A Scripture-Rale to the Lords Table, Errata

A Scripture-Rale to the Lords Table · Errata

The Authour being abſent from the Preſs deſires the Reader to correct theſe Errata's for him, Viz.

IN the Epiſtle Pag. 3. lin. 13. before Miniſters reade Godly. In the Book Pag. 1. l. 4. for import r. impart. p. 4. l. 9. for obſtructions v. abſtractions. p. 14. l. 22. for from r. of. p. 39. l. 14. for on r. in. p. 72. l. 1. after eſteem r. others. p. 76. l. 20. for came r. come. l. 21. for least r. beſt. p. 81. l. 1. after expreſſion r. unſavoury. p. 84. l. 10. for acceptance r. repentance. p. 94. for their r. your. p. 103. l. 7. for men r. me. p. 121. l. 17. for contrive r. continue. p. 156. l. 3. blot out as. p. 18. l. 13. for ſouled r. found. l. 26. after commit r. iniquity. p. 182. l. 13. for him r. them.

p. 1AN ANSVVER to a Book of M^r HƲMPHREYS, Entituled, A free Admiſſion to the Lords Supper.

BEfore we yet enter upon the ſubject it ſelf, give us leave, Reader, further to import unto thee, what hath given us this encouragement, and indeed laid an invincible engagement upon our ſpirits, as to the bearing witneſs againſt this vile piece.

We the unworthieſt of the ſervants of Chriſt, having with many others, long waited for the practice of Reformation in the Parochial Congregations of this p. 2Nation (as the fruit of the prayers, tears and bloud of the Lords people.) And though there have been expedients held forth, yet finding they lay dead upon the ſpirits of too many, it pleaſed the Lord to ſtirre us up, though the laſt and leaſt of our Brethren, to enquire after him in this matter, labouring (as far as we were able) to lay aſide all prejudices and prepoſſeſſions, as to the different wayes were held forth by holy men in the Nation, and ſo to purſue in the Lords ſtrength what he ſhould pleaſe to clear unto us to be his will, and to impreſs upon our hearts, and accordingly to practiſe it: Upon this we betook our ſelves to publick Humiliation in Faſting and Prayer in our reſpective places, as alſo to private weekly ſeeking the Lord together, and conference, in which duties we found the Lord greatly abaſing our ſpirits before him, for the great neglects which had been upon u as to this duty, and we were even afraid to plead with our God, conſidering how greatly we had failed, and put off the work of Reformation from our ſpirits, and the many ſore and great evils the Lord was pleas'd to diſcover p. 3upon our hearts, ſpecially that great ſnare (which we deſire with all humility to declare to the praiſe of God, and the admonition of our Brethren) in which we had been long held, viz.

That reforming our Congregations could not be attain'd, but by a Law from the Supream Magiſtrate, thereby exonerating our ſelves of the duties the Lord required from us, and the laying the guilt at their door, which the Lord hath now ſhew'd us to be a very ſhift; and we conſider 'tis a great mercy that we have protection from the Magiſtrate in the peaceable practice of our conſciences.

2. We are convine'd and finde that 'tis the power of the Goſpel, the Spirit working by it, that is the only expedient to bring a people to a more cloſe and holy fellowſhip together, by their willing and mutual ſubjection to the rule of the Lord Jeſus over them; We take it to be derogatory from him, for a people to be forc'd by humane power into the full fellowſhip of the Church; ſutable to theſe convincements, we endeavour'd to clear unto our people, the nature of Church-fellowſhip, and the way of it, p. 4and the neceſſity of Diſcipline, and ſo to call upon them to joyn with us in the Lords work, that we might give up our ſelves unto him, in a profeſſed ſubjection to the Goſpel, and to grow to a more cloſe fellowſhip together, that all Ordinances might be duly adminiſtred, to the honour of Chriſt, and that formality and lukewarmneſs might be in ſome meaſure broken. Accordingly an Expedient or Profeſſion was drawn up, wherein we acknowledging our former abominations in Worſhip, and profeſſing our Repentance before the Lord for them, do ſolemnly enter into, and renew our Covenant with God, that he may be our God, and we his people, to own the Lord Jeſus in his Offices, to ſubmit to godly Order and Diſcipline, to watch over one another, to walk in mutual edification, knit together in love, and ſo receiving others as the Lord ſhall over-power their hearts, ſome account of themſelves being given, and no juſt exception (in a charitable judgement) to be made againſt them; This being the known duty of every compleat member in a particular Church, as in effect granted by both the godly parties, we conceived p. 5few or none who were for purity would ſtick at it, the want of which practice we take to be the main reaſon of ſuch great corruptions in the mixt Congregations, which corruptions, we humbly conceive, do put us inevitably upon this practice, if Reformation be really effected; That the ſubſtance of this is practiſed by the Presbyterian Brethren, though differing in the expedient, is ſufficiently clear by the practice of the London Presbytery, who call upon all, and receive ſuch as freely tender themſelves, and require an account of them, waiting for the coming in of the reſt, which are much the greater party in moſt Pariſhes, without Excommunicating ſuch as refuſe upon what account ſoever, to our beſt information, and ſo the minor party do withdraw from the greater, which the corruption of the greater part (in their enmity to Reformation) doth put them and us upon, unleſs we will content our ſelves with the ſetting up a meer form of Diſcipline, but indeed ſit down again on the fame lees of formality, which the Lord hath in ſore judgements ſo much witneſſed againſt, and his ſoul abhorreth. To take the p. 6boldneſs of a word more, as to our godly Brethren: We humbly conceive, that if that our Principle agreed upon by the moſt of the different wayes (viz. That every particular Congregation hath power to reform it ſelf, and ſo Miniſters to be helpfull to each other in it) were really practis'd; the controverſie of Appeals would quickly ceaſe. And further (which is alſo on both hands granted) that an Aſſembly of the Officers of ſeveral Churches in the Name of Chriſt, is an Ordinance of Chriſt for the healing of differences, the conteſt, Whether this power ſhall be ſtiled Juridical or Declarative, and whether this Aſſembly ſhould actually excommunicate or declare the fact to be excommunicable, would ſurely ceaſe: It is very ſad that a controverſie about Appeals, which happily in well-order'd Churches, may rarely be needfull, ſhould hinder us in the practice of the firſt Principles which all agree in for the ſubſtance of them, and ſhould make us draw harſh conſequences from one anothers premiſſes, which both diſavow, and ſo lay ſtumbling blocks in the wayes of the weak, and hinder the hoped ſucceſs of p. 7the Goſpel and Reformation in the Nation: Let us firſt have our Churches form'd up and order'd according to Goſpel-rules, the ignorant and profane withdrawn from (ſince 'tis clear they cannot be regularly caſt out by Diſcipline) and then the way of thoſe Churches holding Communion together, would naturally fall in: To this practice (by the good hand of the Lord) we have mutually given up our ſelves, and engaged in the Lord to be helpfull to each other, and to hold Communion together, and a day of ſmall things is wit us, yea we have had very precious teſtimonies of the Lords preſence with it, with ſome of us, for which we bleſs him, and our eyes are upon him to bring his own work to paſs, who is able to work and none ſhall let it, Iſa. 43.13.

The good Lord pardon us, if we are not cleanſed according to the purifying of the Sanctuary.

We ſhall yet for further ſatisfaction, briefly give an anſwer to the moſt common objections to, and miſunderſtandings of our practice.

It is enquired in what relation do we conceive our ſelves to ſtand unto the p. 8reſt, and how doe we eſteem of them?

1. As to the weak (but not obſtinate) that have not ſtrength enough to come up to this practice, we conceive it the Miniſters duty to labour their convincement in publick and private, and the united Brethren to do their duty, by praying for them, and to labour to draw them on to them, by all good wayes and means, and not to neglect them.

2. To ſuch as peremptorily deny to ſubject to Chriſts Diſcipline, upon indeed a profane account, they doe virtually excommunicate themſelves (at leaſt from that particular Church) for being called upon to walk with them in the ſubjection and fellowſhip of the Goſpel, they utterly refuſe ſo to do, but will continue in that looſe eſtate, and though they were baptized, yet by their refuſing to ſubject to Chriſt, they are as Ʋrſin ſpeaks Deficientes à ſuo Baptiſmo, Cap. de diſcip & excom.ſuch as for the preſent make void the fruit of their Baptiſm (though if they are after called we do not aſſert a neceſſity of renewing it) and to admit ſuch to the Lords Supper, were, as that acute Author juſtly p. 9ſaith, and is evident from the Word, to confound and make one the Church of Chriſt and the Kingdom of the devil, as we ſhall (God willing) demonſtrate in this Diſcourſe; and though they pretend to profeſſe and know God, yet factis negant foedus Dei, they deny him and his Covenant in their works and lives,Tit. 1.16.Titus 1:16 and ſo ought not to be admitted to the Seals of it.

So that ſuch perſons refuſing to own the Covenant of God into which they were tendered in Baptiſm, Jeſus Chriſt in his Offices and Diſcipline, and the fellowſhip of that particular Church, whereof he pretends to be a Member, being called thereunto, or by their ignorance and profaneneſſe not fit to be received; what need any formal act of Excommunication paſſe upon them?

Specially firſt, Since there was never any ſuch former orderly receiving them into the compleat Communion of the Church upon their profeſſed faith and obedience before the Church, nor did ever give their conſents to ſubmit to Diſcipline.

Secondly, Neither is there any way how they ſhould be rightly excommunicated, p. 10for that the major part of the Church is corrupt (which we may well ſuppoſe in moſt of the mixt Parothial Congregations in England) and ſo will not excommunicate, nor are fit to do ſo, nor fit to chooſe Officers to do it.

Beſides, as we have formerly hinted, we never heard that either the Presbyterian or Congregational Brethren do excommunicate ſuch as ſubmit not; and therefore we rather wonder the more why this ſhould be kept up as a note of difference between them, when practice confutes it.

3. It is objected, that we propoſe a Covenant: we anſwer for the ſatisfaction of any, that we propoſe the Covenant eſtabliſht in Chriſt Jeſus; The profeſſing to enter into which, we inſiſt upon in order to a perſons partaking the ſeal of it; and thoſe who require profeſſion of repentance and faith in Chriſt before the Presbytery do, in ſubſtance the ſame thing; for Knowledge, Faith, and Obedience are the graces of the Covenant.

1. It is moſt evident that Faith and Repentance in Chriſts and the Apoſtles time were expected and required to be p. 11profeſſed from the perſon to be baptized.

2. 'Tis manifeſt that backſliders from this profeſſion were not to be admitted to further Communion, as Simon Magus; And that thoſe who brake bread, Act. 2.42. continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowſhip. It is alſo evident that in the pureſt times the Sacrament of Baptiſm was adminiſtred to the party entring into Covenant, Credis? Credo, Abrenuncias? Abrenuncio; Doſt thou beleeve? I beleeve. Doſt thou renounce? I renounce. Plainly, it will then follow, that it is the duty of thoſe who are baptized in Infancy, after they have gladly heard and received the Word, to own, profeſs and enter into the Covenant of God into which they were tendred in Baptiſm, and to joyn themſelves by a free expreſſed conſent, to the Communion of the Church, that ſo they may continue in the Apoſtles doctrine and fellowſhip, and breaking of bread, &c. This was appointed to be the practice of the Church of England, and other Reformed Churches, to require this, and ſo none to be eſteemed in the compleat Communion of the Church without it, p. 12and therefore not to be admitted to the Lords Supper, till ſuch a covenanting, ſubmitting and joyning: We finde holy Bucer much lamenting the want of this practice, in an Epiſtle to Calvin, Ʋtinam, ficut iſtud foedus civile, hìc aliquando redintegraſſemus & ſanxiſſemus foedus vitae aeternae, quomodo vos conati ſoli praeſtitiſtis; Calvin. epiſt. fol. p. 509.Further, Martyrum Eccleſiae ſevera Diſciplinae religione erant conjunctae &c.

