The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Chapter 11
CHAP. XI.
Queſt. 7.
Of the leaven, 1 Cor. 5. Eraſtus his ſentence in his l. 3. c. 6. andPage 240. 241. …. c. 7. Examined.
Erastus. I ſhall grant (ſince Beza will have it ſo) that Paul Of the leaven. 1 Cor. 5.expoundeth the Ceremony of leaven, in the celebration of the paſſeover, and that he doth not only allude to it: Paul compareth the feaſt of unleavened bread to the pilgrimage of our life in this world, and leaven ſignifieth wickedneſſe: Hence as the Iews all the time of the feaſt might eat no leavened bread, ſo all our life are vve to leave and forſake the vvorld and journey toward our promiſed Canaan, we are never to live wickedly, What can hence be collected? but as he that eat unleavened bread, was to be killed, ſo ſhould every wicked man be killed? He that eat leavened bread in theſe ſeven dayes, was not commanded to be debarred from the Paſſeover: And the Paſſeover was the beginning of this feast, as faith in Chriſt was the beginning of our ſpirituall eating of Chriſt crucified for us, and of our new Chriſtian life.
Anſ. I hold that learned Beza hath well expounded the leaven Beza contr. Eraſtum de Presbyterie, Pag. 88.here; he compareth the ſcandals of wicked men to leaven, the holineſſe of the Saints to unleavened bread, and the publick Congregation to the feaſt of the Paſſeover, and Excommunication or putting away to the removing of the leaven; for a ſcandalous man corruptethBuxtorfius in Lexico, Rabinco. pag. 2303 in voc. the whole Church: ſo the Jewes and Rabbines, as Buxtorfius ſaith, that the Rabbins call naturall concupiſcence, foreign. Rabbi Alexander ſaid after his Prayer: Lord, It is known to thee that it is my will to do thy will: But what retardeth me? the leaven in the maſſe or lump, and Buxtorfius citeth the ſame place, 1 Cor. 5.foreign 6. and Gal. 5. 9. And leaſt we ſhould think that he meant nothingforeign but naturall concupiſcenſe; he ſaith in the Targum, They take the word foreign for wickedneſſe and folly; he citeth Medraſeh Koheleth, cap. 7. ver. 8. except R. Samuel, had been long ſuffering, The Buxtorfius in Lex. Rabbi pag. 1413.Perſian that he taught, had returned to folly, or his old wickedneſſe. Paul ſaith the ſame, Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump: He ſpeaketh to the Church conveened. 2. The compariſon runneth ſo, that the Corinthians were to purge out the old leaven of wickedneſſe, and caſt out the inceſtuous man, that they might be a new lump; and this if it muſt alwayes be done, far more when they are to celebrate that feaſt that came in place of the paſſeover: Nor is the Apoſtle only Teaching what they could not lawfully do, all their life, as they were ſingle Chriſtians, but what was their duty as Chriſtians, foreign conveened together in a Church way, for Paul doth not command one ſingle Chriſtian to caſt him out, but he commandeth the Church, gathered together in the name of the Lord Ieſus, with Pauls ſpirit, and the power of What it is to purge out the leaven.our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, ver. 4. 5. To purge out, not the leaven of ſin in themſelves, but the man, ver. 2. That he that hath done this deed may be put out, and ver. 7. Purge out the old leaven, and that the Apoſtles precept is to caſt out the man, he ſaith it in expreſſe termes, ver. 13. foreign, Caſt out that wicked man from amongst you, and ver. 12. They were to judge him, as one that is within: 2. Becauſe without conveening together in their daily converſation, they were to purge the leaven of m…lice out of their heart, it were a ridiculous thing for Paul to command them to convene altogether, to lead a godly life: 3. There was no need that they ſhould convene with Pauls ſpirit, and in the name and power of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt to lead a godly life, and for a perſonall purging of every man his own ſoul from this leaven. 4. They were to judge this man, ver. 12. Therefore this cannot be meant of a perſonall judging every one of themſelves, but of a Churchjudging of an offender. 5. If Eraſtus grant that Paul expoundeth the Ceremony of leaven, and putting away leaven in the Paſſeover: Let him ſee how he can apply this to killing of every ſingle man that liveth wickedly: We apply it to the caſting out of the ſcandalous out of the Church, as leaven was to be put out of the houſes of all who were to eat the paſſeover.
