An Anti-Diatribe, Part 3
The third Section of the Paper.
THe liberty,The third Section of the Paper. and profitable uſe of private conference, in order to preparatory inſtruction; yea, or probation of faith and repentance, (which Chemnitius tells us to be in uſe in ſome Lutheran Churches) is not controverted. It is an apt, and elegant compariſon of Quintilian, that men are as bottels, which are ſooner and better filled by taking them in hand one by one, and pouring water into them, then by ſetting them together, and ſprinkling water upon them.
2. That whereas the Caſuiſts ſpeak, there is violenta ſuſpicio quae moraliter facit rem certam; for if it be only probabilis ſuſpicio, they will tell you, that melior eſt conditio poſſidentis bonam famam;] but in caſe of violent ſuſpicion, that any perſons are through ignorance unable to diſcerne the Lords body; that they may, and are meet to be examined, is not denied. In ſuch a caſe the ſame may be ſpoken of neglect of probation, as in a lapſe into a crime is ſaid of the omiſſion of reproofe, and admonition. A man may be called to an account for an idle ſilence, as well as for an idle word; for as evil talke leads men into evil, ſo an evil ſilence leaves them in it.
3. That notorious ſinners, and the Caſuiſts ſay, they can be notorious only upon this account, cùm crimen eſt manifeſtum, aut per ſententiam in judicio aut per publicam in eo confeſſionem, aut per evidentiam talem ut nullâ poſſit tergiver ſatione caelari;] that ſuch may, and muſt be excommunicated is granted; not ſo much for prevention of any pollution that others may contract by communion with them, but to humble and to reclaime the offender, and to keep the example from having any contagious ſpreading influence by impurity, as alſo to remove the ſcandal that the diſcipline of the Church may contract by remiſſion, and indulgence. And a power to act in ſuch caſes, the Miniſtery need not complaine to want, much leſſe upon the pretence of ſuch want ſuſpend the celebration, and adminiſtring of the Sacrament altogether; for this power is rooted, and inherent in the keyes, and they may aſſume as large, and free a power to exclude ſome ſuch, as they now take to put by, and excommunicate all, which they do while they (at leaſt the moſt of them) adminiſter it to none, but intermit the uſe thereof altogether. And therefore as one being asked, where he found the interpretation of, and concerning Conſtantines Donation, (as another his gloſſe upon the Salick Law?) anſwer'd, If any looked on the backſide of that Donation, (and ſo of that Law) there it was to be found; ſo it might be more truly ſaid, that from whence they derived the power to excommunicate all by non-adminiſtration, they might fetch a right to exclude perſons ſcandalous, and apparently ignorant. But our Rhodus, and Saltus, our preſent queſtion…s, Whether it be (not only profitable▪ but) neceſſary, antecedently to the communion to examine (not only ſuch, who may well be ſuſpected to be of incompetent knowledge▪ but) all indifferently, ſo as for want of will in any to ſubmit to this probation, they may juſtly be debarred the Sacrament; and for want of power in the Miniſter to exerciſe this Diſcipline, he may lawfully intermit the adminiſtration, or adminiſter it only to ſuch as will ſubject themſelves thereunto convened, (and not by their proper Paſtor) out of diſtant places, and ſeveral congregations?
SECT. VIII.
Of the liberty, and profitable uſe of private conference, &c.
§. 8 1. In this are
1. Some Conceſſions.
2. The ſtate of the Queſtion.
1. The Conceſſions are of private conference, examination of ſome perſons, the excommunicating of others; theſe we accept of. And to ſay truth, in ſome of theſe is more granted then is deſired; namely the inveſting the Miniſter with power of excommunication, or cenſuring alone, which many learned men make an act of juriſdiction, belonging, non uni, ſed unitati, (as they expreſſe themſelves) to the whole Church, or to the Officers of the Church, but not to the Miniſter alone. But he ſpeaks in this the opinion of the Scloolmen, who ſeem (to us) to put Churchcenſures into the Miniſters hands alone. Whil'ſt this opinion makes rather for us then againſt us, we ſhall not contend about it, but take it for granted, and to be as is affirmed and yielded. That which is affirmed of ſuſpicious, and ſcandalous perſons, may alſo paſſe. But ſome note muſt be ſet upon that charge of abſolute forbearance to adminiſter the Lords Supper, and of excommunicating all; for we do neither the one, nor the other.
