An humble VINDICATION Of a Free ADMISSION Unto the Lords-Supper.  
PUBLISHED For the ease, support, and satisfaction of tender Consciences (otherwise remediless) in our mixed CONGREGATIONS.  
As it was delivered at two Sermons upon the occasion of this solemnity, in the weekly labours of john Humphrey, Master of Arts, and Minister of Froome in Somersetshire, newly revised by the Author.  
A Priest is taken from among men, and ordained for men in things pertaining to God, who can reasonably bear with the ignorant, and them that are out of the way, for that himself also is compassed with infirmity.  Heb. 5.1, 2. 
Printed for E. Blackmore, at the Angel in Paul's Churchyard, 1651.   

To the Reader.  
Courteous Reader,  
HAving (by good providence) had some glean of this ensuing discourse, as it was delivered by the worthy Author in his own Congregation, and conferring my notes with a honoured Christian, I found such support and contentment to my own conscience in the sympathy of his approbation, that made me very importunate to have them perfected; and having at length obtained a complete copy, I could not but humbly think it an engagement, much conducing to the glory of God, to get this precious light, left under a bushel in a private auditory, to be set up publicly in the candlestick of the Church, that the spirits of many others might be thereby disclouded from the like scruples, that most sadly hinder the blessed enjoyment of this Ordinance of Christ.  
The work needs not the commendation of another, having in it some exquisite●●tions, and self-excellency enough, to commend it and its compiler; and although it must expect several censures (which is the common fate of the best works) according to the variety of men's humours in these times, yet I am persuaded by experience, to an impartial and disengaged judgement, perusing it with a single eye, it will afford abundant comfort and satisfaction, it being weighty, spiritual, and ingenious, and a piece wherein (if I may use the word of one more learnedly able to judge of it) Mr. Humphrey has comprised the most material things that can be said in this business, as rationally and concisely as any beside him.  
As it has pleased God therefore (pious Reader) to make me instrumental that ever this came to thy sight, let me beseech these two reasonable requests of thee. First, That thou wilt pass no censure upon the Book or Writer, before thou hast read all over, weighing the whole parts together, and examined them seriously by the unerring rule of the word of God. Secondly, Having so done, that thou wilt not suffer thyself to be swayed from judging according to the truth, by any earthly respect whatsoever; and then I doubt not, but the Lord will suitably pour thee out a double blessing in the reading, of establishment for thy judgement, & of peace for thy conscience, which is the only end of publishing this work, and hearty prayer of the occasioner of it.  
I. C.   

An humble VINDICATION Of a Free ADMISSION Unto the Lords-Supper.  Mark 14.23. 
And they all Drank of it.  

I Have spoken of the Institution, Nature, and Ends of the Sacrament; I come now to the Receivers, And they all drank of it. In the 13. verse of the Chapter, we find the twelve with Christ; They were his whole Congregation; in the 18th. v. They were all sat at the Table, as they did eat (in the 22.) Jesus took bread, and gave it them, and so likewise the Cup (v. 23) Saying, Drink ye all of it (Mat. 26.27.) And they did so saith the Text; They all Drank of it, all the twelve without exception; from whence I gather a free Admission to this Ordinance.  
My Brethren, this is a point we know troubles many, and I do humbly acknowledge myself the weakest of a thousand, to satisfy the difficulties of others; yet whereas the apprehensions, many times, of a plain honest meaning Christian, in its pure naturals (I mean unconfounded with the judgements of others) may suit better with common understandings, than a more learned and elaborate disquisition; I shall Sincerely lay you down my very heart and thoughts in this thing, being ready to lie down at the feet of any truly Godly Soul, that either out of tenderness of Conscience, or strength of Reason, dare not, or will not, submit unto my judgement and practice in it.  
For the managing the point, I shall briefly lay down my meaning, or state of the question, give my Proofs, Reasons, and Answer Objections.  
For my meaning it is honest, and very plain, without reservation. The Lord Jesus has a Church in the World, wherein there is a visible profession of his name; In this Church, God has set up his Ordinances of the Word and Sacrament; Of these Ordinances, some are capable, and some uncapable; Those that are uncapable, are so, either by Nature, as Infants, and Distracted persons, or by the Church's censure of Excommunication, and no others. For those that are capable, we must rightly consider this capacity, in regard of the Church (or Minister) in Admission of them to the Ordinance; or in regard of the Communicants themselves in coming thither. Now I dare not yet positively say for the people's part, that all are so capable that they may come as they list (though it be a duty none is excused from) because there is a solemn preparation required, and many cannot seriously find in their hearts to enter, or renew their Covenant with Christ, whereof this is a pledge if it be not misused. Yet I am humbly persuaded for the Minister and Church's part, (who on God's behalf is to offer Christ freely, and so to tender the Convenant to all that will receive him) there is such a universal capacity for all men indefinitely, that if any come in, as professing themselves ready to enter convenant with Christ, desiring so to serve him in the worship of this Ordinance (the former only excepted) we are to encourage them, saying with the Bride, Revel. 22.17. Whosoever is a Thirst let him come, whosoever will, let him come, and drink freely of these waters of Life, or means of Salvation.  
In a word, I do not believe that any, unless first excommunicated (ipso jure or de facto) ought to be refused the participation of this Sacrament. They all Drank of it.  
For my proofs; look into Ex. 12. we read of the Passover, which is the same in signification with the Sacrament, v. 3. Speak unto Israel, let every man take his Lamb, a Lamb for a house. v. 47. All the Congregation shall observe it. And v. 50. The whole people did so, as the Lord commanded them. Add to this 2 Chron. 30.5. They Decreed to proclaim through all Israel from Dan to Beersheba that they should come and keep the Passeover to the Lord. Here you see free Admission without exception. Indeed in Num. 9.7. we find a legal pollution keeping some back for a month and no longer, as it appears in the 11 verse, which nevertheless was dispensable too at the prayer of Hezekiah, 2 Ch. 30.18. the reason being, because such uncleanness kept them from the Congregation (a plain type of the excommunicated only) but as for any spiritual pollution whatsoever (which is to be washed away with a penitent heart) we read of none that might debar them from that Ordinance. This is that we stand upon; As for their legal rights, who knows not they are abolished? Now the Elder Brother (the Passeover) being dead, we shall find the younger (our Sacrament) to have possession of his Inheritance in this free Administration. Turn to the 1 Cor. 10.17. We being many are all partakers of one Bread. All; at Corinth there were many it seems, came over from Heathenism to the Church, and as many as came into them, All (this is the very truth) were admitted to their Communion.  
But now I pray, what All were these? see ver. 14. Flee Idolatry, I speak to you, as men of understanding, judge ye what I say, is not this Sacrament the Communion of Christ, how then can you communicate with I dolls? This is the sense in brief of the whole Chapter; mark it: These Corinth's were such lukewarm Christians, that they were sometimes ready to go to their Idols, and sometimes to Church; like those in the second of Kings 17.41. and happily thought it not unlawful. Now this Argument Paul uses to reclaim them; Do we not All partake of one Bread? therefore join not with Idols. As soon as you come into us we admit, and join with you in our Communion, and profession of Christ, (who is God) And therefore how can you with shame now go to the Table of Idols (which are Devils?) This is very forceable and apparent, That these ☞ Corinth's whilst they are but willing to profess Christ, though yet given to Idolatry, are admitted with the rest to the Sacrament, which very thing too, is urged as a means to reclaim them from it: Compare this with 1 Cor. 11.18. And there are the same Corinthians mutinous and even drunken together at this Table; now this certainly was a great profanation, for which they are reproved and directed to examine, and carry themselves better for the future; but as for their coming together, and general participation, that was but their duty, and nothing is, or could be said against it. Look back to 1 Cor. 10.4, 5. There we have the whole body of the Israelites that passed through the Sea and Wilderness, Baptised under the Cloud, and drinking of the same Rock, Jesus Christ; that is, admitted freely to both our Sacraments. Take any Christian, and he will be ready to say, give me but any place of Scripture, for example of a general Admission, and I will be convinced; Now here is one express, where all without exception, even those very scandalous ones, with whom God was not well pleased, but destroyed in the Wilderness (while there was no legal Rites, spiritual uncleanness not forbidding any) do freely participate of the outward Signs one with another. Neither is it the saying this was a fleeting Ordinance, and necessary to preserve their lives, that can abate the strength of this place; For do we but mark the sense of the Apostle, and you shall see in this very point, and to this very purpose does he parallel these Types to our Sacraments. The scope is this, These Corinth's were given to Idolatry and many vices, but yet thought well enough of themselves, being ready to glory of their outward profession, that they were of the Church, baptised, and communicating with Christians: Now the Apostle to beat them off from this vain conceit, tells them plainly, I would not have you ignorant (says he) that All the Israelites were partakers of both these Sacraments, as well as you, & yet many of them were justly destroyed when they ran to I dolls, as you do; and therefore take heed, and let them be a warning to you; As for these outward rites, they are things indeed. all that come to our Church, and profess Christ are admitted to, and so are ye, but yet think not you shall escape God's judgements, if you walk not answerable to your profession. The true importance of those words being well weighed, are sufficient of themselves to end this controversy, the sense of Scripture, and not barely the words being Scripture. Turn to the parable of the Feast, Matt. 22. with Luke 14 16.23. and though parables are not wholly Argumentative, yet in their main purpose they are as enforcing as any Texts besides; Now if this general Admission is not a chief thing intended, nay the very scope of the parable, judge by these particulars,  
1. First, In Luke there is no other thing added, but the calling of all unto the Feast is the main business there set down only.  
2. Secondly, In Matth. where the story goes on to the Wedding garment, unto the Master's command is added the Servants bringing in all, both Good and Bad. verse the 10th.  
☞ 3. Thirdly, The Lords very exclusion of him that came in to the Feast, manifests he must be needs first admitted, and brought in by the Servants, his Sin consisting not in his coming thither; for that he was compelled to do, (by which I conceive is meant his duty) but in his neglect of putting on his Wedding Garment; whereby it appears by his unpreparedness, he had no mind to come at all, if he could have helped it.  
4. Fourthly, Our Saviour explains his own parable, signifying hereby that many are called, that is the work of the Ministry, we are freely to offer Christ in his Ordinances; but few are chosen, that is the work of God, which we leave only to him. The Servants I say still brought the man in, it was the Lord only took upon him to Judge and cast him out. Now who is that faithful Steward that gives the household their portion of meat in due season, Luke 12.42. but these that are thus doing? 1 Cor. 4.1, 2. Acts 20.28. even as john Baptises All that came to him for his Baptism, Mar. 1.5. Matt. 3. to the 11 verse, though at the same time some of them he calls vipers (Adultis eadem est ratio utriusque Sacramenti, so that I take this a strong proof) and as the Apostles themselves, that when thousands are converted at a Sermon, Acts 2.41.42. they immediately communicate with them, distributing freely not only the meat of the word, but bread too of the Sacrament.  
See once more, Acts 10.28. A peculiar place I like for the expression. Saint Peter here was very scrupulous of admitting Christian Communion with any but the jews, It was a pollution under the Law to participate in any thing with the Gentiles, Io: 4: But being better instructed by a vision from Heaven, God hath showed me now, says he, that I should not call any man polluted and unclean; I thank the Lord I have learned this same Lesson with a satisfied Conscience, to esteem no man unclean, ☞ but all (unless excommunicated) free in the use of God's Ordinances. Add to these proofs the consideration of such Texts as set forth Free grace, as Isa. 55.1. Rev. 22.17. Mat. 11.28. 1 Tim. 2.4. Io. 6.37. with the like, & tell me when the Gospel offers Christ, or when Christ offers himself & grace, which are the things signified, thus freely to poor ☞ Sinners, how can we have the Conscience to turn them away from the Signs and means thereof in this Ordinance?  
For my Reasons. The first and chiefest I draw from the nature of the Sacraments. The Sacraments are Verbum visibile, a visible Gospel; A declaring of Christ crucified; A Memorial of the Covenant made by his death; that is ☞ The Sacraments set forth Christ to the eye, as the Gospel does to the ear; the same matter is presented in both, only to divers senses, and therefore the same latitude must be granted to them both, in their administration. Upon this ground me thinks I stand as upon a Rock, against which all Objections, like waves, do but dash themselves in pieces. Look into the 1 Cor. 11. we find Christ in the words of Institution, ver. 25. telling us, The bread is his Body, the Cup is the blood of the New Testament, and the whole action, an ordinance in remembrance of him. Now the Apostle comments on this in the 26 verse, For as oft as you do it, you do show forth (says he) the death of the Lord; whereby you see plainly what is his judgement of our Saviour's Institution, whatsoever you may think of it, and that is to be a declaration, showing, or holding forth his death (or Covenant made by his death) unto the Receivers. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this annunciation, or showing forth, is taken from the Jews, Exo. 1●. 26, 27. who were to instruct and declare the matter to their children at the Passover; so Christ is here showed forth, as the matter of the Sacrament set forth, I may say, of God, Rom. 3.25. as a reconciliation through Faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins, alike in the Word and Sacrament. You have a place may fully express this for us: O ye Galathians, Gal: 3.2. before whom Christ hath been set out as crucified among your. This expression may be well applied to the Sacraments, which do so show forth Christ's death, that they describe him crucified unto the sight, and set him out unto the eye, that which the word declares him to the hearing. Now if there be any to whom the matter of the Gospel may not be declared, if there be any to whom we may not, or cannot show forth the death of jesus Christ, if there be any stand thus excluded from the Church, that (without her mitigation) we may not tender to them the Covenant, it is they, and they alone can be debarred from the Sacrament. To this end we know the Sacraments are counted Signs and Seals, (and Seal indeed as Signs) now wherein is this but as they signify or represent the new Covenant to us, ratified, in the blood of Christ? Understand it thus; A man covenants with a Landlord about a purchase for his children at such a price, the price being paid, the bargain is established; This done, he requires a writing, wherein the whole agreement is expressly declared; unto this writing the Lord puts to his Seal, to witness the confirmation, and so it is delivered for his posterity. jesus Christ does thus make a purchase for us, his death is the price he lays down to God for it; for conveyance of this purchase, the writing that is drawn is the Gospel, and the Séale put to this writing, is the Sacrament; both of which must go, to make the public Instrument firm, that is, to testify the vatification of it, and so it is delivered for the use of the Church. More fully thus; A Prince (by intercession of a Favourite) sends forth a Proclamation of Grace to Rebels, upon condition of laying down their arms, and coming in to him, unto which he sets his own Seal for their assurance. This Prociamation is the word of reconciliation preached, which runs conditionally to all; The Seal annexed, is the Sacrament; now can it be imagined there is any to whom the Proclamation belongs, without the Seal? Is not the Seal public as the contents of it? And so will it not be plain, that as we offer the conditions thereof to any, so likewise may we, and must we the Seal (upon their desire) to confirm them to come in, and submit unto them? Thus we see the very nature of the Sacraments is as Seals to a Writing, to be but necessary appendices of the Gospel.  
To conclude this first reason, then let me add force to it briefly in these four considerations.  

