THE Understanding Christians DUTY Worthily to Commemorate the Death of CHRIST in the Holy Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord, opened and urged  
In a Discourse upon 1 Cor. 11.28. Designed to the Satisfaction of such as out of scruple of Conscience do omit the same.  
{αβγδ}.  Ignat. ad Ephes. 
Ce●tè Diabolus nullo majore compendio homines perdere poterat quàm sic eos infatuando, ne gustum& saporem talis alimenti perciperent, quo eos of timus Pater coelestis pascere voluerat.  Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 17. S. 42. 
LONDON, Printed by T. C. for Daniel White at the Seven Stars on the North side of St. Paul's. 1660.   

 church interior with figures praying 
The Understanding Christians DUTY.    

THE EPISTLE TO THE READER.  
Christian Reader,  
HAving drawn up these my Thoughts into this Form, in order to the satisfying of a Private Christian, I was moved to let them pass forth into the public out of a hope that the publication thereof might be helpful towards the hindering of the further spreading of that Disease, for which I had provided this Remedy. Many I saw were the Means by which men are hindered from the Duty there urged: Some need therefore I judged there was of acquainting them, both with the Reasons for it, and Motives to it. The judgement of my design I leave to thee, the success to God. One thing I desire of thee, viz. to conceive that urging it as a General Duty upon all Members of the Church of Christ qualified by Age and understanding for such a Performance, I do include and presuppose the conscientious performing of all previous duties predisposing and preparing thereunto. And with this grain of Salt, if thou take what is offered thee, it may become both savoury and beneficial to thee. If thou canst not agree with me in all, yet agree with me in what thou canst: and make not that, which was designed to heal, be an occasion of increasing differences. Too many already are too busy at that work. If my discourse shall at any time press hard upon thy Opinion, or upon thy practise, consider not so much what thou mayst reply to me, or the world, but what thou oughtest to answer to God, and thine own Conscience about it. And take heed of a wilful shutting thine eyes against an offered light. If thou shalt overtake me in any Fault( from which I do not profess myself free) do not reprove me with Words of bitterness, but restore me in the Spirit of metknesse, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. And beware that the discovery of a supposed error, harden thee not into a Refusal of a certain truth. Of the Concealment of my Name( lest that offend thee) take this account. My meaning herein is, that thou shouldst not judge of my Book by my Person, but of my Person( if thou wilt needs be judging) by my Book. 'tis an ill Course, though the Usual Course, to measure a Doctrine by it's Teacher: the Teacher should be measured by his Doctrine. Then is our affection rightly placed, when we love the Teacher for the Truths sake, and the Truth itself, not for its Teachers but for its own sake. Consider therefore, not who I am, but what I say: and of what is said, take Thou the Profit, give Me the Pardon, and for the Praise ascribe it wholly unto God; to whose mercy and goodness I commend Thee, being desirous to be recommended thereunto by thee, as being  
Thy sincere 
 though secret 
 Friend and 
 Servant, 
 Irenaeus Philaléthes. Octob. 26. 
 1659.   

ERRATA.  
In the Epistle, after these words, Duties predisposing and preparing thereunto, add, and there withal the lawfulness of the Minister and administration.  
In the Contents blot out S. 22. N. 1. and S. 22. N. 3. for S 23. r. S. 22.  
In the Book, page. 7. l. 12. experience, red express.   

A General survey of the Contents of this Treatise.  
THe Coherence, Scope, and Division of the Text. Sect. 1, 2, 3.  
Two Duties prescribed in it: one primary and substantial: the other subordinate and circumstantial. S 4. 

