The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Chapter 5
CAP. V.
Queſt. 1.
Whether the word doth warrant diſcipline and cenſures, even to the excluding of the ſcandalous from the Sacraments, beſide the Paſtorall rebukes inflicted by one.
VVE are not to conceive that there was nothing Morall in the Lawes that God made to his people of Iſrael, to debar the unclean, from the ſociety of Gods people, and from communion with them in the holy things of God, Numb. 5. 1. And the Lord spake unto Moſes, ſaying: 2. Command the children of Iſrael that they put out of the Campe every leaper, and every one that hath an iſſue, and whoſoever is defiled by the dead, Lev. 5. 2. If a ſoul touch any unclean thing, whither it be a carcaſe of an unclean beaſt, or the carcaſe of unclean cattell, or the carcaſe of unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him, he alſo ſhall be unclean and guilty—6. And he ſhall bring his treſpaſſe-offering unto the Lord for his ſin, which he hath ſinned, Lev. 7. 20. But the ſoul that eateth of the ſacrifice of the peace offerings that pertaineth to the Lord, having his uncleanneſſe upon him, even that ſoul ſhall be cut off from the people: 21. Moreover Cutting off not alwaies killing.the ſoul that ſhall touch any unclean thing, as the uncleanneſſe of man, or any unclean beaſt, or any abominable unclean thing, and eat of the fleſh of the ſacrifice of peace-offerings, which pertain unto the Lord, even that ſoul ſhall be cut off from his people. In the which obſerve, that here the ſoul that ſhall touch any unclean thing is to be cut off; but Num. 5. 2. He is only to be put out of the Campe; now theſe were not killed that were put out of the Campe, and therefore to be cut off from the people muſt be a morall cutting off by Excommunication, not by death; alſo the word foreign ſignifieth to make a Covenant, to cut off, either by death or any other way▪ as by baniſhment, by which a thing leaveth off to be in uſe, though it be not deſtroyed, as when a branch is cut off a tree, 1 Sam. 31. 9. Yea, we have Iſa. 50. 1. foreign Where is that Bill of cutting off or divorce: Now this was not a Bill of killing the wife that was divorced, but putting her from her husband, as our Saviour ſaith, It is not Lawfull to marry her that is divorced, Matth. 19. 9. A killed and dead woman is not capable of marriage; yet the word is, Deut. 24 1. Ier. 3. 8. from that ſame Theame, foreign: The Hebrewsforeign Ab interi… re popul… rum ſacrum▪ have another more ordinary word to ſignifie death, as Exod. 31. 14. He that doth any work on the Sabbath, in dying he ſhall die: And it is expounded, he ſhall be cut off from the midſt of the people: foreign but Lev. 7. the word foreign is four times uſed without any ſuch expreſſion, ver. 20, 21, 25, 27. To which may be added, that when zealous Hezechiah did finde that the people were not prepared, According to the purification of the Sanctuary, though they had celebrated the Paſſeover, the King did not only not kil them, but prayed, God might be mercifull to them, and the Lord killed them not (ſaith the ſpirit of God) but healed them, Exod. 12. 15. He that eateth unleavened bread, that ſoul ſhall be cut off from Iſrael: but it is expounded, ver. 19. That ſoul ſhall be cut off foreign from the Church of Iſrael: Certainly, he that is killed is cut off from both State and Church, and from the company of all mortall men on earth, Iſa. 38. 11. Then to be cut off from Iſrael is onelyonly to be deprived of the comfortable ſociety of the Church of Iſrael, as the holy Ghoſt expoundeth it: Alſo Lev. 4. If any commit any ſin but of ignorance, and ſo if he touch any unclean thing, or eat unleavened bread, forbidden of God, he is excluded from the holy things of God, while the Prieſt offer for him, according to the Law: Now if he was preſently to be killed, either by the Magiſtrate, or in that act killed by Gods own immediate hand, as Aarons ſons were, there was not a journey to be made to the place, the Lord had choſen to ſacrifice there, which might have been three dayes journey from his houſe, who was unclean; yea, when the man that gathered ſticks was ſtoned, and the falſe Prophet ſtoned, Deut. 13. there was no ſacrifices offered for any of them before they were killed; and I hope, there were no ſacrifices in Moſes his Law offered for the dead. Hence learn we: 1. That to cut off from the Congregation, was not to kill, but it was the Iewiſh Excommunication greater or leſſe: 2. That Moral ſins, under the Old Teſtament debarred men from the holy things of God, while the Prieſts ſacrificed for them▪ and brought them in a capacity to receive the holy things of God.
Leviticus 10. 10. The Prieſts were not to drink wine, when theyMorall guiltineſſe excluded men from holy things amongſt the Iews. went into the Tabernacle: That ye may (ſaith the Lord) put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean: Now Haggai expreſly ſaith, cap. 2. 11, 12. That it was the Prieſts part to put this difference, and ſo to admit to, or exclude from the holy things of God.
