The Golden Mean

1 Consid.

First of all, let it be considered, whether the case of many of our Churches be not such, and so generally corrupted, & distracted, that severe Discipline upon all sorts of scandalous sinners will not be the way rather to ruin than reform them, I mean principally in regard of admistring the Lord's Suppen, which is the great stumbling-stone and rock of offense.

Even judicious Calvin himself, who was strict enough in admission to the Lord's Table, and professed that he would rather suffer his blood to be shed, than willingly partake in the pollution of Christ blood in the Sacrament; and thought, that in the delivery thereof; magnopere delectus requiritur, great choice is required; yet adds, Qui tamen haberi nequit, nisi per Ecclesiae jurisdictionem, which choice notwithstanding cannot be had, without the Churches Jurisdiction: Then afterward, in the same Chapter, he censures immodicam veterum austeritatem, the austerity or rigor of the Antient Fathers; but withal excuses some of them whom he thought were necessitated to use such severity, and therefore brings in Cyprian to this purpose, saying, Certe Cyprianus declarat quam non sponte fuerit tam rigidus. Patientia inquit, & facilitas, & humanitas nostra venientibus praesto est, opto omnes in Ecclesiam redigi, opto commilitones nostros intra Christi Castra & dei Patris Domicilia concludi. Remitto omnia, multa dissimnlo, studio & voto colligendae fraternitatis, etiam quae in Deum commissa sunt non pleno • udicio examino, I hide many things with desire of gathering together the fraternity, even those things that are committed against God himself; I do not examine with strict judgment. Delictis plus quam oportet remittendis pe ne ipse delinquo, I almost offend, in pardoning offenses more than is meet. Thus much out of Cyprian, that worthy man and holy Martyr.

Then again, the same Calvin, in the same section, brings in Chrysostom, Chrysostomus (saith he) aliquanto durior, sic tamen loquitur, si Deus tam benignus est, ut quid Sacerdos ejus austerus vult videri? Chrysostom who was something harsher than ordinary, speaks notwithstanding on this manner, if God himself be so favorable, why should his servant seem so austere?

And after these he also brings in learned Augustine, Scimus praeterea qua facilitate usus est Augustinus erga Donatistas, ut non dubitaverit in Episcopatum recipere, qui aschismate redierant, idque statim post resipiscentiam. Then Calvin add • . verum quia contrariaratio invaluerat, coacti sunt proprio judicio cedere, ut eam sequerentur, but because a contrary course prevailed, they were forced to forsake their own judgment to follow that, whereby we may plainly perceiy, how wise men were compelled, in some cases, for peace sake, to yield to the current of the times, against their own judgment. And moreover in the same Chapter he cites Saint Augustine bringing in an useful saying out of Cyprian, Miserecorditer igitur corripiat homo, quod potest, quod autem non potest patienter serat, & cum dilection gemat, ac lugeat. Words worthy to be written with letters of gold! approved as you may see both by Augustine and Calvin, two men most famous in their generations. Cyprians words are in English thus. Therefore let man mercisully convert what he can, and what he cannot amend, let him patiently bear, and with love lament and bewail with sighs and groans. And furthermore Calvin declares, how the Donatists in S. Augustine's time, were like Anabaptists in his age (even as they are in outs) making a rent and schism in the Church, because the Bishops would not use such severity in Discipline, as they desired; herereupon he relates another notable piece out of the same laborious Augustine: Unumistud praecipue commendat (scilicet Augustinus) si contagio peccandi multitudinem invaserit, Consilia separationis mania sunt, ac perniciosa, ac sacrilega, quia impia at que superba fiunt: & plus perturbant infirmos bonos, quam corrigant aninosos malos. i. e. This one thing he especially commends. If contagion of sinning have invaded the multitude, Counsels of Separation are vain & pernicious, & sacrilegiou • , because impious & proud, and do more disturb the good ones that are weak, than reform the bad ones that are stomacky and stubborn.

Hence the aforesaid Augustine, writing to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, thus complains. Ebrietatem impune grassari in Africa quae adeo graviter in Scriptures damnatur, suadetque ut coacto Episcoporum concilio remedium adhibeatur; yet subjoins withal, Non aspere, quantum existimo, non duriter, non modo imperioso ist a tolluntur, magis docendo quam jubendo; magis monendo quam minendo. Sic enim agendum est cum multitudine peccantium, Severitas aute • exercenda est in peccata paucorum. That is, that drunkenness did rage in Africa without control, which is so much condemned in the Scriptures, and he counsels him to use some remedy, by calling of a council of Bishops; yet saith he, these things are not taken away, as I suppose, by harshness, or by imperious means, rather by teaching than commanding, rather by admonishing than by threatening; For so must we deal with a multitude of offenders, and use severity only against the offenses of a fow.

This is our very case in England, as it was in Africa; the multitude for the most part is grievously infected with drunkenness, & other damnable sin • , & therefore seeing it would be pernicious & impious to separate; (a remedy worse than the disease) to leave them in such a desperate and deplored condition, so can it not be safe to exercise severe Discipline upon them. The reason is, because that would not bring them to shame, being so many that are guilty; for they will harden one another. But some more mild and gentle course must be considered of, to win and work upon them by love, rather than seek to force them by fear, using all kind instructions, and loving admonitions, rather than rigid rebukes, and harsh threatings, which will but exasperate, and make them more obstinate, pertinacious, and peremptory.

And thus you see the concurrent judgment of these three most worthy men, whose praise is glorious, both for piety and parts, which may be the more easily assented unto; if we well consider the Lenity, longsuffering, and patience of our Lord and Savior in the like cases; who when his Disciples in their rash zeal, would have commanded fire to come down from heaven, to consume the Samaritans, because they would not receive him, he rebuked them, saying, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for saith he, The Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. Christ, you see, was not so harsh, and hard in censuring and judging, as the Disciples were, but reproved for their rashness, though they pretended the example of Elias.

It is also generally confessed by all sober men, that the Antient Fathers were too rigid in their Discipline; & too severe in their censures; and yet their case did more require Austerity, as may seem, than ours doth. Because they lived among Heathens, who denied the Lord Jesus Christ: and therefore least Christianity itself should come into more contempt, and be scandalized by the bad conversation of professed Christians, the Officers and Governors of the Church, were forced to use more rigor, for the avoiding of offenses, that so they might win the Gentiles to the love of the truth.

Wherefore we must consider the nature of the times wherein we live, and like wise Physicians temper our medicines so, as that they may be most taking; bitter Pills will not down with some queasy stomachs; we must in most things observe the temper of our distempered people; and sometimes humor them, as we do our froward children, lest they should fret themselves too much.

Christianity is now the common profession, and in credit; therefore our chief endeavor must be to work men to a real practice according to their profession; and because strict Discipline will not now be endured, as sad experience tells us, especially in this juncture of time, when everyone may be of what Congregation he will, or of none at all, and of what Religion he will, that is called Christian, so it be neither Popish, nor Prelatical, or of no Religion at all, so that he keep it to himself, and disturb not others.