1. That we find that the Gospel is to be preached to every creature, and a Baptising them (which on the same ground includes this Sacrament with it) joined as largely in the same Commission.  
2. That as the Gospel is to All, so it offers Christ freely; Now can any avouch, that a poor Soul may take Christ freely without qualifications (which is true in regard of any precedent merit, so there be a present giving up himself to him sincerely, as his ☞ Lord and Saviour) and yet let none but such as are qualified to their mind; be Admitted to receive him at the Sacraments? Is Christ offered as a free gift in the Word, and must we not come without our price and money to this Ordinance? Why, this is even as they conceive of judas, who being about to sell our Saviour, went out to make his bargain, at the Supper.  
3. That the gospel-way is the best way to bring in Souls unto Christ. Let a Man be fully convinced of the free grace of God in Christ, his heart can stand it out no longer against his conversion. Now when the word is preached, the Covenant opened, and the Seal too applied, this Message of reconciliation comes in its full virtue for the working this conviction, and faith unto Salvation.  
4. That the Gospel is a peaceable Gospel, an Embassy of Peace, now how shall this peace be kept, if where it comes, it goes to making separations at this Ordinance? may a poor Soul say, O Lord jesus Christ, though I cannot lay claim unto thee as a Saint, Ican as a sinner (I mean as a wounded sinner), whom thou camest to save; and shall none but Saints apparent be: suffered to come unto him hither? In a word, is the Gospel peaceable, converting, free, universal? What is the Gospel but a declaring Christ Crucified? and what is the Sacrament in the Matter and Contents of it, but the very same? if Paul can tell us what it is 1 Cor. 11.26: therefore there ought to be a free admission to it, as to the Gospel. †   
My second Reason I draw from the nature of the visible Church; The visible Church is a number of such as make profession of jesus Christ, and so are Saints by calling, whatsoever they are in truth, the essential marks whereof (whereby it subsists as visible) is the Preaching of the Word, and Administration of the Sacraments; now unless Men will be so bold to divest our mixed Congregations (and so consequently all England formerly) of the name of the visible Church, they cannot take from us one of its essential notes, in the free use of this Ordinance. This Reason may have invincible support from Christ's own doctrine and example. First, His doctrine in those parables of the little and great fishes in one net; The good and bad called to one feast, as before; The Chaff and Wheat in one Barn; Especially, the Tares and Corn in one field, Mat. 13. The Kingdom of Heaven is compared to that Field, and the Field (says Christ) is the World, that is, the Kingdom of Heaven in the World, or the visible Church clearly in its Ordinances consisting of two sorts of professors, the Hypocrite, and the true believer; which must grow together without separation (even when the Servants discerning the Tares, come and tell their Lord of them) until the day of judgement; now who dare go to anticipate that day, and enter upon the Throne of Christ? Lord is it thy mind we should make the separation between these Tares and Wheat at one of thine Ordinances? I can never believe then, thou wouldst have left this parable so undoubtedly set forth in the Gospel. Secondly, His example, not only in the frequent converse with Publicans and Sinners, but even in this very thing we find him at the Passeover, and his own Supper with judas. The three first Evangelists bring him in express with the rest at Table, and as for John, who wrote after the other, the truth is, (which many do not, or will not know) he finding this Supper fully set forth by them already, as in other things, he says nothing of it. St Luke is most evident, 22. v. 21. where we read after the delivery, Christ says, Yet behold the hand ☜ of him that betrayeth me is at the Table. Yet, as if he should say, Alas, though this judas partakes with us in this very Supper, yet will he go and betray me. So that at the same time, when he openly declares, what a reprobate or Devil he was (that this may not be poorly shifted off with his being a close hypocrite) he not only washed his feet with the rest at a Supper a little before, which john only mentions, but here communicates with him both of the Passeover and of this Supper. The evidence of which fact has ever appeared so fully to the Church, that this alone has been ground sufficient, to deduce their right of free admission; and what need more indeed be urged, but that men when they are willing not to see, will let any hand, put over their eyes, be enough to blind them?  
My third Reason I take from the nature of Christian Communion, and Church-fellowship, which ought to be in Charity, in humility, without judging every one, esteeming others better than themselves, with the like in many places; especially in the Minister, who is to be gentle to all, suffering the evil (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) to win them by this free way to Repentance, 2 Tim. 2.24, 25. And how impossible is this, if we must go to censuring of men's worthiness & unworthiness, preferring ourselves, rejecting others? the ready way to nothing but heart-burnings, and divisions, as we have too sad experience already in most Congregations. To Give weight to this, remember three passages of our Saviour's.  
First, That of the Pharisee and Publican, Luke 18. I need not relate it, only I beseech you lay it to heart whether there be not something (at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess. 5.22.) of the Pharisees, I thank God I am not like this Publican, in the turning away poor sinners from this Ordinance. There is a proud Pharisaisme, I will not accuse any of this, the very latchets of whose holy desires (erring after a likeness here to the Church in Heaven) I may not be worthy; and there is a strict Pharisaisme, as the jews that were so rigid in their Sabbath, Christ was feign to rebuke and moderate them in it; Of such a rigidness ☜ as this, I cannot but most sorrowfully complain in those, that will not allow a free Communion. O my Saviour rebuke the humour of these times that is amiss, and moderate the zeal of all such men, lest by their placing a peculiar and superstitious holiness on this Ordinance, they quite invert the charitable use of it, and withhold the legacy thou hast left thy people.  
Secondly, That passage in Luke 6. When they murmured at him for eating with sinners; The whole, says he, need not the Physician, but the sick, I come not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. O sweet jesus, didst thou alive offer thyself and company to the veriest Publicans, and never castedst out any that came to thee, and shall we take stomach that thou art now thus offered at this Sacrament!  
The third place is in Jo. 8. When some severe jews had brought a woman taken in Adultery, accusing her by the law of Moses, that she should be stoned, jesus said unto them, Let him that is without sin himself, cast the first stone at her. My Brethren, so say I, let a man examine his own heart, and if he does not find himself conscious of the same corruptions, let him have a censure to cast out others; for my part I must profess the serious acknowledgement of mine own vileness, makes me afraid at heart to turn away others, but I have learned with Christ (Heb. 5.2.) to pity them (as a fellow sinner) by my own infirmity.  
☞ My fourth Reason will arise from the vanity, formality, impossibility of selecting people to this Ordinance. Look up but to the heart of all these separations they come to nothing; For put the case, you will have a gathered company, I pray who do you account indeed to be fit and worthy receivers? If not all that make profession as we do mixedly, then, those only that have an interest in Christ, and are true believers: Well, but how will you be able to know them? The heart of man is deceitful above all things, who can know it? And if we can hardly discover our own hearts, how shall we ever discern others? So that all will come but to those that have the fairest show, those that seem such, and you cannot be secured, but there may and will be some hypocrites, and so this true partaking as all one body and one blood, in such an unmixed Communion as you pretend, vanishes, and there can be no such matter; But now if men stand here upon a formal purity, and will have the outward purest Church they can, they go to separating again, and never leave separating and separating (as we have daily Testimony) till they are quite separated one from another; Even as in the peeling of an Onion, where you may peel and peel, till you have brought all to nothing, unless to a few tears perchance, with which the eyes of good men must needs run over in the doing.  
My fift Reason I gather from the uniformity of the Service of God; If all other worship lies in common, it is an entrenchment upon the common liberty to put an enclosure upon the Sacrament. Are all the commands of God universal, why not do this also? if an unregenerate man cannot do any thing that is acceptable to Christ, but it turns to sin (non per se, sed per pravam dispositionem subjecti) and so is Damnable, Pro. 28.9. and yet he is to do his endeavour, and not to be excluded nevertheless from any duty; why must there needs be an exclusion here upon fear of the like sin and condemnation? Let our Independents answer, why do you allow a Syntax in the whole service of God besides; and bring in a Quae genus of Anomalaes' and Heteroclites, only at this ☞ Ordinance? Let some of our Presbyterians answer, how can we admit of Children as Members of the visible Church, being born of Christian parents, unto Baptism, and yet turn away the parents of those Children from the Sacrament? Those that have gone about to answer this, had better haply have said nothing, for our free course of Baptism, and a denial of this, is such a Seam-rent, as will never be handsomely drawn up, though stitched together; Nevertheless in yielding the one, they have granted the other.  
My sixth Reason I lay down from my innocency in thus doing: 1. I do but my duty: 2. I have no power to turn away any: 3. I hope the best, of all: 4. I know God can turn the worst even at this ordinance if he please: 5. I endeavour my utmost de jure that all come prepared: 6. I humbly confess all our sins (as Hezekiah) desiring true repentance, and a pardon for all our omissions; and so lastly, I venture the issue all on God, knowing that his ordinances are a sweet savour unto him, whether we are saved or perish by them.  
I might add here more considerations very pressing, from the command, and good of coming; from the evil of omitting this ordinance. For the good of coming; The Sacrament is a means, and a pledge; a means as well to receive grace, as a pledge to assure us thereof: Now suppose a poor soul wants grace, whether shall he come but to the means of receiving it? The ordinances are as the Baths, there are many come to the Bath, that are never the better for it, yet as they are means of health they are open and free for all, to come, and make experience of them. I conceive as much of the Sacrament, and though we may scruple how an unregenerate man can receive it as a pledge, yet as it is a means whereby grace is conveyed, there is no difficulty. For the evil of omission; In the Law those that neglected Circumcision and the Passeover were to be cut off; and in the Gospel Matt. 22. those that came not into the Feast, were destroyed, the Lord giving a reason, ver. 8. because they were not worthy. Alas! we make a scruple only of coming unworthily, whereas they are most unworthy of all, that come not in to the Supper; we do not find any of the Servants durst refuse to call in all: if they had left out any, they might have been worse served. This one thing hath long stuck on my thoughts; how shall we neglect a certain duty of administering, or of coming to the Sacrament, for fear of accidental scandal, or of committing an uncertain sin, in the doing? Is not this a kind of doing evil, that good may come of it? whose damnation is just: Rom. 3.8. But I will say no more, thus much shall suffice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I will not give you my Reasons by the heap, but by the weight; I humbly commit them to you, only with this caution, that no man take occasion from hence to presume; for as the Israelites (that were destroyed, after they passed the Sea, and drank of the Rock) are set for a warning to the Corinthians, so are they both set for a warning to us, that we daily examine ourselves, and come with reverence, lest we being freely admitted by God's goodness, perish nevertheless with them for our own unworthiness.   