It was our fault (for a time,) and it may be ſome other mens fault at this day. We ſaw cauſe to be humbled for our omiſſion of this duty among other offences, as to the Lords Supper: And we now conceive the inſtitution to be ſo ſtrict, as admits of no deniall, nor of long delay: For ſome years paſt, we have not been guilty of this forbearance; there hath been a frequent uſe of this as of all other Ordinances among us, ſo that all deſirous, and worthy with a little paines might partake thereof. If any defect be, it is but circumſtantial as to the place, and not as to time, or ſubſtance. So much for the Conceſſions. That which followes is the ſtate of the Queſtion.
SECT. IX.
Wherein of the ſtate of the Queſtion.
§. 9 Herein we finde the Author unacquainted with our way, and putting too much together.
Firſt, we do not examine all, as is ſuppoſed; ſuch as are more knowing and willing, do only make profeſſion of their faith and knowledge; ſome in the publick, others more privately. Many have been admitted without having a queſtion asked them, and we can truly averre that we examine none, but ſuch as well may be ſuſpected of incompetent knowledge; ſo that here is no need of diſpute between us.
Secondly, That of omitting altogether the uſe of the Sacrament, muſt have no place in the queſtion neither; for our practice and judgements oppoſe it.
Thirdly, About convening from diverſe Pariſhes, this will but confound the diſcourſe, if mixed with it: For,
1. Moſt of thoſe admitted were taken in, not without their proper Paſter.
2. Such as were admitted of other Congregations, are perſons juſtly offended with the groſſeneſſe of their adminiſtrations at home, where no ſeparation at all is made, nor any cheriſhing of deſires that way. The lawfulneſſe of this we ſhall aſſert in another place.
As the Queſtion is ſtated, there are ſo many things laid together, as would make plaustraria argumenta, tedious Syllogiſmes, and ſo beget confuſion in the diſpute. The ſtate of the preſent difference may be better expreſſed in this,The queſtion ſtated. or the like manner; that is, Whether in the reforming of a long corrupted Church, it be neceſſary that all the Members thereof do ſubmit to ſome examination, or trial of their knowledge, before they be admitted unto the Lords Table?
This Queſtion we fear not to maintain in the Affirmative. Here we ſuppoſe corruption in our Churches, and therefore with men well ſatisfied with their preſent frame and temper, not looking on them as under any ſuch diſorder, as we ſuppoſe, with ſuch we deſire not much to diſpute; We can accept little of reaſon, or truth from men of that minde.
Laſtly, It ſeemes to us that this Paragraph agrees not with it ſelfe, for it oppoſes examination as precedaneous to this ordinance, and yet yields it in ſome caſes to be practiſed. Can the paper allow the keeping back of ſome, yea of ignorant, as well as ſcandalous, and yet abſolutely oppoſe examination (as previous) without which ignorance cannot be well known? Promiſcuous adminiſtring, muſt either ſtand, or fall. If ſtand, then no reformation can be rationally hoped for. And if it fall, let us be taught how the admiſſion of all ſorts formerly practiſed can be redreſſed without examination, or ſome equivalent courſe. At preſent we ſhall bend our ſelves to maintaine the neceſſity of examination unto the right uſe of the Lords Supper in our Congregations, and that ſuch as refuſe to ſubmit thereunto are deſervedly excluded.
When we ſay, examination ſhould be previous (as the Author ſpeaks) or a neceſſary Antecedent, we underſtand not a Phyſical Antecedent, as if it were eſſential to this duty, or Antecedent ſuâ naturâ, for then we ſhould examine as often as we admit, which is not done. Self-examination is a neceſſary Antecedent at all times, and Miniſterial at ſome times; an Antecedent it is, non phyſicè, ſed moraliter, & ex hypotheſi, that is, upon a ſuppoſition of a general corruption in our Churches. It is morally required as neceſſary to the excluſion of the unworthy, according to the minde of Chriſt. We ſhall make this as ſtrong as we can, when we have once anſwered the Arguments by which it is oppoſed, which is our next task.