Consid. 2.

Therefore in the next place I desire, that it may be well considered, whether it were not necessary, to give some indulgence, at least for a time, because of the hardness of men's hearts, as Moses did in the matter of divorce, and that by God's own permission and appointment, Deut. 24.1.

And this so much the rather, because nothing is positively determined in Scripture concerning this particular, to wit; who those are that are to be kept back from the Lord's Supper; but it is left to the wisdom and prudence of those in authority, both in regard of this, and diverse other parts of Discipline, to vary according to circumstances of time, place, and person; seeing Christianity is not now confirmed, (as formerly) to one Nation. and country only; but is free for all Nations, Mat. 28.19.

Now disserent countries have different dispositions, and customs; therefore there could not be the same Discipline in every particular for every people.

Withall let it be observed (which some do not impertinently urge), that the Apostle never blames the Ministers, or any others, for admitting those Corinthians to this Sacrament of the Supper, whom he so much condemns for their unworthy receiving, and upon whom God himself had inflicted such visible judgments, as weakness, sickness, and death itself; for that very sin of unworthy receiving: charging them only that were guilty, to examine themselves, and not the Ministers, either there, or any other where.

Case 1.

But here coms a case of conscience to be resolved: Should all, good and bad be admitted to this holy Sacrament of the Supper.

[Solution.] I answer, No, if we can choose; but when we cannot do what we would, we must do what we can, as reverend M. Blake hath well determined, adding a little after; That the Churches edification is first to be considered; but the peace of the Church by no means neglected.

Case. 2.

But should not people be examined, (by the Minister at least) before they be admitted to the holy Supper; or should all that are baptized, and of years, come that will, without anymore a do, as some do plead?

I answer, though there be no particular precept for such examination, as there is for self-examination, 1 Cor. 11.28. yet I think that it is necessarily deducible, from that which is generally granted on all sides.

All take for granted, that Children, Fools, and Mad-men are to be prohibited this Sacrament of the Supper, and yet there is no syllable for this directly in the Word of God, but only by natural reason, to be deduced thence, because such are altogether unable to examine themselves, and so to improve this Sacrament for their spiritual advantage, &c. by reason of their invincible ignorance. Now there must be therefore of necessity some appointed to judge, who are fools and mad-men, and who are past children, and of years; which cannot be known without examination; and none so fit to examine ordinarily as Ministers, who are, or should be, men approved for knowledge, judgment, and holiness.

And hereupon I argue further thus, If invincible ignorance doth make children and fools unfit to be admitted to this holy Supper, much more will affected ignorance, which makes them not only incapable but unworthy of admittance, because by their negligence they are disabled from discerning the Lord's body, and so must need • at and drink unworthily 1 Cor. 11.29.

Add hereunto, that the Prelatical party, who have been most backward in this business of examination, cannot deny but that confirmation was appointed by our first reformers, and

Now this being in many places neglected on all sides, Ministers not Catechizing, or very few of them, and likewise Parents and Masters, &c. being backward to bring their Children and Servants to learn the Catechism; and Bishops as careless as any t • see it done, and so in a great measure the cause of the neglect of the other, whom they had power by their Courts to compel, had they not wanted care and conscience; hence most sorts of people did still remain very ignorant of the grounds of Religion, being altogether uncatechised. Wherefore let any man judge, what need there is now of more then ordinary examination, or catechizing almost of all sorts, in regard of knowledge; so that a great many that mutter, and make much ado against examination, as if it were so tyrannical, and much worse than Episcopal Government, do say they know not what. For though Episcopal Government, in regard of the execution of that office, fell short in this particular; yet in regard of the right constitution thereof; the Bishops should have caused as much to have been done, as is of late required by moderate Presbyterians; and it was their sin and shame, that they did it not. See the Rubric about confirmation, and before the Communion.

Case: 3.

But shall the scandalous be admitted to this holy Communion? what shall be done with them?

[Sol. 1] I think they should indeed be excommunicated from all public Communion in holy Ordinances, those I mean, that are proved scandalous, and will not be admonished, nor submit and acknowledge their crimes and heinous offenses.

Secondly, seeing that in most congregations there wants sufficient power for authoritative excommunication; I think it very difficult, what to determine in this business; and that because it is hard to judge what is scandal, and also who are scandalous, learned men being much divided in this particular: Therefore I conceive it too great a burden to be put upon the Minister alone, unless he were more infallible than most can possibly be imagined; or unless there were public Laws to regulate and determine, what shall be accounted a scandal, and who, and when scandalous.

[Sol. 3] Thirdly I add, where no Government is set up, as in most places there neither is, nor well can be as yet ( rebus sic stantibus ) for want of fit Officers. If there be any so grossly scandalous, that there need no examination, or other proof; as in case of Bastardy, Common-drunkenness, or the like; if any such should offer to come to the holy Communion, he is to be admonished; & if he do openly confess his sin, and profess his hearty sorrow for the same, & promise by the grace of God to endeavor amendment, I know no reason in all the Word of God, why he should be put by. But if he will not be admonished, but seek to justify himself, or excuse the matter, and remain obstinate, he deserves to be excommunicated, and cast out of the Congregation. But for want of Discipline whereby this might be legally done, I suppose the Minister (if there be any that will join with him, to testify the scandal and obstinacy) may in such a case pass h • m by, charging him not to presume to partake at his own peril; warning also the rest of the Congregation to withdraw from familiar conversing with such an one, more then natural or necessary civil bonds do tie them, to the intent that he may be ashamed, as if he were juridically excommunicate.

But now if none will join with the Minister in this case, but leave the business wholly upon him; I do not think it can be safe for him alone to put him away, only he may charge him to abstain, till he have given some fatisfaction to the Congregation, and not to offer the consecrated elements unto him, and if he will take them of himself, he hath had sufficient warning, his blood shall be upon his own head, and shall not be required at the Minister's hands.

And as for others that are only suspected, the Minister may not meddle with them; no, nor a Presbytery; because, De occultis non judicat Ecclesia, only they may admonish such in private, to carry themselves so, as to take off all suspicion.

Now though this may seem to some very strange, as favoring of looseness and remissnesse, yet let me tell you, that it is no more in effect, than what some of the chief and choice Independents allow, upon the like occasion. For M ^r Thomas Hooker, a man very eminent while he was in Old, and afterwards in New-England, yet in his Survey of Discipline yields as much. In declining times (saith he) a Church being corrupted, when diseases grow deadly, there is allowed, and a toleration of necessity must be so far granted, until juridice the evil be examined, the parties convinced, censures applied for reformation. See M. Cawdrey 's Review, p. 94. M. Blake also quotes another passage to this purpose, out of the same M. Hooker. We see (saith he) how much reverend M. Hooker, speaking the opinion of his party, gives to the Churches conivence or indulgence. If the Church (saith he) either through connivence, negligence, or indulgence sha tolerate such evils, and evil persons in the state of Church-membership, they cannot then deny them the privilege of members; thus far he. Now this is one special privilege of Church-members, that are of years, to receive this Sacrament, or to be admitted to this holy Table, therefore he yields full as much, if not more than I have yielded.

