The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Chapter 9

The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication · Religious polemic · Chapter 9

p. 316CHAP. IX.

Queſt. 5.The 1 Cor. 5. vindicated from Eraſtus his gloſſe. Lib. 3. c. 4. pag. 211, 212.1 Cor 5

The place 1 Cor. 5. for Excommunication, vindicated from the Objections of Eraſtus.

Erastus. Paul did nothing contrary to the Command of Chriſt: But Chriſt excluded no man from the Paſſeover, not Iudas; Ergo, p. 317Neither minded …e to exclude the inceſtuous man; he ſaith not, 1 Cor. 5. Why debarred you him not from the Sacrament? But why did you not obtain by your tears and prayers, as Auguſtine expoundeth it, that the man might be cut off by death?

Anſ. Chriſt would not take the part of a viſible Church on him, to teachus that none ſhould be caſt out of the Church for ſecret and latent crimes: 2. Paul did nothing without the Command of Chriſt: But Chriſt neither in the Old, or New Teſtament, commanded his Church to pray for the miraculous cutting off of a ſcandalous perſon; give an inſtance in all Scripture, except you make this one which is contraverted, your inſtance.

Eraſtus. Paul 2 Cor. 2. abſolveth the man from all puniſhment,Pag. 214. and nameth onelyonly foreign rebuking; Ergo, He was not excluded from the Sacrament.

Anſ. Excluſion from the Sacrament, is but one of the fruits of Excommunication; not formally Excommunication; yet he harpeth on this alway, that to be excommunicated, or to be delivered to Satan, is but to be debarred from the Sacrament. 2. The anſwer preſuppoſeth he was Excommunicated, we urge the place for a precept only of Excommunication, if he repented to the ſatisfying of the Church, there was no need of Excommunication. 3. If the man 2 Cor. 2. was delivered from rebuke onelyonly, and if that was all his puniſhment; Ergo, he was not miraculouſly cut off, for then he muſt have been miraculouſly cut off, and raiſed from death to life againe, unleſſe miraculous cutting off had been no puniſhment: But if he was not miraculouſly cut off, becauſe he prevented it, then with what faith could the whole Church pray for the miraculous killing of a brother, and not rather that he might repent and live? 4. In all the Word of God, the intrinſecall end of putting to death a Malefactor, is to avenge Gods quarrell, Rom. 13. 4. That all Iſrael may hear and feare, and doe no more any ſuch wickednes, Deut. 13. 11. To put away the guilt of ſinne off the Land, Numb. 34. 33, 34. that the Lords anger may be turned away, and a common plague on the Church ſtayed, when juſtice is executed on the ill doer, Pſal. 106. 28, 29, 30, 31. And it concerneth the Church and Common-wealth, more then the ſoule of the Malefactor, and there is nothing of ſuch an end here. But the intrinſecall end here, is, that the mans Spirit may be ſaved in the day of the Lord p. 318Jeſus, and this delivering to Satan is in the Name and authority, and by the power of the Lord Ieſus, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. Now theThe prayers of the Church interveen not for this particular miracle. Sonne of man came to ſave ſoules, not to deſtroy bodies, and burne cities; and though by the power of Chriſt, Peter miraculouſly killed Ananias and Saphira, and Paul ſtroke Elimas the Socererer blinde, yet theſe being Miracles, we heare not that this was done by any interveening act of the Church conveened, or by their prayers to bring vengeance, by a miracle, on the ill do…r. Peter and Paul doe both theſe not asking any conſent, or intervention of the peoples prayers, but by immediate power in themſelves from the Lord Jeſus. 2. If any ſuch power were given to the Church, by their Prayers to obtain from God a miraculous killing of all ſcandalous perſons, who infecteth the Church, in caſe the civill Magiſtrate were an Heathen, and an enemy to Chriſtian Religion and refuſed to purge the Church; Chriſt, who provideth ſtanding remedies for ſtanding diſeaſes muſt have left this miraculous power to all the chriſtian Churches in the earth that are under Heathen Magiſtrates, or ſome power by way of Analogie like to this, to remove the ſcandalous perſon, but we finde not any ſuch power in the Churches under Heathen Magiſtrates, except power of refuſing to the offender the Communion, and rejecting him as an Heathen and Publican that he may be aſhamed and repent. 3. The whole faithfull at Corinth, men, women and children and all the Saints (for to thoſe all, i… this power given, as Eraſtus ſaith) muſtFaith of miracles to pray for this miracle not in all the faithfull at▪ Corinth. have had a word of promiſe (if they ought to have prayed in faith as the Prophets and Apoſtles prayed in faith, that they might work miracles) that Paul was miraculouſly to kill the inceſtuous man▪ But that all and every one who were puffed up, and mourned not at this mans fall, had any ſuch word of promiſe I conceive not imaginable by the Scriptures, for the Propoſition I take it as undeniable; if Paul rebuked the Corinthians all and every one, becauſe they prayed not, and mourned not to God, that Paul wrought not this miracle in killing the inceſtuous man, they behoved to have a word of God, for their warrant, commanding them to pray: O Lord give power to Paul, to kill ſuch▪ an inceſtuous man miraculouſly: For ſuch Faith of miracles had Chriſt, and all the Prophets and Apoſtles, Joh. 11. 41. So did Sampſon pray in faith, Judg. 16. 28. and Elias 1 Kings 18. 36, 37, 38. and ſo did the Apoſtles p. 319pray, Act. 4. 24, 29, 30. and with them the Church of believers, for working of miracles in generall; for the Apoſtles had a word of promiſe in the generall for working of miracles, Mar. 16. 17, 18. But that the Apoſtles had before hand revealed to them all the miracles they were to work: I cannot believe by any Scripture, But that it was revealed to them upon occaſion only, by an occaſionall immediate Revelation, Do this particular miracle, Hic & nunc: And this I am confirmed to believe: Becauſe Eliſha, 2 Kin. 4. was miſtaken in ſending his ſervant with his ſtaffe to raiſe the dead ſon of the Shunamite (a Paſtor with nothing but a club and naked words cannot give life to the dead) ver. 31. and therefore the working of a miracle in particular Hic & nunc was not alwayes revealed to the moſt eminent Prophets, ſuch as Eliſha was; and ſo I beleeve, as working of miracles on this; and this man, came not from an habit in the Prophets and Apoſtles, far leſſe from a habit ſubject to their free will, but God reſerved that liberty to himſelf, to act his ſervants immediatly, both to pray by the faith of this miracle, Hic & nunc, and to work this miracle, Hic & nunc. Now to the Aſſumption: How can Eraſtus or any of his followers aſſure our conſcience that God had given the Faith of miracles to all the ſanctified in Chriſt Jeſus at Corinth, whom Paul ſo ſharply rebuketh, 1 Cor. 5. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. That this being revealed to them by God, and they having the faith, that it was the will of Ieſus Chriſt, that Paul ſhould kill, or (as ſome ſay) deliver to Satan this inceſtuous man to be miracuouſly tormented in the body or fleſh, as Iob was, that he might repent; is it like Chriſt would reveal more of his will, touching every particular miracle to be done by Paul, to all and every ſecure one in the Church of Corinth that were puffed up, and mourned not for this mans fall, then he revealed to the Apoſtles themſelves? But I have proved that the Apoſtles and Prophets knew not, nor had they the particular Faith of this, and this miracle, how then had all and every one of the Church of Corinth this Faith? Now they behoved to have this light of Faith of this miracle revealed to them, that this was Chriſts will, that Paul ſhould work a miracle for the deſtruction of the man; elſe the Corinthians could no more be juſtly rebuked, becauſe they prayed not to God, that Paul might work this miraculous deſtruction of the man (which yet he never wrought, as its clear, 2. Cor. 2. he p. 320was not killed, but repented, and was pardoned) then becauſe they prayed not, that he miraculouſly might cure the criple man at Lystra, Act. 14. or that he might work any other miracle. Now how was this revealed to all of the Church of Corinth that this was Chriſts will? If it be ſaid, they were to pray conditionally that God would either by a miracle take him away, or then in mercyDelivering to Satan not miraculous. give him repentance to prevent deſtruction: 1. We have no ſurer ground for a conditionall and diſ-junctive Faith of miracles in the Corinthians, then for an abſolute Faith: 2. If it was the will of Christ, that the man ſhould by himſelf be miraculouſly killed, why did not the Apoſtle immediatly by himſelf kill him? Why? It was the Apoſtles fault as well as the ſin of the Corinthians, that the man remained as a leaven to ſowre and infect the Church; yea, it was more the Apoſtles fault then theirs, for he had only the immediate power miraculouſly to purge the Church; ſome may ſay, as the Lord Ieſus was hindred ſome time to work miracles, becauſe of the peoples unbelief, Matth. 13. 58. So here Paul was hindred to work this miracle on the ſcandalous man, becauſe of their unbeliefe.