Erastus. I care not much whither the Lord himſelf immediatly, orNone killed for eating leavened bread. the Magiſtrate was to kill him, who eat leavened bread at that time: But I rather think that God killed him; for we finde none killed for this cauſe: 2. Becauſe Paul writ of thoſe who did unworthily eat, 1 Cor. 11.
Anſ. There is no ground that God any way would have them to be killed, that did eat unleavened bread, and that we finde none for that cauſe ever killed, is much for us: for then God did not execute any ſuch Law, which (as Erastus ſaith) was broken by many: It is like God never made any ſuch Law: 2. Becauſe it is ſaid, he ſhall be cut off, who eateth leavened bread, it followeth not that therefore this was done immediately by God; for it is ſaid, Lev. 18. 29. Whoſoever doth any of theſe abominations, even the ſoul that committeth them, ſhall be cut off from amongst the people; if that be killing; it is known, the Magiſtrate was to kill ſuch as committed inceſt, & did lie with beaſts: But Vatablus expoundeth it of Excommunication, thus, Id eſt, Deus non agnoſcet illum tanquam Iſraelitam & circumciſum: and Vatablus underſtood the Hebrew Tongue better, then Eraſtus who profeſſeth he underſtandeth nothing of it. 3. That which Erastus ſaith of Paul, That God himſelf killed theſe at Corinth, who did eat and drink unvvorthily; may as well inſinuate the Magiſtrate ſhould kill with the ſword, all that communicateth unworthily (which is abſurd) as it can prove, that thoſe that eat leavened bread were immediatly killed of God.
Erastus. Thoſe that eat leavened bread vvere debarred from thePag. 241. paſſeover: But leavened bread ſignified, ſcelera, vvickedneſſe; Ergo, vvicked men ſhould by us be debarred from the Sacraments. 1. It is falſe that thoſe that eat leavened bread vvere debarred from the paſſeover by Gods command: Theſe tvvo differ much; he that eateth leavened bread ſhall be cut off, and he that eateth leaven ſhall be debarred from the feaſt of the paſſeover, even as theſe two; the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon, ſhall be whipt with rods, and the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon ſhall be excluded from hearing Sermon; when the Maſter forbiddeth to clatter in time of Sermon, under a puniſhment, he biddeth them not be abſent from the Sermon: ſo when God forbiddeth to eat leaven, under a puniſhment, be forbiddeth not to exclude the man from the paſſeover, the Lord commandeth both to be done.