Case. 4.

But whether may Ministers lawfully administer this Sacrament to those, in whom they can see no signs of sound and saving grace? I answer, yes undoub • edly, and that for these following reasons.

[Sol.] First, because the Apostles in the purest primitives times, never required anymore to admission than outward profession, refusing none that were willing to give their names unto Christ; never once questioning the sincerity of their affections, for ought we read, witness those three thousand souls admitted presently both to Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, upon their willing assent. Act. 2.41. &c. and that breaking of bread. ver. 42. is meant of Sacramental breaking, may appear more plainly, if we well observe, what learned Master Mede saith, concerning the words. They were saith he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which the vulgar Latin turns, Erant autem perseverantes in doctrina Apostolorum, & communicatione fractionis, panis & orationibus; but the Syriac, Perseverantes erant in doctrina Apostolorum, & Communicabant in precatione, & fractione Eucharistiae, hoc est, assidui erant in audiendis Apostolis, & Sacrificio Christiano celebrando, and withal he adds, who knows no that the Synaxis, of the ancient Christians consisted of these three parts, of hearing the Word of God, of prayers, and commemoration of Christ in the Euchrist? And therefore he saith, our translation is not here so right, which refers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and translates it the fellowship of the Apostles, whereas it is to be referred to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vide Mede vol. 1. page, 493. 494.

And to proceed, we do not read of any admitted to baptism, but were also admitted to the Lord's Supper. Hence Act. 20.7. It is said, that upon the first day of the week the Disciples came together to break bread, and Paul preached unto them; Mark, he speaks of Disciples in general, without any exception, that they came together of purpose, to break bread; as a special Sabbath-duty, as well as hearing the Word &c.

[Reason 2] My second reason is, because all circumcised were strictly in joined to eat the Passover, Exod. 12.44. and 47. Every man's servant that is bought with money, when thou hast circumcised him shall eat thereof; all the Congregation of Israel shall keep it, amongst whom, without question there were many, if not most of them, uncircumcised in heart, and unregenerate, uncircumcision in heart, orunregeneracy; was never made a bar to exclude any from the outward Ordinance (though it may from the blessing of it) because no man can judge the heart.

As for these Numb. 9.6, 7. &c. that were forbidden to keep the Passover, by reason of uncleanness, being defiled by a dead body of a man, it was such an uncleanness, as might befall the holiest man among them; besides it was such as kept them out of the Congregation, and so from other Ordinances as well as that. Numb. 5.2. Command the Children of Israel, that they put out of the Camp every Leper, and everyone that hath an Issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead, both male and female, shall ye put out, without the Camp: That they defile not the Camp. ver. 3. Now out of the Camp, then out of the Congregation, but mark what followed. Numb. 9.13. The man that is clean, (to wit, legally) And is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the Passover, even the same soul shall be cut off from his people, because he brought not the Offering of the Lord, in his appointed season, that man shall bear his sin: You see therefore there was great sin, in refusing to keep the Passover, if legally clean, though unregenerate; for that uncleanness there, cannot be extended to inward uncleanness, which man cannot possibly know.

[Reas. 3] Thirdly, because the use of this Ordinance doth much conduce to a through conversion. For here thou must take notice of a twofold conversion, one is unto the Faith, another is to the Truth of the Gospel; the former is only outward, consisting in profession and outward practice only; the other is inward, when the heart receiveth the love of the truth, and of this letter we here speak, which is holpen by this holy Sacrament, reverently and devoutly administered, for we suppose all that can lay any claim to the Sacrament have the former.

[Argument. 1] Now to prove that the use of this Ordinance doth much conduce to this conversion, my first Argument is this: Because it is a means to convince men of sinfulness, which is the first work of the spirit in true conversion, Joh 16.8 Now in this Sacrament Christ, is as it were, Crucifyed before our eyes, and that for the remission of sins, which could not otherwise be expiated, but by the shedding of his blood; likewise it serves to convince us of the heinousness, and hatefullnesse of our sin, which could not be done away by any other means, but by the Blood of the Son of God, as also to convince us of monstrous ingratitud, if we should presume to come to the Sacrament of Christ body and blood, and yet to follow flesh and blood, and not labor to be cleansed by the blood of that Lamb that takes away the sins of the World. Besides the very breaking of the bread, understandingly looked upon, is a forcible argument to break our hearts, (as the London Ministers have excellently and feelingly observed) Was Jesus Christ rent and torn for you, and shall it not break your hearts, that you should sin against him? Was he crucified for you, saith they, and will you crucify him by your sins? And besides, say they, the breaking of the bread is not only ordained to be a motive unto brokennes of heart for sin, but also in the right use to effect that which it moves unto. [Argu. 2] Secondly the Sacrament is a compound Ordinance, consisting of the word, prayer, and elements of bread and wine, and therefore must needs be more forcible then the single word, or both word and prayer without it, when verbum visible is joined both with prayer, and verbum audibile, a three-fold cord is not soon broken.

And the aforesaid London Ministers call it, a Visible Sermon; that as Christ in the ministry of the Word preacheth to the ear, and by the ear conveyeth himself into the heart: so in the Sacrament he preacheth to the eye, and by the eye conveieth himself into the heart. Therefore as the Apostle Peter tells us, That the Wives good conversation may win the Husband, whom the Word will not win, to wit alone, because deeds are often more forcible then words: So I may say, that the Sacrament joined with the Word, may work that, which the Word alone will not effect.

For though the word preached be of greatest weight for Conversion, yet the Sacrament being added as a seal to the Word, to confirm the same, must needs help to work sound and saving faith, and so turre the scale. For as the Apostle saith, Heb. 6.17, 18. God willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong confirmation: So I may well say, that these two immutable things, God's Word and Seal, must needs make stronger impression upon our hearts, to work faith, and consequently conversion.

[Argu. 3] In the third place, doth not experiance tell us, that, since the administration of this Sacrament hath been so much neglected, fewer by far have been converted, than in former times; because this holy Sacrament kept men more in awe, partly by reason of the solemnesse of this Sacred Ordinance, for which men have been pressed to more serious preparation, &c. partly by reason of the Apostles pressing to examination, by expressing the heinousness of the sin, and greatness of the danger of unworthy receiving, that it makes them guilty of the body, and blood of Christ, and to eat and drink their own damnation. 1 Cor. 11.27, 28, 29.