Speaking further of the Churches there, Niſi Chriſto Domino ſunt penitus inſiti, ejus quoque Diſciplinam inter ſe reſtituant, de ipſis miſerè metuo;—Non deſunt in omnibus ordinibus, qui reſtitutioni ſolidae communionis & Diſciplinae Chriſti adverſantur. Which we engliſh for the weakeſt, that they may obſerve the concurring judgements of holy men, as to our own practice.

Oh that we had renew'd and eſtabliſht the Covenant of eternal life, as we have done a civil Covenant. The Churches of the Martyrs were joyned together by the ſevere Religion of Diſcipline. I miſerably fear what may become of our Churches, unleſs they are more cloſely graffed into Chriſt, p. 13and that they reſtore Diſcipline among themſelves. There are ſome of all orders who are againſt the reſtoring of ſolid fellowſhip and Diſcipline.

Now as that which is ſtyl'd a ChurchCovenant, ſo much debated among the godly, we take it to be no more, then ſuch a mutual agreement and joyning together mention'd, that ſolid fellowſhip and Diſcipline may be ſet up, elſe how can there be an unity and fellow-memberſhip in a particular Church?

Say ſuch even who diſpute againſt this practice, This is imply'd in the very principles of Chriſtianity; We then apprehend it is not unlawfully but indeed neceſſary, expreſly to profeſs what flows from the principles of it; ſpecially in this caſe, where 'tis a mans own free act that conſtitutes him a member of a particular Church.

Such a Profeſſion and expreſs conſent to walk in fellowſhip, and to ſubmit to Diſcipline, we call for; and we believe without it it will hardly be ſet up, unleſs a catechiſtical anſwer or two of a perſon examin'd (though never ſo dead-hearted, and a cloſe enemy to the power of godlineſs) ſhall be thought enough, p. 14which will be to ſettle again where we were, in old ignorance, lukewarmneſs, looſneſs and formality; in ſtead of ſuch as fear the Lord, walking in fellowſhip with the Father, and one with another in the Spirit.

Now that any that truly fear the Lord ſhould ſtick at this, viz. to profeſs to own the Covenant of Gods free grace, to give up themſelves unto it, and to Jeſus Chriſt the Mediatour of it in all his Offices, to walk under his Diſcipline, and in fellowſhip with his people, we cannot but juſtly wonder, and why any godly men of parts ſhould frame and raiſe up bug-bears againſt it; The Lord give them to beleeve, yea to taſte the goodneſs and ſweetneſs of it, and they will be humbled before the Lord that they ever withſtood it.

4. The Novelty of this practice, and from keeping any from the Sacrament, is objected to us and others.

We could anſwer at large here, That it is as old as the Goſpel for beleevers to walk together in fellowſhip in the duties expreſs'd, and for unworthy perſons to be kept from holy things.

We might moreover produce the p. 15teſtimony of the moſt eminent Divines, that have been the Lords witneſſes ſince, as the Church of God hath been bleſt with, as Cyprian, Justin Martyr, Chryſostom, Ambroſe, &c.

The abundant teſtimonies of all Reformed Divines, Calvin, Beza, Bullinger, Hyperius, Bucer, Zanchy, &c. with the ſad complaints they make in their writings of the abuſe of the Lords Supper, &c.

Saith Calvin in one of his Epiſtles, ſpeaking of the profane, Sine craſs â Dei injuriâ admitti nequeunt, Lib. Epiſt. pag. 438.quàm turpis & pudenda iſta profanatio Saerorum? The profane cannot be admitted without groſs injury unto the Lord, How vile and ſhamefull is the profanation of theſe holy things?

Yea ſaith Biſhop Bilſon, Not onelyonly the want of the Sacraments, but the abuſe of either hazards the weal of the whole Church, yea caſting holy things to dogs, procures a dreadfull doom, as well to conſenters as preſumers, it being a way to turn the houſe of God into a den of thieves, if profane ones be allowed the Myſteries and Aſſemblies of the faithfull.

p. 165. It is objected, It is tyrannical; We anſwer, we wiſh that people would firſt look to their own duty, To obey them, that have the rule over them, and to ſubmit themſelves to them, Heb. 13.17. before they ſo peremptorily aſſert, That the Miniſter doing his duty, in reference to the Lord, and the good of their ſouls, is tyrannical; What tyranny for a Miniſter to make an univerſal invitation to the people he preacheth to, to own the Lord and one another in holineſs and love, and ſo to walk with them? This Objection proceeds from a love of liberty and elbow-room in a carnal courſe, &c.

6. Separation is objected; What ſeparation for a Miniſter coming to a people ſetled upon the lees of ignorance and profaneneſs, and having much abuſed Sacraments, to call upon all that fear the Lord, to profeſs Chriſt with their mouths, and to give up themſelves to him, and ſo to walk in mutual love and comfort together? Separation from wickedneſs is not ſchiſm, but from the godly; We profeſs to hold Communion with Miniſters and Churches where Reformation is in any meaſure practis'd.

p. 17Laſtly, A vulgar Objection that is in the mouths of moſt, that we take upon us in this practice to judge the hearts of moſt.

We anſwer, though we cannot nor do we undertake directly to judge mens hearts, yet we can argue out what is in mens heart, as the Wiſeman ſpeaks, Counſel in the heart of a man is like deep water, but a man of underſtanding draweth it cut.

And that firſt, by their words, for Chriſt teacheth us ſo to know them, Mat. 12.34. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth ſpeaketh: And verſ. 35. An evil man out of the evil treaſure of his heart bringeth forth evil things, as by lying, ſwearing, hard ſpeeches, bitter ſcoffes, and revilings at ſuch as profeſs godlineſs under the names of Phariſees and hypocrites, with ſuch like corrupt communications, any of which in their conſtant practice diſcover the heart: How elſe did Simon Magus manifeſt himſelf in the gall of bitterneſs?

2. By their works, Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, falſe witneſs, blaſphemies, &c. By ſuch fruits we ſhall know them.

p. 183. An humble Chriſtian will be willing to have his heart tried, and to have his Miniſter apply rules and evidences to diſcover whether it be ſound and right with the Lord or not?

4. Where none of theſe fruits doe appear, we do not pretend to make a judgement of mens hearts, ſo there be a willing ſubjection to the Lord and his wayes, to walk in fellowſhip with him and his people.

Thus have we taken liberty (we truſt without offence to any of the Lords people) with open-heartedneſs and plainneſs, to propoſe what we humbly conceive we have learned of the Lord, and being deeply deſirous to be aſhamed of our former abominations; Ezek. 43.10, 11.Ezek 43:10Ezek 43:11we hope we have, or ſhall ſee the Patern of the Lords houſe; ſo far as in abundance of mercy, he ſhall pleaſe to uſe us; which the Lord (who will build up and come into his Temple) will in his time reveal to all that love him; In the mean time the Lord give unto us and all our Brethren, whoſe hearts are truly after Reformation to pray more, and diſpute leſs, and laying aſide all animoſities, to do the work of our bleſſed God committed to p. 19us peaceably, according to the light we have received in our generations.

Now we ſhall deliver ſome brief and plain obſervations upon this unhappy piece of M^r Humfreys, aiming at the ſatisfaction of the people meerly; conceiving that judicious godly Miniſters are not at all ſtartled in their principles by what he hath vented; And ſo we have laboured to frame ſuch anſwers as are moſt obvious to the people, and not puzzle them.

Firſt, We take notice of this Parentheſis in the Title, viz. That his Treatiſe was publiſhed for the eaſe, ſupport and ſatisfaction of tender conſciences (otherwiſe remedileſſe) in or mixt Congregations.

Anſw. 1. By eaſe, it is plain he means by his Sophiſtry to delude their underſtandings ſo far as that they may without ſcruple partake of the Lords Table with the ignorant and profane; This is to make the conſcience quiet, and not good; as water cooling a feaver for the preſent, but makes it return with greater violence.

2. We are confident this hath not eaſed, but more grieved and perplexed, the moſt tender cohſciences in the Natton, p. 20as moſt of the godly bear witneſs, and hath made the hearts of the righteous ſad; The burden of ſuch mixt communicating, which hath been and is in the mixt Congregations of England, hath been and is the grief and ſad complaint of the ſervants of God both Miniſters and people, and will be proved a ſnare.

3. Whereas he ſaith, Tender conſciences are otherwiſe remedileſs in our mixt Congregations.

1. We offer it to conſideration, Whether he doth not imply that our Congregations ought not to be continued ſo mixt with all manner of profaneneſs and ignorance, as the moſt are? And whether he doth not propoſe this as ſatisfaction to tender conſciences onelyonly in this exigency of time, when he conceiveth no other remedy is to be had for want of a Diſcipline eſtabliſht, and Elder'd Congregations, as he intimates in the cloſe, and as he alloweth of Excommunication all along his book, and ſo his arguments to ſatisfie tender conſciences in ſuch an exigency, imply, that other remedies are deſirable, and to be lookt after.

p. 212. But we conceive and know, that tender conſciences are not otherwiſe remedileſs, if they do not ſubmit to ſuch a mixt Communion, we apprehend the remedy laid down in the Preamble to be proper and good, and what others are practis'd by godly men in the Nation: Surely this evil is not ſo remedileſs, if godly Miniſters and people will do their duty. We deſire with all ſubmiſſion to remark, that many do hotly diſpute againſt Erastianiſm, (viz.) Of Church-power being in the Magistrate, and yet they ſay Diſcipline cannot be practiſed without a Law from them (though they will protect men peaceably doing their duty) which we look upon as a very ſnare upon the ſpirits of good men. Therefore (bleſſed be God) there are comfortable remedies, if applied, without wallowing back again into that ſea of dead bloud, that corrupt, carnal, dead-hearted, formal, prophane, ignorant practice of worſhip we have been in.

We cannot but likewiſe take notice of an expreſſion in the Epiſtle to the Reader, as it ſeems penn'd by another, wherein he cals this practice of freeadmiſſion, precious light; We are ſure p. 22it hath by the holy people of this and other Nations, been ever accounted groſs darkneſs, born witneſs againſt by moſt of the Confeſſions and Martyrs in all ages of the Church, yea hiſt at as a profane principle, and hath ſent many of as eminent Saints as ever this Nation was bleſt with, to priſons and baniſhments: Oh horrid! that the liberty of all ungodly perſons, promiſcuouſly to profane the holy things of God, ſhould now be ſtiled precious light!

Now to take notice and examine how precious it is, yet with all due reſpect to the Author.

His Text, Matth. 26.27. They all drank of it: All the twelve without exception; from whence, ſaith he, I gather free Admiſſion.