The Second SERMON.  
NOw for answering Objections 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Two things I must premonish you. 1. Whereas common notions are like dishes, where the same matter dressed but in another way, or variegated in the expression, receives a several relish and esteem in the palates of ordinary judgements, you must pardon me the Liberty if at any time I be forced in the Cookery of the same sense to serve you in more words than enough to any Objection. 2. Whereas many Godly in these times have a prejudicated opinion against this free Admission, so that whatsoever may be said, is not like to remove all scruples, which are so much fastened on their Consciences, thinking they have holiness on their side; we are to go unto the Throne of Grace, to pray the Lord to give us his Spirit of illumination to direct us in this truth, which is able alone to convince and satisfy us. And for me, if I deliver what is not consonant to the holy Word, I desire the Lord to blot out my Sermon, with my sin, that none of his Little ones may be offended by it; but if it be the mouth of Truth too much kept in silence, delivering nothing but the very doctrine and practice of Christ himself and his Apostles, (as one of his weakest servants does hearty believe) I hope the Lord will give a blessing on it, and send it out as a light into your hearts, to discover those subtleties of Satan, whereby he would obstruct your comfort in the use of this Ordinance.  

Objection 1. This Doctrine will take away the use of the Keys, Excommunicate Excommunication, and leave us no Discipline in the Church.  
Ans. Unto this by way of Concession, although it has been thought, these censures belonged but to the Church, until they had a Christian Magistrate, I grant,  
First, That there is a power of the Keys in the Church.  
Secondly, that the exercise of this consists in Excommunication.  
And thirdly, That the want thereof in the right institution is to be bewailed.  
But by the way of satisfaction, I Answer, this Objection is grounded merely on false surmises about Excommunication, which being removed as the fuel from the fire, it will go out of itself.  
1 It surmises this Church-discipline to lie in a suspension from the Sacrament, as if Excommunication were but an Excommunion.  
Let us therefore know, that these Church censures are punishments upon scandalous persons (after a legal conviction) whereby they are debarred from Christian society in general (lest they leven others by their example) for else what is it to keep a profane person from the Sacrament, but to gratify him, who never intended, at least never cared, to come thither? But now when men will take these keys that were made to the great Church door, opening and shutting to all fellowship, and fit them only to the Chancel door, as if they peculiarly belonged to this Ordinance, they many times get them in so far, that being unable to work them out again, they never leave turning and locking till they have both shut out the Sacrament from the Church, and the Church from the Sacrament.  
2 It surmiseth the institution of this power to be in reference only to the Ordinances, to keep them pure and holy, as if the Sacrament especially would be defiled otherwise to the receivers.  
Let us therefore further know the ends of these Church censures, that they concern not those that are admitmitted to the Ordinance, but are used in reference only to Offenders, that thereby they may be kept in awe, and brought to Repentance. The only ends are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as others have it) for their reformation, satisfying the Congregation, and to warn others.  
3 It surmises a most near essential relation between this Excommunication and the Communion, as if it were a part of it, at least some necessary Antecedence, as if the Sacrament could not be Administered without it. Let us therefore distinguish finally, between the exercise of the Keys as Acts of Discipline, and the use of the Ordinances as Acts of Worship; and though the Keys may have some disposing power in regard of the outward order of our worship, yet is there no alliance in the nature of one another, one is in one Element, the other is in another; even as the Acts of the Assizes may have influence on, but they have no relation to the nature of your private occupations.  
In duties there may be a double relation, a relation of ingrediency, as faith has to prayer, without which be in it, it cannot be effectual; or a relation of subserviency, as the Law has to the Gospel, in being preparatory to it; now there is no such relation at all, not only no ingrediency as a part of it, but even no essential subserviency, or dependence between Excommunication and the Sacrament. For what is the exclusion of another, to the communicating of the Receiver? what physical or moral antecedence, has the punishment of one at the Assize, to the work in your shop, doing your trade? there is indeed a Key of instruction very requisite for our preparation, but as for these Keys of censures what can be more distant and impertinent, to those that are coming hither? So that I judge there is no more reason for one upon this ground to say, I will not go to the Communion, because there is not excommunication, than for one to say, we have here no justices or Sessions, we have no Magistrate in this Town to look to people in their deal, therefore (because it is better that we had) we will not live here, but hold it altogether unlawful to follow our ordinary vocation. But is it not a heavy case we have no discipline established? I say true; but what then? therefore must we have no worship? Secrate ambulante fulguravit.   