[Argu. 4] Lastly another thing which I conceive of no small consequence, is this; In administering and partaking of this Ordinance there is a more particular application of the Elements by everyone that receives, whereas the word preached, being delivered to all at once, is applied but by a few, men being loath, if they can choose, to take that to themselves, which goes against the hair, as most duties do, especially Repentance, or true conversion. But now when the Sacrament of the Supper is administered, they must needs act that do receive, because they must eat and drink, whereby a nearer engagement comes upon them, which makes them look better about them.

Hence many never begin to think seriously of Religion, and a religious, course, until they are to come to the Sacrament, and then they begin to bethink themselves, and to turn over a new leaf, and so fall close to savor and relish Religion, which before they regarded not, or at most very slightly considered. Expertus loquor, See more concerning this matter in M. Blake's Covenant sealed.

[Object. 1] But here it will be Objected, that should we admit those that are unregenerate, being dead in trespasses and sins, it would do them no good at all; but a great deal of hurt, yea prove very poison to them, because they will eat and drink damnation to themselves; for they cannot but eat and drink unworthily, taking God's name in vain. I answer, [Answer.] by the same reason you must keep them from every Ordinance, bebecause, while unregenerate, they take God's name in vain, and hurt themselves as well as in this. Besides, none eat and drink damnation, but those that are in a damnable estate already; For he that believs not, is condemned already, Joh. 3.18. As for poisoning them by this, how can a dead man be poisoned? And besides, I hold it a dangerous error to think, that this Sacrament will prove poison to all that partake of it, being unregenerate; for had it been so, surely the Lord would not have appointed the same meat and drink to have been both Sacramental and necessary food, without which the Israelites had been starved in the wilderness; and with which most of them, being unregenerate, must have been poisoned, if that position were true, for they all ate the same spiritual meat, and all drank the same spiritual drink, 1 Cor. 10.3, 4. whence I argue thus; Seeing the Lord appointed the ordinary food of the Israelites to be sacramental, and the very same spiritual meat and drink with ours; and seeing they were all bound to eat, or else they had been self-murderers; Therefore there can be no such danger of soul-murthering to all unregenerate, that eat in obedience to God's Commandment, which must of necessity follow, if the Sacrament should be poison to all such as were unconverted.

I deny not but there was something extraordinary in that sacramental meat and drink, in regard that the mixed multitude did both eat and drink of the same; yet still the argument holds good, in regard of the sacramentality of it, (as I may say) and that we may rather conclude thence, that those that are no members of the Church may eat at the Sacrament, than exclude those from it that are visible members, though unregenerate. Doubtless the unregenerate sin no otherwise in this, than they do in other commanded duties, which they cannot possibly perform aright in that condition, and which notwithstanding they cannot neglect without greater sin; Minorem contrahit reatum (saith reverend Bowles) qui in officio, quod praecipitur, deficit in modo praestandi, quàm qui prorsus negligit. Peccat ill ex accidenti, scil. ex defectu fuperveniente; hic vero in substantiam praecepti, que jubemur Domini mortem us{que} dum advenerit annunciare. Peccat ill in unum duntaxat praeceptum; hic in duo, quae prudens sciens{que} omittit. And after this manner we were wont to comfort wounded consciences, who were afraid to perform holy duties, because they found such failings and faithless distractions in the performance of them, that they thought they sinned more in doing them, than in leaving them undone; For this we told them, that there was less sin in the willing performance, though with much weakness, than in the willful neglect of them.

[Object.] But here some think to evade, by distinguishing between duties naturally moral, and those of mere positive institution. Moral duties, as prayer, thanksgiving, &c. are confessed to belong in general unto all; but it is not so in duties of positive institution; they are given with limit to some, and are not of universal obligation.

[Answ.] To this Mr. Blake hath sufficiently answered; 1. By way of Concession: Positive precepts bind not at all, because they are not given to all; the Gentil nations were not tied to the Law of Ceremonies given to the Jews, and mere Heathens are not now tied to our Sacraments. 2. For a positive answer he saith; Positive precepts were never given in charge with any such distinction, as to bind the regenerate, and to exclude men in unregeneration, Men under sin, and in nature, are bound to the affirmative part of the second Commandment, to observe every way of worship that shall be instituted by God, all of which are only of positive right. All Israel were tied to sacrifice, as well as to hear, and pray; and all Christians are now under an obligation to the Law of the Sacraments, as they are to other duties. And a little after he adds; There are texts indeed produced, seemingly taking off men under sin, from the performance of positive duties, as Mat. 5.23.24. and as much may be said concerning those that are moral, Ezek. 14.2, 3. & 20.23. thus far Mr. Blake.

[Object.] If here it should be objected concerning the former Scripture, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3. &c. that presently after, God was said not to be well pleased with many of them that are that spiritual meat, &c. [Answ.] but overthrew them in the wilderness, ver. 5. I answer; 'tis true, and this makes much against them, that rest in the deed done, and think Sacraments will save by the bare outward act, sine bono motu utentis; but this makes nothing against what I have said; for the Apostle saith not, that God was displeased with them for eating that Spiritual meat, &c. but for lusting after evil things, as appears ver. 6, 7. &c. In all which, and that which follows in the next Chap. where he speaks of the Lord's Supper, he saith not one word, against their coming to the Sacrament, which was their duty, but only against their misbehaviour at it, which was very gross; whereby it may appear, that many of them were unregenerate, for some of them were drunk, either at or presently after that Ordinance, which is little better, they came to it, not as a sacred, but as a civil, or rather uncivil feast; hence those judgments seized upon them, to wit weakness, sickness, & death ver. 30. & yet not a word of excluding the parties, but only condemning their miscarriages.

Case. 5.

But is not administering the Sacrament to such as be unregenerate, a giving holy things to Dogs, &c. Contrary to Christ's flat command? [Sol.] No • at all in our Savior's sense; This place I know is much urged, and that by many learned and godly men, and I know it is sufficiently answered, by many no less learned and godly, especially by M. Jeanes, and also by M. Blake: yet give me leave to fay something in this particular, because it works much with a great many. I confess I cannot choose but wonder to see this place so wrested by wise and worthy men, as if it afforded Argumentum palmarium, not considering either the absurdity, or inconsequence of their arguing.

First, the absurdity is evident, because taking it for a general proposition, as they do, and so including the holy things of the Sacrament among the rest, it makes full as much, if not more, against preaching to such as they call Doggs, and Swine, and whom they would exclude, eo nomine, from the Sacrament, when notwithstanding they preach the holy things of the Gospel to the self-same Doggs, yea and cast those pearls before those same Swine; especially when they contend for excommunicate persons, not to be excluded the Congregation. Therefore the Proposition cannot be general, in their sense of Doggs, but so as to make flat against themselves. The truth is, preaching, reproving and admonishing are mostly meant by those holy things and pearls, which our Savior speaks of; as M. Perkins and many others give the sense of the place.