Anſ. 1. This is Eraſtus his Argument, not the Argument ofTo eat the Paſſeover with unleavened bread a violation of that Sacrament. Beza, for eating of leaven ſignifieth a ſcandalous and openly wicked man; and if this be the Aſſumption, it is true, but the Syllogiſme ſo formed, ſhall conclude againſt Eraſtus: 2. It is certain that God commandeth the Prieſts not to violate his holy things, Ezech. 22. 26, Hag. 2. 11. 12. Ezech. 44. 8, 9, 10, 11. Elſe how failed they in keeping the charge of the Lord, in not differencing between the clean and the vnclean? Now to eat the paſſeover with leavened bread is an expreſſe violation of the holy things of God, Exod. 12. ver. 8. You ſhall eat the fleſh in that night, roſt with fire and vnleavened bread, ver. 11. And thus ſhall ye eat it—ver. 15. Seven dayes ſhall ye eat unleavened bread, even the firſt day, ye ſhall put away leaven out of your houſes: 2. He that is unclean is forbidden to eat the paſſeover, Lev. 9. 13. The clean only is to keep it: And he that is clean, and not on a journey, and keepeth it not, that man ſhall bear his ſin; Ergo, the unclean are excepted; and he who is ſanctified according to the purification of the ſanctuary only by the Law, is to eat, 2 Chro. 3…. 9. Therefore Hezechiah prayed that God would pardon them that were not ſo cleanſed, ver. 18. To crave pardon preſuppoſeth a ſinne, Num. 9. 3, 4, 5, 6. But ſo it is, That he that eateth unleavened bread in any of theſe ſeven dayes, was unclean, and to be cut off for his uncleanneſſe, and tranſgreſſed this Ceremoniall Law, Exod. 12. 8. 15. Levit. 9▪ 13. Ergo, he was not to be admitted to the holy things of God, except the Prieſts and thoſe who had the charge of the Paſſeover▪ ſhould know him to be purified, Ezech. 22. 26. Hag. 2. 11, 12. And we know it was the Prieſts part to pronounce any clean or unclean, & that the paſſeover was one of the chief of the holy things of God. 3. Eraſtus his conjecture, That he that did eat leavened bread, was not to abſent himſelf from the Paſſeover; but to come tali modo, according to the Law: As the childe that clattereth in time of Sermon, is not bidden be abſent from the Sermon, may prove as well that no unclean, no heathen, or uncircumciſed, are forbidden to eat the Paſſeover; for no Law of God forbiddeth either to eat the Paſſeover, except this, that only the circumciſed and the unclean were forbidden; when the Lord in his Law putteth an expreſſe and a differencing, or diſcriminative character on thoſe that eat, to wit, that they be circumciſed and clean who ſhall eat; Ergo, God, in that putteth an evident inhibition on thoſe that are uncircumciſed heathen and unclean, that they are not to eat, as when God Commandeth every Male to be circumciſed; we infer then no Female were to be circumciſed. And by this means the uncircumciſed Moabite, the Philiſtine, were not by the Prieſts and Porters debarred out of the Temple, or from the Paſſeover, ſo they would be circumciſed and turn Jews: Even as the childe is not excluded by a command of the Maſter from hearing Sermon, only he is forbidden to clatter in time of Sermon: But a Iew was both forbidden uncleanneſſe Ceremoniall by an expreſſe Law, and by another Law he was forbidden to come to the Paſſeover; and a heathen, as heathen, was both forbidden to eat, and the Prieſts forbidden to admit him.
Erastus. Though we ſhould grant, That thoſe that eat leaven were debarred from the Paſſeover; yet it ſhall not follow, that thoſe that live wickedly, ſhall be debarred from the Lords Supper, for the Feaſt of unleavened bread, typified not the Supper of the Lord, but the whole time of our life: Otherwiſe, ſaith he, (in his Theſis) we may live wickedly all our dayes, except when we come to the holy Supper; asPutting away of leaven. the Jews might eat unleavened bread at any time, except on thoſe dayes when the Lord forbade them.
Anſ. 1. We contend not, that debarring of men from any one Ordinance, was ſignified by putting away of the Leaven: But that by putting of leaven from their houſes and Table, was typified (as Paul here expoundeth it) the putting of a wicked perſon out the midſt of the Church, 1 Cor. 5. 2. compared with ver. 5, 6, 7. 13. If the Feaſt of unleavened bread, typified all our life that we ſhould be holy; yet it had a ſpeciall relation to our Purification, when we did partake of the moſt holy Ordinances of God, ſuch as was the Paſſeover then, and to us the Lords Supper: Elſe, Eraſtus might ſay, God hath forbidden ſingle Chriſtians to live at all, except they lived holily, which is a vain conceit. It is not lawfull to Eraſtus to put ſignifications on types, it his will; and therefore that that Feaſt pointed out holineſſe all our life, is utterly denyed; for eating of leavened bread, except in theſe dayes forbidden, was not a ſin, nor any Ceremoniall type at all, no more then our common bread and wine are ſignes of Chriſts body and blood. 2. Paul compareth the Feaſt to the lump of the Viſible Church; ſo as the leaven was to be removed out of all houſes of Iſrael; becauſe it did Ceremonially infect, corrupt, and leaven them, and ſo was to be purged; ſo did the in…ſtuons man, leaven the Viſible Church of Corinth, and was to be purged out: Nor do I contend, that the Lords Supper here is meant, though I know no ſolemn Spirituall Feaſt that the viſible Church now hath, but the Supper of the Lord: But rather I underſtand, Church-Communion in the dain…ies of the Goſpel, which are ſet forth to us under the ſimilitude of a Feaſt, Matth. 22. Luke 14. 16, 17, 18, &c. Prov. 9. 2, 3, 4, 5. Cant. 5. 1.