Object. 2. The most of men are wholly unfit, and not capable of this Ordinance. This is enlarged, Here are things to be done; Preparatory, a serious examination; Executory, an exercise of Faith, Love, etc. And here are things to be received, Remission, Increase of Grace, Assurance, which all cannot obtain neither. Therefore no free Admission hither.  
Answ. There is a manifest weakness in this arguing from men's unability, to our duty. For as to the Church's part, in admission of all (as I at first distinguished) who can but look upon an outward capacity; here is nothing to them, no more than judas unworthiness and inward incapacity was to Christ. Let every receiver think what he has to do. But as to the people's part, I answer 3. things.  

☞ 1. There is no duty a natural man can perform rightly, so that most men are wholly uncapable to hear, to pray, or come to any Ordinances, where Graces are to be acted and received, as well as at this Sacrament, but I hope that will not exclude them therefore from all, and give them a writ of Ease to do nothing; I wonder grave men should beat the air thus with a Feather.  
2. I say to every man, though he cannot do what he should and ought to do, he must still endeavour to do what he can. The infufficiency of any debtor (incurred through his own fault) does not discharge his Bond, but he is to pay what he can; it is every man's doing less than he can, that shall condemn him at the last day, say Divines; so say I, Let every man do what he can still, and this is plain Divinity.  
3. There may be a difference between a worthy Receiver, and a Receiving worthily; As a poor man (says Pemble) though but unworthy to sit there, may carry himself very worthily at the King's Table. In this case therefore whosoever thou art, do thou labour thy best to prepare thy heart, and if after thy examination, thou judgest thyself but unworthy, let thy humbled soul come and say nevertheless, Lord, if I am unworthy, whither shall I go to make me worthy? Is it not to thee my kind Saviour, that has an invitation (Come ye laden) for the poorest sinner? It is true, many count me but as a Dog, Lord I confess I am no better in my own apprehension; But let even this poor Dog eat of the crumbs of thy Table. If I neglect my duty, I certainly offend thee, if I come Lord, I do but humbly venture on thy mercy.   

Rep. But is not the Ordinance hereby taken in vain against the third Commandment?  
Answ. On the Receivers part when they find no benefit by it, they may judge so, and are to find their fault, and repent of it; But not of the Admitters part, who are to do their duty, and leave the success to God; Even as Christ preached to the people in Parables, and gave only his Disciples the privilege to understand them: And as all were suffered to touch Christ, when but one only received virtue from him; so do I humbly conceive are we to suffer all to come unto him here, leaving it to his breast alone, to give out the effectual benefit, to whom he pleases.    

Objection. 3. Holy things to holy men.  
Answ. There is a double holiness, an Inward, and Outward holiness; And this both in Things and Persons: In Persons, An outward holiness consists in their bare profession, and name of Christian, and so are Saints by calling; An Inward holiness consisis in the work of Grace upon their hearts, and so are Saints by election. In Things likewise, The Ordinances are all holy, There is an Outward holiness in the Outward communication of them; There is an Inward holiness in the Inward Communion, virtue, power or ☞ efficacy of them. Now Outward holy things to Outward holy men, and Inward holy things to Inward holy men, a visible Ordinance to the visible Church, and the invisible Grace, to the invisible Members that have a saving interest in them by Faith,  

Rep. But do We not hereby make ourselves one with the wicked with whom we join, and can we have Communion with Christ and belial?  
Answ. We do, and must be one, with all that join in the same profession; that is we are one, or one body, as Members of the same visible Church in its outward capacity, freely administering the Ordinances, whereof we are to partake; but we are not one with them in their evil courses, we disclaim them wholly in the impiety of their conversation. So that we have communion herein only with Christ, and have noting to do with belial. For I would not have any so grossly think, that a joining with a wicked man's person, is having communion with belial, but accompanying him in his evil ways (Communio malorum non maculat Quenquam participatione Sacramentorum (says Austin) sed consentione factorum:) If the Corinthians were alive, and you joined with them in going to their Idols, this were indeed a communion with belial; but if you only joined with them in coming to the Lords Table, you should partake of Christ alone, as the Godly of them then did, and as we ought to do. I will go with the wickedest man alive to the Church, but I must leave him at the Alehouse; We may join with any to do good, as to worship God in his Ordinance, but we cannot (that is we may not) join with any in the least evil; we cannot serve God and the Devil. But you will say further, Do we not profess the wicked, with whom we join, not only to be one of us, but one of Christ, and partakers of his death? and how can we do so? I answer, very well. The visible Church is the Body of Christ; As Christ said, Every branch, in me, that beareth not fruit. Io. 15.2. As Peter says, There are some that deny the Lord that bought them. 2. Pet. 2.1. As Paul says, There are some that are sanctified with the blood of the Covenant, which they trample upon. Heb. 10.29. (with Heb. 2.9. 2 Cor. 5.14.) So say I of all ungodly professors, They are such branches in Christ, redeemed and sanctified, in the same sense as the Scriptures mean in these places; that is, in regard of a visible esteem, whereby they externally partake of the Ordinances of Christ, and so are reckoned as Members of him: Let such places be laid it little more to heart, and when you have made the Orthodox interpretation, the Question will be even done, and we shall be no longer afraid of a free Admission, when we must affirm, that there is an historical visible faith, that gives an outward Church-right unto the Elements, as a true saving Faith, that gives interest to the effectual grace of the Sacraments; Even as the branches have some union with the root, that bring forth only Leaves, though they partake not of that vital Sap, that sends forth fruit also.    

Object. 4. The seal is set to a Blank, if All be admitted.  
Answ. Unto this, which hath troubled many, I answer not presently by the distinction of an Outward and Inward, an Absolute and Conditional sealing: But I desire a right understanding of this Notion, how the Sacrament is a Seal. I have always thought, here lies generally people's mistake, they take it to be a Seal unto their Faith, and if there be no true faith, it is set (they think) unto a blank, and this breeds a miserable fear, to whom it is delivered. Let us know therefore, that the Sacraments are not properly Seals unto our Faith; how do we conceive Faith, such a thing as must have Gods Seal put to it? God doth not attest our Faith, but the truth of his own promises; But they are Seals properly of the Covenant: A Covenant is a thing must be sealed, and the maker is to attest it thereby. Indeed they may be said to be Seals of our Faith (as Divines speak) consecutiuè, by a consequence of speech, because as Seals confirm a thing, so Faith is confirmed and strengthened by receiving; but they are not Formaliter, formally in a true proper sense, Seals unto any thing but the Covenant, or representations of the effectual Seal, the blood of Christ, by which it being ratified with God, the Lord declares it by the Gospel; unto the administration whereof, the Sacaments are set, to signify the undoubted truth of it, as Seals (we say) and Signs, showing us, As the bread and wine is broken, poured out, and offered, with the other actions, so surely hath Christ's body been broken, his blood shed, that all that believe in him according to this Covenant, should have grace and salvation by him. The expression is borrowed from Row. 4.11. where Circumcision is said a Seal, not simply of Abraham's Faith, but of the righteousness of his Faith (or of righteousness, I take it, through Faith: Phillip 3.9.) that he should be the Father of them that believe, which thing sealed to, is the very tenor of the Covenant. Now let Circumcision be received on Isaac the Child of promise, or on Ishmael that must be cast out, it is the same Seal of Abraham's Covenant; Let the Sacrament be offered to the Godly, or to the Hypocrite, it is the same Seal of God, declaring the truth of his Covenant, which stands most sure, and all the unbelief in the World cannot make it of no effect. Even as a Proclamation of pardon (as we instanced before) unto Rebels, comes with the Broad Seal to those that refuse it, and yet it is no less a true Seal, and set to a true writing, than if they did all come in and embrace it: so that if it want its due effect on the Receiver, it may be said (if you will) to be set upon a Blank (where Seals are set) but not to a Blank, seeing the Lord hath set it, to the truth of his Word, or grace of his Gospel.  