Hence for this cauſe it is ſaid, as 2 Chron. 23. 19. Iehoiada appointed the officers of the Lords houſe, ſo he ſet porters at the gates of the houſe of the Lord, that none which are unclean in any thing, might enter in; ſo Ezra 9. 21, 22. None did eat the Paſſeover, but ſuch as were pure, and had ſeparated themſelves from the filthineſſe of the Heathen of the land; for this cauſe doth the Lord complain of the Prieſts, Ezech. 22. 26. Her Prieſts have violated my law, and have polluted my holy things, they have put no difference between the holy and the prophane; neither have they ſhewed the difference between the unclean and the clean, Ezech. 44. 6. And thou ſhalt ſay to the Rebellious, even to the houſe of Iſrael, thus ſaith the Lord God; O ye houſe of Iſrael, let it ſuffice you of all your abominations: 7. That ye have brought into my ſanctuary, ſtrangers uncircumciſed in heart, and uncircumciſed in fleſh, to be in my ſanctuary to pollute it, even my houſe, when ye offered my bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken my Covenant, becauſe of all your abominations: 8. And ye have not kept the charge of my holy things: But ye have ſet keepers of my Charge in my Sanctuary for your ſelves. 9. Thus ſaith the Lord God, no ſtranger uncircumciſed in heart, nor uncircumciſed in fleſh ſhall enter into my ſanctuary, of any ſtranger that is among the children of Iſrael: Here is a complaint, that thoſe that have the charge of the holy things, ſhould ſuffer the holy things to be polluted: I grant it cannot bear this ſenſe, that none ſhould be admitted to be Members of the Viſible Church under the New Teſtament, but ſuch as are conceived to be regenerate; except it can be proved that the Sanctuary was a type of the viſible Church: 2. That the Apoſtles conſtituted their Churches thus; but we read not in all the New Teſtament of any admiſſion of Church Members at all: but only of baptizing of thoſe who were willing to be baptized, and from this reſulted the capacity of a Church Relation in all Churches viſible: Nor, 2. Do we finde any ſhadow in all the word of God, of tryall of Church Members, by way of electing and chooſing of ſuch and ſuch, as qualified by reaſon of a conceived regeneration in the perſons choſen, or of rejecting and refuſing others as conceived to have no inward work of grace in them; this I believe can never be made good out of the word of God. 3. They muſt prove the Apoſtles admitted into the Sanctuary of the Viſible Church Ananias, Saphira, Simon Magus, and others uncircumciſed in heart, to pollute the holy things of God, and that the Apoſtles erred, and were deceived in the moulding of the firſt Apoſtolick Church in the world, which was to be a rule and pattern to all Churches in the New Teſtament, to all Ages: I deny not, but they might have erred according to the grounds of theſe, who urge the compariſon for a Church of viſible Saints, but that the Apoſtles De facto did erre in their Election and judgement, in that wherein the holy Ghoſt holdeth them forth and their acts to be our rule and pattern, I utterly deny: I grant Act. 15. In that Synod they did Act as men and Elders, not as Apoſtles, but that it could fall out, that they ſhould uctually erre, and obtrude falſe Doctrine inſtead of truth to the Churches in that Synod which is the firſt rule and pattern of Synods, I ſhall not believe.
But there is this Morall and perpetuall truth in theſe Scriptures▪ 1. That there are under the New Teſtament, ſome over the people of God in the Lord, ſome that watch for their ſouls, and govern them; as here there were Prieſts, Levites that taught and governed the people: 2. That the Rulers of the Churches, alwayes are to have the charge of the holy things; and to ſee that theſe holy things, the Seals and Sacraments and word of promiſe be not polluted, and that therefore they have power given them to debar ſuch and ſuch profane from the Seals, and ſo are to diſcern between the clean and the unclean, and this which the Prophet ſpeaketh, ver. 9. is a prophecie never fulfilled after this in the perſons of the people of God; therefore it muſt have its ſpirituall truth fulfilled under the New Teſtament, as is clear, ver. 11. Yet the Levites that are gone away The place Ezekiel 44. v. 11. 12. 13. 14. to be fulfilled under the New Teſtament.far from me, ſhall be Miniſters in my Sanctuarie, having charge at the gates of the Houſe, and Miniſtering to the Houſe—14. And I will make them keepers of the charge of the Houſe, for all the ſervice thereof, and for all that ſhall be done therein, Ver. 15. And the Prieſts and the Levites the ſons of Zadok, that kept the charge of my Sanctuary, when the children of Iſrael went aſtray from me—they ſhall enter into my Sanctuary, and they ſhall come neer to my Table to miniſter unto me, and to keep my charge—23. And they ſhall teach my people the difference betweene the holy and prophane, and cauſe men to diſcerne between the uncleane and the cleane. 24. And in controverſie they ſhall ſtand in judgement, and they ſhall judge it according to my judgement, and they ſhall keepe my Lawes and my Statutes, in all mine aſſemblies, and they ſhall hallow my Sabbaths. Now this Temple was another houſe, then Solomons Temple, as is evident out of the Text, it having roomes, dimenſions, ſtructures, ſo different that none can imagine them one houſe, and theſe chapters containe the diviſion of the Holy Land, which after the captivity was never done, for the ten Tribes never returned, and this Temple is clearely a type of the new Ieruſalem, and agreeth to that City ſpoken of, Revelation, chapters 21. and 22. As may appeare eſpecially by the foure laſt chapters of Ezekiel, and in the laſt words of the laſt chapter, And the name of the city from that day ſhall be, The Lord is there. And the Prieſts after the captivity as well as before brake the covenant of Levi, Mal. 2. And therefore I ſee it not fulfilled, except in the viſible Church of the New Teſtament, and in the Aſſemblies of Chriſtian Churches, Mat. 18. Act. 15. and the reſt of the Church-aſſemblies under the New Teſtament: As for the Lords perſonall raigne on earth, it is acknowledged there ſhall be no Church policy in it, no Word, Sacraments, Ordinances, no Temple, as they ſay from Rev. 21. 22. And with correction and ſubmiſſion, the Prieſts and Levites, that Ezek. 44. 15. are ſaid to keep the charge of the Lords Houſe, when others went aſtray, I take to be a prophecie of theſe Paſtors under the New Teſtament, to wit, the Apoſtles of Ieſus Chriſt, and Paſtors, and teachers that Chriſt left in his Church; for the edifying of his body, Epheſ. 4. 11. 12. When theſe Scribes and Phariſes did ſit in Moſes his chaire for a while, Mat. 23. but onelyonly as porters and inferiour Officers in Gods houſe, yet they were to be heard, while God ſhould cut them off, as he prophecied, Zach. 11. 8.