Anſ. Paul could not profeſſe this; for he had not aſſayed to work any miracle of this kinde, as Chriſt had done, Matth. 13. But only ſheweth them of a report came to him of the fact, and of their ſecurity, and not mourning: 2. Paul ſhould then rather have rebuked their unbelief, and not praying that God would miraculouſly deſtroy the man; but this Paul doth not. 3. Paul rebuketh them, for not judging him, not putting him out of the midſt of them: Muſt that be Pauls meaning; pray to God that I may have grace and ſtrength immediatly from God, to kill him miraculouſly, and to judge him. Now they knew the Apoſtle miraculouſly thus judged thoſe that are without, as he ſtroke with blindneſſe; Elymas who was without the viſible Church: I conceive the whole Churches were to pray, as the Apoſtles do with the Saints, Act. 4. 29. 30. That miracles may be wrought both on thoſe that are without and within: But of this judging he ſaith, ver. 12. What have I to do to judge them alſo that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? 4. It is directly contrary to Chriſts direction, Matth. 18. Which is, that by rebukes we gaine the offending brothers ſoul: Now Eraſtus will have him gained to Chriſt, p. 321by removing his ſoule from his body, and by killing him. Yea, the Apoſtle writing of the cenſuring of thoſe in Theſſalonica, who walked unorderly, and obeyed not the Apoſtles Word, which doth include ſuch as breake out in Inceſt, Adulteries, Murthers, is ſo farre from giving direction to kill them miraculouſly, that he biddeth onelyonly keep no Church company, nor Chriſtian fellowſhip with them, but yet they are to be admoniſhed as brethren; Ergo, they were not to be miraculouſly killed, for then they ſhould be capable of no admonition at all being killed; And could there be worſe men then was amongſt the Phillipians, Enemies of the croſſe of Chriſt, whoſe end is deſtruction, whoſe God was their belly? Yet there was no blood in the Apoſtles pen, he chides not the Phillipians, nor the Galathians who had amongſt them men of the ſame mettall, Gal. 5. 7, 8, 9, 10. Ver. 19. 20, 21. Nor the Timothies who would have to doe with farre worſe men, 2 Tim, 3. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Nor Titus who had to doe with wicked Cretians, Tit. 1. becauſe they cryed not to God, for Pauls bloodie ſword of vengeance, that theſe wicked men might be cut off by Satan, nor doth the Apoſtle to the Hebrewes draw this Sword againſt thoſe who ſinned againſt the Holy Ghoſt, c. 10. c. 6. Nor Iames againſt bloody warriours, Murtherers, Adulterers, Oppreſſors, c. 4. c. 5. Nor doth Peter and Iude uſe this ſword, or command the Churches to uſe ſuch carnall weapons againſt the wickedeſt of men, but recommended long-ſuffering, rebuking, the rod of Church-diſcipline, to reject Hereticks after admonitions. Hence I argue negatively; in all the Scripture, never did the Lord command that they ſhould pray to God and mourne, that he would inflict bodily vengeance and death, or yet ſickneſſe on any ſcandalous profeſſor, nor is there promiſe, precept, or practiſe in any Scripture of this Church cenſure. 5. Eraſtus doth thinke a court of the Church, that hath power to lead Witneſſes, judge and cenſure offenders an extream wronging of the Magiſtrate, and an incroaching on his Liberties, but here is a more bloody Court, for if the whole faithfull are to pray for bodily death by the Miniſtery of the Devill, upon one of their own brethren, becauſe he hath lyen with his fathers wife, or fallen in Adultery, or Murther, as David did: Surely they muſt pray in faith, and upon certaine knowledge that he is guilty; the Law of God and Nature muſt p. 322then have warranted the whole Saints, Women and Children, to meet in a grand Jurie and Inqueſt, either to have the fact proved by Witneſſes, or to heare his owne confeſſion; elſe how could they pray in faith, if it was not ſure to their conſcience that the man had done this deed? Here is a Jury of men and women, I am ſure unknowne to the Apoſtolique Church. 2. A greater abridging of the Magiſtrates power then we teach: The Church ſhall take away the life of a Subject & never aske the Magiſtrates leave. 6. It is againſt Chriſts minde, Mat. 18. …s Eraſtus expoundeth it, that Chriſtians ſhould go any further againſt an offending brother, then implead him before an Heathen, though he adde injurie to injurie: But this wa… maketh the Holy Ghoſt ſharply to rebuke all the Saints when they are off…ded, before the barre of Heaven, by crying miraculous blood…e vengeance upon the Offender. 7. It is evident this man repen…ed, and that the Corinthians confirmed their love to him, and did forgive him, 2 Cor. 2. 7. 10. Ergo, He was not miraculouſly killed. But we never read, where it was Gods will and Law that an …ll doers life ſhould be ſpared, though he ſhould repent, becauſe his taking away is for example that others may feare. 2. That evill, and as it is here, leaven may be taken away; if then it had been bodily death, I ſee not how Paul and the Corinthians could have diſpenſed with it. 8. Eraſtus doth not, nor can he confirme his unknown Expoſition by any parallel Scripture of the Old and New Teſtament, which I objected to him in his Expoſition of Matth. 18. Let the Reader therefore obſerve how weak Eraſtus is, in arguing againſt pregnant Scriptures, for Excommunication.