Man a word Comprehending both sexes. S. 5.  
Two Points raised from the Text. S. 6.  
Understanding Christian, who S. 7.    
Command of Christ Immediate and Mediate. Direct and Indirect: all binding. S. 9. N. 2.  
An express, immediate, direct command from Christ for the Duty of commemorating his Death by communicating. S. 9. No. 3.  
That command neither to be restrained to that particular Time, but extending to the Future. S. 9.5. nor to those particular persons, but reaching unto all succeeding duly qualified Church-members. S. 9. N. 8.  
The Duty practised in the Church early, and often, and supposed to be perpetual. S. 9. N. 7.  
A mediate, indirect command for the Duty. S. 10. N. 1.  
The phrase Let him eat, implies a command. S. 10. N. 2.  
The Duty urged from practise of the Primitive Church, S. 11. N. 1.  
The practise of the Church a kind of Interpretative command of Christ. S. 11. No. 1.  
The practise of that primitive Church in this Particular declared, S. 12. N 2.  
The Ground of that practise. S. 11. N 3.  
Apostolical Orders grounded on Authority Divine. S. 11. N. 5.  
practise of the Primitive Church in Essentials of Worship binding. S. 11. N. 6.  
The Duty enforced upon the Account of Christian Gratitude. S. 12. N. 1.  
Which is not to be expressed generally onely, but this way particularly. S. 12 N. 2. 3.  
Mr. Perkins judgement upon the case. S 14.  
Grounds of the Duty a sufficient justification of our practise. S. 16.  
Neglecters of the Duty Reproved and charged with Unworthinesse towards God; Rebellion against Christ; Breach of Communion with the Church; Unthankfulnesse for the Benefits of Christ's Death; and contempt of Christ's Ordinance. S. 17.  
Sense of a mans unworthiness and fear of the Danger of unworthy Receiving pleaded. Sect. 18. and answered. S. 19.  
Unworthiness exempteth not from Duty. S. 19. N. 2.  
No necessity of either unworthy Receiving or unworthy Refusing the Sacrament, both the Inconveniences being to be avoided by taking a middle way. S. 19. N. 3.  
Not every unworthy Receiver necessary damned. S. 19. N. 4.  
A twofold worthiness: viz. of Person and of Performance. S. 19. N. 5.  
Worthiness of Performance stood upon by the Apostle, not worthiness of Person. S. 19. N. 5.  
Worthiness of Performance wherein it stands. S. 19. N. 6.  
A two sold worthiness of Person, viz. an Inherent and an Imputed. S. 19. N. 7.  
Imputed worthiness qualifies for Communicating. S. 19. N. 7.  
Supposed Inherent worthiness a bar to Receiving. S. 19. N. 7.  
Small measure of Repentance and Faith pleaded. S. 19. N. 8. and answered, N. 9. &c.  
Measure of Repentance and Faith necessary in a worthy Communicant not expressed, S. 19. N. 9, 10.  
Truth of both necessary to a worthy Receiving, S. 19. N. 9. 10.  
Hypocrites whether Receiving or not in a sad case. S 19. N. 10.  
Better do the Duty so well as we can out of respect to God's Command, though we cannot do it so well as we would; then not to do the Duty at all, out of respect to our own doubt, that we cannot do it so well as we would. S. 19. N. 11.  
Dr. Ames Resolution upon two Cases of Conscience. S. 19. N. 12.13.  
Not being in Charity pleaded and answered. Sect. 20. No. 1.  
The Plea of not being in Charity, so far from excusing, that it aggravates the uncharitable Non-Receivers guilt. S. 20. N. 2.  
Mr. Perkins Judgement upon the Case. S. 2. N. 2.  
Wickedness of the Minister pleaded and answered. S. 21. N. 1, &c.  
Wicked Ministers to be removed by the Discipline of the Church. S. 21. N. 1.  
The efficacy of the Sacrament depends not on the Holiness of the Minister. S. 21. N. 2.  
Israel punished for abhorring the offering of the Lord, because of the Priests wickedness. S. 21. N. 2.  
Mr. Attersol and Mr. Perkins Judgement upon the Case. S 21. N. 2.  
Ezception against the Form and Posture in giving and receiving considered. S. 22. N. 1. &c.  
Melancthon's practise in the Case, as also Mr. Hildersham's and Mr. Calvin's judgement upon the Case. S. 22. N. 3.  
Exception against our Parochial congregations considered. S. 23. N. 1.  
Scriptures alleged against receiving in such Congregations. S. 23. N. 2.  
Considerations offered to the Alledger of these Scriptures. S. 3. N. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.  
1 Cor. 5.11. considered and cleared. S. 23. N. 9.  
2 Cor. 6.17. considered and cleared. S. 22. N. 11.  
Ephe. 5.11. considered and cleared. S. 22. N. 12.  
2 thessaly. 3.6, 14. considered and cleared. S. 22. N. 13.  
Considerations offered to him that will join in Church fellowship with none but such as are Really Holy. S. 22. N. 19.  
Ursinus judgement upon the Case S. 22. N. 15.  
Considerations offered in the way of Motive to the performance of the Duty. S. 23. N. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.  
Benefits of worthy Receiving. S. 23. N. 7, 8, 9, 10.  
The Duty of Receiving not to be performed without the preparatory Duty of Self-Examining. S. 24.   