Anſw. 1. But we are bold to ſay moſt inconſequently, as ever was Argument drawn by a man of parts. Juſt the contrary will be thus argued, There were but only twelve Apoſtles (though Chriſt had many other followers and hearers) admitted by Chriſt to his Supper, therefore all of all ſorts were not admitted to come; this is ſure more colourably argued.

p. 232. Becauſe onelyonly twelve Apoſtles, none being under ſcandal or ignorance, brake bread with Chriſt, therefore ignorant, ſwearers, liars, drunkards, unclean perſons, covetous, revilers and haters of godly Preachers and people, ſuch as moſt Congregations, to ſpeak out, do abound with, may now come to that holy Communion of Saints.

3. Here is the force of his Argument, Chriſt took twelve with him, and all thoſe twelve drank of the Cup, therefore all might have come that would. Twelve Aldermen are invited by a Major to a feaſt, and becauſe all the twelve eat, therefore all the beggars of the Town might have come.

If the ſtreſs of his Argument lie in Judas his partaking of it, he might have been pleas'd ſo to have urg'd it, and not put ſuch a fallacy upon weak people:

And if it do, we anſwer briefly here, (and more fully where he plainly urgeth it) that it was irrational Judas ſhould have been kept off before he had committed the ſcandal, ſpecially Chriſt acting in that as an ordinary Miniſter and Paſt our to his Church.

p. 24In his ſtating the Queſtion, he aſſerts, All in the viſible Church are capable of all Ordinances, but Infants, diſtracted perſons, and excommunicated perſons.

1. Let the Reader obſerve, that M^r Humfreys allows Excommunication: of whom? of ſuch as are detected for ſcandal, or unduly admitted into the Church formerly, being groſly ignorant; How will free Admiſſion and Excommunication ſtand together? If it be every mans duty to come, why ſhould any hinder him?

But ſaith he, unleſs excommunicated: But what if they are excommunicable? Doth not that Paſtour and Church ſinne before the Lord if they do not excommunicate them? If the greater part be ſuch, ought not the Paſtour and ſuch as fear God with him (due means having been uſed for the conviction of the ignorant, ſuperſtitious and ſcandalous) to withdraw from them, in the exerciſe of this Ordinance, if Diſcipline cannot otherwiſe be taken up, as in a corrupt majority how can it?

Pag. 3. ſaith he, Though he queſtions the capacity of many people, becauſe a ſolemn preparation is required, yet he ſaith, p. 25he humbly perſwades himſelf that for the Ministers and Churches part as to offering Chriſt freely, there is ſuch an univerſal capacity, that if any come in profeſſing themſelves ready to enter into Covenant with Chriſt, and ſerve him in this Ordinance, we may encourage him, from Rev. 22.17.

Anſw. Here is the fallacy couched that runnes thorow the whole Book.

But is not this a ſad confounding of things?

1. It is moſt true, that ſinners are freely to be invited to Chriſt? But muſt it be preſently to this Ordinance of the Supper? If they do indeed profeſs themſelves ready to enter into Covenant with Chriſt, and their lives do not contradict this covenanting, the Church is to receive them, but ought not this to be an explicit profeſſion to the Church or Officers of it? Muſt a profane perſon ruſhing upon the ordinance as formerly, be ſuppoſed to do ſo, meerly becauſe he comes? Upon this ſcore, who ever they be, Turks, Pagans, Jews, if they hear a Sermon, and come and eat and drink at the Supper, it is to be ſuppoſed they do p. 26implicitely enter into Covenant with Chriſt; how abſurd would this be, and makes the bloud of the Covenant an unclean thing?

But ſecondly, his humble perſwaſion is not argument enough to prove, that the Miniſter and Church is to be ſo remiſs and ſlight in this matter, without a former profeſſion before the Lord and the Church, of every perſons willingneſs to covenant with Chriſt, and ſubmit to Diſcipline, (eſpecially in this lapſed ſtate we now are in) and the Church in a judgement of charity ſatisfied in them; if he means ſuch a precedent, explicite, open profeſſion of every perſon, we agree with him; but unleſs his Congregation be the Phoenix of all in England, I beleeve he would have but a few Communicants upon ſuch an account, as trial hath been made by many godly Miniſters in this particular.

But as we have ſaid, if he mean his meer coming, is ſuch a profeſſion, we take it to be very deluſory, indeed a very mocking of the Lord.

Beſides M^r Humfreys well knows how unduly all ſorts have been admitted to the Communion of the Church formerly, p. 27and therefore now in times of Reformation the caſe is diſtant; how few, alas to be found that know or have been ever truly taught what it is to covenant with Chriſt?

This ſtrange latitude that this latter ſenſe implies, is farre from the Churches ſtrictneſs in the pureſt times, in the admitting their Catechumeni into the fellowſhip of the Church.

He goes on, Pag. 4. That he believes none unleſs excommunicated (ipſo jure, or facto) ought to be refuſed, &c.

If he means by excommunicated, ipſo jure, ſuch as of right ought to be excommunicated by the Church, then the matter is ended; for it is moſt true, that none but ſuch as are already excommunicated, are to be kept from the Supper, and ſuch without queſtion ought to be kept off, and if ſo, he grants what we deſire.

But let us examine his further proofs for free Admiſſion.

His firſt Scripture is from Exod. 12. There was free admiſſion to the Paſſeover, therefore to the Supper.

p. 28Anſw. 1. If all came to the Paſſeover, then there was no Excommunication in the Jewiſh Church, which Scripture Eraſtus and his followers uſe to prove there was none; And by this argument he will make void Excommunication now, (which as he hath ſtated the matter, will not be well conſiſtent with his free Admiſſion.) All to come to the Lords Supper, as all did come to the Paſſeover, none kept back from the one, therefore none from the other.

2. But we deny that all were admitted to the Paſſeover; he confeſſeth himſelf, from Numb. 9. that they were to be kept off for a monethmonth, for legal pollution (which was a type of ſinne) ſuppoſing that they ſhould cleanſe themſelves in that monethmonth, otherwiſe they were longer to be kept off, as will neceſſarily follow, the end of their keeping off for that time, being that they ſhould be cleanſed, as Pareus, and others upon the place well obſerve.

We cannot here inſiſt to enforce the many Scriptures and Arguments which have been brought by others, to prove that the Jews were kept from the Paſſeover both for legal and moral uncleanneſs p. 29for ſcandalous ſins, which we are confident neither he nor all the world will be able to anſwer: Therefore we do indeed the more wonder that he will urge this, and go about to impoſe it on Miniſters and people, ſo ſlightly paſſing over what ſo many learned and godly men have wrote, ſpecially the London Miniſters, and Scotch Divines, and not take notice of their weighty arguments.

But we will clear it from the Scriptures plainly. See, Reader, Numb. 15.30, 31. & Chap. 19. That there was a cutting off from the Congregation ſuch as did ought preſumptuouſly againſt the Lord, that deſpiſed the word of the Lord, that tranſgreſſed the Sabbath. So Ezra 10.8. Whoſoever would not come to build the Temple within the three dayes, ſhould be ſeparated from the Congregation. And whoſoever ſhould confeſs Chriſt was to be put out of the Synagogue, John 9.22. Yea himſelf grants, that the Jews had their ſeveral degrees of Excommunication, p. 84. of his Book. And is not the neglect of keeping of the profane from the holy things charg'd upon the Prieſts as a great evil? Ezek. 22.26. Her Prieſts have p. 30violated my Law, and have profaned my holy things, they have put no difference between the holy and profane, &c. Yea further, Ezek. 44 7, 9. The uncircumciſed in heart were not to enter into the Sanctuary to pollute it, that is, ſuch as did manifeſtly in their lives appear to be ſo, though they had received outward Circumciſion. And the Lord ſaith, verſ. 13. That ſuch of the Prieſts that thus tranſgreſſed the Covenant of the Lord ſhould bear their iniquity, and they ſhould not come near unto him to do the Office of a Prieſt any more. This alſo is typical of the ſpiritual Sanctuary the Church of Chriſt in Goſpel times.

From what hath been ſaid, it will eaſily appear, without troubling the Reader with any more, that the Jews were kept off from the Paſſeover for preſumptuous and ſcandalous ſins; for if they were cut off from the Congregation, then they came not at the Paſſeover; and one end of their cutting off was, that they might not defile the Paſſeover, as hath been proved; Therefore, Reader, thus farre it appears M^r Humfreys hath deluded thee.

His next Scripture is, 1 Cor. 10.7. We p. 31being many are all partakers of one bread, All at Corinth, &c.

Anſw. True, All ſuch who joyned themſelves to the Church by the preaching of the Apoſtles did ſo, who came and profeſſed ſubjection to the Lord Chriſt and his Goſpel, 2 Cor. 9.13. and became a chaſte Spouſe unto Chriſt, Chap. 11.2. theſe did all partake it. But, Sir, were the Parochial Churches in England (though we deny them not to be Churches in a large ſenſe) ſo brought in? Will you compare the obſtinate ignorance of this age of people, to profeſſing Saints at Corinth? whom Paul ſtyleth, Called to be Saints, and ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus, 1 Cor. 1.2. as we ſhall elſwhere urge.

Are not zealous Preachers of the Goſpel, upon laying aſide corrupt forms, and ſuperſtitious uſages in too many places, deſpiſed and reviled by the moſt, as Novelliſts and Troublers of Iſrael? would, do you imagine, Paul write to ſuch as Saints and ſanctified, and ſtile the Churches the chaſte Spouſes of Chriſt, where ſo much abetted profaneneſs and affected ignorance?

2. Beſides the Apoſtles drift in that p. 32place is not to prove that all did partake of the bread, but that thoſe that did partake, were one bread together, and therefore they ſhould flie idolatrous ſeaſts, leſt they were made one body with them, by eating with them.

Pag. 6. But faith M^r Humfreys, Many of theſe Corinths were ready to go to their Idols, and to commit Idolatry.

Anſw, It ſeems then they were but ready to go to their Idols, they did not actually commit Idolatry. The truth is this, ſome of them through weakneſs, did eat at their feaſts, of meats ſacrificed to Idols, which things the Apoſtle ſeverely warns them of, leſt they ſhould be tempted back to Idolatry, by the example of the Jews, and the Lords judgements upon them; not as if theſe Corinths did already commit Idolatry, but he warns them againſt it, and ſo in the cloſe of the Chapter ſtates the eating of thoſe meats, in it ſelf an indifferent action, ſo the ſnare to Idolatry be avoided, and offence to the weak brother; which Interpretation is given by all ſound Interpreters we meet with.

Now to ſtile the Corinths lukewarm Chriſtians. as indifferent to Chriſtianity p. 33or Idolatry, and ſo to juſtifie the Admiſſion of ſuch to the Lords Supper, is more then this Scripture will allow.

3. By this Argument alſo he would prove, that ſuch as are actual Idolaters may be admitted to the Sacrament. This is free Admiſſion to purpoſe.

But 1 Cor. 11.28. ſeems to him to ſtrike further, Theſe Corinths were mutinous and drunken at the Supper, for this they were reproved and directed to examine themſelves, &c. but for their coming 'twas their duty.

