persevere in their gross scandalous sins," &c. But I beseech you, what if they persevere in their gross scandalous sins, neither desperately nor professedly? Must they not then be excommunicate? Shall not the offender be cast out of the church after clear proof of the offence, and several previous public admonitions contemned or neglected? Must we wait till the adulterer profess that he will persevere in his adultery; and till the blasphemer profess that he will persevere in his blasphemy? Nay, further, what if the offender do neither professedly nor actually persevere in his gross scandalous sin? Put the case: He that hath blas phemed once do not blaspheme the second time; and that he who grossly and scandalously profaned the Lord's day, did it but once, and hath not done it again since he was reproved. Must this hinder the sentence of excommunication, when that one gross scandal is not confessed, nor any sign of repentance appearing in the offender?

Moreover, whereas Mr Prynne in his fourth query, and in several places of his Vindication, seemeth to allow none to be admitted to the Lord's table except such as profess sincere repentance for sins past, and promise newness of life for time to come: if we expound his meaning by his own expressions in other places, that which he granteth bordereth upon nothing; for, p. 13, speaking of scandalous sinners' admission to the sacrament, if they profess sincere repentance for their sins past, and reformation of their lives for time to come, he addeth, "as all do, at least in their general confessions before the sacrament, if not in their private meditations, prayers," &c.; and a little after he saith, that "all who come to receive, do always make a general and joint confession of their sins before God and the congregation," &c. And then he addeth, p. 14, Yea I dare presume, there is no receiver so desperate, that dares profess when he comes to receive, he is not heartily sorry for his sins past, but resolves to persevere impenitently in them for the future, though afterward he relapse into them, as the best saints do to their old infirmities," &c. I know the best saints have their sinful infirmities, but whether the best do relapse to their old infirmities may be a question. And, however, he doth open a wide door for receiving to the sacrament all scandalous sinners not ex

66

communicated, if they do but tacitly join in the general confession of sins made by the

whole church, or do not contradict those general confessions, and profess impenitency and persevering in wickedness, though in the meantime there be manifest real symptoms of impenitency, and no confession made of that particular sin which hath given public scandal. Wherefore I say plainly with the Professors of Leyden, Synops. Pur. Theol., disp. 48, thes. 35, the administration of this censure of suspension from the Lord's table hath place in these two different cases, "either when one that is called a brother hath given some heinous scandal of life or doctrine, who after admonition doth indeed by word of mouth profess repentance, but yet doth not show the fruits meet for repentance, that so the scandal might be taken away from the church; or when he doth not so much as in words promise or profess repentance," &c. Martin Bucerus hath a notable speech to this purpose, de Regno Christi, lib. 1, cap. 9: To hold it enough that one do profess by word only. repentance of sins, and say that he is sorry for his sins, and that he will amend his life, the necessary signs and works of repentance not being joined with such profession, it is the part of Antichrist's priests, not of Christ's."

In the next place it is to be taken notice of, how palpably and grossly Mr Prynne contradicteth himself in divers particulars ; which being observed, may peradventure make himself more attentive in writing, and others more attentive in reading such subitane lucubrations. The particulars are these which follow:

1. Vindic., p. 17, he saith, the confession of sin which was made at the trespass-offerings, was "not to the priest, classis, or congregation, but to God alone."

In the very same page he saith, "None were kept off from making their atonement by a trespass-offering, if they did first confess their sins to God, though, perchance, his confession was not cordial, or such as the priests approved, but external only in show." I beseech you, how could it be at all judged of whether it was external and only in show if it was made to God alone? Nay, if it was made to God alone, how could it be known whether he had confessed any sin at all, and so, whether he was to be admitted to the trespass-offering or not?

2. Vindic., p. 50, he freely granteth "that all scandalous, obstinate, peremptory, incorrigible, notorious sinners, who desperately and professedly persevere in

work," to suppress all kinds of sins, schisms, to reform and purge the churches. If this be "the speediest, best, and only way to suppress all kinds of sins, schisms, to reform and purge our churches from all scandalous offences," as he there saith, and if the word and the magistrate are only able to effect this work, how is it that the Lord's supper doth change men's hearts and lives, and that more effectually than any other ordinance? Again, p. 37, he saith, he hath in other treatises of his proved "God's presence and Spirit to be as much, as really present in other ordinances, as in this" of the Lord's supper. How then makes he this sacrament to be the most powerful and effectual ordinance of all others, to humble, regenerate, convert?

7. Vindic., p. 40, he makes the sacrament to be a seal to the senses of unworthy persons, but not to their souls. In this latter sense he saith it is a seal "only to worthy, penitent, believing receivers."

