An Anti-Diatribe, Part 5
The fifth Section of the Paper.
THE Canon preſcribing, and directing the due adminiſtration,The fifth Section of the Paper. and receiving of the Euchariſt is, 1 Cor. 11. We cannot with Tertullian adore the fulneſſe of Scripture, unleſſe we yield it to be a perfect rule of faith and manners, which it cannot be if it be deficientin any thing neceſſary to be done, or believed, eſpecially in ſuch places, where it purpoſely hand leth things of that concernment; and therefore here (and only here) an argument ab authoritate negative holdeth good. But in that Chapter I finde a precept, Let a man examine himſelf; none, that he ſhould neceſſarily paſſe the examination of his Paſtor. Between the proper examination of himſelf, and eating, and drinking; no other thing intervenes, and therefore this very Commentary is made upon that Text by pathetical Chryſoſtome: He doth not bid one man to examine another, but every man himſelf, making the judgement private, and the tryal without witneſſes. Pareus ſtrikes in uniſons with that ancient Father: The Apoſtle ſaith not, The Prieſt ſhal examine, or prove them, but every man himſelf. So doth Sarcerius, He commands not that one ſhould be approved to another; but each one to himſelf, as long before Clemens Alexandrinus accounted every mans conſcience to be hisbeſt director in this caſe, l. 1. Stromat. By what authority then can he be rejected that hath examined himſelf? And to ſuſpect that any have not examined themſelves, that ſhall profeſſe to have done ſo, without pregnant probability to the contrary, how can it be compatible with that charity that hopeth all things, and ſuſpecteth not?
SECT. XII.
Wherein of a third Argument from 1 Cor. 11.28. Let a man examine himſelf.
§. 12 The third Argument lies in the fifth Paragraph, and is another beaten Objection from 1 Cor. 11.28. This hath two ſupporters:
1. That it is the very Canon for the Sacrament.
2. The fulneſſe of the Scripture.
Anſw. We anſwer, There is a twofold fulneſs of the Scripture:
In its parts, and in the whole. There is a fulneſſe in every part, in every phraſe and ſentence. The ſmalleſt filing of this wedge is pure gold. Mountaines of matter hang upon the ſmalleſt ſyllable, as the Jewes uſe to ſpeak; ſo in the whole. The whole is a full rule of faith. Now ſo far we agree, but that all of any matter is contained in any one place, (which is here ſuppoſed) will be hard to prove. We are not wanting to the due reſpect of Scripture, while we hold the whole to be a moſt compleat rule of faith and manners. That which is wanting in one place, is ſupplied in another. It hath been the ill hap (if I may ſo ſpeak) of all the Arguments hitherto alleadged, to daſh upon that Rock, (ab authoritate Scripturae negativè,) which makes them all deficient in their authority, while the Scripture ſtands for a firme and full rule to all the godly. That the Apoſtle doth purpoſely handle the Doctrine of the Sacrament in that place, we freely grant; but that nothing can be neceſſary about the practice of it, which is not there expreſt, we ſee no reaſon to yield. We are ſure there is that elſewhere which is not there, and we hope all is neceſſary that is revealed. For redundancy is a blemiſh the word is as free of, as it is of defect. Beſides, reaſons may be given, why no mention there, and then, of any preparatory work by the tryall of others.
1. Becauſe thoſe ſpoken unto, namely the Corinthians were before, and newly admitted into Church-fellowſhip, by profeſſion of their faith, and therefore needed not to be called to this again. Whereas ours are borne in a Church, where hath been a long neglect of true Diſcipline, and where an unfitneſſe in many is confeſſed by all that are ingenuous.
2. The Apoſtle in this Scripture eyes Chriſts performance with his Diſciples, where was no need of this examination, they being all formerly joyned to Chriſt, and known of him. You may finde learned Zanchy the Proteſtant Schoolman (as he is deſervedly ſtiled) making, and in ſome part reſellng your objection, ſo farre, as that this Precept doth not deny the inſpection of others. If none of theſe were of weight, why may not the examination of Paſtors and Church-Officers well ſtand with that of a mans ſelf? Theſe being not contrary, but ſubordinate, the Precept is not excluſive. It is not, Let a man examine himſelf only: Small hopes of that mans ſelf-examining, who cannot bear the friendly tryal of his Miniſter.