We cannot ſay as ſome doe, that perſons were deprived amongſt Object.the Iewes, of Church communion in the holy things of God, becauſe of Ceremoniall, not of Morall uncleannes, but now under the new Teſtament only Morall uncleannes can exclude perſons from the holy things of God; and therefore to argue from ceremoniall uncleannes in the old, to morall uncleanneſſe in the new, is no good conſequence. ICeremoniall excluſion from holy things under the old, did tipifie excluſion for morall uncleanneſſe under the New Teſtament. Levit. 5. 2…. anſwer, the Ceremoniall uncleanneſſe in the Old, which did exclude from the holy things of God, doth ſtrongly conclude that morall uncleanneſſe under the New Teſtament doth exclude from the holy things of God, if that excluſion of the Leaper out of the campe ſeven dayes, and the touching of the dead, though imprudently, did typifie ſome other excluſion from the holy things of God, as no queſtion it did, then the conſequence muſt be ſtrong. 2. It is alſo falſe that morall uncleanneſſe did not exclude from the holy things of God under the Old Teſtament, For 1. what was more ordinary, then that ſacrifices ſhould be offered for ſins of ignorance, for treſpaſ…es, and while this was done, the perſon was not admitted to partake of the holy things of God. 2. Whence was the Lords frequent complaints of wearying his ſoule with ſacrifices, ſolemne aſſemblies, feaſt dayes, and new Moones, when they were morally uncleane, and their hands were full of blood, and they had not put away the evill of their doings, did not love judgement and juſtice, Iſaiah 10. 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19. And when God complaineth ſo of them, Ier. 7. 8. Will ye ſteale, murther and commit adultery, and ſweare falſely, and burne incenſe unto Baal, and walke after other Gods whom ye know not? 10. And come and ſtand before me in this houſe, which is called by my Name? Ergo, Murtherers and adulterers were debarred from entring into the Congregation of the Lord, and partaking of the holy things of God, while they repented. Let none ſay by prophecying, or the keyes of knowledge in preaching the Word, they were declared unworthy to enter into the Temple; but that will not conclude that it was the Prieſts office by power of diſcipline to exclude them from coming unto the Sanctuary of God. Anſ. But if the Porters were ſet at doores of the Lords houſe, to hold out the uncleane, and if the Lord charge the Prieſts with this crime, that they Ezek. 44. 8. ſet keepers of the charge of the Lords houſe for themſelves, that is, for their owne carnall ends, and not for the honour of the Lord: And that ver. 7. They brought into the Sanctuary of the Lords houſe uncircumciſed in heart, that is, ſuch as were morally uncleane, then had the Prieſts a power to debarre from the Sanctuary ſuch as were morally uncleane, and if the Prieſts are ſaid to beare rule by their meanes, Ier. 5. 31. Then the Prieſts did beare rule and governe, though they abuſed their Power, and the word foreign ſignifieth to have dominion over any, Pſal. 72. 8. Pſal. 110. 2. 1 Kin. 4. 24. Levit. 26. 17. And the Scripture gives a power of judging and governing to the Prieſts. And 2 Chron. 30. 6, 7. The Poſts that Hezekiah and the Congregation of Iſrael ſent through the Land, commandeth a morall preparation to thoſe that were to keepe the Lords Paſſeover, to wit, that they ſhould turne againe unto the Lord God of Abraham, and ſhould not be like their Fathers, nor like their Brethren, that treſpaſſed againſt the Lord God of their Fathers. And ver. 11. divers of Aſhur, and Manaſſeh, and Zebulun humblid themſelvs, and came to Ieruſalem to keepe the feaſt of the Paſſeover. This proveth clearly that people under the Old Teſtament were no leſſe to try and examine themſelves, by the King and Prieſts commandment, carried to them by Poſtes before they ſhould eate the Paſſeover; then they are to try themſelves before they eate and drinke at the Lords Supper: onelyonly the adverſaries ſay, the Prieſts by preaching were to debarre from the Paſſeover thoſe who were morally unclean, but not to debarre thoſe who were morally uncleane, ſo they were not typically and ceremonially unclean, by any power of Diſcipline, or by Porters ſet at the gates to keepe them out of the Sanctuary. But I anſwer, 1. How are the Prieſts Ezek. 22. 26. reproved for violating the Law of God, and prophaning his holy things, in that they put no difference between the holy and prophane, the clean and the unclean? Surely the Prieſts prophaned in the higheſt way, the holy things of God, in admitting into the Sanctuary, thoſe who were not onelyonly ceremonially, but morally uncleane, as murtherers, adulterers, Who cryed the temple of the Lord, Ier. 7. And they put no difference betweene the Holy and Prophane, when they admitted to the holy things of God, and into the Sanctuary the uncircumciſed in heart, for they doe more pollute the holy things of God, who partake of them being morally uncleane, and uncircumciſed in heart, then thoſe who are onelyonly uncircumciſed in fleſh.