Anſw. 1. Theſe Corinths being newly come out of Idolatry, as hath been ſhew'd, did in imitation of the idolatrous ſeaſts keep their love feaſts, Jude ver. 12. when they came to the Lords Supper. At which feaſt there was exceſs among them, not preciſely at the Lords Supper, as verſ. 21. of that Chapter, where it is ſaid, Every one took his own Supper, and ſo ſome were drunk, that is, ſome were exceſſively feaſted and filled, while others, the poorer ſort, wanted: This diſorder the Apoſtle reproves, and rectifies their practice; but ſurely never p. 34thought any Miniſter of the Goſpel would plead this for an allowance, that profane drunkards ought to come to the Lords Table.

Reader obſerve, that by this Argument, in perverting theſe Scriptures, he pleads for impenitent Idolaters and drunkards to come to the Sacrament; Hath not this man a great care of the the Lords worſhip?

2. It doth not appear, that this was an obſtinate, conſtant practice of the Corinths, but a weakneſs, they being newly come out of their Heatheniſm.

Now ſaith he, For their coming nothing was ſaid againſt it, that was their duty.

Anſw. Upon this diſtinction we preſume the Author took up this judgment; we ſhall further ſpeak to it, where he more at large urgeth it.

For preſent, we deny there is any abſolute command of coming to the Sacrament, unleſs ſo qualified, as the word of God requires; worthineſs being the very formality of their coming. There's a double worthineſs, Real, the ſanctification of the perſon, without this no particular perſon ought to come p. 35(at leaſt begun upon him) for he eats and drinks damnation without it; And let a man examine himſelf, and ſo let him eat, ſo, and not otherwiſe, without his examination he ought not to come; this as to his own conſcience.

Will not M^r Humfreys preach thus, Unleſs you examine your ſelves, that is, as to your repentance and faith, you ought not to come to this holy Ordinance? Or will he ſay thus, Though you do not, yet you ought to come, that's your duty? For, ſaith the Author, Nothing is or could be ſaid againſt their coming: Nothing?**1 Cor. 11.27, 29, 30.1 Cor 11:271 Cor 11:291 Cor 11:30 Is eating and drinking judgement to themſelves nothing? Be ſtricken with ſickneſs, weakneſs, death, Is this nothing? But he will ſay, This was for their unworthineſs; therefore they ought not to come, being under ſuch unworthineſs. If a Maſter enjoyn his ſervant not to come into his preſence, unleſs ſo and ſo habited upon pain of death; ſhall that perſon yet go, becauſe he will ſay, he ought to go to his Maſter, 'tis his duty? So ſaith the Lord Chriſt by Paul, He that comes to me in the Ordinance of my laſt Supper, ought to come with ſuch and ſuch a worthineſs, or he p. 36incurs death and judgement without his repentance: Now will that perſon ſay, or will any ſay to him, 'Tis your duty however to come? Nay, Is it not their duty to abſtain? 'Tis his duty indeed to examine and prepare himſelf, and ſo to come, but 'tis not his duty to come, if unworthineſs be upon him: 'Tis true, there is an indefinite mediate obligation of all fleſh to obey God the Creatour in every command of his, and 'tis their ſinne and condemnation in failing, but there are ſome duties of his worſhip, wherein he hath appointed that his Name ſhall be thus and thus ſanctified by his own people, and to approach him in theſe without it, is a greater ſin then to abſtain from them, eſpecially in this Ordinance. So much for real worthineſſe, &c.

Secondly, There is viſible worthineſs. in reference to the Church; and this the Church is to look to, in order to the right honouring of the name of God in his worſhip, and its own purity. Now Paul in this Chapter doth only admoniſh the Corinths, and convince them, and ſo ſeems to hope their amendment in the two laſt verſes of the Chapter, and p. 37though he doth not give order to the Church here to excommunicate them, which 'tis not probable he ſhould before reproof and admonition (eſpecially being newly brought over to the faith of the Goſpel, and ſo but tender) yet no queſtion if they had continued in this ſinne, as the people in the mixt Congregations do in theirs, the Church ſhould have had direction about it, as well as touching the inceſtuous perſon, and others in the fifth Chapter; for he will grant theſe to be ſcandalous ſins in the Church, and if perſiſted in to merit Excommunication. That theſe corruptions ſo witneſſed againſt by ſuch ſevere reproofs and judgements from heaven ſhould be pleaded as paterns of practice, is moſt abſurd, eſpecially comparing the Church of Corinth, & our Parochial Churches, and ſo to draw a parallel practice, ſtiled Saints, and ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus, the chaſte Spouſe of Chriſt, converted by the preaching of Paul, a Church ſtored with rare ſpiritual gifts, and ours for the moſt part trained up under a dead form of worſhip, and a little heartleſs preaching (for a great part, to ſpeak plainly againſt the power of godlineſs, and p. 38ſuch as do profeſs it) in ignorance of the way of life and righteouſneſs by the Lord Jeſus, living in known, groſs, moral ſins, as hath been ſhewed, and which cannot but be evident to the Author we deal with.

To proceed, The Achillean place is the next in the ſame page 7. 1 Cor. 10.4. as if it were a new Diſcovery, when long ſince urged by Eraſtus and his followers, the vanity of the Inference hath been over and over confuted by many godly men, which he is pleaſed to paſſe by. Now (ſaith he) here is a clear Scripture for free Admiſſion; The Iſraelites that paſſed thorow the ſea and wilderneſs were baptized under the cloud, and drank of the ſame ſpiritual rock, that is, admitted freely to both Sacraments, all ſcandalous ones without exception.

Anſw. 1. Sir, Why do you not ſpeak out, but here and there mince in Excommunication? When you plead for all ſcandalous perſons to be admitted, and by conſequence received and continued in the Church: If the ſcope of all you aſſert be in want of Diſcipline, why do you go about to prove it an abſolute duty?

p. 392. Conſider the ſcope of the Chapter, which is, firſt, to warn the Corinths of eating with Idolaters, as hath been opened, leſt they ſhould be tempted back, and ſo fall into the ſame condemnation of the Jews, who were baptized, drank of the ſame ſpiritual rock, ate manna, and yet for their ſins, the wrath of God came afterwards upon them: alſo in the 5^th verſe it is ſaid, With many of thoſe God was not wellpleaſed, which may be underſtood for their evil eating and drinking, as well as the reſt of their ſins, as M^r. Trap on his Notes on the place.

Now if we ſhould allow the parallel of theſe types, which Beza will not allow to Eraſtus, it will not in the leaſt meaſure prove his deſign: For firſt, the manna and the water of the rock were their ordinary food, though they had alſo Evangelical ſignifications; ſo that if ſcandalous ſinners had been debarred of theſe, they had been debarred of their ordinary food, which makes a vaſt difference between their caſe in the wilderneſſe, and ours at the Lords Table.

3. The Apoſtle ſpeaks of ſuch ſins as p. 40were committed after the eating of the manna, and drinking the water of the rock, for as ſoon as they fell to Idolatries and whoredoms the wrath of God came upon them, Numb. 26.64, 65. therefore they did not eat of the manna, and drink of the rock after the committing theſe ſins: Alſo theſe ſcandalous ſinners were to be caſt off by death by the Law, except ſuch of them as did repent, and ſo not to be admitted: Hence we have this Argument from this place againſt M^r Humfreys, as given forth by learned M^r Gilleſpy in his Aarons Rod, viz. If God himſelf did execute ſuch Diſcipline upon thoſe who were tainted with Idolatry, fornication, and other groſs ſins, &c. that he would not permit them to enjoy their former liberty of eating of the manna, and drinking of that rock (as typifying Chriſt) untill they mourned, repented, confeſſed, and atonement was made for them; it is much leſs the will of God that ſuch ſcandalous ſinners as are impenitent, and manifeſtly irreconciled to God, ſhould be admitted and received to the Lords Supper. But the former is true, Therefore the latter. If he urge here, They ought to p. 41be put back by Excommunication, why doth he ſo poſitively and peremptorily urge this Text to prove free Admiſſion, when indeed the ſcope of the Apoſtle is to prove the contrary, and to warn them of it, leſt the ſame judgments come upon them alſo?

It is ſad to bring that for an example of allowance (let him have what obſtructions he pleaſe) which is left as an example of the fearfull judgement of God to be trembled at in all ſucceeding ages by all abuſers of Church-priviledges.

His next Scripture is, The Parable in Marth. 22. compared with Luke 14.16, 23. that all were invited to the feaſt, and the ſervants brought in all both good and bad; whence he infers free Admiſſion.

1. We do not finde any ſolid Divines underſtanding this feaſt of the Sacrament, nor is there the leaſt colour ſo to do: But this Parable is to ſet forth,

1. The tender of the Goſpel to the Jews, who refuſing it, it is ſent to the Gentiles, expreſſed by the high-wayes and hedges, the remote corners of the world; So that the calling of all in p. 42Luke is the call of the Goſpel for all to come in and accept of the terms of it; And all that come and profeſs ſubjection to it are received by the Church, and ſo to partake of all the Goſpel-Ordinances till by their converſations they ſhall diſcover themſelves hypocrites.

But ſaith he, In Matthew, The ſervants of the Maſter of the feaſt, brought in good and bad.

In anſwer hereunto, Firſt, All both good and bad are invited freely by the Goſpel.

Secondly, Good and bad are gathered in, but by the bad is certainly meant cloſe hypocrites, for when they come in, they pretend ſubjection to the Goſpel, and ſo are put under Goſpel-adminiſtrations: But Chriſt ſhews the danger of that hypocriſie, and that if ſuch as come unto the feaſt of the Goſpel in hypocriſie not having the wedding garment, the regeneration of the Spirit upon them, ſhall be caſt into utter darkneſs; That this is the plain ſcope of the Parable, is the aſſent of moſt godly Interpreters.

Now that hypocrites ſhall be in the Church till the later day, who queſtions? p. 43But that when their hypocriſie is viſible, they ſhall be caſt out of the Church, and ſo not admitted to the Communion of the Church in the Supper, is clear from the Diſcipline Chriſt hath elſwhere inſtituted in Matth. 18. and by M^r Humfreys own conceſſion in allowing the Ordinance of Excommunication; and though the perſon without the wedding garment (repreſenting all the cloſe hypocrites) was firſt admitted by the ſervants, yet he was not admitted as not having a wedding garment, but ſuppoſed in a judgement of charity to have it, becauſe he profeſſeth to put on Chriſt in ſubjecting to him, but that he is therefore to be continued and admitted to all Ordinances upon his ſcandal appearing, as we have ſaid, cannot in the leaſt meaſure be gathered from this Parable: But we need ſay no more, but that M^r Humfreys hath perniciouſly perverted the ſcope of the Parable, Jews and Gentiles muſt be called to faith in Chriſt by the Miniſtry, Therefore ignorant and prophane muſt be admitted to the Lords Supper; it followeth not.

But, ſaith he, This perſon was compelled to come in (ſtill underſtanding it of p. 44the Sacrament, which is we conceive confuted) which, ſaith he, was his duty, and he had no minde to come in, if he could have helpt it.

An. If he would not have come in if he could have helpt it, & ſo was compelled, what is this but a forcible compelling of men to the Sacrament? Sure here's liberty and free Admiſſion deſtroyed again, but by a worſe principle, viz. that people may be compell'd to the Sacrament, though they have no minde to come; for what elſe can be gather'd from that expreſſion? If he then do ſo underſtand it of a forcible compelling to the Sacrament againſt mens wils, we referre him for an anſwer to all ſolid Proteſtant Divines againſt the Papiſts, urging this Scripture for forcible compelling to ſubject to the Church, and ſo to make Churches by the ſword; And likewiſe to what hath been anſwer'd to the practice of the Prelates in puniſhing perſons if they came not once a year to the Sacrament, which is now hiſt at by all the godly in the Nation, as a practice moſt abominable.