Erastus. You muſt prove, that to mourn, becauſe the man is not takenLib. 3. c. 4. p. 213. away, is all one, as to mourn that he is not debarred from the Sacraments by the Miniſters and Elders.

Anſ. That is denyed; to be debarred from the Sacraments, is but a conſequent of Excommunication: 2. It is a putting of the man from amongſt them, not by death, that we have refuted; not from eating and drinking with him onelyonly, that I improved before: Ergo, it muſt be a Church ou…-caſting.

Erastus. Paul might deliver the man to Satan, though he did Repent;Page 215. as the Magiſtrate did puniſh Malefactors, whether they Repented or no….

p. 323An. Ergo, he repen: ed, and was pardoned by the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 2. 10. after he had been killed, which is abſurd.

Erastus. If to deliver to Satan, were nothing but to debar the man from the Sacraments, ever while he ſhould repent; Why ſhould Paul with a great deal of pains and many words, have excuſed himſelf to the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 2. and cap. 7. and as it were deprecate the offending of them; for they ſhould know, that this manner of coercing and puniſhing, was, and ought to be exerciſed in the Church; if it was but a ſaving remedy and invitation to repentance, Why were they ſad? They ſhould rather have rejoyced, as the Angels of Heaven doth at the Converſion of a ſinner, then Paul muſt have intended another thing.

Anſ. This is a meer conjecture as Eraſtus granteth moſt heTheſ. 58. p. 44. p. 225. ſaith againſt the place is; for he ſaith, Aliam conjecturam etiam addidi, ſuch a violent remedy of repentance, as is the cutting off of a member from Chriſts body, being the moſt dreadfull ſentence of the King of the Church, neareſt to the laſt ſentence, was to Paul, and ought to be a matter of ſorrow to all the Servants of God, as the foretelling of ſad Iudgements, moved Chriſt to tears, Matth. 23. 37▪ Luke 19. 41, 42. And moved Ieremiah to ſorrow, cap. 9. 1. And yet Chriſt was glad at the home-coming of ſinners, Luke 15. 6, 7, &c. Theſe two are not contrary as Eraſtus dreameth, but ſubordinate; to wit, (That Christ ſhould inflict the extreameſt vengeance of Excommunication, which alſo being bleſſed of God, is a ſaving, though a violent remedy of repentance,) and (To rejoyce at the bleſſed fruit of Excommunication, which is the mans repentance:) And the Apoſtle 2 Cor. 7. profeſſeth his ſorrow, That he made them ſad, ver. 8. and alſo rejoyceth at their gracious diſpoſition who were made ſorry: He is far from excuſing himſelf, as if he had done any thing in weakneſſe; this were enough, and it is an Argument of our Proteſtant Divines, to prove that the Books of the Macabees, are not Dited by the Holy Ghoſt, as Canonick Scripture is; becauſe the Author 2 Macab. 15. 38. excuſeth himſelf in that Hiſtory, as if he might have erred, which no Pen-man of holy Scripture can do: And Eraſtus layeth the like blame on Paul, as if he had repented that he made them ſorry, by chiding them, for not praying for a miraculous killing of a Brother: This is enough to make the Epiſtles of Paul to be ſuſpected as not Canonick Scripture; yea, Paul ſaith the p. 324contrary, 2 Cor. 7. 9. Now I reioyce, not that yee were made ſorry, but that yee ſorrowed to repentance, for yee were made ſorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive dammage by us in nothing, and 2 Cor. 2. 8, 9. he exhorteth them to rejoycing, at the mans Repentance, and to confirme their love to him, (which demonſtrates that he was now a living man, and not miraculouſly killed,) and commendeth their obedience, v. 9. in ſorrowing, as he did chide them that they ſorrowed not, 1 Cor. 5. 2. So that Paul is ſo farre from accuſing himſelfe for making them ſad, that by the contrary, he commends himſelfe for that, and rejoyceth thereat. And if the matter had been Excommunication, while the man ſhould repent, (ſaith Eraſtus) they knowing this ought to be in the Church, they ſhould rather have reioyced, then bin ſorry. And I anſwer, if the matter had been a miraculous killing of him, that his Spirit might be ſaved in the day of the Lord: ſhould they not reioyce at his ſaving in the day of the Lord, whether this ſaving be wrought by bodily killing, or by Excommunication? And ſo this conjecture may well be retorted. 2. They were not to bee ſorry at the mans repentance, but to rejoyce; yet were they to be ſorry at the violent mean of cutting him off from Chriſts body, as a father may be glad at the life and health of his childe, and and yet be ſorry that by no other mean his health can be procured, but by cutting off a finger, or a hand of his childe. 3. They knew that miraculous killing (as Eraſtus dreameth) was alſo a ſaving ordinance (the remaining in the Church, or not remaining is all one) becauſe Paul chideth them, (as he dreameth,) that the man might be miraculouſly killed.

Erastus. What need was there that the Corinthians with ſuchPage 45. diligence ſhould intercede for the man, if they knew when he repented, he was to be received againe into the Church? Now that they interceded for him is clear, for Paul ſaith, 2 Cor. 2. 10. To whom yee forgive any thing, I forgive alſo.

Anſ. Becauſe there is a great hazard in Excommunication, of an higher degree of obduration and condemnation; if the party be not gained. 2. I ſee no ground for this conjecture, that the Corinthians interceded for him at Pauls hand, for if he ought to have been miraculouſly killed, then whether he repented or repented not, both Paul and the interceders ſinned; Paul in being p. 325broken, they in requeſting for a diſpenſation of a Law, in which God would not diſpenſe, as he that would requeſt to ſpare the life ofNum. 34. 31. 32.Num 34:31Num 34:32 a repenting Murtherer againſt Gods expreſſe Law, ſhould ſinne; and Paul ſhould ſinne in pardoning upon requeſt, where God would not pardon.

Erastus. How excuſeth Paul himſelfe that he would try their obedience, that c. 7. he would have their care for him made manifeſt, if he had not commanded a greater thing, then to debarre a wicked man from the Sacraments?

