject, turn from, keep no company one with another?

Next he anticipates the uſuall anſwer to his Argument, viz. If I muſt decline a wicked man, ſo as not to eat with them (which I interpret by our ordinary converſation) how much more muſt I decline him at this Sacrament?

He anſwers, 'Tis a fallacy, and is ſorry to ſee many gravel'd at it; I muſt not be ſuch a mans common companion, therefore I must not go to Church with him.

Anſ. This ſerves but to gratifie the ignorance and ſuperſtition of too many, who think it enough if they come to Church; We muſt all, ſay they, go to Church, and have the Communion at Eaſter, He's worſe then a Jew that will not; And too many know little further what true Church-Communion is.

p. 173But ſaith he, Arguments from the leſſe to the greater muſt be in things of the ſame kinde and nature; which theſe are not.

Anſ. Sir, Common familiarity is enjoyned to Church-members, as hath been ſhewed, and forbidden to others; upon weighty Grounds; for how can there be mutuall edification without familiar coming together, which though the means may be ſometime in eating and drinking together, yet the people of the Lord do, or ſhould do all to the praiſe of God and their mutuall comfort in him whenever they meet; and ſo 'tis a degree of Church-communion.

Yea (ſaith he) Eating with another is in my own arbitration; I muſt not chooſe evil, but I am bound to go to the ſervice of God.

Anſ. True, In Gods way, but not to partake of other mens ſins, which I do, if I do not my duty to prevent them; which as the caſe ſtands in the moſt Congregations is hard to do, as hath been ſhewed.

He ſaith, He underſtands Mat. 18.17. in the third ſenſe, which is, That there ought to be no ſeparation from any in any of Gods Ordinances, unleſſe in caſe of Excommunication, and ſo 1 Cor. 5.1.

p. 174Anſ. 1. Yea Sir, It may reach to perſons excommunicable, when the Officers ſhall neglect their duty. We require any Scripture to ſhew an obligation upon a Church-member to abide in ſuch a Church-communion where no hope of redreſſe of ſuch abuſes, it may be the whole leavened.

2. If Excommunication ought to be, why do not godly men when they have power from God and man put it in practiſe? If the Parochiall frames as mixt, be too corrupt to take it up of themſelves, by reaſon of an averſeneſſe to any ſuch Reformation; it will ſurely juſtifie the godly and willing people in non-communion in the Sacrament.

3. Though in Mat. 18. & 1 Cor. 5. There be no mention of the Sacrament, yet that one end of Church-cenſures is to keep the viſibly-unworthy from it, is confeſſed by himſelf in p. 84. as hath been obſerved: He further urgeth ſeverall Scriptures which prove non-communion with the wicked, which he ſaith are to be underſtood only in caſe of Excommunication, and are many leagues off from the buſineſſe of the Sacrament.

Anſ. Let it be granted, that theſe p. 175Scriptures are to be underſtood in caſe of Excommunication; But thoſe Scriptures do ſuppoſe it to be exercis'd in all Churches, as in the Primitive Churches it was; We ſtill ſay to you and others, that the caſe is far different, where people have for the moſt part owned the profeſſion of Chriſtianity from the Magiſtrates Laws, and not from the Goſpel powerfully preached, and do ſtill abide in bitter enmity to the power of holineſſe, and too many as great revilers of it, as Papiſts or flat Atheiſts; And had never diſcipline exerciſed, nor did ever ſubject to it, and being now call'd upon to do it, do hate and ſcorn it, and ſuch who are willing to doe it; as M^r Firmin well obſerves in his ſerious Queſtion, p. 30.

Now he concludes with 4. wiſhes.

That we had a Government eſtabliſht in the Church, the neareſt in Christian prudence that may be to the Word of God.