Object. But the Church under the New Teſtament can no otherThe Churches excluſion from the Seales declarative, not coactive by violence. way but morally, and by preaching (as it would ſeeme) onelyonly debarre ſcandalous perſons from the Seales and Prayers of the Church; for ſhould a ſcandalous perſon, or an excommunicate perſon obtrude himſelfe on the Lords Supper, againſt the will and ſentence of the Church, the Church cannot uſe any bodily violence to hinder ſuch prophane intruſion upon the holy things of God, becauſe the Churches weapons are not carnall but ſpirituall; bodily violence can be noRemonſtrant in Apollo. ſpirituall weapon, that the Church as the Church can uſe, ſo do the Remonſtrant Arminians argue, and ſome other for the congregationall way.
Anſ. This Argument is againſt all Church-cenſures, but though the Church as the Church cannot hinder ſcandalous intruders upon the holy things of God, by bodily violence, it doth not follow; Ergo, The Church can keep the holy things pure no way, but morally, that is, by preaching only, for we can give a third way: The rebukes, admonitions and Excommunication, or delivering to Satan Cenſures applied to ſome by name.are all tranſacted without any bodily and externnll violence, Chriſts Kingdom reſigneth all ſuch carnall weapons to the Magiſtrate, who is the only Governour of the Church of Chriſt, as the Opponents ſay, All Church Cenſures are by way of Declaration, applied to ſuch men by name; and there co-action, though penall, is not by bodily violence, but by acting upon the conſcience of men and putting them to ſhame.
Hence 2. We argue, if beſide the preaching of the word, inArg. 2. which Commandments, Promiſes and threatnings are propoſed to all in generall; there be rebukes of the Church, the ſentencing of ſuch and ſuch perſons by name, as Hymeneus and Philetus, and other Blaſphemers; the Authoritative Declaration, that ſuch a brother is to be eſteemed as a Heathen and a Publican, and brotherly fellowſhip of eating and drinking with ſuch an one denied, that he may be aſhamed, if theſe be, then are ſome debarred from the holy things of God, by Church-Cenſures, beſide the preaching of the word of God.
But the former is true; Ergo, ſo is the latter.
The Propoſition is proved, becauſe all wicked perſons and heart-hypocrites are excluded from the holy things of God, by the Preaching of the Word: But only theſe that are notoriouſly, and by teſtimony of witneſſes, convinced to be ſcandalous or contumacious in atrocious ſins, after they are by name rebuked, and are declared to be eſteemed as Heathen and Publicans; and from whom we are to withdraw brotherly fellowſhip, are excluded from the holy things of God, by Diſcipline and Church Cenſures.
The Aſſumption I prove: Becauſe the word is preached to all by one in office, and that a Steward and diſpenſer of the myſteries of God, and he excludeth all unworthy ones known to be ſuch, or inviſible only, from the kingdom of God. But the Cenſure, 1. Is inflicted by many, 2 Cor. 26. by the Church, Matth. 18. 17. conveened together, 1 Cor. 54. (2.) It is applied to ſuch perſons by name, 1 Cor. 5. 5. He that hath done ſuch a deed, ver. 2. Hymeneus, Alexander, 1 Tim. 1. 20. Jezabel, Rev. 2. 20. (3) The whole congregation is not to eat or Table with ſuch an one, 1 Cor. 5. 11. We are to note and obſerve him, and to have no company with him, that he may b aſhamed 2 Theſ. 3. 14. to eſteeme him as an Heathen and a Publican, and exclude him from the Seals of the Covenant, ſo long as he remaineth in that ſtate.
3. Arg. If a perſon may for not hearing the Church, be judged as an Heathen and a Publican, and his ſinnes bound in heaven by the Church; then by diſcipline he is excluded from the holy things of God in a peculiar way, in the which contumacious perſons, uncircumciſed in heart are excluded, in foro interno Dei, in Gods ſecret Court; But the former is true, Matt. 18. 15. 16, 17, 18. Ergo &c. Now if there be two Courts, one before God, Rom. 2. 16. Rom. 14. 4. 1 Cor. 14. 25. 1 Ioh. 3. 21. Another of the Church, Mat. 18. 15. 16, &c. 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5, 6, 11, 12. and two ſorts of bindings, two ſorts of Witneſſes, two ſorts of Sentences, then can it not be dedenyed but the Church hath a ſpirituall Court for cenſures, as well as for preaching the Word.