But, ſaith he, to come was not his ſinne (ſtill unduly meaning the Sacrament) p. 45but without his wedding garment.

It hath been anſwered, that to come is not his duty unleſs he hath his wedding garment; 'tis his greater ſinne to come ſo, then to refrain, becauſe 'tis an abominable mocking of the Lord, who hath laid upon men no abſolute command to come, but a conditional, therefore not to come according to the conditional command is the ſin.

By this compelling therefore is meant the free invitations and compellations of the Goſpel (Evangelii inculcatione & hortationum inſtantiâ, as Bucer on Mat. 22.) upon which the Gentiles ſhall come into it, and not of compelling men againſt their wils to the Sacrament, a practice the ſoul of the Lord abhors.

His fourth Obſervation, Pag. 10. That our Saviour explains his own Parable, Many are called, few are choſen; That is, ſaith he, the work of the Ministry, we are freely to offer Christ in his Ordinances; but few are choſen, that is the work of God, &c.

Anſw. Very true, many are outwardly called by the Goſpel, but few choſen, p. 46'tis only known to the Lord who are his choſen ones, and therefore the Church looks to outward profeſſion and calling, but if any deny their call, by contrary walking to it, nothing is here gathered to the contrary, but the Church muſt caſt them out; Secret election belongs to God, but the electing of ſitly qualified perſons to the Lords Supper, belongs to the Church; It is the work of the Miniſters to offer Christ freely in the Ordinances, but in Chriſts own way and method, to offer him firſt in the preaching Ordinance, and if any ſoul profeſs to embrace him before the Lord and the Church, then to have the ſeal of his love in the Supper, which things indeed he doth confound and mix all the way, and which being diſcovered the ſnare is broken.

Secondly, That few are choſen, that is the work of God, yea that the ſervant brought in the man, it was the Lord only took upon him to judge and caſt him out.

Anſw. Who doubts this, but it is the Lords work to chooſe? The Church meddles not with mens election, but their calling and profeſſion; it is his work to p. 47caſt out, his work alone to diſcover cloſe hypocrites at the laſt day; But, Sir, we beſeech you, Is this excluſive of all other caſting out by the Church, why then do you ſpeak of Excommunication? Your indeed continued contradiction: Is not the Church to caſt out open ſcandalous perſons, or to withdraw from ſuch as ſcorn at Diſcipline, or have been unduly admitted as compleat members into the Church, being groſly ignorant? ſurely you will grant both.

He concludes this Argument as with a victory from Luke 12.42. Who is that faithfull ſteward that gives the houſhold their portion in due ſeaſon?

Anſw. We anſwer (and may we do it with grief of heart) not ſuch as give their Maſters bread to dogs, his enemies in their wicked lives; or ſuch as refuſe to profeſs ſubmiſſion and ſubjection to him, being called thereunto; He is a faithfull ſteward who caſts out his maſters traiterous enemies, who diſhonour his family, and gives his bread, the ſeal of his love, to his houſhold onelyonly; A ſtronger Argument needed not be brought againſt him.

The Lord forbid the godly Miniſters p. 48of this Nation ſhould now, after all their crying for Reformation be found ſuch Stewards as free Admiſſion would have them.

What he urgeth from Act. 20.28. is as impertinent, where Paul chargeth the Elders of the Church of Epheſus, to take heed, and to feed the Church of God, &c.Epheſ. 2.22. & 4.16.Eph 2:22Eph 4:16 That Church which is deſcribed to be built up as an habitation of God thorow the Spirit, fitly framed and compacted together, as brought into the order of the Goſpel, by the holy and powerfull preaching of it by the Apoſtles.

Now, 1. What's this to ignorant, corrupt, carnal, formal, profane, ſuperſtitious and malicious Congregations, that they muſt ſtill be fed with this Ordinance, to the flattering of them in a miſerable ſinfull ſtate, and ſend them with a cruel pity to hell with them?

2. Such are not fit to be fed with Sacraments, which have not feeding ſouls for it.

His next place is, Mark 1.5. & Mat. 3. where he ſaith, John baptizeth all that come unto him for Baptiſm, though he cals them vipers, &c.

This he cals a ſtrong place; But, p. 49Reader, ſee the weakneſs of it for his purpoſe.

Anſw. 1. It is queſtioned by many learned men, Whether theſe Phariſees were baptized by John; but if we grant they were, we anſwer,

2. The Phariſees came to Johns Baptiſm, John ſeeing them, deals roundly with them, and cals them a generation of vipers, and pleads with them, Who had warned them to flie from the wrath to come? ſeeing they were ſelf-righteous perſons, and need no repentance in their own conceits; His Baptiſm was the Baptiſm of repentance, and ſinners, loſt ſinners, who ſaw their need of repentance came to it; What made they in the number of them? Thus John labours to convince them; now ſuch of them as were wrought upon, and came to him, caſting off their own former ſelf-conceitedneſs, and confeſſing their ſins, and ſo ſubmitting to the Baptiſm of repentance and remiſſion of ſins, were baptized of him, as 'tis clear Mark 1.5. They were baptized of him, confeſſing their ſins; ſo that 'tis not to be underſtood that John lookt upon thoſe as continuing in their Phariſaiſm, and ſo a generation of vipers, p. 50when he baptizeth them; but as repenting ſinners, and ſo preſſeth them to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance; Now who denieth ſuch perſons ſo confeſſing their ſins generally before the Preachers and Church, and ſo defiring to be received into the fellowſhip of the Church, and the priviledge of all Ordinances, but that they ought to be received? What is this to ſuch who either were never called upon ſo to profeſſe repentance and faith, or being ſo called upon, do yet ſcornfully refuſe to do it? as it is too evident where ever Reformation hath been ſet on foot in this Nation.

He makes ſuch another inſtance in that of Acts 2.41. Where (ſaith he) they immediately communicate with them, diſtributing freely, not only the Word, but Sacrament.

But what were theſe? Such as at the Apoſtles preaching were pricked at the heart, crying out in deep conviction of conſcience, Men and brethren, what ſhall we do to be ſaved? and profeſſing openly their repentance.

What is this again, to ſuch whoſe hearts riſe up againſt the Goſpel-Miniſtry, p. 51who cry up a Service-book above Goſpel-preaching, full of obſtinate ignorance? The Author knows he need not go farre to finde ſuch; which are thoſe godly men ſtick at as to Admiſſion to the Lords Supper, and not poor, convinced, repenting ſouls, who profeſs it before the Lord and his people.

His next Scripture is Acts 10.28. which he cals a peculiar place; Peter, ſaith he, Was very ſcrupulous of admitting Chriſtian Communion With any but the Jews, it being held pollution under the Law to partieipate in any thing with the Gentiles, but after the viſion God inſtructed him to call no man unclean. Reader, obſerve this,

Becauſe Peter had a viſion that the Goſpel was to come to the Gentiles, and therefore he might have converſt with them, therefore every Gentile, every leud, ignorant, profane perſon, is to be accounted ſo elean, as to be admitted to the Lords Supper: For this is the whole force of the Argument: Every man knows that by that viſion nothing elſe is meant but the preaching of the Goſpel to the Gentiles; ſure conſiderate unprejudiced perſons will not be p. 52heightned againſt Reformation by ſuch kinde of reaſoning, when the nakedneſs of it is diſcovered.

Now, ſaith he further, I have learned to count no man unclean unleſs excommunicated.

No? What if half or more of a Congregation be actually unclean perſons, living in known ſins, and the Miniſter and the reſt do not excommunicate or withdraw from them, Doth not ſin lye upon them for the neglect of their duty? And are not ſuch perſons to be accounted as unclean by them? Many do finde a ſhift for conſcience this way; It had indeed more colour, if the people had profeſſed a willing ſubjection to Diſcipline before, and Excommunication had been ever duly adminiſtred in the Parochial Churches of England, but it will not be à ſalvo in the corruptions they now lie under.

To theſe he adds the texts which ſet forth free grace, and ſo pleads; When the Goſpel freely offers Chriſt, when Chriſt offers himſelf and grace, which are the things ſignified, How can any have the conſcience to turn them away from the ſigns?

p. 53This is a very confounding of things, and indeed a meer fallacy.

Anſw. 1. Doth not Chriſt freely offer himſelf to Jews, Turks and Pagans, therefore have you ſo eaſie a conſcience as to give them the Seals before they profeſs to receive the grace offered unto them?

2. It is true, when Chriſt offers himſelf and grace, and ſo ſouls receive him, and profeſs to do ſo, when they have (in the charitable judgement of the Church) the ſubſtance, none ought to deny them the Signs; but when they refuſe to declare or profeſs this, and have all their dayes abuſed this Ordinance through groſs ignorance and profaneneſſe, who can have ſo pitileſs a conſcience as to ſuffer them to continue to do ſo, when they doe not their duty to prevent it? The Lord lay it not to the charge of any, &c.

Now we come to his Reaſons: His firſt and chiefeſt, upon which he conceives himſelf to ſtand upon a Rock, but Reader, obſerve how ſandy it will appear, we dare be bold to affirm, that his whole building will fall, if this be the only Rock and ſupport of it.

p. 54The Sacraments (ſaith he) are verbum viſibile, a viſible Goſpel; The Sacraments ſet forth Chriſt to the eye, as the Goſpel doth to the ear, therefore the ſame latitude in the Administration of both. This is the ſubſtance of the Argument.

Anſw. If there be the ſame latitude of adminiſtring the Goſpel and the Sacraments, then to whomſoever the Goſpel is preacht, the Sacraments are alſo to be adminiſtred. The Goſpel is preacht to all the world, therefore all the world to take the Sacrament. Sir, you know well enough that the Apoſtles preacht the Goſpel to whole Cities, yea Nations, but adminiſtred the Sacraments only to ſuch as came and profeſſed repentance and ſubjection to the Lord Jeſus. Upon this ſcore, as many as hear the Goſpel preached, profeſſing to be converted or not converted, may come and eat bread and wine with the Church at pleaſure. A monſtrous profaneneſs.

But his reaſon is, Becauſe this Sacrament ſhews forth the death of Chriſt, and this is, ſaith he, Pauls judgment of Chriſts Inſtitution.

But, Sir, To whom did it ſhew forth p. 55the Lords death, and who were to uſe it for that end? Were they not the profeſſing Saints of Corinth, ſuch that had given up themſelves to the Lord by the will of God.

Briefly, let it be ſhewed, that Jeſus Chriſt did inſtitute Sacraments for any other then profeſſing beleevers, or make any promiſe to them for converſion, or whether they were ever adminiſtred unto any but ſuch as owned and ſubmitted to the Church: But he will not ſure ſay, the Goſpel is to be preacht to no other, therefore there is not the ſame latitude in the adminiſtration of both.

But he further urgeth, Gal. 3.2. for this, O ye Galathians, before whom Chriſt hath been ſet out, as crucified among you. This expreſſion, ſaith he, may well be applied to the Sacraments.