Anſ. This is but a ſhadow of a reaſon againſt the Word of God, for to be caſt out of Chriſts body, and not acknowledged for an Iſraelite of God, and that in heaven and earth: and ſo to be debarred from the Seals, is a higher thing then bodily killing, as to be received as a Member againe, and to be written amongſt the living in Ieruſalem, is like the riſing from the dead, as may be gathered from Rom. 11. 15. and is farre more then deliverance from miraculous killing.

Erastus. Theſe words, ye was made ſorry according to God, that2 Cor. 7. 45.2 Cor 7:45 ye might receive dammage of us in nothing, cannot agree with the purpoſe, they ſhould have ſuffered no loſſe by obtaining pardon to a miſerable man excluded from the Sacraments, while he ſhould repent; but if he was to be killed, they ſhould have loſt a brother, and ſo ſuffered dammage.

Anſ. The hazard of loſing his ſoule, repentance not being ſo eaſie, as Eraſtus imagineth, had been a greater loſſe, then the loſſe of a temporall life, the ſoule being to be ſaved in the day of the Lord.

Eraſtus. Paul requireth his Spirit, and the power of the Lord IeſusPage 45. to this worke; Ergo, It was more then to debarre from the Sacraments.

Anſ. Eraſtus ſhould prove; Ergo, It was more then to Excommunicate. 2. Ergo, It was rather more then bodily death. His ſeventh reaſon I hope after to examine.

Eraſtus. Paul ſaith, he decreed to doe this, and does not commandPage 45. 46. the Church to doe it, or that the Church alone ſhould doe it: We never read that Paul, whether alive or dead, did write to one, or many, to deliver any to Satan, for the deſtruction of the fleſh, that was proper to the Apoſtles onelyonly, as the gift of healing was, Act. 5. and c. 13. p. 326and he writeth, he will come himſelfe with the rod, and he himſelf 1 Tim. 1. delivered Hymeneus and Alexander to Satan.

Anſ. This is much for us, you never read that Paul did writeThe Church, not Paul alone had hand in delivering the man to Satan. to one or many, and did chide them, becauſe they prayed not that he might worke this and this particular miracle; or that without error he might write this or that Canonick Scripture, and therefore becauſe this delivering to Satan, was commanded to the conveened together Church, with his Apoſtolique ſpirit, and warrant to deliver ſuch a one to Satan, and to judge him. v. 12. And to purge him out, and caſt him out, therefore am I perſwaded it was no miracle proper to Paul onelyonly. 2. How prove you that Paul, his alone without the Church Excommunicated Hymeneus? Paul ſaith that Timothy received the gift of God, by his laying on him hands, 2 Tim. 1. 6. Ergo, By the laying on of his hands onelyonly, and not of the whole Presbytery? It followeth not, the contrary is, 1 Tim. 4. 14. 3. Delivering to Satan, v. 5. is all one with purging out, v. 7. as is cleare by the Illation. I have decreed, though abſent, to deliver ſuch a one to Satan. Hence his conſequence, v. 7. foreign, Purge out therefore. 2. To deliver to Satan, is either all one with judgeing thoſe that are within, v. 12. And ſo with judging this man, and with putting of him out, v. 13. or it is not all one; if theſe be all one, then hath the Church a hand in this delivering to Satan, and ſo it is not a miraculous killing. Eraſtus granteth the conſequence, if theſe be not all one, this is two judgings of the man, one of Pauls v. 5. by miraculous killing, and another of Pauls and the Church, v. 12. This latter muſt be ſome Church judgeing of thoſe that are within the Church, common to Paul and the Corinthians, as the words cleare, and which is oppoſed to Gods judging of thoſe that are without; and this is ſo like Excommunication, that Eraſtus muſt make ſome other thing of it. Now we cannot ſay that there was any miraculous judging of this man, common to Paul as an Apoſtle, and to the Corinthians, the ordinary beleevers and Saints, as Eraſtus yeeldeth. 3. foreign to put foreign, …ſt interſiccre. p. 47.away the man, which is expreſly commanded to the Church of Corinth, v. 13. muſt be the ſame foreign and putting away, foreign, in the ſame word foreign, that is, v. 2. But that taking out of the midſt of them is a miraculous killing of the man, as Eraſtus ſaith, now this cannot be, for then the people muſt be joyned in the p. 327ſame work of miraculous killing with the Apoſtle Paul; now both we and Eraſtus muſt diſclaim this; Ergo, there muſt be ſome common Church caſting out, common to both.

Erastus. To put away out of the midſt of them, is not to debar from the Sacraments, but to kill; if it were but to extrude the man out of the ſociety of the faithfull, what need was there of publick mourning? and if he had been to be cast out amongſt the heathen, how could the spirit be ſaved? as is ſaid, for without the Church there is no ſalvation.

Anſ. To put away out of the midſt of them, is to put the man out of the Congregation, as the word Careh is expounded before, and is not to kill: were Hymeneus and Alexander delivered to Satan, that they might learn not to blaſpheme? what learning or Diſcipline can dead men be capable of? 2. There's need of mourning when any is cut off from Chriſts body, it being the higheſt judgement of God on earth. 3. Without the viſible Church altogether as Heathens are, there is no ſalvation; But to be ſo without the Church, as the caſting out is a medicinall puniſhment, That the ſoul may be ſaved in the day of the Lord, is a mean to bring the ſoul in, to both the inviſible and viſible Church, and putteth none in that ſtate, that they cannot be ſaved, but by the contrary in a way to be ſaved; ſo the man periret, niſi periret.

Erastus. It would ſeem, it may be proved from the Text, that theIn Theſ. 48. man perſevered not in that wickedneſſe, for the Text ſaith, foreign & foreign: He that hath done, and that hath wrought this deed, not he that doth this deed; and therefore it ſeems Paul would inflict puniſhment as a good Magistrate uſeth to do (even though the man repent) and he ſaith, that his ſpirit may be ſaved, then the man repented.

Anſ. 1. Reconcile theſe two (Paul was as a good Magiſtrate to kill the man, though he ſhould repent) and (yet at their interceſſion (ſaith Erastus) he did forgive him;) durſt Paul at the requeſt of men, pardon a Malefactor contrary to the duty of a good Magiſtrate? 2. Can Paul intend, in miraculous killing, only the ſaving of the mans ſoul, and knowing that he was ſaved, and having obtained his end, yet he will uſe the mean, that is, he will kill him? or if he intended another end alſo, that others might fear, how could he not kill for this end? A good Magiſtrates zeal ſhould p. 328not be ſoftned and blunted, for the requeſt of men.