Erastus. The leaven of the Paſſeover does not ſo ſignifie impurity of life, that Excommunication can be hence gathered: therefore the Apoſtle alludeth to that place, that or the like way, as the Jews did Celebrate their Paſſeover without leaven; ſo it becometh us to Celebrate our Paſſeover without the leaven of malice and wickedneſſe: Leaven ſimply, may either ſignifie good or evil, as Matth. 13. and 16. and Potuit, it might ſignifie our naturall corruption. For God not only forbiddeth to eat leaven, but to have it in the houſe; and leaven ſignifieth …ſſe ſo to be puniſhed, as ye… ſay, even by death.
Anſ. The Leaven of the Paſſeover, ſignified ſo impurity, as we are to put out the perſon that leaveneth the Church, out of the Church, as they were to put leaven out of the houſe; and not only ſimply, not to eat it; ſo are we not only, not to eat and drink with a ſcandalous man, but he is to be reputed no member of the Church, but a leavening and contagious man; and therefore Paul doth not here, as Eraſtus dreameth, ſhow what way every one in his own perſonall practiſe and duty, as a ſingle Chriſtian is to do, that he may ſave his own ſoul; and therefore every one was to celebrate a Chriſtian Paſſeover in his own ſoul, laying aſide the leaven of malice: Though I grant, That Paul, ver. 8. doth infer and draw a concluſion of a perſonall purging out of the leaven of malice and hypocriſie out of every mans heart: But Paul doth expreſly command the Corinthians as a convened Church, to put out from amongſt them another man, for the ſaving of that other mans ſoul: And what they ſhould do in a Church ſociety toward the man, foreign, Who hath done this, to wit, down right they ſhould Iudge him, Caſt him out, purge him out as a leavening peece. And the world cannot give any other meaning of the words, then that, as the Iews were to put all leaven from amongſt them, when they were to celebrate their Paſſeover: So the Corinthians were to exerciſe the like work, upon this inceſtuous man, and to put him out from amongſt them, as one delivered to Satan, as a lump of ſowre leaven; and we ſeek no more for Excommunication. 2. Leaven ſignifieth Matth. 13. good, the Kingdom of God is compared to leaven: But here it is corruption of contagious ſcandall in this inceſtuous man; and ſuch leaven as is to be caſt out, and purged away. Now, I hope, we muſt not purge out, and caſt away the Kingdom of heaven: and Matth. 16. 6. The leaven of the corrupt and falſe Doctrine of Phariſees and Sadduces, that corrupteth the hearts of men, is meant, and of this leaven we are to beware: But why doth Eraſtus ſtrive to bring the reader in a good opinion of leaven, which Paul would have us to deteſt? I know not a reaſon, but becauſe the place is ſo evident for the caſting out of an inceſtuous man from amongſt the Corinthians, leſt he ſhould infect the flock, and that by the Church convened together in the name and power of Chriſt, that his ſoul may be ſaved; and this is the very excommunication that we aſſert. 3. This leaven, (ſaith he) may ſignifie naturall corruption: Now Erastus putteth us to (a may be,) but (a may be) will not do it: For the Text ſaith not, I hope, by Eraſtus his confeſſion, that the poor man muſt be delivered to Satan, that is, miraculouſly killed, for naturall concupiſcence. All the world thus are delivered to Satan, as being heirs of wrath for ſin Originall, at leaſt in demerit. 2. The man was not judged, purged out, and caſt out, as leaven that ſowred the Church, for naturall corruption. 3. Paul offendeth not with them, that they were puffed and mourned not for the mans Originall ſin, but for his actuall wickedneſſe, becauſe he had gone in to his fathers wife, an Abomination that the Gentiles are aſhamed to name.