True, it may be, but it is clear it was not the Apoſtles meaning there, but the doctrine of Chriſt crucified, from the power of which they were revolting.

But grant it were, What doth he gain by it? It only will prove, that the Galatians (as a Church) received the Lords Supper, and that Chriſt was ſet out to p. 56the eye of a beleever; What's this to prove the ſame latitude of preaching the Goſpel and adminiſtring Sacraments?

He is willing to prove it further by a Metaphor; A man covenants with a Landlord about a purchaſe, the price being paid, the bargain eſtabliſht, he comes and requires his Seal for confirmation; So Jeſus Chriſt makes a purchaſe for us, gives us the writing and ſeal in the Goſpel and Sacrament. This is the ſubſtance.

Very true, but muſt not the party for whom this purchaſe is made come firſt and accept of the bargain upon its own terms, and ſo have it ſealed to his uſe? ſo muſt not every ſoul firſt profeſs to accept Jeſus Chriſt on his own terms, and ſo the Church in the name of Chriſt to give him the ſeal, the Sacrament?

So, ſaith he, a Prince proclaims a pardon upon condition of laying down their arms, and ſo gives forth a pardon and ſeal, &c. So Jeſus Chriſt, &c.

Anſw. But muſt not then the rebel firſt lay down his arms, and profeſs ſubjection &c. ſo muſt not every ſoul profeſs laying down their ſins, and to ſubject to Chriſt?

p. 57Now, ſaith he, will it not be plain, as We offer the conditions to any, ſo may we the ſeal, &c.

1. True, we offer pardon of ſinne, the condition, as he cals it, but we are not to apply the ſeal, unleſs there be a profeſſed acceptance of it.

2. If a ſoul do firſt accept of the conditions, or do not break them by continuing in ſinne, then he is to have the ſeal: But what doth all this make for his purpoſe? If he intend by this that all that ſubmit to the Goſpel-terms and conditions, which are repentance, faith and obedience, that they ought to have the Goſpel-ſeal, the Sacrament, who will contend with him? This doth not ſure prove the ſame latitude in preaching the Goſpel and adminiſtring Sacraments. The Goſpel may be preacht to thouſands who may not accept of the conditions of it.

We will here urge the Argument of that learned Divine Parcus on Ʋrſin, Catech. de diſ.againſt this judgement; ſaith he, The ſigns are to be adminiſtred to none but to whom the promiſe belongs, but this belongs not to wicked impenitent perſons; Therefore; His reaſon he gives, p. 58is that which ſpeaks juſt contrary to M^r Humfreys aſſertion; If the Church ſhould adminiſter the ſigns of grace to ſuch, Verbo viſibili abſolveret, quos verbo audibili damnaret. The Church would abſolve in the viſible Word, the Sacrament, whom He doth condemn in the audible Word, the Goſpel, which declares no unbeliever, or wicked perſon, as ſuch, to have inheritance in the kingdom of God; If no inheritance, then not the ſeals of that inheritance: But we have ſtood too long upon this, which we the rather do to undeceive the weak.

But yet, there is ſo much ſtreſs laid upon this his Argument, that it is backt with four conſiderations.

His firſt, The Goſpel is to be preacht to every creature, and a baptizing them, therefore this Sacrament alſo, &c.

What is this but a repeating the ſame thing? But was every ſoul baptized that had the Goſpel preacht to it? Doth it not run, Mar. 16.15. He that beleeveth and is baptized, &c,

Why will men offer to ſtagger weak ſouls with ſuch inconſequent reaſoning?

p. 592. His ſecond conſideration, That the Goſpel offers Chriſt freely to all, &c. without qualifications (ſo there be a preſent giving up himſelf ſincerely to him) And yet none but ſuch as ſhall be qualified after their mindes muſt come to the Sacrament.

Anſw. But would he have no qualifications upon a ſoul that comes to the Sacrament, no repentance, no faith? &c.

Doth not his ſincere giving up himſelf unto the Lord as his Lord and Saviour imply theſe? But what if this ſoul ſhould before the Miniſter and Church before he comes to this Ordinance profeſſe, that in ſincerity (ſo farre as he knows his own heart) he doth give up himſelf to the Lord and his people? Would this take off from the free tender of Chriſt?

Further, ſaith he, Is Chriſt offered as a free gift in the Word, and muſt we not come Without our price and money to this Ordinance? &c.

Anſw. The Authors ingenuity were deſirable here; Do the Preachers when they call for Repentance and faith in ſuch as come to this Ordinance, and ſutable converſation, do they make this p. 60buying of Chriſt? Beſides, The Word is to begin and work faith; this Ordinance ſuppoſeth faith; for it is ſuppoſed the bargain's made before the conveyance is ſealed; that a ſoul receives Chriſt, before Chriſt ſeals his love to him.

His third conſideration, That the Goſpel way is the beſt way to bring ſouls to Chriſt; Let, ſaith he, a mans heart be fully convinced of the free grace of God in Christ, his heart can ſtand it no longer out againſt his converſion.

Anſw. This is true, but what to purpoſe in his Argument? Is every mans heart ſo convinced that hears the Goſpel? He muſt firſt profeſs to have his heart convinced of the free grace of Chriſt, before he can rationally deſire the ſeal, or it can rationally be given unto him.

Aye but, ſaith he, when the Word is preacht, Covenant opened, Seal applied, the Meſſage of reconciliation comes in its full vertue to convince, &c.

But, Sir, keep to your rule, the Goſpel way is the beſt way, &c. Was this ever the Goſpel way, or is it any where preſcribed in it? Was not conviction p. 61alwayes profeſt before either Sacrament was adminiſtred? We are well aſſured he cannot ſhew any precept or example to the contrary in the Goſpel. Therefore this huddling of things will not paſſe.

4. His fourth conſideration, ſure a haſty one, is this, The Goſpel is a peaceable Goſpel, an embaſſie of peace, now how ſhall this peace be kept if we go to make ſeparation at this Ordinance?

Anſw. The truth is, a ſufficiently worldly and carnal Argument; but, Reader obſerve, may not the ſame reaſon be urged againſt the preaching of the Goſpel too? Doth not this breed diſturbance? &c.

Yea, is not this reaſoning directly againſt what Chriſt himſelf delivers ſhall be the effect of the preaching of the Goſpel, Matth. 10.33, 34. I came not to ſend peace but a ſword; I am come to ſet a man at variance againſt his father, &c. And a mans foes ſhall be thoſe of his own houſe, &c. And elſwhere, I will gather you one of a family, and two of a City, &c. Jer. 3.14.

Now is not the Goſpel a Goſpel of peace (that is, to the ſoul which receives p. 62it, in which ſenſe it is an embaſſie of peace) becauſe it will make ſuch work in the world, by the oppoſition of men againſt it? May it not as well be ſaid, O the Goſpel will make diſturbance? How ſhall the peace be kept? Whereas it is on purpoſe to ſeparate the kingdom of Chriſt from the world? The truth is, this argument is of ſo little weight, that therefore ſuch a ſeparation as keeps off ignorant and profane perſons from the Supper, ought to be, becauſe it will diſturb the conſciences of ſuch, and may (by grace) awaken them to a conſideration of their own condition, and not longer be flattered in the cuſtomary carnal way they have been lulled aſleep in: He next ſtates the caſe of a poor wounded ſinner, as if it were meant any ſuch ſhould be kept off by godly men who plead for the purity of this Ordinance; We plead againſt ſuch as are whole in their own opinions, ignorant, profane, revilers, and not wounded ſinners, if they declare themſelves poor ſinners and wounded, no doubt but they will be received.

We ſhall not adde any thing to the other part of this conſideration, it being p. 63but a repeating of what is before urged.

His ſecond Reaſon is drawn from the nature of a viſible Church, which (ſaith he) is a number of ſuch as make profeſſion of Jeſus Chriſt, and ſo are Saints by calling, whatſoever they are in truth, the eſſential marks whereof (whereby it ſubſiſts as viſible) is the preaching the Word, and adminiſtring Sacraments.

Anſw. Not to diſpute this, How far the preaching of the Word and adminiſtration of Sacraments are eſſential marks: The Word may be preacht to thoſe that are no Church, and the Sacraments adminiſtred to a falſe Church; Ordinances are rather food and maintenance of the Church, then the marks of it.

There may be Churches in a large ſenſe, that may have no right Goſpelconſtitution, and yet have theſe Ordinances, as begun meerly by the command of the Magiſtrate to ſubject to ſuch forms he preſcribes, and not by the preaching of the Goſpel, and a voluntary ſubmiſſion of a people to it; and ſuch are not properly Saints by calling: It is poſſible there may be p. 64ſuch Congregations in England, &c.

Will you ſtile affected-ignorant perſons, ſcoffers at inſtruction and the power of godlineſs, obſtinate hereticks, Saints by calling, though they make profeſſion of Jeſus Chriſt? Surely this deſtroyes their profeſſion.

Therefore it may be added that a Church is coetus fidelium, a ſociety of believers that profeſs Chriſt and his Goſpel, and practiſe anſwerably, and are anſwerably united by mutual agreement, who ſubmit freely to Chriſts Diſcipline.

But he goeth on, Now unleſs men will be ſo bold, as to diveſt our mixt Congregations of the name of the viſible Church, they cannot take away one eſſential note, in the free uſe of this Ordinance.

Anſw. But, Sir, there is much difference between the reforming of a Church, that there may be a due and juſtifiable uſe of this Ordinance, and a taking of it away, which we know none but fanatick perſons who deny the uſe of this Ordinance to do.

But he will prove, That our mixt Congregations ought to have the uſe of this Ordinance, both from Chriſts doctrine and example.

p. 65His Doctrine, In the Parables of the little and great fiſhes in one net, good and bad called to one feast, the chaff and wheat in one barn, tares and wheat in one field, Mat. 13. which muſt grow together till the day of Judgement, and ſo no ſeparation.

Anſw. Briefly, Thoſe tares we underſtand, with moſt reformed Expoſitours, to be cloſe hypocrites, and nor of open profane perſons and revilers of the Goſpel-Miniſtry, and of the power of godlineſs, elſe to what purpoſe doth he elſwhere ſpeak of Excommunication, which is to caſt ſuch as pretend to be Chriſts friends, but walk as his enemies, out of the Church? And if under pretence of this, all ungodly blaſphemous wretches, groſs ignorants, muſt be admitted: What difference between the Church and the Kingdom of the devil?

We allow there is no ſeparation from cloſe hypocrites, De occultis non judicat Eccleſia. But as to open, diſcovered, ſcandalous perſons, the Church is to caſt them out; or if they are the greater part, to withdraw from them, as hath been ſhewed.

If it be reply'd, That the ſervants knew them to be tares, therefore not p. 66cloſe hypocrites: We anſwer, That godly Miniſters may diſcern hypocrites with a knowledge of probability, and ſo theſe ſervants might diſcover the tares; ſpecially if by Zizania theſe tares are meant burnt ears of corn, as M^r Leigh, M, Trap and Weems, &c.

2. It is alſo ſaid, Matth. 13.25. While men ſlept the enemy ſowed tares; Where Chriſt imputes it to the remiſneſs and ſleepineſs of the ſervants, the Miniſters, that tares came into and were ſuffered in the Church.