Eraſtus he ſaith, He decreed to deliver the man to Satan, for the destruction of the fleſh, that the ſoul may be ſaved; now foreign is to give over, to permit; here a perſon given, a perſon to whom, a perſon giving, to wit, Paul, and the end; wherefore, that the ſpirit may be ſaved; it is, as if I would give my ſon to a Maſter, either to be inſtructed, or chaſtiſed, ſo 1 Tim. 1. Act. 27. 28. Matth. 5. 18. Matth. 24. foreign, Mar. 15. The brother ſhall deliver the brother to death, and the Lord ſaith to Satan, behold foreign, I give him to thee, this is to deliver one afflicted, killed, condemned.

Anſ. All this is needleſſe; to be delivered over, is to be recommended and taken in a good ſenſe alſo, Act. 14. 26. Commended to the grace of God, Act. 15. 40. foreign and weTo be delivered to Satan. deny not but to be delivered to Satan, is to be delivered to be afflicted, but the queſtion is, what affliction is meant here; the affliction of the fleſh ſay we, or of the unrenewed part, oppoſed to a ſaved ſpirit.

Erastus. It is unpoſsible that the word foreign deſtruction, can bePag. 218. The deſtruction of the fleſh. ſhown to ſignifie the destruction of the deſires of ſinfull fleſh in all the New-Teſtament, it alwayes ſignifieth killing, death, destruction; nor doth the thing it ſelf compell us to take it other wayes here, nor for killing and death, as 1 Theſ. 5. It is true foreign Rom. 8. foreign to kill, destroy, crucifie, are ſo taken, but never foreign or foreign in either ſacred or prophane Authors.

Anſ. I conceive Chryſoſtom knew Greek better then Eraſtus, Chryſoſtom. Homil. 15. in 1 Cor.the man was delivered to Satan, foreign. That he might ſcourge him (as he did Job) with a hurtfull boyle or ſome other ſickneſſe. Hence as that learned and judicious Divine, who hath deſerved excellently of the Proteſtant Churches,Pet. Molineus In ſuo vate opuſcule eruditisſimo. lib. 2. cap. 11. pag. 108. Hyeronymus in cap. 5. ad Galat. Petrus Molineus ſaith on the place, Chryſoſtom, Homo Grece eloquentiae R…rum exemplum, A rare example of Grecian eloquence, doth think per foreign by the word deſtruction, not death, but ſome heavy torment to be meant; And I am ſure Hieronymus, a man in the tongues incomparably skilled ſaid, by deſtruction here, was meant jejunia & egrotationes, faſting and diſeaſes: 2. Nor need we contend for foreign, which in all Authors of the world, ſignifieth deſtruction, for foreign is to deſtroy; the queſtion will rather be, p. 329what is meant by the fleſh, but certainly it is in prophane Greek Authors as unuſuall (I except ſacred Greek Authors, ſuch as Baſil, Chryſoſtom, who knew what mortification meant) to ſpeak as Paul doth, Rom. 8. 13. If ye mortifie the deeds of the fleſh, ye ſhall live: Let Erastus finde me a parallel to that in the New Teſtament, foreign I think Eraſtus may not deny that this is to mortifie the ſinfull works of the body of ſin, yet Ariſtotle, Plato, Lucian, Plutarch, H…ſiod, Homer, nor any prophane Greek Author ever ſpake ſo: We ſhall therefore deny that foreign ſignifieth never to Greek Authors any thing but bodily death: forWalens do. diſcr. Magiſt. pol. to. 2. Arg. 6. fol. 10. In vate. l. 2. cap. 11. p. 111, 112. Ambroſius lib. 1. de penitentia. Hyeronymus in c. 5. ad Galar. Auguſti. l. 6. de ſerm. domi in Mont. cap. 38. Chryſoſtom hom. 15. in 1 Cor. Molineus loc cit. Piſcator 1 Cor. 5. Zanchius com. in 2 Theſſ. 3. citeth theſe words, 1 Cor. 5. 3. 4, 5. for Excommunication.1 Cor 52 Thess 31 Cor 5:31 Cor 5:41 Cor 5:5 2 Theſſ. 1. 9. foreign everlaſting deſtruction, is ſome more then bodily deſtruction. 3. We ſay it is unpoſſible that foreign can be ſhowen to ſignifie in either Old or New Teſtament, a miraculous deſtroying of the body by Satan, we retort this reaſon back upon Eraſtus, his Expoſition is not tollerable, becauſe it wanteth a parallel place, it is his own reaſon.

Eraſtus. The deſtruction of the fleſh muſt be the deſtruction of the body, not of concupiſcence, becauſe he addeth that the ſpirit foreign may be ſaved, here the ſoul is oppoſed to the body.

Anſ. Though we ſhould grant, that by the fleſh is meant the body, yet it followeth not, it is the miraculous killing of the man, as I obſerved before. 2. It maketh nothing againſt Excommunication; for many learned Proteſtants teach, that though to deliver to Satan were a bodily puniſhment or conjoyned therewith, as the Learned Anto. Waleus doth obſerve; yet the Apoſtle is clear for Excommunication in this chapter; & the learned Molineus denyeth delivering to Satan to be expounded of Excommunication, and will have the deſtruction of the fleſh to be ſome bodily tormenting of his body by Satan, & ſo doth ſundry of the Fathers, eſpecially Ambroſe, Hyeronimus, Auguſtinus, and Chryſoſtom; though Auguſtine be doubtful: Yet Molineus ſaith, Certum eſt paulum velle hunc inceſtum moveri communione Eccleſia: ſed id vult fieri ab ipſa Eccleſia Cor…nthiacâ, dicens, ver. 13. Tollite iſtum ſceleratum è medio vèſtrúm: And that grave and judicious Divine Piſcator ſaith, on the place; That the forme of Excommunication is this delivering to Satan: but the deſtruction of the fleſh, he thinketh to be the exhauſting of the naturall ſtrength of the body with ſorrow for his ſin, according to that Prov. 17. 22. A broken heart dryeth the bones: And therefore p. 344it is to be obſerved that …raſtily, Eraſtus inſiſteth moſt on thoſe points and ſyllables of a Text, whereon all Divines, Ancient and Modern do place leaſt ſtrength for Excommunication; I might therefore paſſe all Eraſtus his force againſt Excommunication in theſe, and he ſhall be not a whit nearer his point. 2. But I ſhall follow him; when foreign the fleſh, and foreign the ſpirit are put together, I ſee no reaſon that the one ſhould ſignifie the body, the other the ſoul: I know the contrary to be, Rom. 8. 1. Thoſe that walketh foreign after the inordinate affections, and luſts of the fleſh, are oppoſed to thoſe that walk, foreign after the spirit, and Gal. 5. 17. the fleſh, (foreign) luſteth againſt the spirit, and the spirit (foreign) againſt the fleſh, Joh. 3. 6. That which is born of the fleſh, foreign is fleſh, it is not that which is born of the body as body, and that which is born foreign of the ſpirit is ſpirit, ſo Rom. 8. 9. 13, 14. Eraſtus ſhould have ſhewed us ſuch places wherein foreign and foreign the fleſh and the ſpirit ſignifieth the body and the ſoul, when the matter of ſalvation is ſpoken of as here, That the ſpirit may be ſaved, ver. 5. then foreign the fleſh is for the moſt part, if not alwayes, taken in an evil part, for the corruption of mans nature.