4. Arg. Excluſion of an offender from the ſocietie of the Saints, and not to eate or drinke with him, is ſome other reall viſible cenſure accompanied with ſhame, then any cenſure by the preaching of the Word; but there is ſuch a cenſure inflicted by the Church, Ergo, The Propoſition is cleare from Rom. 16. 17. Now I beſeech you brethren, marke them that cauſe diviſions and offences, contrary to the doctrine which yee learned foreign and avoid them. Here is a reall, viſible, and perſonall note of ſhame put on Schiſmaticks, a bodily declining and avoiding of their company, which could not poſſibly be done by preaching of the Word. But (ſome may ſay) this was not done by the Church court, but every one as private chriſtians were to eſchew the ſociety of Schiſmaticks, and by this you cannot conclude any Church cenſure.
Anſw. Not to ſay that it were unjuſtice to decline any, and renounceEſchewing the ſociety of ſcandalous church members muſt be a church cenſure. ſociety with him, before he were convinced to be factious according to Chriſts order, Mat. 18. which to Eraſtus is a way of common and naturall equity. And ſo in order to ſome publique cenſure before the Church. Paul w…i…eth to a conſtitute Church at Rome, in which he preſcribeth Rom. 12. the Officers duty, as what Paſtor, Doctor, Elder, Deacon, ought to doe in a Church body; We cannot imagine he could command every private Chriſtian to inflict the cenſure and puniſhment, (for a puniſhment it is in order to a publike ſin) of avoiding any in Church communion, profeſſing they ſerve the Lord Ieſus Chriſt, as theſe doe, verſe 18. upon their owne private opinion: Ieſus Chriſt and his Apoſtles muſt have left men looſe in all order and diſcipline by this way, howbeit the adverſary would deny a church puniſhment, here is a puniſhment inflicted by many, 2 Cor. 2. 6. And it is not inflicted by way of preaching, ſo 2 Theſ. 3. 14. If any man obey not our word by this Epiſtle, note that man, have no company with him, that he may be aſhamed, foreign by the learned is to put a publike church note on him that he may be confounded, make him a foreign, a publike wonder, that he may be aſhamed, as Piſcator and P. Baynes obſerve on the place expounding it of excommunication, and the ſame word foreign that is here, is uſed toward the inceſtuous man, who was to be excommunicated, 1 Cor. 5. 9. I wrote unto you in an Epiſtle, not to keepe company with fornicators, the word foreign ver. 1. is aſcribed to the inceſtuous man, and here they are not to be mixed foreign with fornicators, verſ. 11. But now I have written unto you not to keepe company, if any man that is called a brother, be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or an extortioner, with ſuch a one, no not to eate. And that we may know that this is a church cenſure, he addeth ver. 12. For what have I to doe to judge them alſo that are without? Ergo, this no keeping company with ſuch, is a Church judging.
5. Arg. The Church of Pergamus is rebuked for having amongſt them, ſuch as hold the doctrine of Balaam, and Revel. 2. 14. and Thyatira, that they ſuffered Iezabel to preach and ſeduce the ſervants of God, ver. 20. as the Church of Epheſus is praiſed v. 2. that they cannot beare with them that are evill, but had tryed ſuch that ſaid they were▪ Apoſtles, and were not, and had found them liars, Rev. 2. 3. Here is it clearely ſuppoſed that theſe churches were to cenſure falſe teachers, if any ſhall ſay they were to cenſure them no other waies, but by preaching againſt their errors; 1. This would eſtabliſh a Prelate above the Church contrary to that of Mat. 18. Tell the Church, and 1 Cor. 5. Where the Church gathered together was to excommunicate. 2. The Angel of the Church is taken collectively, for all the Rulers and the whole Church to whom Chriſt writeth, as is cleare, in that he ſaith ſo often; He that hath an eare let him heare what the Spirit ſaith to the Churches, not to the Pastors only. 2. The removing of the Candleſtick, is not from the Angel but from the Church; and repentance, and the fighting and overcomming, a reward of the crown of life, and many other things are evidently ſpoken to the Churches, not to the Angels of the Churches. And therefore the tryall of falſe Apoſtles muſt be by a Church, a Court, a colledge of church rulers, as Paul ſpeaketh unto, Act. 20. 17. Where it is ſaid, Paul called the Elders of the Church of Epheſus, and exhorted them to beware of falſe teachers, that ſhould not ſpare the flocke, and ſhould teach perverſe things, v. 28. 29. 30. and of this ſort were theſe lying and ſeducing Apoſtles, now how can one Angell or many Paſtors by preaching onelyonly try falſe Apoſtles, and finde them lyars? This trying and ſentencing of lying ſeducers, Rev. 2. 2. muſt be by a court, ſuch as we find to be the practiſe of the Apoſtles and Elders at Ieruſalem, who in a Synod Act. 15. did finde theſe who taught a neceſſitie of Circumciſion, to be perverters of ſoules and liars, ſaying, They had the Apoſtles authority for what they taught, whereas they had no ſuch thing, and Schiſmatick troublers of the people, Acts 15. See what further I have ſaid for Excommunication before, cap. 2. and ſect. 7. which proveth alſo the ſame thing. The Church of Thyatira would not be rebuked for ſuffering Jezabel to teach, if they had no power of Church cenſures to hinder her; It is not enough to ſay that the Angel of that Church did ſufficiently hinder Jezabell to teach, when in publike he declared and preached againſt her falſe doctrine, and by the ſame reaſon Paſtors exoner their conſcience, if they preach that ſuch and ſuch ſcandalous perſons are not to eate and drinke their owne damnation, though they debarre them not in a viſible court by name from the Lords table, and though they never excommunicate them, and therefore there is not any cenſure but Pastorall rebukes by way of preaching, not any other by way of diſcipline.