3. By thoſe tares, Chriſt doth underſtand, ſuch who are not openly and notoriouſly ſcandalous, but ſuch tares who are much like the wheat (as Hierom ſaith thoſe kinde of tares were) elſe he would contradict himſelf, in commanding ſcandalous perſons to be caſt out of the Church, Matth. 18.17. and yet here to command them to let them alone.

To conclude his Argument he breaks out in Rhetorick, Who Lord dare anticipate thy throne to ſeparate? &c.

None, we hope, viz. to undertake to ſeparate all cloſe hypocrites out of the Church, as hath been ſaid; but there are ſome who may and ought to be ſo p. 67bold (whereof we believe M^r Humfreys, and his Church to be a part) to exerciſe that power Chriſt hath left them to preſerve their Churches from ruine and pollution; elſe all Chriſts threatnings to the Churches of Aſia for continuing profaneneſs, blaſphemy, lukewarmneſs among them, commending them that could not bear the evil had been vain; What elſe indeed is the Church of Chriſt, but ſuch a ſeparation of believers from the pollution and wickedneſs of the world?

Next he would prove it from Chriſts example, Who converſed with Publicans and ſinners.

Anſw. This will ſerve, as it hath ever done, the turns of the profane people to urge againſt the ſtrict and reſerved carriage of the godly, in not frequently mixing in their companies, as they abuſe this Scripture; but it is ſad to have it urged by a Miniſter.

2. Becauſe Chriſt converſed with Publicans and ſinners to convert them, therefore did he admit them, as ſuch, into his Family, and give them the ſeals of his love, which muſt be the import of the Argument, if it pretend to prove p. 68any thing; If you had Infidels dwelling near you, becauſe you did ſometime converſe with them, Would it be a good Argument for any to urge againſt you, that you therefore gave them the Sacrament? Were Publicans and ſinners admitted for his Diſciples, or to his Supper, till called and became followers of Chriſt?

But now comes in the invincible Argument, viz. That Chriſt ate the Paſſeover and his own Supper With Judas.

Anſw. We ſhall for brevities ſake avoid this conteſt, Whether Chriſt did give the Supper to Judas. The Author paſſeth by the many preſſing Arguments that are given to the contrary by many learned men, ſpecially M^r Gilleſpy, &c.

Only this, It is not likely that the Lord Jeſus ſhould ſay to one who was about to betray him, Take, eat my body, which was given for thee? for if Judas received it, Chriſt ſpake to him with the reſt.

2. If it be replyed, That Chriſt dealt as an ordinary Miniſter in this adminiſtration, then it will help to fortifie the anſwer we chiefly ſtick to (ſuppoſing we p. 69grant him that Judas did receive, &c.) which is, That Chriſt dealt as an ordinary Miniſter, and ſo Judas was admitted as a cloſe hypocrite. Beſides, Judas had not committed the finne, as yet, and ordinary Miniſters do not uſe to keep any from the Sacrament for ſins they fear they may hereafter commit, but have not yet committed them.

Now all that will not admit of his aëry free Admiſſion, are wilfully blinde, as he concludes, cenſoriouſly enough, againſt the judgement of moſt famous holy Divines, both ancient, reformed and modern, as ever the world was bleſt with ſince the Apoſtles times. This may gain opinion with his Pariſhioners, but not with the godly wiſe.

His third reaſon is, From the nature of Christian Communion and Church-fellowſhip, which ought, ſaith he, to be in charity and humility, without judging, &c. to judge others better then themſelves, ſpecially in the Miniſter, from 2 Tim. 2.24, 25.

Anſw. 1. As to Church-fellowſhip, The fellowſhip of Saints with the Father, and with Jeſus Chriſt, and one with another, by mutual union and free agreement p. 70in the Lord. There's ſure but little footſteps of it in the moſt parochial frames.

How were they united into ſuch a holy fellowſhip? Is a coming together of groſly ignorant, ſwearers, profaners of the Sabbath, abetting and pleading for all ungodlineſs, haters of ſuch as are godly, like a fellowſhip of Saints, as the Primitive Churches were? We may boldly return this Argument upon M^r Humfreys.

Church-fellowſhip, is a holy fellowſhip of Saints walking in the light, 1 Joh. 1.3, 7. 1 John 3.6. Epheſ. 5.8, 9, 10, 11. 'Tis not a fellowſhip of Saints and devils (appearing even to be ſo) of light and darkneſs; therefore all manner of wretched perſons, wallowing in all filthineſs and profaneneſs; ought not to be received into it.

But ſaith he, It ought to be in humility and charity, yea men profeſſing Saintſhip ought ſo to walk together, and all for bearance as to one anothers infirmities to be uſed. But what kinde of charity is this to admit ungodly perſons, as the members of Jeſus Chriſt, walking indeed as the members of Satan: So the p. 71truth is, profane people cry out, Oh you-muſt have charity! The reforming Miniſters have no charity, and the like; when too many have equivalently renounced every part and article of their Covenant made to God in baptiſm, not minding to renew it; yet they blame us as uncharitable, becauſe we will not flatter them in their abominations with the precious ſeal of Chriſts love, when they walk as his enemies, and have their mouths open againſt all goodneſs; That this is the temper of moſt, witneſs the preaching of all godly Miniſters.

Now what a kinde of charity were this? Oh, mercileſs flattering pity!

Again, we beſeech you to remember, that Church-fellowſhip muſt be as well in holineſs as in charity, here is no pleading for purity, but all for peace and charity.

But ſaith he, We ought to judge others better then our ſelves; but Sir, this ſure was ever preſt upon ſuch as profeſſed Saintſhip in the Churches of Chriſt, not of ſuch, who though they will be good Chriſtians in their own and others eſteem, do yet hate the name of Saint, and revile it; ſuch an humble Chriſtian p. 72is not in the greateſt humility, to eſteem better then himſelf, as the grace of Chriſt hath diſtinguiſhed him.

But he puts an eſpecially to the Miniſter for this excellent humility and charity, he is to be patient, &c. from 2 Tim. 2.

Did ever any man underſtand that Scripture of adminiſtring Sacraments, but himſelf?

Beſides, though this is to be a Miniſters carriage, yet one duty doth not claſh with another, he ought to do his duty alſo, to keep Chriſts Ordinances pure, and to try the people he is ſent to,

Oh, but ſaith he, If we muſt go cenſuring one anothers worthineſs, 'tis the ready way to heart-burnings, &c.

We have before anſwered, that we take leave to call this but a very carnal Argument, Chriſt came not to give ſuch a kinde of peace between Saints and the wicked.

Beſides, this ſtrikes at all Diſcipline, which muſt not hence be exerciſed for fear of heart-burnings. It may indeed make the Miniſters many enemies; The Lord grant this be not too great a ſnare upon many; free Admiſſion makes p. 73much for the eaſe, peace and intereſt of a Miniſter in the world: but it maketh him an unfaithfull ſteward of the myſteries of God.

Now, to crown all, he is pleaſed to adde, That it is but a rigid Phariſaiſm to deny free Communion.

Sir, You have abundantly gratified prophane people (into whoſe hand your Book comes) and helps on the old accuſation of godly Miniſters and people, viz. That all this ſtrictneſs they pretend to, is but Phariſaiſm and hypocriſie; your ſinne and doom is 2 Chron. 19.2.

We do not plead for rigidneſs truly ſo called; Godly Miniſters invite the weakeſt to profeſs repentance, and faith, &c. and ſo to be received into Communion: but for the withholding of the holy things of Chriſt from ſtubborn perſons who ſcorn ſuch profeſſion, is no more then Chriſt commanded M^r Humfreys and us to practiſe.

The compariſon of the Phariſee and Publican is the old charge of the lukewarm carnal party againſt Profeſſors of godlineſs: Oh, ſay they, theſe will be holy, they are ſo ſtrict, juſt like the Phariſees; Why? becauſe they will not p. 74partake with them in the unfruitfull works of darkneſs, and now would not be guilty of their Sacrament-ſins, which they are, if they do not their duty to keep them off.

Next, he breaks out with a pathetical expoſtulation and prayer, Rebuke the humour of theſe times, Oh my Saviour! &c.

Reformation is but a humour, and ſuperſtition with M^r Humfreys; Lord Jeſus rebuke the profaneneſs of theſe times, and let not thy holy things be thus proſtituted! Rebuke them that call evil good, and good evil.

Another he follows with, That ſince Chriſt offered himſelf to ſinners, and never caſt out any that came, Shall any take ſtomack he is offered in the Sacrament?

Anſw. This is the former confounding of things that ought to be diſtinguiſhed; If a ſoul profeſs to come to Chriſt, that is, to ſubject to him, and walk with his people, who will deny him the Seal? Doth it therefore follow that the Lords Supper is to be given to thoſe who do not come to him, and being call'd upon will not profeſs to do ſo?

p. 75But let us enquire, Doth the Author of free Admiſſion conceive, that Jeſus Chriſt would have admitted Publicans and ſinners to his Supper without any more ado? Were they not firſt to be received as Diſciples? Here's his Argument, Chriſt ſometimes converſt with Publicans and ſinners, therefore all may come to the Sacrament.

His next Scripture is John 8. about the adultreſſe woman, ſaith Chriſt, He that is without ſinne, caſt a ſtone at her.

This was to check the proud Phariſaiſm of others, who ſcorn'd her out of vain-glory, when they themſelves were guilty of as great ſins; Muſt therefore adultereſſes without profeſſed humiliation to the Church be received to the Lords Supper? Though a beleever finds the ſame corruption in himſelf, and is abaſed in it, yet he ſees himſelf diſtinguiſht through grace from an unhumbled adultreſſe, from ſuch that live in open ſcandalous ſins, which he pleads for to come to this holy Ordinance.

His fourth reaſon ſpeaks high words, Which doth ariſe from the vanity, formality, p. 76impoſſibility of ſelecting people to this Ordinance.

To prove either of theſe diſtinctly, nothing is offered, onelyonly ſomething in the general; 1. Look but to the heart of theſe ſeparations, and they come to nothing. This is as ſlightly as uncharitably ſpoken.

Anſw. If he means by ſeparations, the uniting of ſuch as profeſs repentance and faith before the Lord and his people into a cloſer fellowſhip, that all Ordinances may be rightly adminiſtred: We anſwer, Theſe ſeparations, bleſſed be the name of the Lord, came to ſomething, and the good hand of the Lord is with them, and hath gloriouſly appeared for them. But to ſpeak plainly, we wonder what the mixt Parochial Congregations for the moſt part came to, if we look into the leaſt of them, where no Church-Reformation is practiſed, even the very leaſt of them is carnal, formal, deadhearted worſhip, no fellowſhip together, nor mutual edification, but ſetled upon the dead lees of formality, and flattered to their own deſtruction in ſuch a condition by a continued enjoyment of all Ordinances, without any diſcovery p. 77(but by meer coming to the Ordinances) that they ſo much as pretend to Jeſus Chriſt.

2. Beſides, godly men doe not ſelect, but invite all upon profeſſion of owning the Lords Covenant, Repentance, &c.

He puts the caſe, You will have a gather'd company, Whom would you admit, if not all that make profeſſion, as we do mixtly, then thoſe only who have an intereſt in Chriſt and true believers?