Erastus. How could they deſire the Apoſtle not to deliver him to Satan, that he might (as Beza expoundeth it) deſtroy his fleſh, that is, bring him to repentance? How could Paul aſſent to ſuch a Petition? How could the Apoſtle write that he did forgive him? Did Paul by forgiving him, permit him not to mortifie and deſtroy his fleſh, and ſinfull luſts?

Anſ. Let Eraſtus anſwer, How could the Corinthians beſeech Paul not to kill him, that his ſoul may be ſaved in the day of the Lord? How could Paul grant ſuch a Petition, as that the man ſhould not be ſaved in the day of the Lord? How could Paul by pardoning the man, permit, that he ſhould not be ſaved in the day of the Lord? for the ſaving of the mans ſoul, is no leſſe a fruit of this delivering to Satan, then is the deſtroying of the luſts of the fleſh. 2. They might well deſire that upon the mans repentance Paul would take a milder way and courſe to effectuate theſe two deſirable ends, the mortification of his luſt, and the ſaving of his ſoul, then the laſt and moſt dreadfull remedy, which is the cenſure of Excommunication. 3. The deſtruction of the luſts of the fleſh is a Scripturall p. 341remedy for ſaving of the ſoul in the day of Chriſt, at is clear, Rom. 7. 7, 8, 9, 10. Gal. 5. 24, 25. But whether miraculous killing be ſuch a mean ordained of God is the queſtion, and ought to be proved by ſome word of God, beſide this place in controverſie.

Erastus. Theſe words, that the ſoul may be ſaved in the day ofTheſ. 59. pag. 49. the Lord, do hold forth, that the miſerable man was preſently to die.

Anſ. That they hold forth no ſuch thing, is evidently proved, for how were they to caſt him out and judge him? And how was Paul to pardon him, and they and Paul to confirme their love? 2. When Peter ſaith, 1 Pet. 1. 7. That your faith may be found unto praiſe, honour and glory at the appearing of Jeſus Chriſt? were all theſe preſently? Becauſe Paul and the faithfull Philippians were waiting for their Saviours ſecond coming, who ſhould change their vilde bodies, were they to die preſently? When Paul prayeth, that Oneſiphorus may finde mercy in that day, 2 Tim. 1. 18. I pray you, will it follow that Oneſiphorus was preſently to die?

Erastus. The word foreign rebuke, doth not ſignifie rejecting from the Sacraments, 1. Rejecting from the Sacraments is never put for puniſhmentTheſ. 59. 49. in Scripture. 2. It is but a rebuke inflicted by many; and Paul, 2 Cor. 2. abſolveth him from this as a ſufficient puniſhment, a rebuke is no puniſhment.

Anſ. 1. To be debarred from the ſociety of the faithfull, as Hagar was, as Cain was; as David was, Caſt out of the Lords inheritance by Saul; yea, to be rebuked, Ezech. 3. 25, 26. are evils, but they are not evils of ſin; Ergo, He ſpeaks not like a Divine, who will not have them puniſhments; if to injoy the Sanctuary, Church, holy things of God, and the ſociety of the Saints be a rich, bleſſing of God, as the Scripture ſaith it is, Pſal. 42. 4. Pſal. 27. 4. Pſal. 84. 10. Pſal, 110. 3. Pſal. 63. 1, 2, 3. Cant. 1. 7. 8. Cant. 2. 16. 17. Cant. 5. 1. Cant. 6. 1, 2, 3. Rev. 2, 1. and to deny this be a ſymtome of prophanity, then to be ſeparated from theſe as a Heathen, muſt be to the children of God, the greateſt evil of puniſhment and matter of ſorrow on earth, it ſmelleth not of piety to deny this.

Eraſtus. If the man was only rebuked; How was he to be deliveredTheſ. 60. Page 50. to Satan to be tormented and killed? Some Ancients anſwer, he was but delivered to Satan to be afflicted in his body with ſickneſſe, and at length delivered by Paul, others ſay more congruouſly to the minde of Paul; that Paul purpoſed not by himſelf to deliver the man to Satan, but to do it, with the Church congregated together, and p. 344duplicate page p. 341duplicate page p. 344duplicate page p. 341duplicate page p. 332when the Church ſaw him ſwallowed up with griefe, they deferred while they tryed Pauls minde, and obtained pardon to him, and in the means time threatned him, if he ſhould not repent; and obtained at length, that Paul ſhould pardon him. Anſ. Many learned Divines hold the former, yet ſo as they conclude Excommunication out of this Chapter; of this I ſay no more. But Eraſtus hath a way of his own. To which I ſay, 1. There is no Scripture, but this controverted one to warrant that the Apoſtles who had the gift of Miracles, 1. Suſpended the working of Miracles, either on the prayers, or free conſent of the whole multitude of beleevers. 2. That the execution of a miraculous work, was committed to Deputies and ſubſtitutes under Paul, who had it in their power miraculouſly to kill him, or in their free will and Chriſtian compaſſion, to ſuſpend the miracle, and not kill. 3. That the Apoſtles in acts of miraculous juſtice, ſought adviſe of any, or might be broken by requeſts, to deſiſt from miracles as they ſaw the party repent, or not repent, or friends intercede, or not intercede. 4. So many circumſtances of the Text, laying a command on the Church of Corinth, to put him out and judge him, and yet the matter remaine a miracle. Theſe to me are riddles, if God had told us ſuch a Hiſtory, I could have beleeved it; but to gather theſe by uncertaine conjectures. without any ground of other Scriptures, is a thing I can hardly beleeve. But ſince Excommunication is an ordinary cenſure, the Church might well, as they ſee the man penitent, or contumacious, caſt him out, or not, pardon, or not pardon.

Eraſtus. Paul delivered to Satan Hymeneus and Alexander, that they might learne not to blaſpheme, not that the dead are capable to learne, or to be blaſphemed; but this be ſaith as a Magiſtrate, when he ſaith he will give an ill doer to the hangman, that he may learn to ſteale no more, and to rob no more.