Rep. But were it not absurd for a man to set his seal, when there hath been no agreement and transactions before? So do unregenerate men, who come to the Sacrament without that solemn giving up the Soul to God, as be aught, who enters Covenant with him.  
Answ. I grant with sorrow, there are too many of us come absurdly, and but wickedly, when we forget to do that we ought, The Lord forgive us; but though in the reciprocal action, as it is to be a seal (as is said) of man's part, the receiver fails in his solemn mutual engagements according to the Covenant (whereof he is to repent;) yet as for the Minister, or Church, who offer it as a seal on God's part, there is a true seal to a true Copy, and nothing out of Order. The Sacraments therefore may be considered in their nature, and in their use: In their nature, I take them to be Gods seals only, as primarily signifying his grace, and showing forth Christ, though in the use and effect they are to be man's too, as secondarily he is reciprocally to believe, and engage himself unto God: (Sacramenta nostra accipimus ex manu dei, & nobis sunc signa gratiae primo, secundary obligationis & professionis nostrae: Paraus in Locpraedict) In the notion they are man's seals, we may conceive the Sacraments Seals of Faith, for Faith is the Condition of the Covenant, and we seal to our Condition, so that as they are conceived thus indeed; they are seals of Faith, because seals of the Covenant, which I stand upon: But as they are Gods seals, for the same reason they cannot be seals of Faith (but consecutiuè, as I said before, in the effect to the Godly, to yield what may be expressively only) because God seals not imaginably to our part of the Covenant which is Faith, but to his own part, which is the promise, and so I call them seals of the Covenant or promise formally, and not of faith. Now I say clearly, though an unregenerate ☞ man cannot receive the Sacrament, as a seal of his Faith, yet the Church can give it, as a seal of the Covenant; and though it wants its due effect on him, there is the right nature nevertheless in the Administration, though not a right use of it in the receiver; even as at the word, where there may be true preaching, and the nature of the Gospel, though the hearers apply it not as they ought, by faith. Look back to that only place Ra. 4. where it is said Circumcision is a seal, Abraham is said to receive it as a seal, which receiving includes Gods giving; so that we must look upon the Sacraments in the nature of them, as God's seals from the very institution; who else durst appoint such things to signify such spiritual matters? & as they are Gods seals they are set to his own word, and so can never be to a blank while there is truth in the promise, and writing in the Gospel. Now than the Sacraments being Gods seals certainly, in the institution & nature of them, if I should deny them to be man's seals at all, there being not for it one tittle of Scripture, I should quite remove the scruple from the hearts of men; but whereas (that I may not remove their care and duty too) I grant though in the nature of seals, they are Gods Seals, Gods own seals, seals of the Covenant only, yet in the use of seals and effect, they are to be man's seals also, seals to the Condition of our part, seals of faith, and so I cannot, I may not acquit the receivers wholly, but that they come absurdly, set a seal to a blank, and take the Sacrament in vain (as it is to be their seal) if they come without Faith, and those solemn engagements as God Requires of us; though I can fully acquit the Church herein, in her delivery of the signs on God's part (as we are his Ambassadors;) because the Covenant by him stands sealed to all whomsoever, and there can be no doubt of sealing to a blank I affirm, so long as the Promise or the Gospel itself holds in force, the tenor whereof this Sacrament seals absolutely to us. The tenor of it I say, mark me, not our interest in it; for that it seals not absolutely. The Sacrament is the external seal (the internal only of the Spirit can absolutely give this interest to any) this outward seal, is set to God's outward copy of the Covenant, that is the word; now look what the word affirms, the Sacrament seals, and confirms according to the tenor thereof, and no otherwise. Now the word speaks not particularly of any man's single interest, but generally it declares to all a common interest upon condition they believe; now as this interest is expressed conditionally, so the Sacrament cannot seal to it but conditionally, according to that tenor is expressed; or rather let me say the Sacrament seals generally (so I will express it) the truth of the Covenant freely to all, engageing them unto it, and the interest or benefits of the Covenant, to every single person, upon the terms, conditions, or tenor only of the Gospel.  
I must profess this in the Embryo has lain a long time in my apprehensions, and I cannot but be glad to find a piercing and godly man (I take him) whom the right conceiving of. this alone (he says) converted hi●… and satisfied him.  
The Covenant runs thus, He that believes shall be saved, add I believe, Ergo I shall be saved; from which syllogism we gather our assurance. Now to which of those propositions (says he) does the Sacrament seal? not to the minor as it is surmised, for no Scripture says of any particular man he believes, and God seals to his own word not ours. Nor to the conclusion for the same reason. But to the major, which it absolutely seals, as true to us, according to the tenor of the Gospel.    

Object. 5. The Covenant belongs not to All, therefore the Seals neither.  
Answ. The Covenant is sometimes taken in Scripture for those absolute promises of Gods putting his Laws in our hearts, keeping us by his power to salvation, and to the like purpose, Heb. 8. which are proper only to his Elect, and belonging to his secret will: Or the Covenant is taken as it is for the tenor of the Gospel in Gods revealed will, and so it runs on these terms: Whosoever believes shall be saved, and whether this belongs to all, is no question. It is true for our comfort; whosoever comes under these conditions, may have an assured trust, that the absolute promises also belong to him; but nevertheless it is the conditional Covenant, or the Covenant in its conditional capacity, that is tendered to us the word, and sealed to, in the Sacrament: So that the Covenant is indeed of the same extent with the Gospel, and the very tenor shows it universally belonging to whomsoever. Now then, As when I have a business to propose in general to my Parish, I read the Contents, which when they like, I propose certain Articles, and say, whosoever will agree to this, let them come and set their hands unto it. In like manner here, when I have held forth the glad tidings of the Gospel, I show them the conditions of the Covenant: Jesus Christ offers life to all upon these terms of Faith; If you will resolve to accept him as your Lord and Saviour, to forsake sin, and serve him; come, put your hands and seals thereunto, in this Sacrament, and lo, here is the seal of God, on his part if you do, to witness the certainty of salvation promised to you. So that to speak sincerely, if we should propose two men; one that is not in Covenant with Christ, and one that is, this Sacrament doth more ingenuously belong unto the first, who hereby comes to do it solemnly at this time; supposing, now he resolves to enter covenant with him. You will say, the Covenant doth not belong to him; What? Doth it lie upon his everlasting damnation or salvation, and not belong to him? The benefit of the Covenant, you may truly say, belongs not yet to him, until he is in Covenant, but the Covenant itself is of Epidemical concernment, and so far belongs to all, that it is to be tendered freely, and offered to them, that whosoever doth receive it, may have the benefit of it.  

Rep. But what right doth this give him to the Covenant?  
Answ. As the Sacrament is a showing forth of Christ, with a tender of the Covenant in his blood, there is an open, free, general right to it, for all that will come in to Christ. Let me beseech you, mark this distinction; There is a double right here observable. A right of Obligation, and A right of privilege. For the right of Obligation, in the Ministers offer of Christ freely, and the people's receiving him in his own terms, I do avouch a universal right, to every Ordinance, Isa. 66.23. they being duties of worship, which is of universal command (and this often, primitively once a week) though for the right of privilege in any, to enjoy the sweetness, comfort, efficacy, life, and benefit of them, I acknowledge it a prerogative, belonging only to the Saints, and Elect of God. Now put case, a poor soul should stand in doubt of his right to this Ordinance, that yet fain would come to Jesus Christ. Let him say, Lord my heart is humbly afraid of my unworthiness, yet seeing I come resolving to give up my Soul to thee, and it is our duty to come in, at this Supper; This Right of Obligation shall be my warrant to bring me in, and then Lord I hope thou wilt let me find the Right of Privilege too, in thy due season O my God; Put case again, A godly heart should rise at the conceit of a wicked person receiving with him, Let him think presently thus, though there is a nearer Right unto my soul, blessed be the mere free grace of God, yet there is a right of obligation to every one, I ought not to be offended with any, the Lord sanctify it to them for their conversion, the knowledge of this distinction may do very much to allay the troubles of many judgements, and more Consciences in this controversy.    