Anſw. We know not well what he means by making profeſſion as they do; What profeſſion he means; If he underſtands it of all people in the Nation making profeſſion, ſuch as it is, an implicite profeſſion, becauſe they come to the Ordinances; we do not account this a ſufficient profeſſion (and ſo the Brethren of both wayes call for explicite profeſſion, and a converſation not denying that profeſſion) for Atheiſts and all profane perſons come to Church, as he ſtileth it, who revile the preaching of the Goſpel, if it be powerfull, ſearching, and wallow in all manner of wickedneſs, making no more of the name of God and Lord in their mouths, then p. 78of the name of a beaſt, as is the moſt common practice of much the greater part; and if they be called upon to profeſs Chriſt, repentance, faith, before the Miniſter or others, they hate and ſcorn it.

Now if he means by ſuch a bare external profeſſion, without any regard to knowledge or converſation, we deny it to be enough, if this be all they mixtly do.

But, ſaith he, if in gathering a Church, you receive not all that make profeſſion mixtly, as they do (that is, as we conceive ſuch as we have deſcribed) then only ſuch as are true believers.

Anſw. Here lies a fallacy; Such as would gather companies, as he cals it, or unite people into a cloſer communion, that the Churches may be purer, have a middle way between his mixt profeſſion and true believing, that is, an explicite profeſſion of repentance and faith, and confeſſing of Chriſt, and not denying this in the tenour of their converſations: And of theſe indeed we do not pretend to be able to know them who are true believers, and who are not. What Reverend M^r Baxter ſaith in this p. 79caſe, is moſt true, in his learned Treatiſe of Baptiſm; The judgement may be falſe, but the rule of judging infallible, which is by explicite profeſſion and converſation.

In that Pag. 23. he ſeems to impoſe upon godly Miniſters, as if they went about to have Churches without hypocrites. No, ſure they would have outward viſible purity, as much as may be, they would have their Churches like the Communion of Saints, and not a den of thieves. They know that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, 1 Cor. 5. how much more danger of the Lords diſpleaſure, when even the whole lump is near leaven'd with ignorance, profaneneſs, enmity to Godlineſs; They would not keep up ſuch frames of Churches, viz. lukewarm formality, which the Lord profeſſeth to abhorre, and ſpue out of his mouth from being Churches, Rev. 3.16.

He there further ſpeaks of a formall purity. We contend, as much as may be for a reall purity, and power of godlineſs; but ſuch as live in open and known profaneneſs have not ſo much as a formal purity.

p. 80And as for ſeparation upon ſeparation, as in the peeling of his Onyon, which may cauſe men to weep. We would not meddle with his jeſts in holy things; But we hope and pray that the Lord will give M^r Humfreys a heart to weep in private, and that bitterly for the grieving moſt of the godly of the Nation, and laying a ſtumbling block in the wayes of the Lords people, and making the hearts of the wicked to rejoyce; as we are ſure this piece of his hath abundantly done.

His fourth reaſon, Is gathered from, the uniformity of the ſervice of God; That all other worſhip lies in common, then it is an entrenchment upon the common liberty, to put an encloſure upon the Sacrament.

Anſw. That uniformity of Gods worſhip in this matter, coſt the holy Preachers of this Nation dear under the Biſhops. Oh! that it ſhould be again pleaded for!

But, ſaith he, all worſhip ought to lie in common.

Yet Chriſt cals his Church, Cant. 4.12. A garden encloſed; And a vineyard of red wine, Iſa. 27.2. and many the like expreſſions p. 81(to ſay no more) as any fell from his pen; The Diſcipline of the Church hath heen uſually ſtiled the hedg and fence of the Church, to preſerve it from ruine and pollution, and now muſt all be in common?

'Tis an entrenchment (ſaith he) upon the Common Liberty; 'Tis indeed a reſtraining of a curſed liberty, that ever we beleeve was pleaded for by a man pretending to fear the Lord; All in common to Atheiſts, Drunkards, Swearers, Revilers, ignorant perſons, now, all in common, and yet he would make us beleeve he is a friend to Diſcipline: But now we have a fetch, Are not ſaith he all the Commandments of God univerſall, why not Do this alſo?

Anſw. Sir, We beſeech you to whom was Do this, in the adminiſtration of the Supper ſpoken to? Was it to all that ever heard Chriſt preach, or only to his 12 Apoſtles?

Further, He urgeth, If an unregenerate man can do nothing but ſin in all worſhip, why muſt he be kept from this more then other, why a more fear of his ſin here? This the ſubſtance.

Anſw. Becauſe the other Ordinances p. 82of the Word and prayer are for his converſion, this ſuppoſeth men converted in a judgement of charity, and ſo rightly received and continued in the Church according to Chriſts order. A wicked man is abſolutely forbidden to receive the Lords Supper, and none commanded to come but he who hath proved himſelf fit by examination, but there lieth an abſolute command upon all men to hear and pray; As to his Grammar Allegory to the Independents of Heteroclites and Syntaxis; That they allow a Syntaxis in the whole worſhip of God, but make Hetoroclites at the Sacrament,

'Tis likely it is becauſe they would keep a true Syntaxis and godly order in their Churches, and not admit of Heteroclites, viz. prophane wretches and deſpiſers of holineſſe into it; what is Diſcipline but to keep off ſuch Heteroclites from the fellowſhip of the Church, and ſpecially in this Ordinance? As to the practice of ſuch Presbyterians as baptize the Children of all, but not admitting all to the Supper, we ſhall not ſay much of it: Learned men conceive from 1 Cor. 12.23. We are all baptized into one Body whether Jews or Gentiles, that Baptiſm is p. 83into the univerſall Church; It doth not therefore follow that ſuch a one hath priviledge in a particular Church of all Ordinances, unleſſe his profeſſion made in baptiſm be perſonally received, and ſo he joyn himſelf to a particular Church; but have the people of England in Pariſh Churches ever done ſo? ſpecially ſuch as are obſtinately ignorant and prophane: But for ſuch perſons who cannot be judged either of theſe, as to the baptizing of their Infants, we leave godly men to their own practice, as they ſhall ſee it moſt conducing to reall Reformation.

His ſixth Reaſon is drawn [from his own innocency in thus doing, in admitting all to the Supper.]

Anſ. We beleeve it will not be found his innocency (without deep repentance) in the day of the Lord.

Saith he [I do but my duty] That's but the Queſtion beg'd; We deny it to be ſo upon the terms he goeth.

2. He hath no power to turn away any; We will not diſpute this with him, becauſe if he had power, by his own principles he ought not ſo to do, for he argues all are to come, good and bad; Or if p. 84he would exerciſe Diſcipline 'tis his own fault, he draws not on thoſe who will ſubmit to it with him, and ſo practiſe it.

3. He ſaith, He hopes the beſt of all, But Sir, Is the meer coming of a perſon ground enough for hope without any diſcovery or triall of him? and when he lives in known ſins and never profeſſeth acceptance to the Church! How can he call this ground enough for his hope? He will ſure preach the contrary to his people, that 'tis not ground enough to themſelves, and why ſhould they then be flattered in ſuch a hope by the Sacrament? which is indeed the great miſchief we apprehend comes by free admiſſion; Oh that there were ground enough of preſent hope upon the body of the people of this Nation? If M^r Humphreys Congregation be not peerleſſe, ſure he may queſtion his ground of hope upon too many, &c.

He ſaith, God can turn the moſt at his Ordinances.

Anſ. But ſhew us where he hath promiſed he will, or any example of it; 'tis not good arguing from Gods omnipotency to his ordinary way of dealing; if a wicked man were in Gods way to converſion p. 85at the Lords Supper he might expect a bleſſing, but he is out of Gods way, and therefore he hath no ground to expect converſion, or we to ſuppoſe it.

5. I endeavour (ſaith he) my utmoſt that all come prepared.

Anſ. For a Miniſter to do his utmoſt in this caſe, yea, what de jure of right he ought to do is a great matter: we know not the Authours particular practice, but we conceive if he doth no more then what we can gather, he is far from doing his utmoſt duty, unleſſe he reprove, examine, exhort, even one by one, we mean all that are admitted, as Paul did the Theſſalonians, 2 Theſ. 2.11. we beleeve he is bound in this Corruption of times to call upon all to come and own the Covenant of the Lord their God, and ſubjection to Chriſt, and to give up themſelves to the Lord in a fellowſhip together, or elſe we humbly conceive he doth not the utmoſt of his duty.

6. He confeſſeth the ſins of the Congregation.

Anſ. But ought not every ſinner upon a due receiving into the fellowſhip of the Church to confeſſe himſelf a ſinner, and his loſt condition in himſelf before the p. 86Lord, and his people in ſome good meaſure? Mar. 1.5.

Laſtly, He addes, He might further prove from the command and good of coming, and from the evil of omitting it, the Sacrament is a means and a pledge, a means to receive grace, and a pledge to aſſure. &c.

Anſ. 'Tis a means of receiving more grace, but not the firſt grace; But (ſaith he) Suppoſe a poor Soul wants grace, whither ſhall he come but to the means of receiving it? If he be a poor Soul in his own ſight and appehenſion, and ſo comes thirſting after grace, it ſuppoſeth grace begun. Bleſſed are they that thirſt, &c. and ſo that proves nothing for his purpoſe.

The Ordinances (ſaith he further) are the baths, there are many come to the Bath that are never the better for it, and yet they are means of health, and open toall, &c.

Anſ. But Sir, Where do you finde this Allegory in the Scriptures, That all men may freely come to the Sacrament as to the Baths?

2. Such as come to the Bath come as ſick and weak, and pained, and ſuch coming to Chriſt in his Ordinances ſhall finde healing; what's this to the whole who need not the Phyſician, as impenitent p. 87ſinners and groſſe ignorant perſons are?

But the Baths are open and free to all: That is the abuſe of them, they are meant only for the ſick and pained, and ſo 'tis of Chriſts healing Ordinance of the Supper, 'tis the abuſe and that a great one, if any but ſuch as profeſſe to deſire healing of Chriſt be admitted to them.

That 'tis a means of conveying grace, he ſaith there is no great difficulty.

Anſ. If he means the firſt grace, 'tis ſuch a difficulty as he hath not unfolden in this Treatiſe; and to ſeek for the firſt grace from the uſe of the Supper is not of Gods ordaining, and is indeed a piece of will-worſhip; Faith cometh ordinarily only by the Word preacht.

For the evil of omiſſion, p. 26. he ſaith, Thoſe that neglected the Paſſeover were out off, &c.

Anſ. He may alſo remember that ſuch as had morall uncleanneſſe upon them were not to come, and if they did they were to be cut off from the Lords People.

He addes, In the Goſpel thoſe that came not to the Feaſt, Mat. 22. were deſtroyed.

p. 88Anſ. It hath been anſwer'd, that 'tis to be underſtood of the generall Call of the Goſpel, and not of the Lords Supper, ſpecially of the Jews, who were deſtroyed for not receiving the Lord Jeſus.

But (ſaith he) we are not to neglect a certain duty for fear of accidentall ſcandal.

Anſ. We deny it to be a certain duty to every ſoul but only to the really fit, as to themſelves, and viſibly fit as to the Church, to receive them. No abſolute command, no abſolute duty.

His Admonition as to Preſumption in coming, the Lord alſo ſet home upon his own heart as to his preſumption in admitting.

Now we come to his ſecond Sermon, where he undertakes very curſorily to anſwer many Objections that Learned and Godly men have made againſt his judgement.