But now, if you take Doggs and Swine in Christ's own sense (who must needs be the best expositor of his own meaning) for such as will rent you, and trample upon those pearls which you give them; see then the inconsequence of their inference: Those whom they would exclude from these holy things and precious pearls in this Sacrament, never offer to rent or tear those that administer them; but the contrary, they are ready to rent those that refuse administering to them, though not with their teeth, yet with their tongues, as many can testify. And as for trampling these pearls under their feet, they are so far from it, as that they prize this above most other Ordinances, and have used to come more reverently to it, than to any Ordinance whatsoever; carrying themselves worse by far towards the Word preached, which as yet they are allowed to enjoy.

Moreover, let them take Doggs for whomsoever they will, provided they have this quality here mentioned by our Savior, to be ready to rent those that would give them this holy Supper, and there need be no controversy in this case; for if they should but offer such an affront for administering these things unto them, we would not offer to give them; indeed we should not need to trouble our selves about them in this respect, because they would not come to this Ordinance at all, as many now sinfully refuse, who hold us and our Ministry Antichristian, and surely we are not so Popishly affected, as to carry it to their houses, or carry it about, and call upon them to adore it; as the Papists do their Host, or Breaden god, which they call the Sacrament of the Altar.

[Object.] But some will say, Is not this Children's bread, and therefore not to be given to Doggs, according to the saying of our Savior, Mat. 15.26.

[Answ.] 'It is most true, it is indeed Children's bread, and therefore not to be given unto Doggs: But who are Children in that speech of our Savior? Even all those that are of the Visible Church, in opposition to those that were not; for this Woman of whom he spake was a Gentile, and not a Proselyte; and the Jews in those days were only of the Church, and so Children, how wicked soever; which is likewise manifest by Christ's foregoing words, ver. 24. I am not sent, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel: mark, even the lost sheep of the house of Israel, as well as those that were already found, are reckoned there to be the same with the Children: And consequently Doggs, according to Christ's meaning, must needs signify there, such as were not of the Visible Church, or uncircumcised; and so likewise those are children among us, who are received into the Visible Church, and Baptized, and have right unto Children's bread, and cannot be counted Doggs in our Savior's sense there, but only Infidels and unbaptized are to be accounted such, and not to receive this Sacrament in statu quo.

Case. 6.

But will not this largeness in Admission give offense to many of God's people, and cause them to separate from us, and speak evil of us, as if we were no true Churches.

[Sol.] I answer; It is too common, even for holy ones, to take offense where none is given; and therefore we need to be as cautelous as we can, that we may give none occasion in this censorious age; and I am confident if the cause be well examined, they that take offense at mixed Communions, as they call them, & so separate, have given far greater offense by the rents & divisions that they have made in our Churches, and yet count it their glory; though it be to the great grief of many godly ones, as well as ungodly; hindering their conversion; and opening the mouths both of Popish and profane adversaries; causing them to blaspheme profession, and Religion itself.

And as for the truth of our Churches, I verily believe most of them are as pure and free from corruptions, as most of those Churches of Asia, to whom our Savior sent several Epistles, and called them all golden Candlesticks, Rev. 1.20.

The Church of Sardis, Rev. 3.1. had a name to live, and was dead; and the Church of Laodicea was neither cold, nor hot, but luke-warm, the worst temper that could be in a Church, which made Christ so sick of them, that he was ready to spew them out of his mouth, Rev. 3.15, 16. There was nothing it seems commendable in them, else surely our Savior would have taken notice of it, as he did in that of Sardis, saying, That they had a few names, that had not defiled their garments, Rev. 3.4. But it seems there were none among the Laodiceans, for if there had, why should not Christ have encouraged them, as well as others? seeing he passed an impartial censure, doubtless, upon them all.

And withal let it be observed, that Christ himself doth not there make so much adoabout polluting of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, more than about other Ordinances, which is now so much insisted on, and was then no doubt, as much defiled, if not more than among us, considering what gross corruptions some of them had, and Christ set himself of purpose to correct whatsoever was most amiss among them, and therein set us a perfect copy, how to reform deformed Churches, commending the good, and condeming the bad; But we hear never a word, that they should make a separation, because of the bad; but rather to rebuke, and so to reform them.

Rev. 2.14. He condemneth the Church of Pergamos, because she had them that held the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balaack to cast a stumbling block before the Children of Israel, and to eat things sacrificed to Idols, and commit fornication, and the like, and thereupon bids them Repent, or else he will fight against them, with the sword of his mouth, But never commands the good to separate, although such foul evils were tolerated amongst them.

He also sharply reproves the Church of Thyatira, for suffering the Woman Jezebel, who called her self a prophetess, to teach and seduce his servants, to commit fornication, &c. threatening her heavily. Rev. 2.20, 21, 22, 23. Yet not a word, to the well affected of separation, or any such thing.

Lastly we see plainly, that two many have fallen off to separation, even where none have been admitted at all, & that partly for fear, least some should take offense, and so separate.

And as for those that have separated, because they could not enjoy such pure and unmixit Communions among us, as they supposed, how fearesully have some of them fallen from one degree of separation to another, till at last they have separated not only from all Churches, but from all Ordinances, and consequently from all Religion also: Such is the giddiness of this age, by reason of the subtlety of some seducers, especially Priests, and Jesuits, that go under the name of gifted brethren, and teach them to blast all our Ministers, and Ministry, as usually they do; That being the first thing they commonly teach!

Now when they have once begun to separate from our Churches, and censure us and our Ministry, as Antichristian, some of them grow so self-conceited, and censorious, that no Church will hold them; but they soar aloft above all Ordinances, as carnal and low things: Yea the Scripture it self is counted but a dead letter, whereby some of them at last become worse, than the worst of those they have so rashly separated from.

My very heart doth sometimes bleed, to confider, how our fair hopes, which we had of many, have been by this means blasted, and poor souls utterly undon, who (I am persuaded) were well-meaning men and women: and with good intent entered upon that way of separation, But we may see how dangerous it is, to be wise above that which is written, and more strict then God's Word will warrant us, which I wish were well considered of all well-minded Christians, least they rush upon the same Rock.

For the Devil is never more dangerous, than when he transforms himself into an Angel of light, as he hath usually done in our days, and hath gotten great advantage against us by over-doing, as well as formerly by under-doing, as learned and zealous M. Baxter hath well observed.

This is as clear as the Sun to those that do not willfully wink, and shut their eyes. For when Satan saw, that the gross Superstition and Idolatry in Altar-worship, and the like, brought in by some of the Bishops, was quite quashit, and become odious, by the late Parliament, about the beginning, and that a reformation was intended, and endeavored, he than cuningly turned hands, and would turn Reformer also; But with full intent to deform and overturn all, for whatsoever the Parliament began to do, he would be sure to over-do, that so he might undo whatsoever they had done.

1. As for example, when the Parliament went about to reform our Churches, and repair the breacher, he will have them utterly raced down to the ground, as Antichristian; and rebuilt from the bottom, as if they were no true Churches at all.