Anſ. The Angel of Thyatira had not ſufficiently hindered Jezabel The hindering of Jezabel by preaching onelyonly not ſufficient.to ſeduce the ſervants of God, by only preaching againſt her falſe doctrine, in regard that Paul and Barnabas not only hindred thoſe that teached, that the Gentiles ought to be circumciſed, Act. 14. cap. 16. by Preaching; but alſo had recourſe to the power and authority of a Synod, that in a Synod which is a Court eſſentially conſiſting of many Paſtors and Elders, they might be declared to be perverters of ſouls, and liars, as indeed they were judicially declared to be ſuch, Act. 15. 24. Hence I argue; if the Apoſtles could not be ſaid ſufficiently to hinder Jezabels and Seducers, by only Preaching, and Diſputing againſt their errors, except in caſe of their perſiſting in their errors, they ſhould tell the Church convened in a Synod, as Chriſts order is, Mat. 18. Then the Angel of Thyatira, or any one Paſtor do not ſufficiently hinder ſcandals, but may be well ſaid to ſuffer them by only private rebuking and publick Preaching, except they uſe all theſe means to hinder Iezabels, falſe Teachers, and all ſcandalous perſons, that the Apoſtles uſed, and therefore the Angel of the Church of Thyatira muſt be rebuked for not uſing the Authority and power of the Church againſt Iezabel. And here by the way, when theſe falſe Teachers had ſinned againſt their brethren in perverting their ſouls, they take not the courſe that Eraſtus dreameth to be taken according to Matth. 18. They complain not to the Synedrim, or Civill Magiſtrate, who ſhould uſe the ſword againſt them, but to the Church Synodically convened at Ieruſalem, who uſed againſt them the Spirituall power that Chriſt the head of the Church had given them.
6. Arg. If there be an Eccleſiaſticall debarring of ſcandalousDebarring of the ſcandalous from the ſeals pro…ed. perſons from the holy things of God, eſpecially from the Supper of the Lord by Cenſures, and not by the preaching of the word only, then there be Cenſures and power of juriſdiction in the word beſide preaching of the word. But the former I make good by theſe following Arguments.
1. Arg. If the Stewards and diſpenſers of the myſteries of God, are to cut the word aright as approved workmen, 2 Tim. 2. 15. And are to give every one their portion of bread according to their need, and meaſure, Matth. 24. 45, 46, 47. 1 Cor. 4. 1. 2. 3. and muſt not ſ…ay the ſouls which ſhould not die, by denouncing wrath againſt the righteous, nor ſave the ſouls alive that ſhould not live, by lying words, Ezec. 13. 19. by offering mercy to the wicked and impenitent, then as they ſhould not deny the ſeals of ſalvation to Believers, hungring and thirſting for Chriſt; neither ſhould they give the ſeals of life to thoſe that are walking openly in the way of deſtruction.
But the former is true; Ergo; ſo is the latter. The Propoſition is clear: As the word ſhould not be divided aright, if wrath ſhould be Preached to believing Saints, and life and ſalvation offered to the obdurate and wicked, ſo neither ſhould the Stewards cut the ſeals of the word aright, if the Supper were given to wicked men: If they ſhould ſay, This is the blood of the Covenant, ſhed for the Remiſſion of your ſins, Drink ye all of it: They ſhould ſave alive thoſe that ſhould die, with lying words; for the ſeals ſpeak to the Communicant, and apply to him in particular, the very promiſe that in generall is made to him; and this will prove as the Magiſtrate being no Steward of the word, and not called of God thereunto, as Aaron was Heb. 5. 4. can no more diſtribute the word and ſealsIt belongeth not to the Magiſtrate to … debar from the ſeals. to whom he pleaſeth, Ex officio, then he can Preach and Adminiſter the Sacraments, nor ſhould another man, who is no Steward, but a Porter or Cook, Teach, and that by his office how, and to whom the Steward ſhould diſtribute Bread: nor is it ſufficient, to ſay, by this one man, not the Church, is to debar from the Sacraments, for the ſeals being proper to the Church, as the Church, he muſt act here, in, and with the power of the Church. 2. It is another queſtion, whether by the Miniſter, or by the Church any ought to be debarred, and whether there be any ſuch Cenſure as debarring from the Seals; and its another queſtion, by what power, whether by the power of order, or by the power of juriſdiction, Miniſters may debar the ſcandalous from the ſeals; I conceive by both powers, they may keep the Ordinances pure; and if it belong to the Magiſtrate to debar any more then to preach the word, and by the way of Eraſtus: The Magiſtrate by his office, as he is a Magiſtrate only is deputed of Ieſus Chriſt to Steward the ſeals to whom he pleaſeth: Ergo, (ſay I) to cut the word aright to whom he pleaſeth, muſt be his due.