Yet, p. 44, 45, the strength of his tenth argument lies in this, that the sacrament sealeth unto the communicants' souls, yea, to the flintiest heart and obduratest spirit, the promises, an union with Christ, assurance of everlasting life, and therefore, in regard of the sealing of all these particulars unto men's souls, must needs convert an obdurate unregenerate sinner: which argument were nonsense if it did not suppose the sacrament to seal all these particulars even to the souls of unregenerate sinners. Mark but these words of his own: "Since that which doth seal all these particulars to men's souls, and represent them to their saddest thoughts, must needs more powerfully persuade, pierce, melt, relent, convert an obdurate heart and unregenerate sinner," &c.

8. Vindic., p. 28, he admitted that a minister ought in duty and conscience to give warning to unworthy persons of the danger of unworthy approaching to the Lord's table, "and seriously dehort them from coming to it unless they repent, reform, and come prepared."

Vindic., p. 46, He tells us of an old error in forbidding drink to those who were inflamed with burning fevers, which physicians of late have corrected, by suffering such to drink freely. He desires that this old error of physicians may not enter among divines; for as drink doth extinguish the unnatural heat, which else would kill the

diseased, so "feverish Christians, burning in the flames of sins and lusts" ought to be permitted freely to come to the Lord's table, because they "need it most to quench their flames." Do these now repent, reform, and come prepared? Yet here he makes it a sin to forbid them to come to the Lord's table. Though he applieth it against suspension, yet the ground he goeth upon makes it a soul-murdering sin so much as to dehort them from that which they need most to quench the flames of their lusts.

9. Vindic., p. 37, " I answer, First, That the minister doth not administer the sacrament to any known impenitent sinners under that notion, but only as penitent sinners, truly repenting of their sins past." The meaning of which words cannot be that the minister gives the sacrament to known impenitent sinners, while known to be impenitent, and yet he gives the sacrament to those known impenitent sinners, not as impenitent, but as penitent,-which were a mighty strong bull. But the meaning must needs be, that the minister gives the sacrament to such as have been indeed formerly looked upon as impenitent sinners, and known to be such, but are now, when they come to the sacrament, looked upon under the notion of penitent sinners, and that the minister gives the sacrament to none except only under the notion and supposition that they are truly penitent.

This, as it casts down what himself hath built, in point of the converting ordinance (for if the sacrament be not administered to any known impenitent sinners, under that notion, but "only as penitent," then it doth not work, but suppose, repentance and conversion in the receivers, and so is not a converting ordinance to any receiver), so also it is inconsistent with what himself addeth in the very same place. Secondly, saith Mr Prynne, "He (the minister) useth these words, The body of Christ which was broken, and the blood of Christ shed for you,' &c., not absolutely, but conditionally only, in case they receive the sacrament worthily, and become penitent and believing receivers, as they all profess themselves to be, just so as they preach repentance and remission to their auditors; therefore the case is just the same in both (the word preached and the sacrament) without any difference." Here Christ is offered in the sacrament as well as in the word, and accordingly the sacrament administered to known impeni

tent sinners under that notion, and as still known to be impenitent, upon condition that they become penitent.

10. Vindic. p. 52, "It being only the total exclusion from the church and all Christian society (not any bare suspension from the sacrament) which works both shame and remorse in excommunicate persons, as Paul resolves, 2 Thess. iii. 14; 1 Cor. v. 13, compared with 1 Cor. v. 1-11." Yet, p. 4 and 10, he denieth that either 1 Cor. v. 9, 11; or 2 Thess. iii. 14, can amount to any excommunication or exclusion from the church, and expounds both these places of a private withdrawing of civil fellowship, without any public judicial act or church censure.

11. In his "Epistle to the reader," before his Vindication, he disclaimeth that which some conceived to be his opinion, viz., that the ministers and elders of Christ's church "ought not to be trusted with the power of church censures, or that all of them are to be abridged of this power;" and professeth that these debates of his tend only to a regular orderly settlement of the power of presbyteries, "not to take from them all ecclesiastical jurisdiction due by divine right to them, but to confine it within certain definite limits."

Diotrephes Catechised, p. 7, " It is the safest, readiest way to unity and reformation, to remit the punishment of all scandalous offences to the civil magistrate, rather than to the pretended, disputable, questioned authority of presbyteries, classes, or congregations."

12. Vindic., p. 2, He agreeth with his opposites, that scandalous obstinate sinners, after proof and conviction, "may be justly excommunicated from the church, &c.; and that 1 Cor. v. 13, warrants thus much, &c. So that thus far there is no dissent on either part." Remember the present controversy which he speaks to is concerning excommunication in England, and so under a Christian magistracy.

Diotrephes Catechised, p. 9, 10, He plainly intimateth that 1 Cor. v. 13, is no satisfactory argument "for the continuance and exercise of excommunication" in all churches, and where "the magistrates be Christian." And that those who press this text, may as well conclude from the very next words, 1 Cor. vi. 1-9, " that it is unlawful for Christians to go to law before any Christian judges now," &c. Where by the way

it is also to be noted, that he should have said "before any heathen judges." Otherwise the argument cannot be parallel.

I shall now close with four counter queries to Mr Prynne.