2. And when they sought to reform the Ministry, and cast out those that were corrudted, being either ignorant or scandalous, he goes higher, and will have all pulled down, Root & Branch. Not only Archbishops and Bishops, but all Ministers made by them whomsover. And when the Parliament proposed, to mend the Ministers maintenance, least scandalous means should make scandalous Ministers; he would have them preach gratis, as the Apostls did, and stand to the people's courtesy, and work for their living, as the Apostle Paul and some others had done, and for this purpose raised up Preachers, of his own inspiring end Ordaining; just as Jerobeam did, of the lowest of the people, which were not of the suns of Levi. 1 Kings. 12.31. Whosoever would he consecrated hlm, and he became one of the Priests of the high places. 1 Kings. 13.33. so he resused no Methanicks, but encouraged them, and cried them up, and not only cried down all other Preachers, but to this end cried down Tithes also, as Antichristian, and unjust. Though in the Scriptures the godliest men did first give them, to wit Abraham the Father of the faithful, and Jacob, of whom came the twelve Tribes of Israel, and God himself did afterwards in his wisdom settle them, as his own portion upon his own tribe of Levi, which he chose instead of the first-born, to do his special service.

By these means the Devil hath done more mischief, then most can imagine; for he very well knows, that take away maintenance, and you take away Ministry. No man (saith the Apostle) goeth to warfare any time at his own charges. 1 Cor. 9.7. Speaking of maintenance for Ministers; Hence our gracious Lord and Master, gave his own Tribe of Levi very liberal allowance, even under the Law, for that administration, which was far inferior to ours under the Gospel.

Again the Devil further knows, that take away Ministers, and you ruin the Churches; as you do an Army by taking away their Commanders: because Ministers are the Churches 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Guides or rulers, Captains or Leaders, Heb. 13.7. & 17. the Watchmen and Shepherds that must feed and defend the flock of Christ from Wolvs, which the Apostle fore-told would enter among them, Act. 20.28, 29, 30, 31. And if we have neither Churches, nor Ministers, we shall have in a while no Ordinances; and hence many came to be above Ordinances, (a most transcendent evil!) when once they had rejected our Ministry, and our Churches. For I conceive, that if Satan's young Chaplains could have preached and prayed as well as other Ministers, they would not for shame have left off Ordinances, which they kept up for a time, usurping the office of the Ministry, but at length left that, when they saw their own inabilities that way, and fell to ascribe all to inward Revelations, and took those Revelations, (which were doubtless from the Devil) to be divine dictates from the Holy Ghost, and as good, or rather better than the holy Scriptures, which they found did not make for them, but rather flat against them; though sometimes they would pretend Scripture to deceive silly souls.

4. Again, when the Parliament would reform something about the Sacrament of Baptism, Satan would still go beyond them, and taught by his Emissaries, that all must be re-baptized that were baptized in their Infancie; neither should that be administered to any, till they should renounce our Churches and Ministry, and give a reason of their faith. By this means concluding our poor Infants to be in a far worse condition, than the Infants of the Israelites, who were received into the Church by Circumcision, and ours must be left without for lack of Baptism. And yet he stopped not here neither; but went yet higher with some, that they should decry all waterbaptisme, that was but a carnal Ordinance; he will have them have none but spiritual-baptism, rejecting water-baptism as need less for them that had the Holy Ghost, when as the Apostle Peter, after he saw that the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost, did thereupon baptize them, Acts 10.47. Can any man (saith he) forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? Do not they then absurdly forbid water-Baptism?

5, Lastly, when the Parliament intended to reform something in the Administration of the Lord's Supper, and to keep back the grossly ignorant and scandalous, that either could not, or would not improve that holy Sacrament to their spiritual advantage, he labored to go still beyond them, he will have none admitted, but those that may be judged truly gracious; and herein he seemed something modest, and therefore he goes a little further, and would not admit of some, unless they were first dipit, or rather duck'c over head and ears, as if it had been possible for John Bartist thus to have dealt with Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, who came to his Baptism, Mat. 3.5, 6. which had been more then an Herculean labor.

Cons. 3

In the next place I desire, that it may be impartially considered, whether or no the Sacarment of the Lord's Supper, be not in some sense, over highly esteemed amongst many; I mean, especially in comparison of other Ordinances, whether there be not a sin on the right band, as well as on the left; that as some do under-value it, so others do over-value it. Indeed I have been long mistaken, if some holy men have not (in a kind) idolized this holy Sacrament. I suppose that Popish Transubstantiation, or at least their idolatrous adoring of their Sacrament of the Altar, and also the very Altar whereon it is offered, did arise from some such overweening conceit, that some of the Ancients, or others had of this Sacrament. And what a world of wrangling, and sea of blood hath been spent, in our own and other Nations, by reason of these errors that seem so plausible, and to be done in honor to our Lord Jesus Christ! In like manner the over high conceit of the other Sacrament of Baptism begat great inconveniences among the Ancients; who judging that Baptism did actually wash away all their sins; and if they sinned heinously after Baptism, they could not so easily obtain remission; and because Baptism was not to be iterated, but only once to be administered, therefore they stayed from receiving Baptism a long time, that they might have the brunt of sin over before it, by which it would be the better taken away, than by any other means. Now this too high conceit of Baptism, caused some dangerously to defer it, so that some Christians (of good age) died unbaptized, and either never received the Lord's Supper, or else received it disorderly; for as no uncircumcised person was to eat the Passover, Exod. 12.48. so by consequence none unbaptized should receive the Supper.

I have not written this, as if I would that men should have a mean esteem of this holy Ordinance of the Lord's Supper; for I hold it very precious and sovereign, and to be used with much reverence, Devotion, and thankfulness; and therefore am very much grieved, that it hath been so much disused in many Congregations; but I conceive, that so highly to prize it above other Ordinances is very dangerous, producing sad effects, as we have seen. And I verily be ieve, that this preferring of it so much, as if it were of all others such a Noli-me-tangere, and as if no other Ordinance could so defile, or be de filed, hath been on main case of most of our late breaches amongst brethren in our Churches, when as the Word of God speaks as much, if not more, against the profaning of other OrdinancesSee, Prov. 28.9. He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination. and Isa. 1.11, 12. &c. And what reason can any man give, why a wicked man should more defile another at this Sacrament then at other parts of God's worship?

[Ob.] It is objected that at this Sacrament we propfesse ourselves on body with them, which some dare not do with the wicked.

[Answ.] And do we not so, when we pray to the same God, our Common Father, in the same congregation with them? Were not all the Coogregation of Israel members of the same visible Church, and called God's people by God himself, though many among them notoriously wicked? Psal. 50.7. Hear O my people and I will speak, O Israel, and I will testify against thee I am God even thy God, and yet see what some of them were v. is 16. &c. who then are we, that we should utterly disclaim them, before they utterly disclaim him, and he hath given them a bill of Divorce? Hath it not been sufficiently manifested, that the Kingdom of Heaven. i.e. Christ's visible Church, is like a Field wherein tares must grow together with the Wheat, until the harvest, which is the end of the World? Mat. 13.24, 23. &c. And also, that in the visible Church many are called; But few chosen. Mat. 20.16.22.14.