2. Arg. As the diſpenſers of the word muſt not partake of other mens ſins, 1 Tim. 5. 22. ſo neither ſhould they diſtribute to wicked and ſcandalous men, ſuch Ordinances, as they ſee ſhall certainly be judgement and damnation to them, and as maketh the Communicants guilty of the body and blood of our Lord: Now that the Stewards Communicate with the ſins of theſe manifeſtly ſcandalous, to whom they adminiſtrate the Supper: I prove: 1. Becauſe they that ſow pillows under the head of the openly wicked, preaching peace to theſe who ſhould die, do hunt ſouls, Ezech. 13. 20. and partake of their preſumption, and they that heal the wound of the people with ſmooth words, are falſe dealers, and concurreth to the wound of the people, Ier. 8. 10, 11. As the Prophet that preacheth lies partaketh of the peoples preſumption; which believe thoſe lies, Ier. 14. 14, 15, 16. 2. If Eve ſhould but reach the fruit of the forbidden Tree to Adam, and ſay take and eat, ſhe partakes of Adams ſin, if the mother give poyſon willingly and wittingly to a childe, ſhe killeth her childe, though it be told the childe that it is poyſon: The Supper to thoſe who knowingly to us, eat unworthily, is forbidden meat, and poyſon.
3. A third Argument is, from the nature of holy things. It is not lawfull to give that which is holy to dogs, nor to caſt pearles before ſwine, leaſt they trample them under their feet, Matth. 7. 6. But the Sacraments are holy things, ſaith Eraſtus, and no man canThomas Eraſtus lib. 3. confirmat. Theſium lib. 3. …. 3. pag. 207. Nam et ſacramenta ſub ſub foreign nomine comprehendi concedo. deny it; Ergo, we are not to give the Sacraments to the ſcandalous and openly prophane.
But Eraſtus anſwereth, That the Lord preached the word to Phariſees, and the word is a holy thing, and a pearl, and by Dogs, and ſwine, he meaneth open perſecutors. They that will ſeem members of the Church, and confeſſe their fault, and promiſe amendment, are not ſuch as will trample on the Sacraments, and will turn again to tear you: Et ſi quis talis reperiatur hunc ego admittendum minime cenſeo, for ſuch (ſaith he) Are not to be admitted to the Sacrament.
Anſ. Theſe holy things, which prophane men and openly ſcandalous can make no uſe of, but pollute them to their own deſtruction, and the abuſing of the Ordinances, no more then Dogs and Swine can make uſe of Pearls to feed them, but onelyonly trample on them, are not to be given to the prophane and openly ſcandalous: But the Lords Supper is ſuch a thing, being Ordained only for thoſe that have ſaving Grace, not for Dogs. Now the Aſſumption applied to the word, is moſt falſe, (as it is applied to the Lords Supper, it is moſt true) for the Word is Ordained by ſpeciall Command to be Preached to Dogs and Lions, that thereby they may be made Iſa. 11. 4, 5, 6, 7. Iſa. 2. 3. 4. Lambs and Converts; the Supper is not a mean of Converſion; and ſince Dogs can make no uſe of it, but trample it under foot, we are forbidden to give ſuch holy things to them. It is true, They'll trample the Pearl of the word; but we are Commanded to offer the word to all, even while they turn Apoſtates. 2. If Chriſt Commanded the word to be Preached to Phariſees and Saduces; theſe were ſuch perſecuters as ſinned againſt the Holy Ghoſt, Dogs in the Superlative degree, Matth. 12. 31, 32. Joh. 9. 39, 40, 41. Joh. 7. 28. Joh. 8. 21. Ergo, Chriſt Commanded ſome holy things, the word to be given to Dogs; and yet his precept cannot be obeyed, if we give them the Sacrament. 3. By what Doctrine of Scripture will Erastus have theſe that trampleth on Ordinances, and turn again to tear us, debarred from the Supper? For in his Theſ. 26. 27, 28, 29. he holdeth it unlawfull to debar any Judas from the Supper; doth he think there be no Dogs in the Viſible Church? Peter ſaith, There be ſuch Dogs as have known the way of truth, and turn to their vomit; and ſuch may promiſe amendment, confeſſe their ſin, and deſire the Sacrament.
4. Arg. Thoſe who will not hear the Church, but doth ſcandalize, not only their Brethren, but alſo a whole Church, and are to be eſteemed as Heathen and Publicans, are not to be admitted to the higheſt priviledge, and to feaſt with Chriſt, when the Church knoweth they want their wedding garment: But there may be, and are many in the Church of this ſort; Ergo, ſuch ſhould not be admitted: For the Major, I ſet down the words of Eraſtus grantingEraſtus, Confi. theſ. l. 3. c. 3. pag. 207. Qui membra externae volunt eccleſiae videri, illi non calcabunt Sacramenta nec offere… tem laniare tentabunt, & fiquis talis reperiatur hune ego minime admittendum cenſe…. it. The Aſſumption, both Scripture and experience proveth; for there be in the Viſible Church, Dogs, Perſecuters, Jezabels, as there be many called, and few choſen.