Erastus. Then the man muſt be killed, as he that eat leavenedPage 244. bread was killed: and though the puniſhments of Moſes Law as ſuch, muſt not be brought in the Chriſtian Church, yet if God ſubject men to the Magiſtrates Sword, men cannot free them from it, though there may be degrees of puniſhment.
Anſ. We denyed that thoſe that eat leavened bread with the Paſſeover were killed, but onelyonly excommunicated and cut off from the congregation: God never ſubjected any to the ſword, for that cauſe. 2. We deny that therefore by proportion the inceſtuous man ſhould be killed; by what conſequence will Eraſtus prove that thoſe that gathered ſticks on the Lords day, thoſe that are ſtubborn to Father or Mother, thoſe who commit fornication now in the Iſrael of God under the New Teſtament, muſt be ſtened to death by the Magiſtrate, or miraculouſly killed by the Apoſtles? it muſt be by the ſame conſequence, that Eraſtus reaſoneth here. But did God kill immediatly any offenders at all for originall ſin, ſome one more nor other? as Eraſtus dreameth this man was killed. 3. What warrant hath Erastus that the Devill killeth any one of the viſible Church now under the New Teſtament, and any of the children of God, whoſe ſpirit are ſaved in the day of the Lord? proferat tabulas. Eraſtus ſaith it, neither Prophet nor Apoſtle in the Old or New Teſtament ever ſaid it.
Erastus ſaid, an Anagogicall ſenſe is not concludent.
Anſ. Where the Holy Ghoſt giveth the ſenſe, it is falſe, ſaith Beza. 2. Why doth then Eraſtus conclude miraculous killing from the Types of the Old Teſtament?
Eraſtus. Where I pray you doth Paul ſay that the puniſhment of eating leavened bread did typifie your Excommunication?
Anſ. The word Excommunication may be by the Church uſed as the Word, Sacrament, Trinity. But the thing is not ours, but an ordinance of Ieſus Chriſt. 2. Paul ſaith in this very place, as Iſrael were to put away leaven in their Paſſeover, ſo is the convened Church of Corinth in the name and power of Chriſt to put out, judge and purge out a corrupting and leavening inceſtuous man, and this is all we ſeeke for Excommunication.
Erastus. I never finde the name of the Paſſeover in the NewPage 245. Teſtament put for the Supper of the Lord.
Anſ. We are not in ſuch need of that interpretation, as to put the name of the one for the other. But let Eraſtus ſhew where he readeth that the thing, to wit, that the one Sacrament ſucceeded to the other; and Beza may thence inferre his point, if God would have no man to eat the Paſſeover with leavened bread, and if eating of leavened bread, and bread it ſelfe was to be put out of all the houſes of Iſrael, thereby ſignifying that inceſtuous and ſcandalous perſons are to be caſt out of the Church, and ſo from the Sacraments; let Eraſtus ſee what Beza hath ſaid amiſſe here.
Erastus. God would have the Iewes to eate the Paſſeover without leavened bread, that they might remember of their wonderfull deliverance out of the hard bondage of Egypt, and of the deliverance of their firſt borne.