[Ob.] But doth not the Apostle say, that a little leaven leaveneth the whose lump? and therefore bids purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, speaking of the incestuous person. 1 Cor. 5.6.7.

[Answ.] True; he would have such notorious, scandalous persons, as the incestuous Corinthian was, to be purged out by excommunication, that ye may be a new lump, and because Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us, but never bids you put out yourselves from the Sacrament, more than from other Ordinances, if such be not put out.

[Ob.] But doth he not say expressly. v. 11. With such a one, [Answ.] no not to eat. This must needs be meant of familiar eating, because it is spoken by way of diminution, and wherein one is more likely to be infected, than at the Sacramental Supper.

[Ob.] And whereas it is urged hereupon with much confidence, That if we may not eat with them at our own table, much less at God's.

[Answ.] It is a mere inconsequence, how strong soever it may seem to weak Disputants; for I may and must do many things with wicked men in God's house, which I need not do with them in mine own. The Adversaries will grant that I may, yea and must pray, and hear, and sing with them in God's house, which I am not bound to do with them in mine own; I am left at liberty in the one, but not in the other.

Case. 7.

But will not this gratify the wicked, who are so much for this liberty, to come to the Sacrament of the Supper?

[Sol.] It will not gratify them at all in their wicked ways, but in a commanded duty, which is incumbent upon them, as well as any other duty; for the sinfulness of man doth not dis-oblige him from any duty, especially being part of God's worship, as this is. And by receiving them to the Sacrament, we more oblige and engage them to other duties also; as to mortify sin, pressing them to renew their repentance, because by receiving this Sacrament, a Seal of the Covenant, we are to renew our Covenant with God, as we desire he should renew it with us, by renewing his grace and blessings upon us; otherwise we tell them this Sacrament will but aggravate their sins, and also their judgments, 1 Cor. 11.30. And therefore as those whom John the Baptist called, generation of vipers, Luk. 3.7. he notwithstanding badtized them unto repentance, Mat. 3.11. i.e. to engage them more thereunto; for he told them withal, That then the ax was laid to the root of the trees, to hew down every tree that brought not forth good fruit, and cast it into the fire, ver. 10. so may we administer the Lord's Supper to men unto repentance, to persuade them to bring forth fruit accordingly.

Hence I suppose, that those Ministers who neglect to administer this Sacrament, deprive themselves of a very forcible argument, whereby they might persuade men and women to sound repentance; least going on in their sin after this Sacrament, they should crucify Christ afresh, and put him to an open shame, as those, Heb. 6.6.

In the next place I shall humbly desire my godly & reverend Brethren of the Ministry, who have a long time desisted from celebrating this holy Supper, sadly to consider how unjustifiable their practiseis in this particular, especially if they should still persist in such a course. Many have hinted much in this particular already, especially learned & laborious M. Blake, whose books of the Covenant, and also of the Covenant sealed, are of singular use for most Ministers, that are at a loss in this regard, and the latter book especially, being as a word spoken on the wheels to such, as judicious M. Vines hath it, in his Epistle before that book.

I wish withal, they would consider, how unlike they are unto the Primitive practice, which celebrated this Supper every week, and for some time every day in the week, being so in love with the Lord Jesus, whom they knew in the flesh, and who had lately laid down his life for them; and because they conceived that this would be, not only profitable to themselves; but pleasing unto God, to keep such an holy memorial of Christ's death, and passion, certainly they were not so scrupulous as many are in these days, about admission.

And if you consult learned and laborious M. Mede. he will assure you, that the ancient Churches in their public meetings, did so commemorate the sacrifice of Christ in celebrating this Supper, as that they thought it an especial means to make all other services accepted; and to that purpose alledgeth divers testimonies, of Tertullian, and others, and among the rest Origen. Hom. 3. on Levite. where treating of the show-bread, which was continually set before the LORD with incense, for a memorial; that is to put GOD in mind of them, he makes it in this respect to have been a lively figure of the Christians Eucharist, for saith he, Ista est commemoratio sola, quae propitium facit Deum hominibus. Thus far, and much more to this purpose, saith M. Mede. Sit fides penes Authorem.

If this be true, as his Authors seem to prove, then judge you what we ourselves, and our Churches have lost, for lack of this Ordinance; and you may well conceive, that it is no marvel, if God forget to do us so much good for Christ's sake, as otherwise he would do, and hath formerly done, when we forget, or neglect to put him in mind of that propitiatory sacrifice of his dear Son, by celebrating his sacred Supper, Ordained for this very end to be a special memorial of his meritorious death, that he himself might be mindful of us, and merciful unto us.

Consid. 5.

Furthermore let it be considered, that the main business of the work of the Ministry, should be the conversion of souls, to bring them from darkness to light, & from the power of Satan unto God. Acts. 26.18. Now by non-administration of this Sacrament, we greatly distaste a great many, if not most that are not really converted, whereby our Ministry is made more contemptible, & odious, than otherwise it would be, and so less effectual, especially to such as stand in most need of it. And those that administer, and admit only a few, refusing a great many, they give far greater distaste, and cause them to harden their hearts against them and their doctrine, and make them hearken to any hedge-priest, that will sow pillows under their armeholes, and sooth them in their sins, rather then seek to convert them, to the great prejudice of their poor souls.

[Object.] And whereas some suppose, that staying for a while may increase their appetite, and make them more hunger after it.

[Answ.] I answer, that fasting indeed a little while may do so, but long fasting quite loseth on's stomach, and we see by sad experience that it hath done so in this very thing, for a great many, who were earnest for it formerly, are now grown cold, and care not for it, being either sullen, or senseless of their own misery.

Again, by hindering so many from coming to this sacrament, we deprive ourselves of a great advantage, that formerly we had of the younger sort, by way of Chatechizing them befose they come to the Communion. For where Ministers were conscientious and laborious, the Younger sort especially did usually resort unto them (not only to pay their Offerings as some object) but chiefly to be examined and instructed in the grounds of Religion, at least once a year, which made them more mind their Catechisms, that now are wholly laid aside, by most of them, so that they know nothing in matters of Salvation, but are like Heathens.

Moreover by this means we had a fair opportunity to fasten so wholesome exhortations upon them, for their souls health; to make them consider their ways, and walk worthy of this holy Sacrament: and therefore to avoid the common corruptions of the times, as drunkenness, swearing, profaning the Sabbath: and the like evil courses, and also evil Company, the bane of thousands.

All which opportunities are now lost, in regard of most, who will not come to be catechized, because they cannot come to the Sacrament: And we have no power to compel them.

Case. 8

But will not this harden them in their sins, to receive so many to this Sacrament; as some imagine?