Anſ. 1 Tim. 1. 20. I delivered them to Satan. foreign.Page 221. Hymeneus and Alexander not killed by Satan. It is like to edifying diſcipline, and agreeable to Pauls uſe of the rod of diſcipline, 2 Cor. 10. 8. Though I ſhould boaſt ſomewhat more of our authoritie, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for deſtruction. Now it were ſafer to give a ſenſe congruous to the intrinſecall end of diſcipline, which was not for deſtruction of the body, but for the edifying of ſouls. 2. Yea, p. 333ſo Paul had no leſſe the Sword, then the rod of the Word, Nero had not ſo heavy a ſword, as miraculous killing: Should not Paul ſpeake rather as a Paſtor of Chriſt, then as a bloody Magiſtrate?

Erastus. If to deliver to Satan, be all one with debarring fromPage 223. the Supper onelyonly, yet it is not all one, with being caſt out of the Church, without which there is no ſalvation, but the Supper is not abſolutely neceſſary to Salvation.

Anſ. Nor doe we put that neceſſity on the Sacraments, but where the man is excluded from the Sacraments, for ſuch a ſinne as if he repent not, he is excluded from Salvation; it concerneth him much to thinke it a weighty judgement to be excluded from the Seales.

Erastus. Theſe two are inconſiſtent which you teach, to wit, thatPage 223. he is not debarred from the Sacraments, who deſireth them, and that his deſire whether it be a right, or a wrong and unlawfull deſire, ſhall depend on the judgement of others, to wit, the Presbytery.

Anſ. Eraſtus ſhould have made others ſee how theſe two fights together, I ſee no inconſiſtencie, no more then to ſay a childe that deſireth food is not debarred from food, and yet his deſire of food may be ſubject to wiſe Stewards, whether every deſire of food be right or no, as whether he ſhould be anſwered by the Stewards, when he deſireth poyſon or bread, not to ea…e, but to caſt to dogs; and this will fight againſt preaching of the Word, the Profeſſor that longeth for the comforts of the promiſes of the Goſpel is not debarred from them, yet are preachers to try whether threatnings be not fitter for him in his ſecurity, then the comforts of the promiſes.

Erastus. Paul, 2 Cor. 12. and 13. threatneth not excluſion fromPage 224. the Lords Supper, to thoſe who had not repented of their ſchiſme, drunkenneſſe, denying of the reſurrection, but he ſaith he would ſeverely puniſh them according to the authority and power given him of God, and he did this frequently, but we read not excluſion from the ſacraments.

Anſw. 1. It is true, he threatneth thoſe who had not repented of their uncleanneſſe, and fornication, and laſcivionſneſſe, 2. Cor. 12. 20, 21. and c. 13. v. 2. threatneth that he will not ſpare, but uſe his authority, but doth Eraſtus read that he either threatneth, or doth p. 340actually, miraculouſly kill any of the beleevers at Corinth? and let him anſwer why the Apoſtle did not write to the Church▪ that they would conveene, and take courſe with them, as he did with the inceſtuous man, 1 Cor. 5. 2. when he ſaith, He will not ſpare when he comes, he muſt be expounded according to Eraſtus, to come as a miraculous Magiſtrate to kill them. 3. He ſaith not they were impenitent, but he feareth it ſhould be ſo. 4. We hold if any ſhould be contumacious, he would not onelyonly deny pearls to ſuch Swine, as his Maſter commanded, Mat. 7. But alſo follow that rule, Mat. 18. 4. Eraſtus himſelfe granteth, if there ſhall be found a man that tramples upon the Pearles and holy things of God, as there muſt be ſome one or other, which is ſuch as deſerveth to be miraculouſly killed: By this Argument he granteth (I ſay) that ſuch a one ſhould not be admitted. Hunc ego minimè admittendum cenſeo, but how ſhall he be not admitted by this Argument?Page 207. Page 223. 124.

Erastus. There were many amongſt the Ancients who deferred their Baptiſme to the end of their life, when therefore it is not written, that theſe are damned, who are excluded from the Supper, againſt their will, and not thoſe who willingly exclude themſelves from Baptiſme, why ſhould the one more then the other be delivered to Satan? for he is in a better condition, who is excluded by the Presbyters againſt his will from the Supper, then he who doth of his owne free will exclude him ſelfe from Baptiſme.

Anſ. That the Ancients in the Apoſtolique Church, which is our rule, did deferre baptiſme till they died, Eraſtus cannot prove, the Ancients after them is not our rule. 2. That theſe were admitted to the Supper, a Sacrament of the nouriſhment of theſe in whom Chriſt liveth, before they were baptized, which is the Sacrament of Regeneration, and our firſt birth, cannot be defended by Eraſtus, and ſo he argues from an unlawfull practiſe. 3. We reach not that any is damned, becauſe he is excluded from the Supper, that Excluſion is a puniſhment; men are damned for ſins, not for meer puniſhments, but his ſin is bound in heaven, becauſe of a great ſcandall; ſuch as inceſt, and that, if he repent not, is the cauſe of damnation: and therefore Eraſtus ſhould have compared ſinne with ſinne, the ſcandall with ſinfull refuſing of Baptiſme, and not have made a halting and lame comparilon, an argument that concludeth nothing. 4. Though thoſe p. 337who deferred baptiſme till death, ſhould not have been delivered to Satan, yet will Eraſtus ſay, they ſhould not have been otherwiſe cenſured? for theſe behooved with Socinians to hold Baptiſme but an indifferent rite, and by this many lived in the contempt of a neceſſary ordinance, (though not ſimply neceſſary) and ſo died with the ſinfull want of Baptiſme many times.

Erastus.The excluſion of men from the Sacraments did creep into the Church when men did aſcribe ſalvation to the Sacraments, therefore the Supper was given to dying men, though excommunicate; as the deniall of the Supper damneth, Ergo, the receiving of it ſaveth. And ſo of Baptiſme they reaſoned.

Anſw. Eraſtus nameth this his own probable conjecture. But it is to beg the queſtion, he may know how ſingular Auguſtine was for the neceſſity of Baptiſme, and how many of the Ancients were againſt him in it. 2. He may know this conſequence to be a conjecture, and that it is not ſtronger, becauſe it is his owne. 3. He granteth that excluſion of the unworthy from the Sacraments is ancient, ſo much gain we by his conjectures.

Erastus. When the Church wanted a Magiſtrate and the ſword▪ Page 227. 228. 229.Paul commanded that the Corinthians might obtain by their prayers, that the inceſtuous man might be put from amongſt them, that is, that he might be killed; if he command not that the man be killed, but caſt out of the Church only, he ſhould ſay as much as if one ſhould bid preſerve the chaſtity of a Virgin by caſting her out of the ſociety of chaſte matrons, into a bordell-houſe; and Paul biddeth not the Corinthians deliver the man to Sathan; but only that they would convene, that he might, as preſent▪ in Spirit, deliver him to Sathan; and that they would deliver him to Sathan, and put him out of the midſt of them, by prayers and mourning: for in my corrected Theſis, I ſaid, that this, put away evill out of the midſt of you, Deut. 13. was in ſillabs Deut. 17. & 19 & 21. 22. …er. &c. 24. once, and foreign is in them all.