Anſ. Reverend Beza ſaith theſetwo were by-paſt benefits remembredDe Preſbyt. page 92. in that Sacrament: But we have the Holy Ghoſt expounding that …he putting away of leavened bread, did typifie the purging out of the inceſtuous men, and other ſcandalous perſons out of the Church, which is our point, otherwiſe let Eraſtus ſhew us what is meant by foreign the whole Maſſe and lumpe, for it ſignifieth either one ſingle man; Or 2. The Maſſe and body of the viſible Church, of which the inceſtuous man was a Member; or ſome third thing, which Erastus and hisWhat is meant by the whole lumpe; and what by leaven. followers muſt teach us. Now the whole lumpe can neither ſignifie the inceſtuous man, nor any other ſingle member of the Church. Not the inceſtuous man, 1. He was not the whole lumpe in danger to be leavened, for he was the leven, then he was not the lump in danger to be leavened; for the one is the agent infecting, the other the patient infected. The whole lumpe was the thing out of which the leaven was to be removed, the terminus à quo, the inceſtuous man was to be purged out, therefore the leaven cannot ſignifie wickedneſſe in abſtracto, as Eraſtus ſaith, but the wicked man in concreto; for the leaven muſt ſignifie that which is caſt out, foreign, out of the midſt of them, v. 2. Now this was not inceſt, but the man that had his fathers wife, and had done that deed. 2. Again, the leaven was the perſon to be delivered to Satan, that had a ſoul to be ſaved in the day of the Lord Ieſus. But wickedneſſe in abſtracto is not delivered to Satan, nor hath it a Spirit to be ſaved in the day of the Lord. 3. The leaven is ſuch a one as is to be judged, as is within the Church, v. 12. and is called a brother, with whom we are not to eat, v. 11. now this cannot be ſaid of wickedneſſe in abſtracto. But neither can the whole lumpe be one ſingle man; 1. One ſingle man needed not the ſolemn conveening of the Church in the Name and power of the Lord Jeſus, for his perſonall purging, for his perſonall purging is not a Church-act, but an act of a mans daily converſation and Chriſtian walking. 2. The purging out, and the caſting out is foreign, v. 2 out of the midſt of them, then there was a ſociety to be purged; Ergo, not a ſingle man onelyonly. Much more I ſaid before, which cannot but miſt Eraſtus, or any his followers, except they expound this whole lump to be the body of the viſible Church of Corinth. 2. So Gal. 5. 9. he addeth v. 10. he that troubleth you, (the lump in danger to be leavened,) ſhall bear his judgement, v. 12. I would they were cut off that trouble you. Then the whole Churches of Galatia were the troubled lumpe, & ſo it muſt be here, if this truth be ſo convincing out of the Text, let any Eraſtian extricate himſelf, if he can deny, but here is a Church-lump, a Church of Rulers foreign gathered together in the Name and power of the Lord Ieſus, that purgeth out of it ſelfe leaven, not wickedneſſe, in abſtracto, as I have demonſtrated, but a wicked man named a brother, leſt he leaven the whole Church, to the end his Spirit may be ſaved; Iudge reader, if this be not name, nature and thing, of that which Eraſtians deny, to wit, of Excommunication. I humbly provoke them to make good ſenſe of the 1 Cor. 5. and ſhew me what is the wicked man. 2. The caſting out of the midſt of you. 3. The ſaving of his Spirit. 4. The convened together court, inſtructed with the Name, and authority, and power of Chriſt, and if this be not a Church power, efficacion, and authoritative, being ſteeled with the power of the Head of the Church. 5. What is the leaven? 6. What is the act of leavening? 7. What is the whole lumpe? 8. What is the purging out, putting out, and judging of the man? 3. We know Eraſtus denieth any Church Government at all, but ſome acts of punitive juſtice in the Magiſtrate. But the Churches praying, conſenting that a ſcandalous perſon ſhall be delivered to Satan, or ſome other waies puniſhed by the Chriſtian Magiſtrate, are acts of Church government, ſo proper to the Church, as the Magiſtrate as the Magiſtrate, cannot exerciſe ſuch Acts.