Object. 6. The Sacrament is not a converting Ordinance, we preach to all to convert them, but w●e may Administer only to the regenerate, to confirm them.  
Answ. Unto this Objection, because it is so much urged, give me leave to use some words. I do acknowledge Divines do usually distinguish, of a Sacrament of Initiation, and Confirmation, ingeniously attributing our new birth first to Baptism, and then our nourishment and increase unto the Supper, and so they make a converting Ordinance of the Word, and Baptism (the laver and means of regeneration) a confirming one only, of this Sacrament; although I take a grant of the one, to be a sufficient medium to prove the other. But under favour, unless we take this only in regard of the visible Church, into which, 'tis true, Baptism alone does incorporate us; we must understand it not after a rigid form of speech, and Idiom of truth, but after a more solute and ingenuous conception; that is, it is such a notion as holds full enough to be handsomely spoken, but holds not so strictly as to build arguments on it, otherwise the ingenuity thereof, will trip up their judgement. It is a rule therefore worthy here of our knowledge, that in divinity, we often give an indefinite denomination to things as they are most eminently inclined; as for instance, in indifferent things (which are indifferentia ad unum) when they incline more to evil in the use than to good (as many harmless recreations) we condemn them indefinitely as evil, though in some cases they are warrantable: Ec. 3.4. And I may happily with right circumstances lawfully use them. So whereas this Sacrament doth more emminently incline to be, and is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most usually confirming and more seldom converting, they do apart eminentiori denominate it indefinitely a confirming ordinance only. And indeed this is true when it is taken in respect of the same persons, whom we supposing to have been converted by the Word and Baptism already, the Supper is, and can be only a confirming Ordinance unto them without question. But as for others, who we conceive, not yet converted, and so humbly coming hither for conversion, I doubt not, as there is no Scripture to the contrary; so there is no reason, but as the Word and Baptism do confirm, as well as convert; so may this Sacrament convert, as confirm, according as God gives forth his grace to the Condition of the Receivers.  
There is therefore an error (to answer directly) in this Objection about the nature of the Sacrament (which being as we have shown) a visible word holding forth Christ and the Covenant to the sight, is converting, as the Gospel doing the same to the hearing; for if the Centurion believed only by seeing Christ corporally on the Cross; if the contemplation of the Creature sacrifices, sight of miracles have been means, to some of their religion and conversion, we cannot doubt, but the eyes may much more spiritually instruct us here in the melting objects of Christ's passion, redemption and tender mercies outwardly represented, seeing we hope the working of the spirit too, by virtue of an ordinance.  
☞ Let the World Answer Paul's argument, To show forth the death of Christ 〈◊〉 the means of Conversion. The Sacrament is the showing forth his death, 1 Cor. 11.26, Therefore as it does so, it is undoubtedly converting. Hence I observed in the words of institution, there was a Take and an Eat, two words, a Take for such as have not Christ (a word of grace) to convert those: and an Eat, for such as have already received him, to nourish and confirm them. For, put case, a moral man, taken for a good man, yet unregenerate, is, and cannot be refused to be, admitted hither: The man does his best to prepare himself, and so comes; do we think now, to such a man the Ordinance is necessarily fruitless, and can have no work on him? then God help us. Shall not his examination, confession, prayers, meditation, with all the Ministers exhortations, be more solemnly conducing now, to work grace in his heart, and to convert him (this being the way of the spirits motions) than the bare preaching of a sermon? Especially seeing the word doth not only precede, but accompany, and is a very part too, of the Sacrament. Accedat verbum ad elementum & fit Sacramentum.  
But, put case further, a poor soul much humbled in the sight of his sins that cannot yet be able to believe and close with Christ, comes hither; hoping to meet with this favour here; well, the word of reconciliation is freely opened, the free mercies of Christ set forth, and all this while it hath not happily this effect upon his heart, yet when he comes to see the truth of all this sealed with Gods own seal, Christ freely offered, and peculiarly received of him in the Sacrament, his soul by all these heavenly wires is catcht, taken, drawn, and even enforced to a saving Faith; the spirit using such most powerful methods, for the work of his grace, which he infuseth in us, by a sweet attemperation to the will, not by compulsion, habitus infusi, being wrought per modum acquisitorum. And this we have lively represented in the two Disciples of Emmaus whose hearts did burn within them at the hearing of Christ, but at the breaking of bread their eyes were fully opened to know and to believe him. Luke. 24.30, 31.  

Rep. Although a Man may be converted At, it is not By the Sacrament, it is occasionally, but not intentionally a converting Ordinance.  
Ans. This being undeniably granted of our opposites, the matter is upon the point yielded; for consider sincerely this: It may be, Peradventure a man may be converted by it, and no text expressly forbids any coming to it; is not this enough? And it may be granted, lay it well to heart, no place to the contrary alleged, who doubts not but all It may bee's, all occasions must be taken for our salvation?  
But that I may wholly root out this subtlety, which I think the spirit of error has insinuated in the hearts of many Godly men; I have three things more to say, which by God's blessing will fully do it.  
1. Let us clearly know, that the Sacraments, and all Ordinances, are primarily and properly means of grace; It of conversion, or confirmation. For this grace we receive in the use of them, is that which converts some, and strengthens others. Now than we come to this Sacrament, as the means to receive God's grace, and this grace, which he distributes as a most wise God, works in every one, as his state and need requires; in the converted for their strength and establishment, and in the unregenerate for their conversion.  
2. Consider what is conversion. There is an outward conversion from Heathenism, to the profession of Christ; we do not stand to say the the Sacrament is such a converting Ordinance, as if Christ should bid us go forth with this Sacrament, and convert the Nations, let this be imagined only of the word. But there is an inward effectual conversion of such as outwardly profess Christ, to the truth of grace in their hearts. Now how is the work of grace (or true conversion) wrought through the word itself? Not from any active power it has per se, upon the Soul; but per modum objecti we say, and instrumentally; the object is proposed or revealed, that is all the word does, and then it is the spirit that by illuminating the mind, and a touch upon the will, brings the heart to embrace the object, whereby it is converted. Now is it not just thus likewise in the Sacrament? This Sacrament shows forth Christ Crucified according to the Covenant, who is the true object of Faith and Life, upon this the spirit of God draws the heart (by illumination and conviction) to embrace him upon those terms he here is offered, insomuch that experience can witness that some are, and have been hereby converted. What difference is there imaginable between this conversion and at the Word? What a shift is it to say it is only At, and not By the Sacrament, when it is instrumental per modum objecti, as the Word? where I may say the same too as truly, that it is more properly At, than By, the Word itself, there being no active virtue but of the spirit, in the one, or the other.  
3. As for this device of the Sacrament being occasionally, not intentionally converting; There may be a principal intention and subordinate; more primary, or secondary ends in an Ordinance: Though the word be the principal converting Ordinance, we cannot deny but others may be subordinately also converting, as Prayer; why else doth the Church pray, Turn thou u●, and we shall be turned, Convert thou us, and we shall be converted? Now as Prayer and other means of Grace are converting, and that intentionally in being used to this end; So I affirm of the Sacrament, unless you can find in your heart to keep this pitiful shift still, and say, rather than this shall be, you will distinguish between a converting ordinance and means of Conversion, other ordinances are means of Conversion, but yet the word, you persist, is the only intentionally (that is intended) converting ordinance: Well; go too, what then I pray? To the purpose. Then you will say the word shall be held forth to all as intended to convert them, but the Sacrament shall not, being not so intended in the Institution: Be it so: It follows then, there must be no Ordinance administered to those that are not converted, but only that which is thus an intended converting Ordinance: Is this as you would have it? This is the very ground on which you stand: But hark ye, my Friend, I pray then what shall become of public prayer & other Ordinances in the Church, when the Word is the only principally intended converting Ordinance out of question? By this doctrine at one dash you take away all other duties in our mixed congregations: In what a case are you here brought? what can you invent? On necessity you must recant and confess indeed, that Prayer and the like duties, though not principally, yet in a subordinate way are converting Ordinances, or means and helps of conversion; and upon that account you admit all to them: Now if you will do so, then is the door as full open in this subordinate way too, for the Sacrament: If you will not, I believe the Sacrament will be contented to be shut out with such good company, and desires to far no better, than her fellow-ordinances.   

Rep. But unregenerate men (you will say) are dead in their sins, and shall we give bread to the dead? men must first be living, new born, and converted Christians, before they can feed at the Sacrament?  
Answ. As for the sense of this, it is answered already, as for the words and Fancy, I return accordingly. If we could conceive any bread to be such, as would fetch life in a man, we should give it him when he is dead; but now 〈◊〉 see Jo. 6.33. I am the bread of life, says Christ, not only (I hope) to confirm, but give life; Now Christ being offered in this Sacrament, this bread, is the bread of Life, this cup, the cup of Life, able by God's grace as well to beget Life, as increase it. If we give Aqua vitae to dying men, we may give Calix vitae to dead Christians, to quicken and convert the unregenerate, as to comfort and establish others.    

Object. 7. Judas received not the Supper, for in Mat. 26.23.26. he is said to dip his hand in the dish before the administration, and in 10.13.30. as soon as he received the Sop he immediately went out. Besides some learned men conceive the Sauce he dipped in, was the Sauce of bitter herbs in the Passeover (called Cheroseth) and that was therefore before the Sacrament.  
Answ. Here is a manifest mistake in the ground of the objection. It is supposed St. John speaks of the Passeover Supper, as the other Evangelists, but see the first verse of john 13. with verse 29. and it is expressed, Before the feast of the Passeover, Supper being ended; as if he should say, As for the Sacrament Supper at Passeover, the other Evangelists have fully spoken, but there was a Supper a little before, where there was remarkable these passages they have omitted, and so he relates a washing the Disciples feet, and other things that were not to be done at the solemnity of the Passeover, but the feet were to be shod then & the like gestures quite contrary. Ex. 12.11. But if (as some say) those passages which noted their haste out of Egypt, were not obligatory when they came to the Land of Rest, yet so large a circumstance as is here mentioned of joh. to be introduced of Christ at that time is not probable. See Io. 12.1. There Christ came to Bethanie six days before the Passeover, whereabouts he stayed that time (going sometimes to the City to preach. Mar. 11.17.19. and back again) it being near the Mount of Olives, which he did then frequent. Luke 22.39. In this space he road to Jerusalem on an Ass, and came back at night. Mar. 11.11. Now this night happily, or thereabouts, was this Supper John mentions, where judas having received the Sop, went from thence, to agree with the Priests, the Devil then putting it into his heart. Luke 22. 14. When the Passeover drew near, mark it, Then entered Satan into judas, and he went and communed how he might betray him. Then, when it drew near, that is about a night before, or just two nights, comparing this with Mat. 26. 2.14. Mark 14. 1-12. So that it could not be at the time supposed, that is manifest. Now on the morrow, or two days after this, Christ went from this Bethany, again to jerusalem, (which was some 2 miles thither) it being the day of the Passeover. [Whether Christ kept it the same night with the jews, I need not controvert, seeing he kept it certainly the first day of the Feast, Mat. 26.17. Exod. 12.16. and the time when the Passeover was to be killed Lu. 22.7. Mar. 14.12.] ●here according to the Law, he eat that Supper with the Twelve, and instituted his own. Mat. 26.26. Now here was judas amongst the rest, sitting together with them at the Table till all was done. Luke 22.21. And when they were risen, Christ with his Disciples going again to the Mount of Olives, judas stole away (happily in the dark) to fetch the-Officers according to his agreement and betrayed him. So that Christ forewarned his Disciples twice of judas Treason, the night or two before, by giving him a Sop, with which the Deulll entered his heart at first, to set him upon his bargain, and here at the time of his own Supper with a like Item again, by dipping his hand with him in the dish, A like I say, not the same; for St. john's giving him the Sop is not the same thing, as not at the same time, with Saint Matthew and Marke's dipping in the same dish. That I say being before the bargain (while it was to do. Io. 13.27.) this at the very time of accomplishing it; (being already agreed and so in effect done, Mat. 26.24.) As for many learned men's thoughts about the Sop, and the Supper, whether there was one, two, or three, this night, I leave only as conjectures, wherein they may err, as they have done in this, and so not to be built upon; and forasmuch as judas was at. Table, by the testimony of 3 Evangelists, methinks their witness should be sufficient for his receiving, but when it shall be considered too, that the fourth is so far from saying any thing against it, that he says nothing of this supper at all, they having sufficiently done it already. I hope this objection will trouble Folks no more. As Christ offers himself to those that refused him, You will not come unto me, that you may have life. I would have gathered you, and you would not. As Christ converses with those that could not profit, you understand not, 10.8.43. because you cannot hear my words. And as Christ when he preaches to all freely, says, He that hath ears to bear, let him hear; So does he administer this Sacrament to judas amongst the rest, and so do I administer it to all, saying, He that can receive, Let him receive it.   