Anſ, Yea, let him ſay, That which the Word of God holds forth; Jeſus Chriſt did not ſo little conſider of the rule and order of his Churches, as to leave it wholly to Chriſtian Prudence, which is the very inlet of all tyranny that hath p. 176been exerciſed over the Churches of God: yet we allow Chriſtian prudence, if clearly according to generall rules of the Word of God.

But he would have it eſtabliſht: By whom? We preſume he means the Magiſtrate; What, cannot the Goſpel do it? Sure Jeſus Chriſt would rule by the rod of his mouth, Iſa. 11.4. the rod of his ſtrength, Pſal. 110.2, 3. And not by Magiſtrates compelling Edicts: Though in bringing all to converting Ordinances, we humbly conceive their power is to be put forth, and in reſtraining blaſphemies, but not to the whole order of Church-communion; let the Goſpel be left to its proper work; If men ſpeak of countenancing by their power; what would we have more then protection in our duties, which bleſſed be God, we enjoy; The Lord free the Spirits of godly men who pleade for purity and diſcipline, from this ſnare; for we dare averre it to be a great one.

2. He wiſheth, That the duty of fraternall correption, a watching over, and admoniſhing one another in love, were better known and practiſed.

Anſ. Let him wiſh and pray for it p. 177more; But this may be preſt by a Miniſter till his heart ake, conſidering the cuſtomary formality the moſt are held under, and ſtand for nothing, and will not reach any reall Reformation, till they ſhall be cal'd upon, to come and profeſſe their willingneſſe to ſubmit to ſuch diſcipline actively and paſſively: An then M^r Humphreys and others will diſcern the temper of this generation as they yet remain; That they will neither enter in themſelves, nor ſuffer others to do ſo:

3. He wiſheth, That men would look more into their own conſciences, and leave the judging of others ſpirits, hearts, and reins alone, &c.

Anſ. Who he means in this admonition we know not; we know not of any who undertake this kinde of judging, but judge by profeſſion and converſation; We mean godly Miniſters, who call upon their people to ſubmit to diſcipline, and joynt communion; We wiſh M^r Humphreys ſeriouſly to conſider whether he need not take this back again to his own ſpirit; For his bringing the practiſe of Reformation under the doom of Pride and Phariſaiſm; as hath been obſerved: p. 178And as he cals for ſo univerſall a charity, we wiſh he extend it not beyond what his own conſcience may one day fly in in his face for; for countenancing ignorant and prophane ſouls in their waies, as his piece ſerves for nothing elſe: Oh ſay they, let us go on, for all what our Miniſter ſaith, M^r Humphreys in his Book ſaith, they ought to judge charitably of me, though we refuſe to profeſſe Repentance and Faith, and to come under diſcipline, and checks theſe new troubleſome Miniſters for it; And we all ought to receive the Lords Supper.

Sir, We are bold to minde you again that you have deeply wounded the ſpirits of many of your brethren, and the Lords people in the Nation, and made the wicked bold in their wickedneſſe, and have much hardned them againſt their Miniſters, See Eze. 13.22, 23.

Laſtly, He wiſheth, That though there may be ſome judging by the fruits, yet hat wiſe religious men would be more cautious of countenancing theſe Separations in the viſible Church, becauſe upon this ſcore he ſaith there may be Separation upon Separation in the ſame Church, &c.