1. Since diu deliberandum quod semel statuendum, which is a received maxim approved by prudent men, and God himself, as his epistle to the reader saith, whether was it well done to publish his subitane lucubrations (as himself in that preface calls them), and upon so short deliberation to engage, in this public and litigious manner, against the desires of the reverend and learned Assembly, especially in a business wherein it is well known the hearts of godly people do generally go along with them?"

2. Whether Mr Prynne's language be not very much changed from what it was in the Prelate's times, seeing, Vindic. p. 7, he hath these words: "Our opposites generally grant," &c., citing only Cartwright? And are the old nonconformists, of blessed memory, now opposites? Where are we? I confess, as he now stands affected, he is opposite to the old nonconformists, and they to him. For instance, Mr Hildersham, lect. 5 on Psal. li., holdeth, that all open and scandalous sinners should do open and public repentance, and acknowledge their scandalous sins in the congregation, otherwise to be kept back from the holy communion. And while Mr Prynne pleadeth that Matt. xviii. 15-17 is not meant of a presbytery or of any church censure, he manifestly dissenteth from the nonconformist, and joineth issue with Bishop Bilson, de Gubern. Eccl. c. 4, and Sutlivius, de Presbyterio, cap. 9, pleading for prelacy against presbytery.

3. Seeing the business of excommunication and sequestration from the sacrament, now in public agitation, is a matter of great moment, much difficulty, and very circumspectly to be handled, established, to prevent profanation and scandal on the one hand, and arbitrary, tyrannical, papal, domineering power over the consciences, the spiritual privileges of Christians, on the other (these are his own words in the preface of his queries), whether hath he gone in an even path to avoid both these evils? Or whether hath he not declined to the left hand, while he shunned the error of the right hand? Whether hath he not so gone about to cure the heat of the liver, as to leave a cold and phlegmatic stomach uncured?

And whether doth he not trespass against that rule of his own last cited, when he adviseth this as the best and only way to suppress all kind of sins, and to reform and purge the churches of this kingdom, that the sword of excommunication and suspension be not drawn, but only the sword of the Spirit and the sword of the magistrate? Vindic., p. 57. Finally, Whether, in this kingdom, there be more cause to fear and apprehend an arbitrary, tyrannical, papal, domineering power over the consciences of Christians (where church discipline is to be so bounded by authority of parliament, that it be not promiscuously put in the hands of all, but of such against whom there shall be no just exception found, yea, are or shall be chosen by the congregations themselves, who have also lately abjured, by a solemn covenant, the Popish and Prelatical government)? Or whether we ought not to be more afraid and apprehensive, that the ordinances of Christ shall hardly be kept from pollution, and the churches hardly purged from scandals, there being many thousands both grossly ignorant, and grossly scandalous ?

4. I desire it may be (upon a review) seriously considered, how little truth, wisdom, or charity, there is in that suggestion of Mr Prynne, p. 57, that the lives of the generality of the people are "more strict, pious, less scandalous and licentious in our English congregations, where there hath been powerful preaching, without the practice of excommunication or suspension from the sacrament, than in the reformed churches of France, Germany, Denmark, or Scotland,

for which I appeal to all travellers," &c. I confess it is a matter of great humiliation to the servants of Christ, that there is occasion to exercise church discipline and censures in the reformed churches, yet this is no other than what was the condition of the apostolic churches; 1 Cor. xii. 21, "I fear (saith the Apostle) lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness, and fornication, and lasciviousness, which they have committed." And this is not the only testimony concerning scandals and disorderly walking in those primitive churches; but as for those who are so rigid in their censures against the government of the reformed churches, I answer to them, as Jerome did of the Montanists: "They are rigid, not to the end that themselves also might not commit worse sins; but this difference there is between them and us, that they are ashamed to confess their sins, as if they were righteous: we, while we repent, do the more easily obtain mercy." Mr Prynne, and others of his profession, are not very willing that such an ecclesiastical discipline be established in England, as is received and settled in Scotland and other reformed churches; but if once the like sin-searching, sin-discovering, and sincensuring discipline, were received and duly executed in England, then (and not till then) such comparisons may (if at all they must) be made, between the lives of the generality of the people in England, with those in other reformed churches, which of them is more or less licentious and scandalous.

A Testimony of Mr Fox, Author of the Book of Martyrs, taken out of a Treatise of his, printed at London, 1551, entitled "De Censura Ecclesiastica Interpellatio J. Foxi," the Eighth Chapter of which Treatise is here Translated out of Latin into English. That the thought and care of ex

communication hath now so far waxed cold, almost in all the churches, is to be ascribed (as appeareth) unto three sorts of men. The first

1 Rigidi autem sunt, non quo et ipsi perjora non peccent: sed hoc inter nos et illos interest, quod illi erubescunt confiteri peccata, quasi justi: nos dum pœnitentiam agimus, facilius veniam promeremur.