5. Arg. If the inceſtuous man muſt be caſt out, leſt he leaven the Church, then can he not be admitted to Communicate with the Church, in that which is the higheſt ſeal of Chriſts love; but the inceſtuous man muſt be caſt out, leſt he leaven the whole Church, 1 Cor. 5. 4, 5, &c. Ergo, The Propoſition is clear, becauſe none can be put out of the Church, but they muſt be ſeparated from the Table of the Children of the Church; the Aſſumption is 1 Cor. 5 13. foreign Put him out, ver. 7. Purge him out. Now the Church hath no power by bodily violence to attempt a locall ſeparating of him in perſon from them, as they are men, though they may ſeparate themſelves from him; then it muſt be a declarative caſting of him out, as unworthy to Communicate with the Church in ſuch holy Ordinances, as diſtinguiſheth the Church from other Societies, and theſe be the Seals of the Covenant.
6. We are not to ſuffer ſin in any, Levit. 18. 17. Rev. 2. 20. but to hinder it ſo far as we can according to our vocation, 1 Sam. 3. 13. As the Prieſts hindred Ʋzziah to Sacrafice, 2 Chron. 26. 18, 19, 20. And muſt pull them out of the fire, Jude ver. 23. As the Law of nature would teach the Mother, not only, not to co-operate with her ſonne attempting to kill himſelf; but to hinder and ſtop him by pulling a knife or ſword out of his hand, when he is about to deſtroy himſelf; if ſo, then ought not the Church and her Officers to co-operate ſo far with thoſe who do Eat and drink their own Damnation, as to exhibite and give to ſuch the ſeals of the Covenant, to pray that theſe ſeals may be bleſſed to ſcandalons ones, which is to pray directly contrary to the revealed will of God in his word, and againſt that which the faithfull Paſtors and Paul Preacheth, That every one ſhould try and examine themſelves, and ſo eat and drink: Now a reall and phyſicall co-operating of the Church, with ſuch manifeſt impiety, muſt then be the Churches ſuffering of ſin in a brother, or not hindring him …o eat his own Damnation; if the Lord have committed a power of diſpenſing the ſeals to Chriſtians, not to Pagans and Turks: Let Eraſtus ſhow any precept or practiſe, why we might not admit Jews, Turks, Indians, though never Baptized, to eat and drink the Lords body and blood, (we are to Preach the Goſpel to them, if they were amongſt us) except that ſuch as are to communicate according to the will of Chriſt, are Chriſtians, members of the Church, who doth try and examine themſelves; and Jews and Turks though dwelling and born amongſt us are not ſuch, yet Eraſtus would that ſuch ſhould never be admitted to the Lords Supper, though they ſhould deſire it: Officers alſo have a command not to diſpenſe ſome parts of the word to all, as we are not to rebuke open Scorners: Should any of our Church turn Iew and blaſpheme Chriſt, and pertinaciouſly after conviction perſiſt in his Apoſtacy; might not Eraſtus aske by what command of Chriſt will ye not Preach the Goſpel to ſuch an one? Chriſt made no exception, but ſaid, Preach to all Nations, why do you make Exceptions? might we not anſwer, Chriſt hath given a power of diſpenſing the Goſpel to all; yet hath he excepted ſome, becauſe its againſt the will of Chriſt that ſuch can obey the Goſpel: We are bidden pray for all, yet are there ſome that we are not to pray for, becauſe they ſin unto death: ſo is the caſe here in ſome kinde.
7. It is for our inſtruction that the Prieſts were rebuked, for that they admitted into the Sanctuary the uncircumciſed in fleſh and heart, that they put no difference betweene the cleane and the uncleane, and prophaned the holy things of God, Ezek. 44. 9. Ezek. 22. 26. Hag. 2. 11, 12, 13. And this was a ſhadow of things to come, as was obſerved before, teaching us, that farre leſſe ſhould the Paſtors of the New Teſtament ſuffer the holy things of God to be prophaned.
8. We read that Iohn Baptiſt and the Apoſtles baptized none but ſuch as confeſſed their ſinnes, and profeſſed …aith in Ieſus Chriſt, it would then appeare to be the will of Chriſt, that every one ſhould not be admitted to the Lords Supper, though ſome ſay, the Apoſtles baptized ſingle perſons not in Church communion, ſo that Paſtors adminiſter the Sacraments by reaſon of the power of order, as they are Paſtors, not by power of juriſdiction, as having warrant from any Church, in regard Churches at the beginning had the Word and Sacraments before they had any Church Government, yet I conceive the Lords Supper is a Seale of a Churchcommunion, 1 Cor. 10. 16. 17. and the like I ſay of Baptiſme typed by Noahs Arke, 1 Pet. 3. 19, 20, &c. and though the Apoſtles, partly by priviledge, partly through neceſſitie, the parts exiſting before the whole, were neceſſitated firſt to baptize, and then to plant Churches, yet the Churches being once conſtitute, theſe are▪ Church priviledges to be diſpenſed both by the power of order, and the power of juriſdiction.