Object. 8. Unworthy Receivers are guilty of Christ's blood, and eat their Damnation, therefore we must not allow a free Admission.  
Answ. Unto this I shall speak First on the Church's part, and Secondly, on the Receivers.  
1. For the Church's part, I mean the Admitters (if the term takes place with us) and Joiner's; I do verily believe, let men urge what they will, this can never be made any way to concern them. There is a general command, Do this, every one is to examine himself and to come worthily, if they do not, they receive their own damnation (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I Cor. 11. 29) they receive not ours, who do our duty as we are bound, and leave others unto God.  

Rep. But you will say; If another should be taking a cup of poison shall not we be partakers of his blood, if we do not hinder and and forbidden him? Qui non vetat, etc.  
I answer, (besides that we have no Quum possit) it is a wonder to me any religious man should compare this Sacrament to a Cup of Poison, seeing it is in its own nature a Cup of Blessing, and if it prove death to any (as Sin may take occasion from the Commandment and slay us) through their own impiety; it is more than we can know, or aught to judge, seeing God is able to make it (as it is) a Cup of Salvation, even to the worst. Let us act with charitable thoughts, and leave the success to God. Even as Paul in his preaching, who in 2 Cor. 2. tells us, It was the savour of death unto some, ver. 16. yet must he preach it in every place, ver. 14. because it was nevertheless a sweet savour unto Christ, in those that perished, as in those that were saved, ver. 15. So say I of this Sacrament, we must do our duty and administer freely, knowing God will make all his ordinances a sweet savour to himself, whether it be of life unto life, or death unto death to any of us.  
2. For the Receivers part, there is a double duty; A principal, Do this: And an accessary, Let a man examine himself. We are bound to come, and to come worthily; If a man fails in the one, and is not sufficiently prepared; I dare not say, that must keep (I am sure it will not excuse) him from the other. This is certain; those dreadful expressions of being guilty of Christ's blood, and drinking damnation, are to make men take heed that they prepare themselves and come worthily, but I cannot think they are to affright any man from the Sacrament. There are 3 Quaere's therefore, I will submit here to further consideration.  
☞ The first, Whether the very eating and drinking of an unworthy Receiver be damnation, that is, (to free some weak minds from fearful thoughts) whether it be such a sin, as makes a man guilty without repentance and God's mercy, of Condemnation? And I conceive we must distingnish between the very receiving, which is good; and the unworthiness, which makes the sin only. This unworthiness is in the Person, or in the Act: In the Person it consists in his evil conscience, which will condemn him whether he comes, or abstaines from coming. Put case one receives not, and is unworthy, the guilt of his unworthiness lies nevertheless upon him for that, it may be, more; for in this very refusing, his own Conscience condemns him, and God is greater than his Conscience; whereas if he comes, it happily may excuse him something in not neglecting the outward performance, not aggravate his condition; for though he fails in the inward, and that failing is sin, yet that Act he does, makes him not more sinful for the doing, but he would have sinned more, to have failed in that too, and not have done it, Unworthiness in the act, consists in obliquity, deficiency, or failing in the right manner of receiving, though the outward work itself be not amiss. There is the matter of a duty and manner; As for the matter, every one can do, in a Christian deportment at the Table, but in the manner, to receive in Faith, Love, and other graces as we ought, this a natural man cannot do, and so he sins in his duty. His very Act is not sin, so far as he does do in the matter it is good (not only sub genere entis, but good in tanto sub genere morum) but this failing and swerving in the manner, is the evil, which as it cleaves unto, we may conceive, defiles the Act, and makes it liable unto judgement.  
Now than my second Quaere is, whether receiving the Sacrament unworthily, is otherwise damnable, then praying and hearing unworthily; (whereof Christ says as much, Go and preach, he that believeth not, is damned, Mar. 16. I ohn 3.18. ipso facto as much as here) And if it be not, why upon the same account, as men go to prayer, to the word and other duties, though they cannot pray and hear worthily, they may not as well go to the Sacrament? my thoughts are thus; It is a sad Dilemma unregenerate men are in; If they pray, hear, receive, they sinne (not in what they do, I conceive, but in what they not do) by failing in the manner, their persons being not acceptable: If they do not pray, hear and receive, they sin worse and are impious. Now what must be done here? If there be a necessity of sinning, of two evils the least must be chosen: it is a less evil to do what we can, though the outward matter only 〈◊〉 be done, than to fail in matter and manner too, wholly casting off the care of God. But if that axiom be true, Nomo angustiatur ad peccandum, there is no case wherein a man is necessitated to sin, (and so that saying Of two Evils, must be taken always the malo poenae not culpoe, Rom. 3.8.) than it is more clear, Every man must come and do the best he can, which if he doth, happily he shall not sin (at least so far, he does not) and God may bless his endeavours, Habenti dabitur, whereas if he neglects, he sinneth without question, this being masum per se, the other per accidens only. I will be hold therefore to distinguish: There may be a profane, presumptuous coming to an Ordinance, or a Christian coming in conformity to God's Worship; though it is better not to come, than to come in a profane way, this being rebellion and sin in the fact; yet I say clearly, it is better to come in a Christian way, though but in an outward conformity to God's service, than altogether to neglect it; which being granted and practised of all in other duties, I think it but a begging the question, to deny it in this Sacrament.  
My third Quaere is, Whether an unregenerate man conceiving himself not worthy, must never come to the Sacrament, for fear of eating his damnation. And herein my thoughts are apt to run comparatively on the word; The word sets forth Christ on the terms of Faith and new obedience, that is the Gospel rightly administered, whatsoever effect it hath on the hearers; Now it is their part indeed to receive and apply it by Faith, if they do not, it pronounceth them damned; Thus the Sacrament likewise shows forth Christ unto the sight; and for the Church's part she is to declare and offer him to all, however he is received: Now the Receivers, 'tis true, in the like manner again are to receive in Faith, as they ought to do: If they receive unworthily as the word denounceth, this seal 〈◊〉 their damnation. Now a man will say, if the word pronounceth my damnation, so long as I am an unworthy hearer, I will not go thither, I shall but hear my damnation; but I say you must go thither, you lie in a damned state already, and it is necessary this damnation should be pronounced upon you, to awake you out of your security in it, that by the terrors of Conscience you may be driven to repent and be converted; so the word is good in itself, and the savour of life even while it damns a man, if he usefully receive it: So say I of the Sacrament, it is good in its nature, it is appointed for our good, and so we are to come unto it, as a means of grace; but if it accidentally seals to any man his damnation, it is through his own unworthiness, and he is then to make the same use of it, as of the damning word, that laying to heart the horror of his sin, in being guilty of the blood of Christ, he may be provoked thereby to fly to jesus Christ, for a merit of his blood to wash away his guilt of it; and having received so many seals of his damnation, he may be forced to the Lamb who alone is able to open all those seals, by pardoning his sins, and so to turn the savour of death unto life, and to make even damnation itself (such is the power of his grace) subservient to his conversion and salvation. I sum up this. If coming unworthily makes a man guilty of Christ's blood, by pouring it out in vain, what shall an open refusing deserve, that even tramples upon it in the despising this ordinance?    