It is meant (as Zanchy well) of ſecret ſins, (we may adde, and of ſincerity of graces) which men cannot ſee in others.
But our examination is for the ſatisfaction, and honour of the Church, and is of that which may be known and judged by others: Mens own is for the reformation, and comfort of their own conſciences. We believe that thoſe Miniſters that hold it neceſſary, (as the caſe now ſtands with our Congregations) to examine others, are yet little behinde their Opponents in earneſt preſſing upon mens conſciences the examination of themſelves, charging ſuch as they deal with, not to reſt on the trial and approbation of others, but to approve themſelves to God in the ſearching, and judging of themſelves.
Laſtly, becauſe the Scripture ſtands for ſuch a fulneſſe in that ſingle Scripture, as to leave out no one neceſſary thing: Let us aske whether a godly Communicant be bound to no other duty, beſides what is there particularly expreſt? We hope prayer at leaſt, and ſundry other duties, which are not mentioned, may yet be regarded and practiſed, and have their warrant elſewhere. Some Fathers and others do gloſſe theſe words, as is ſaid in the Paper, but not in that ſenſe.
Their minde was, and ſo is ours, that men ſhould not buſie themſelves about others, neglecting their own condition, nor reſt upon other mens opinions of them, without diſcerning a difference from themſelves formerly, and from others at preſent. Chryſoſtome ſpeaks well, when rightly taken for private examination ſhould be in a ſecret place, (where the ſoul may freely have communion with God;) but that which is for reformation, and ſatisfaction of the Church, ſhould nevertheleſſe be with witneſſes.
If Clemens Alexandrinue counted every mans conſcience his beſt director, we hope he meant this of conſciencious men, not of men void of true conſcience, which is the condition of all ſuch as we willingly keep off.Pareus in verba, id eſt, 1 Cor. 11.28. in parte altera, p. 563. Pareus is one brought in to ſide with the Fathers, unto him we are contented to hearken; We have ſought the words alledged, and finde him thus ſpeaking: Non dicit Apoſtolus, Sacerdoter probent, &c. that is, The Apoſtle doth not ſay, Let the Prieſts examine, or try the Communicants; but, Let every one examine himſelf; to ſhew the Reader, what an uniſon this is. We muſt freely point at a great miſtake, and that in three points.
1. Pareus ſpeaks this of Popiſh Prieſts.
2. Of Auricular confeſſion.
3. In the following words he is ours, juſtifying what he is alledged againſt: Examina publica, vel privata, that is,Examina publica, veprivata minimè improbamus, ſed requirimus. publick or private examinations of Communicants we by no means condemne, but require.
So that however he grants the examination there commanded, to be eſpecially of a mans ſelf, which we freely aſſent unto. yet he is not againſt that which we contend for. It is here and elſewhere hinted, that our examination is riſen out of the aſhes of Auricular confeſſion; but (alas!) the difference between theſe is eaſily ſhewed, and the harſhneſſe of the compariſon is as evident.
1. Examination defended is ſometime before the whole ſociety, and never ſo private, as is ſuggeſted: but always before two or three witneſſes at the leaſt.
2. Auricular confeſſion is conſtantly, and continually renewed, ſo often as the Ordinance is made uſe of: this is never but once.
3. Ratione ſubjecti, they are as wide as a Miniſter of the Goſpel, and a Frier or Jeſuite. It is not for want of ignorance, & ill will to the truth, that examination by Church Officers, to finde out mens fitneſs for viſible communion, is counted by many a point of Popery; but enough of this. Shortly, he that builds upon the alledged Text, that no others have to do with mens fitneſſe to the Sacrament, becauſe a private ſelf-examination about the ſincerity of their graces, to ground a judgement of faith upon, is commended; or that it is againſt charity, to ſuſpend any man that profeſſeth himſelf prepared; he that layes this upon the Text, layes more upon it then it will bear, and which the Ancients and Moderne approved Authors will not own, as we hope more fully to prove anon.