Anſw. 1. That the Church wanted the ſword is no wonder; the Church as the Church, hath no ſuch carnall weapons as the Sword, and that Peter in killing Ananias and Saphira, and Paul in ſtriking Elymas with blindneſſe, did ſupply the place of a Chriſtian Magiſtrate which the Church then wanted, ſo as it was the Chriſtian Magiſtrate his place, if there had been any to ſtrike Ananias and Saphyra with ſudden death▪ I doe not beleeve upon p. 336Eraſtus his word, becauſe I finde Nadab and Abihu killed immediately by the Lord from heaven with fire, Lev. 10. 1. and at that time when there was Moſes and ordinary Magiſtrates to have killed them, and God immediately cauſed the earth to open her mouth and ſwallow up quick Cor…h and his company, and yet there was a Magiſtrate to doe juſtice on them, for their …reaſonable conſpiracie; and I ſee not how this may not warrant Miniſters, when either heathen or Tyrannous Magiſtrates refuſe to uſe the ſword, to fall to as Paſtors, and in an extraordinary manner uſe the ſword againſt murtherers in the viſible Church. It is true, Peters miraculous killing of Ananias, may poſſibly hold forth the duty analogicallyDelivering to Satan not miraculous. of puniſhing ill doers in a Magiſtrate, where he is a Chriſtian member of the Church. But it is a conjecture without Scripture, that here Paul doth call the Corinthians in to come and be coactors with him by their prayers in a particular miracle which was never wrought, for Eraſtus granteth he was never killed. 1. Paul reprehendeth their not mourning, v. 2. And you are puffed up, and have not rather foreign mourned. This was an ordinary, Chriſtian, not a miraculous duty, which they ſhould have performed as a Church, though he ſhould not have written to them. Let Eraſtus cleare how Paul chideth them, for want of an habituall Faith of Miracles, and of a ſorrow proportioned thereunto. 2. That Gal. 5. 12. foreign would God they were cut off that trouble you; if this was in Pauls power, by a miracle to cut off the falſe Apoſtles, how could Paul wiſh to doe a Miracle and did it not? 2. If he wiſhed theſe ſhould be cut off by the Galathians, then as Beza de Presbyt. page 82. ſaith, It was in the Galathians power ſo to doe; and why ſhould not they have prayed miraculouſly for the deſtruction of ſuch? 3. In all the word, to deliver to Satan, is never to kill by Satan; as Beza ſaith, and Eraſtus can anſwer nothing to it. 4. That Paul here tooke the Magiſtrates Sword, becauſe the Magiſtrate was a Heathen. 5. That the Church, when a Magiſtrate doth not his duty, is to pray, that God would by ſome miraculous and immediate providence, ſupply the Magiſtrates place. 6. That Paul doth rebuke the Corinthians, not for the omiſſion of an ordinary duty, and the want of an ordinary faith, but becauſe of the want of extraordinary ſorrow, and of the faith of Miracles, in p. 337old and young, and women who could pray for the miraculous killing of this man, all theſe look beſide the Text, for ver. 2. he ſaith ſuch a hainous ſin is committed, and ye are puffed up, foreign blowen up, and have not rather foreign mourned: this is the defect of an ordinary grace, and hardneſſe and ſecurity that Paul rebuketh in them, as the firſt word ſignifieth, 1 Cor. 8. 1. foreign foreign knowledge puffeth up, 1 Cor. 13. 4. Love foreign is not blown up, 1 Cor. 4. 6. 1 Cor. 4. 18. Col. 2. 18. and the other word ſignifieth ordinary ſorrow, Mat. 5. 4 Bleſſed are they that mourn, foreign, Luk. 6. 25. 2 Cor. 12. 21. Iam. 4. 9. Mat. 9. 15. There is not one word of praying by the faith of miracles in the Text (for ſuch a faith is required to ſuch a prayer) that God would miraculouſly deſtroy the man, or that Paul rebuked them for not praying in this miraculous faith: it is the way of Erastus to obtrude Expoſitions on the Scripture, ſo unknown and violent, as they are darker and harder to be beleeved then the Text. 5. The Apoſtle commandeth them toforeign, to put away not always to kill. put out the man foreign, that is, to kill him: What killing is this? to pray to God that Paul miraculouſly may put him out, and kill him, give us any word of God, that foreign in the Old or New Teſtament ſignifieth any ſuch thing, there is not one word of Prayer in the Text: 6. They were to conveen, not ſimply, as Chriſtians, to pray, but with the vertue of his ſpirit, as preſent in minde, but abſent in body; this muſt put ſome more in them then a mourning ſpirit, for the want of which he rebuked them; it is as much as he and they together were to joyn in putting out the man and judging him, as he ſpeaketh, ver. 12. 7. Nor is this all one, as to put a woman out of the company of chaſte Matrons to the bordel houſe to keep her chaſtity, no more then the wiſdom of God in Paul doth, Rom. 16. 17. 2 Theſſ. 3. 14. 15. put unordinate walkers out of the ſociety of thoſe who walk according to the truth of the Goſpel, that they may preſerve their ſound walking, eſpecially when excluſion from the godly cauſeth ſhame, and ſo humiliation, and this reaſon is againſt Gods wiſdom, as much as againſt us: 8. That to put away evil, foreign, Deut. 17. and 19. and 21. and 22. is to kill, is not denied, and that in divers places, but not to pray that evil may be miraculouſly put away, as Eraſtus ſaith: But we are to ſee, whether foreign in the Hebrew (of which Language Eraſtus profeſſeth his ignorance) ſignifie that alwayes: The contrary I have already p. 338ſhown, the learned Pagnine and Mercer ſay the contrary, that it ſignifieth, to cur, devide, or ſtrike a Covenant, Gen. 15. 18. Deut. 19. 5. Jer. 34. 8. Eſa. 55. 3. and Maſter Leigh in his late Critica Sacra Leigh in Critica Sacra, pag. 245.on the Old Teſtament, ſaith, it ſignifieth to ſtay, to cut off by death, by baniſhment, or any other way, whereby a thing in uſe before, afterward ceaſeth, Joel. 1. 8. Amos 1. 5. Yea, to cut off by divorce, as I noted before, and Exod. 12. 15. To cut off from Iſrael, is expounded, ver. 19. to cut off from the Church of Iſrael: Yea, the Law forbiddeth that not only in the time of the Paſſeover, they ſhould not eat leaven, but it ſhould not be in their houſes; Now muſt they be killed, if it was found in their houſes, beſide their knowledge? ſee Deut. 16. 3. Exod. 13. 7. What Eraſtus ſaith to the end of the Chapter; is but repeated reaſons before anſwered.