Object. 9: The Ordinance is polluted if all be admitted.  
Answ. Unto the unworthy receivers, it may be said defiled, in that sense, as all things else are to the unbelievers, whose conscience is defiled, that is I conceive in sinning in all that he does. Tit. 1.15. But unto the admitters (unless they be convicted) and joiners (who (as the Schools say well) concur in their Actu physico, not morali, to their act of receiving, not unworthiness) their minds being pure, All things (even the worst) are pure, and there is no more reason to be afraid of coming for that unworthiness of another, then for a man to scruple likewise, because the cloth is not clean enough upon the Table. Indeed in the Law we read of a distinguishing the clean from the unclearn, Levit. 10.10. & 11.47. which otherwise would defile their Sacrifices. Hag. 2.14. and their very Temple. Ezech. 23.38.39. Such an outward holiness had their legal Rites, that it could be touched, but the holiness God now requires is more inward certainly, and to be laid up closer in the heart, then that the external holiness of another should come at, or reach it: We must conceive under the Gospel all this legal holiness, in places, persons, things, is abrogated; so that there is nothing unclean now unto us. Rom. 14, 14. which thing was showed Peter in a vision; it is pity men had need of another to mind them of it. But that all scruple may be removed, Christ has left it in plain words, Nothing without the man, defiles the man, Mar. 7.15. and nothing that enters into the mouth; as if he would meet with this in particular, Mat. 15.11. If the heathen husband be sanctified to the believing wife, which is the nearest communion that can be, 1 Cor. 7.14. so that that she must not separate from him in the duties of Marriage, as it is God's Ordinance; I may resolutely say, it is not the unworthiness of another, shall make the true believer separate from the Sacrament, but even the vilest that comes there, are sanctified to him (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that is, are clean in respect of his communicating with them, so that their wickedness, being an external thing to him, cannot ☞ defile his duty. This is the privilege (I take it) of the Gospel many think not of, that now we are to have Free Ordinances, and to account no man unclean in the use of them. My Brethren there are some touches of the Law and Superstition on you; you know what a sacred thing was made of the Communion Table when the Rail was about it; now I pray think how you refine and spirituallize your old Superstition, by putting a spiritual rail about the Sacrament, when you debar poor sinners from coming hither? Let us take heed, there will be something of the Pharisee in these spiritual proud hearts of men, there will be setting a rail still about the Communion Table.  

Rep. But are we not faulty and partake of other men's Sins, if we do not our best to have the Leven purgedout, and therefore we may not say, Am I my Brother's keeper, look they to it?  
I Answer. There are several duties of a Christian he is to do: He is to pray, receive. He is to love his neighbour: Among the rest there is a duty much neglected of brotherly Admonition, whereby we are to Rebuke the faulty, and to tell the Church of them, supposing it in a capacity to hear us, if we neglect our duty we are guilty in some measure, partakers of their sin; and defiled by it; well, let this be granted; what then? why me must labour a Church establishment, and so to amend this great neglect among us, but I hope it will not follow, that in the mean while we must not receive the Sacrament, pray, nor perform those other several duties we have to do, it is a plain fallacy (a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid I take it) to think our coming to the Sacrament with a wicked man is sin itself, or makes it the sin, or us more guilty of the sin, because we ought to have admonished them, and laboured their excommunication: no, this neglect of ours is the sin by itself, and the coming is our duty: God forbidden that I should think, if I do sin in omitting one thing, that I must not therefore go to do my duty in another. Because the leaven is not purged out must there be no lump? this was, I may humbly say, a too overly surprise of godly Mr. Burroughs.   

Rep. But you will say more obviously, Are not all ignorant and scandalous persons Swine and Dogs, to be rejected and kept from the Pearls and holy things of the Sacrament?  
I answer, I dare not say so; though I see what interest lies at stake, which may soon fancy a Christian conveniency, into a Divine necessity,  
For First, This is Petitio principii and if you speak indefinitely, my proofs assure the contrary.  
Secondly, I place a great distance between an unfitness to come unto the Sacrament as in other duties (Let a Man examine himself) and being excluded.  
Thirdly, The keeping of any cannot be pretended to, without power in our unelderd Congregations, it being confessed a power not of order but of jurisdiction.  
Fourthly, Men may be Dogs and Swine, either in the course of their lives, or in the public esteem of the Church; now in our Ministerial admission, we are to look on men as they are in the Churches esteem; and may not account or deal with them as Dogs, (as we cannot execute an arrant thief) until they are juridically censured to be such, by lawful authority.  
Fifthly, To speak particularly: Concerning the ignorant, I dare not judge so rigorously; The 5 Hev. 2. comes near my heart; there are many sorts of ignorance, the case whereof may need instruction mostly, not censure. For the scandalous we know there must be admonition first, twice or thrice, Mat. 18.15.16. And then if they continue obstinate (not else) and are notorious, an Excommunication is granted. verse 17. 1 Cor. 5.13. yet I cannot find any where (unless I look without the book) that this is merely in reference to the Sacrament, but from Christian Communion in general; at least in the primary nature thereof, though I will yield much by way of indulgence, unto the Church's wisdom, according to the ancient practice of the Jews and Greek Christians; the several species or rather degrees whereof I must leave unto more learned Rabbis; And as to this present writ of suspension in hand, which men would have a middle thing between Admonition and Excommunication, I must make my return truly, Non est inventa, in baliva nostra. I speak it with reverence to wiser judgements, who may allow as prudent, in the way of Discipline, what they will not enforce upon the Conscience, as necessary, in our worship.    

10. The last Objection is from those several Texts that are alleged for a separation from Wicked persons.  
Unto all which I answer briefly, and (I conceive with submission) fully; Separation from wicked men is either in regard of their sins, or their persons; In regard of their sins, it consists in departing from their evil courses; In regard of their persons, it is either in case of common familiarity, or in case of Excommunication. Now it is certain we must separate,  
First, from all wicked men in their sins and evil courses, this is out of question.  
Secondly, we grant that we must separate also from them in common familiarity, taking heed of intimacy and keeping them company, lest we be partakers of their sin, by infection or connivance with them.  
☞ But Thirdly, I affirm there is no Scripture commands our separation from them in the Sacrament, or any of God's public Ordinances, unless in case of Excommunication; which alone can debar any from Church-communion.  
In the first sense you must take these Scriptures, Eph. 5.11. 1 Cor. 10.20.21. These Corinth's did well to come to the Lords Table, their sin was only in partaking with Idols. so 2 Cor. 6.14. to the end, where they are rebuked for joining in the same sin of Idolatry. If you understand this, Be not unequally yoked, of Marriage, compare it with 1 Cor. 7.13.14. There the believing wife must in no wise separate from her infidel husband, here she must come out & be separate, how can this be reconciled but that she may have communion with the person in what is Lawful, and yet be separate from him in his ways, that are evil? You may add happily in this first sense. jer. 15.19. 2 Thes. 3.6.11. Rev. 2.6. All which texts are hereby answered, that though indeed they do command a separation from the wicked; it is from them in their sins, not from joining with them in doing our duty.  
In the second sense, you may take 1 Cor. 5.9. to the 12. 2 Thess. 3.14. Rom: 16 17. 2 Tim. 3.5. 2 Io. 10.11. Pro. 22.24.25. and it may be 2 Thess. 3.6. Tit. 3 10 and so these Scriptures are likewise answered which do further forbid us the wickeds familiarity as their sins, not a bare accompanying with any in God's Ordinances.  

Rep. But you will say, If I must decline a wicked man, so as not to eat with him, (which I interpret by our ordinary conversation) how much more must I decline him at this Sacrament?  
I Answer, this is clear fallacy, I am sorry to see many gravelled in their minds at it; as if there were any force in this, I must not be such a man's common companion, therefore I must not go to Church with him: We must know, Arguments from the less to the greater, must be in things of the same kind and nature; Now it is one thing to eat at home, an indifferent action, where I am left to my own arbitration and must not choose evil, and another to eat at the Sacrament, which I am bound unto as a piece of the service of God.  
In the third sense I take Mat. 18.17. 1 Cor. 5.1. to the 9 where the whole Communion or Life of Christians, is compared to an unleavened Feast (from which that person was to be excluded in general) without peculiar mention (as some would have it) of the Sacrament you may reckon hither many places Io. 9.22. 1 Tim. 1.20. etc. In which case only when excommunicated, the matter is granted. And thus I am apt to think, 1 Cor. 5.9.10.11. 2 Thes. 3.6.14: 2 Io. 10. etc. quoted in the second sense before, if strictly taken, stands in full force only. As for Mat. 7.6. which properly concerns Admonition, jer. 15.19. 1 Tim. 5.22. which, (with some ceremonious precepts of the Law) In the words, are much applied for the scaring of many consciences, I must appeal to other judgements when they are well weighed, whether in their proper sense and importance they are not many leagues off this peculiar business of the Sacrament.  
I will conclude with 4 Wishes:  

1. I Wish we had a Government established in the Church, the nearest in Christian prudence that may be, to the word of God:  
2. I Wish the duty of Fraternal correption, a watching over, and admonishing one another in love were better known and practised amongst us.  
3. I Wish that men would look more into their own consciences, and leave the judging of others spirits, hearts, and reins alone, to the judgement seat of Christ.  
4. ☞ I Wish, though there may be some judging by the fruits, that wise religious men would be more cautious of countenancing these separations in the visible Church, seeing upon the same ground that you go to gather a Church out of my mixed congregation another will gather a separation out of your Church; and so continue (as I have intimated from our sad experience) an endless separating, until this first separation shall in a few years be able to take up the saying of that Greatest Grandmother, unto those many schisms she shall see issuing, as her natural offspring, out of her own bowels, Rise up Daughter, go to thy Daughter, for thy Daughter's Daughter has a Daughter; for this separations separation has a separation.      
Deo Gloria, Mihi Condonatio; J. H.  
FINIS.   

ERRATA.  
PAge 15. line 20. add (In an orderly way) thus, which on the same ground in an orderly way includes, etc. p. 30. l. 9 (as) left out, and as for me. p. 41. l. 7. for ann, read (and). p. 48 l. 25. for converted him, read (converted his opinion.) p. 53. l. 25. (and) left out, and a consuming one. p. 58. l. 22. for and, read (a) thus, an It may be, granted. p. i●. l. 23. add (and) and no place, etc. p. 63. l. 17. leave out (we) p. 66. l. 13. for where, read (There.) p. 68 l. 10. add (it) let him receive it. p. 71. l. 28. add (the) the obliquity. p 73. l. 12. leave out (●o) and read be done. p. 77. l. 9 for (Ex.) read Ezek.