Erastus. Paul-delivered Hymeneus and Alexander the ſameHymeneus and Alexander not miraculouſly killed by Satan. way to Satan, by miraculous killing of him; and whereas it is ſaid, that they may learne not to blaſpheme: Judges ſpeake ſo when they kill Murtherers and Theeves that he ſhall teach them to doe ſo no more by taking the head from them.
Anſ. That word of a judge killing a man for Murther, Sirra, Ile teach you other manners then to kill, can no waies be aſcribed to Paul, who doth not ſcoffe ſo at taking away mens lives. Paul who wiſhed to be ſeparated from Chriſt, for the contumacious Iewes, and would not kill any by Satan, ſince his rod and power was for edification, 2 Cor. 10. 8. and that the Spirit may be ſaved in the day of the Lord, 1 Cor. 5. 5. he ſpeaketh more gravely and leſſe imperiouſly, and without boaſting and jeering in a matter of Salvation. 2. foreign that they may be inſtructed or diſciplined not to blaſpheme; cannot be ſimply that they may blaſpheme no more, becauſe killed by the Devill. For 1. let Eraſtus in the Old or New Teſtament produce a parallel place for that Expoſition, where the word foreign to be inſtructed is aſcribed to the dead; but this is a common fault in all Eraſtus his expoſitions of Scripture, that they want all ground in Scripture,Eraſtus his expoſitions all without ground of Scripture. as let me put upon all the followers of Eraſtus to give a parallel to this Expoſition of Mat. 18. Let him bee to thee, that is, to thee onelyonly, when Chriſt ſpeaketh of a generall Rule of all that ſcandalizeth. 2. Let him be as a Heathen. Give a place of Scripture for this. 1. Let him be as ſuch Heathen onelyonly as acknowledge Ceſar, and his Deputies for lawfull Iudges. 2. A parallel for this we ſeek, Let him be as a Heathen, that is, convene him before an heathen Iudge. 3. What Scripture expoundeth delivering to Satan for edification, and not deſtruction, 1 Cor. 5. to be a Magiſtraticall killing by the power of the Devill, that others may feare. 4. Put out, purge out, judge thoſe only that are within, are expounded by Eraſtus, pray for a miraculous deſtruction by the devill, as the lictor and hangman of the Apoſtle, that none may be killed miraculouſly for enormous ſcandals, no not ſuch as Elimas the ſorcerer, who was never within the Church; but thoſe that are within: And did the company of the Saints, pray with the Saints, that ſignes and wonders, and ſo miraculous killing might be wrought, not on any but on thoſe that are within the viſible Church, not on the enemies, and Iews haters of Chriſt, and without the Chriſtian Churches, when the Apoſtles miraculouſly eſcaped out of their priſons? Act. 4. 29, 30. Act. 5. 19, 20, 21, 22. Act. 12. 7, 8, 9. Act. 16. 25, 26. 27, 28? I might alledge many other ſuch like interpretations of Eraſtus. 5. foreign in the New Teſtament, ſignifieth to inſtruct and chaſtiſe the living, never any ſuch thing is aſcribed to the dead. Gal. 5. 22, 30. Tit. 2. 20. Rev. 3. 19. Heb. 12. 10. Luk. 23. 16, 22. 2. Cor, 6▪ 9. Act. 22. 3. Act. 7. 22. as they that are taught to ſinne no more by being killed. 6. Robert Stephan. citeth in the margent, 1 Cor. 5. 5. to expound it of excommunicating of Hymeneus and Alexander, ſo doth Piſcator, ſo Calvin, Beza, Marlorat, ſo Vatablus ſaith, Quos eje…i ex eccleſia et cenſui magis dignos eſſe eccleſia Satane quam Chriſti, ſi non reſipiſcant. 7. Beza De Presbyt. p. 87. learnedly obſerveth that it is no Grammer; for if the effect of learning not to blaſpheme be ſuſpended upon the miraculous killing of Alexander, then he was firſt killed, & then learned not to blaſpheme. But ſo Paul could have ſaid he was killed, ut non blaſphameret, that he might not blaſpheme, not that he might learn not to blaſpheme.