[Sol. 1] I judge it rather a means to make them consider their ways, and convince them of their sins, and so convert them, and bring them home unto God, as I have formerly proved.

[Sol. 2] Secondly, I suppose this will no more harden them in sin, than their admission to all other Ordinances, unless it be because some erroneously conceive, that this Sacrament belongs only to those that have true grace, which fancy hath been fully confuted.

[Sol. 3] Thirdly, we see too palpably, that men are more hardened in sin, since this Sacrament hath been so sequestered, (as I may say) than formerly, when they were more generally admitted. And I verily believe, that the general exclusion of so many from this holy Supper, doth, and will, much more harden their hearts, than general admission of all Church-members, in the greatest latitude.

[Sol. 4] Lastly, Add hereunto, that we see by experience, in the Country, that those who are kept from this Sacrament wax wild; and grow more careless of all Religion; and on the other side, those few that are by some admitted, when others are excluded, wax wanton, & some of them so swell with self-conceit, that they presume to teach their Teachers, and lead their leaders: Thinking themselves too good, to be under any Officers, and so have forsaken their own, and all other Churches, and their Teachers, and turned Mountebanks: and set up themselves above all others whatsoever, which is two apparent, both in Old and New England; Witness the Seekers, Quakers, Ranters, and other Rebells against God and man.

Case 9.

But is not this Sacrament (as some say) a privilege that belongs not to Babes, but to strong men, that are able to digest strong meat, such as this Sacrament is.

It is indeed a privilege of the Church, and belongs only to Church-members, no unbaptised may eat thereof, as no uncirumcised might eat of the Passover. Exod. 12.48. It is also a duty as well as a privilege, which all of years are bound to perform, that are baptized, as M. Perkins saith in his Cases of Conscience.

And that it is not strong meat, but even milk for Babes in Religion, I shall easily evince. My reason is, because it is one of the most sensible Ordinances which Christians have, as Baptism is the other; because, (as all Authentic Authors grant) in these outward visible Ceremonies, God is said more to stoup to our capacityes, and to help our infirmities; seeing hereby he teacheth us, not only by the ear, but by other senses; as by seeing, and Tasting; Senses that far more affect the ignorant, than hearing.

Case. 6.

In the last place let it be well weighed, how those Ministers can answer it to God and their own Consciences, for neglecting such an especial part of their Ministerial Office, as the administration of the Eucharist is, [Object.] and was ever held to be. If they shall still reply, It is because they fear they shall do more hurt than good to many souls, offending tender consciences, and the like;

[Answ.] I answer, if that which I have said cannot give satisfaction, yet let me persuade them, to be restless, till they be more fully resolved; I am very sensible of your sad condition, as having been in the same perplexity myself, but I have now by God's gracious assistance arrived to such a plerophory in most of these things, that I find abundance of satisfaction in mine own Spirit; and therefore I do the more pity my brethren, that want satisfaction in this particular, which is one of the main reasons, that hath moved me to take this matter in hand.

Now whereas I know, you are afraid of offending others by your administering, I know also, that it is unavoidable in any duty almost, that we do in this cryticall age, therefore I pray you consider, how great offense on the other side, is given by your non-administration, and justly taken, whereas the former Offence is likely to be taken where none is justly given, and we are charged to give no offense to any, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God; 1 Cor. 10.32. But for more full satisfaction in this case, what a sin it is, and how much offense it gives, to neglect this administration, I refer it to M. Jeanes, who hath both largely, and learnedly handled this particular. And thus much shall suffice concerning the considerations, and cases of Conscience. I will conclude with a few motives, to stir up myself and others to a more frequent and conscionable celebration of this holy Supper.

[Motive 1] First, because the keeping of the Passover solemnly, though but outwardly of many, was a means to free all the Families of the Israelites from having their first borne destroyed from the Egyptians: So may the keeping of this Supper, that succeeds the Passover, be a means to preserve us from common calamities, seeing our Sacraments are not less; but rather more effectual than theirs, and withal considering that this is an approved way of renewing our Covenant with God, and God's renewing his Covenant with us, when we keep this, Epulum Foederale: This feast of the Covenant, or Covenant-feast; where God seals his covenant to us, to be our God, and to take care of us, as Confederates do one for another.

[Motive 2] Secondly, if many were sick, and weak, and some died; because of the sin of unworthy receiving, as we see, 1 Cor. 11.30. Their sin and judgments cannot be small, that altogether omit this holy duty.

For it is a ruled case, that the willing neglect of good duties is a greater sin, than the weak performance of them. I do verily believe, that many abstain out of mere conscience, fearing that they should do more hurt than good, but Conscientia erronea non obli gat.

[Motive 3] Thirdly it is without question; and granted on all sides, that it is a duty necessarily incumbent upon a Minister of the Gospel, to administer this Sacrament, being a special part of GOD's public worship; but it is questioned by most, and flatly denied by many, both learned and godly men; that a single Minister hath power of himself to suspend a scandalous person from the Sacrament. Therefore it must needs be safer for a Minister to do that, which is his certain duty, than neglect it wholly, and so in a kind suspend all, good and bad, worthy as well as unworthy.

[Motive, 4] Lastly, the often Celebration of this sacred Supper, tends much to the glory of GOD, and the Churches good; because herein is a thankful acknowledgment of CHRST crucified for us, and also a putting GOD the Father in mind of CHRIST'S Death (as some suppose) and of his Covenant of grace, sealed with his Sons blood, and also a renewing our Covenant with GOD, as was formerly said, that he may renew his grace and mercy upon us: Which things are of singular use.

Wherefore let us lament, and lay to heart our former great neglect, and labor for time to come to be more faithful and frequent in administration of this holy Supper, as without all Popish superstition, so with all reverence, and godly simplicity; which I take to be the main defect in those Corinthians, that received so unworthily.

And as for those that are so apt to Censure in this case, let me commend to them the Apostles practice, in that 1 Cor. 11. When they had much transgressed in unworthy receiving, and for which GOD had grievously judged them, he never blames the Minister for admitting them, but biddeth everyone Examine himself, and so eat, verse, 28. and tell's them. ver. 31. If they would judge themselves, they should not be judged of the LORD. This, this is the right way to reformation, To cease judging others, and fall more closely to judging of ourselves. There was never more judging of others, and less judging of men's selves. If men would more judge themselves, they would certainly judge others less, and so sooner escape the just judgments of GOD. Matthew, 7.1. See Romans, 14.10. Why doest thou judge thy brother? We must all stand before the judgment seat of CHRIST: And verse. 13. Let us not therefore judge one another anymore, but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block, or an occasion to fall in his brothers way: Romans. 15.5.6. Now the GOD of patience and consolation, grant us to be like minded one towards another, according to CHRIST Jesus, that we may with one mind, and one mouth glorify GOD, even the Father of our LORD Jesus CHRIST,