If he mean by Separations and gathering p. 179of Churches, the practiſe which we have in this Treatiſe laboured to vindicate, viz. That when a faithfull Preacher of the Goſpel is ſent to an ignorant, ſuperſtitious, prophane people, (the moſt part by far ſuch:) And if it pleaſe the Lord to work upon a part of this people, as to draw them out to own the Goſpel from him, and to conform to it, and ſo that Preacher draweth the willing people upon their profeſſion, into a more cloſe union and fellowſhip together, waiting and labouring to bring on the reſt to them; If we ſay he mean by this, the ſeparation he would caution againſt, we hope and pray that wiſe and religious men will not be deterred from it by any thing M^r Humphreys hath produced againſt it, but will in the ſtrength of the Lord ſet about it againſt all oppoſitions, All conſiderations of eaſe or intereſt being thrown off: By which means, 1. They will be found faithfull Stewards to their Maſter. 2. They will keep themſelves pure, 1 Tim. 5.22. 3. They will ſanctifie the Name of Chriſt aright in this Ordinance of the Supper. 4. They will be free from the ſinne of flattering ſouls to hell by it. 5. They ſhall diſcern p. 180how the Lord owneth and bleſſeth their Miniſtery. 6. They ſhall have ſweet communion with Saints. 7. They will by this provoke and awake all to examine their condition. 8. They will act ſutably to thoſe rich and glorious promiſes of the building of the Lords Temple in the latter daies of the Goſpel, Zech. 6.12, 13. and many others.

For Separations in the viſible Church which he ſuggeſts dangerous, We anſwer, That if as much and great profaneneſſe and abominations ſhall be fouled with the viſible Church (as is too apparent) as even among ſuch know not God, Then Separations as to the holy things of God, where holy men have only right, is juſtifiable in the eyes of God, Saints and Angels.

For his ſuggeſted danger of ſeparation upon ſeparation; 1. We anſwer, That how is there properly a Separation, when there hath been no true uniting, nor hath one perſon conſidered himſelf to have any more relation to another, then as one of their Pariſh, but hear one another lie, ſwear, and commit together, and rather encourage then reprove one another for it; Separation is properly p. 181in and from a true Church-fellowſhip, and not from ungodlineſſe and prophaneſſe in a Scripture ſenſe.

Beſides, what if there may be unſtable ſouls ſeparate from ſuch a joynt-communion (as 'tis like there may in the pureſt conſtitutions) ſhall there, for that reaſon, be no Church-communion nor endeavour after it?

What if Excommunication be ſet up by a Law from men in every Pariſh, (which we beleeve to be impoſſible to any purpoſe, as the caſe ſtands with moſt Miniſters and People who are bitterly againſt it) and there ſhould 50 lyars, ſwearers, &c. be caſt out, would not there lie the ſame Objection againſt this practiſe alſo? And yet the Author makes us beleeve he would have Excommunication ſet up.

Now when M^r Humfreys hath done all, let us ſee how far we can gather from his own expreſſions an implied allowance of our own practiſe, though his Book in the main fights againſt it.

1. He cals for Church eſtabliſhment, and for Diſcipline, for watching over one another, for mutuall Reproof and Admonition, and confeſſeth there comes p. 182guilt and defilement upon a ſoul if it be neglected.

Now we crave of our Brethren of the Miniſtery, and the people we preach to, and others, to conſider, that theſe are the duties we call upon for to be practiſed, and that people that fear the Lord might ſubmit conſcionably to the practiſe of them; We crave of M^r Humfreys his more candid and honeſt interpretation of other his Brethren acting conſcienciouſly in the Lords work, according to the light imparted to him, labouring to extricate the people by the good hand of God with them, out of ignorance, ſinne, and dead-hearted formality, by a reall practiſe and not pretended only of Reformation; And that the Lord may humble him for his great evil in this little but miſchievous piece, ſo miſerably ſerving the turns of the enemies of goodneſſe; and that he will ſpeedily call it in, or we ſhall pray that the Lord will ſtir up others to do it for him.

FINIS.

Poſtſcript.

Reader,

BE pleaſed to take notice, that this Treatiſe hath been above this half Year fitted for the Preſſe, but by reaſon of the death of a friend to whom it was committed to be printed, it hath been retarded.

Be pleaſed alſo to take notice that M^r Anthony Palmer hath in the Preſſe ſeverall Sermons on Matt. 8.23, 24, 25, 26, 27. Intituled, The Tempestuous Soul Calmed by Jeſus Chriſt.

End of the text · Anthony Palmer, A Scripture-Rale to the Lords Table (1654)