THE Understanding Christians DUTY.  1 COR. 11.28. 
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup.  
THe Apostle having taken notice of some miscarriages in the Corinthians at their meetings together to eat the Supper of the Lord and rebuked them for them, ver. 17. to 23. In order to the preventing of the like to come, First, He spreads before them the Institution of that Holy Feast, ver. 23. to 26. Secondly, He instructs them in the Main End of that Institution, viz. The Commemoration, or showing forth of the Lord's death, ver. 26. Thirdly, He acquaints them with the dangerous Guilt which they should draw upon themselves by unworthy Receiving, viz. The Guilt of the Body and Blood of Christ, v. 27. Fourthly, He prescribes them the Way by which they might become worthy Receivers, viz. By examining themselves before they Receive, here in this verse 28. But let a man examme himself.  
So that the Text is a kind of Apostolical Canon, or Constitution given to the Corinthians for the Examining of themselves in order to their worthy Receiving of the Holy Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord.  
The Particulars which it presents us with are two, 1. A Double Duty, viz. 1. To examine a mans self; and 2. To eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup. 2. A single Subject on whom these Ducies are incumbent. A man.  
Of the Duties prescribed in the Text, the One is Primary and Substantial, and that is, To eat the bread, and drink the Cup of the Lord. The Other is, Subordinate and Circumstantial to be done in the way of Preparation for the First; and that i●, For a man to examine himself.  
The Subject is Indefinitely expressed by {αβγδ} Man, a word comprehending both the sexes of human kind, and by the Circumstances of the Place restrained to a Church-member able to perform the Duties of examining himself, and Receiving the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord; Let a man, i.e. every such man, examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.  
So that the Points, that the Text holds forth, are Two.  
It is every understanding Christians Duty to Commemorate the Death of Christ by a worthy Celebration of the Supper of the Lord. Let him eat of that bread—  
In order to a worthy Celebration of the Supper of the Lord it is the Duty of every Communicant to examine himself before he eat of that bread& drink of that cup. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat—  
I begin with the First, viz. It is the Duty of every Understanding Christian worthily to Receive the Supper of the Lord.  
By Understanding Christian, I mean a member of the Church of Christ sufficiently for the condition of the person catechised in the Articles of the Christian Faith in General, and particularly in the Doctrine of that Holy Sacrament, and in the Duties belonging thereunto: Such a person, being not otherwise legally suspended, nor privately hindered by just Impediment therefrom, ought, and is bound in duty to Commemorate the Death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord. Where again by just Impediment I mean with Mr. Perkins, contagious and incurable sickness, necessary journey and such like, which may be dispensed withall.  
I now proceed to the proof of the Point. And it will appear to be the Duty of every Church member so instructed, as is said, to Commemorate the death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord upon a Threefold account. 1. Of obedience to the express command of Christ. 2. Of conformity to the practise of the Universal Church of Christ. 3. Of Gratitude or Thankfulness for the Benefit arising to every Christian from the Death of Christ.  
And First it will appear to be the duty of every understanding Christian to commemorate the death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord upon the account of Obedience to the experience command of Christ.  
The express commands of Christ are either Immediate, as spoken by Christ himself in his own person; or Mediate, as spoken from Christ by his Apostles: and both again are either Direct and positive; or Indirect and Suppositive. And whatsoever appears to be a command of Christ any way, whether Immediately, or Mediately, Directly, or Indirectly, it obliges the person concerned therein, either to a Necessity of Obeying it, or to a Necessity of sinning by disobedience to it. These things being thus premised, we will now see in how many respects it appears to be the Duty of every understanding Church-member to commemorate the death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord.  
And it appears to be the duty of every understanding Christian, &c. First by express, Immediate, Direct, and positive Command given by Christ himself in his own person. This appears from all those places of Scripture where the Institution of that Sacred Supper is recorded, Matth. 26.26, 27. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to the Disciples, and said, Take, eat, this is my Body. And he took the Cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it. So Mark, 14.22. And as they did eat, Jesus took bread— and said, Take, eat— So Luke 22.19. And he took bread— saying,— This do in remembrance of me. So and most fully in 1. Cor. 11.23, 24 25, 26. For I received of the Lord that which also I dolivered unto you— Take, eat— this do in remembrance of me; and again, This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. In all which places there is a command expressly, immediately, directly, and positively given by Christ to his Church in its then Representative Body consisting of the whole college of his Twelve Disciples to perform those sacred Actions wherein the celebration of his Supper chiefly consisteth, viz. To take, and eat, and drink, bread and wine first consecrated by blessing or thanksgiving.  
That he gave them such command the words are too plain for any man that hath not lost his wits or senses to deny. Take, eat, drink ye all of it, Do this, or this do, all are plain imperative words importing a direct and positive command, not leaving the persons therein concerned at liberty to do it, if they listed, or to leave it undone, if they listed not, but imposing a Necessity of doing it under penalty of sinning by disobeying it.  
Now if any man granting these words to import a command shall object, that it was but a command pro tempore, having no other respect then unto that particular Time and Action; I answer: That Objection is refuted by the only Naming of the End which our Saviour mentioned for his giving them that command, which was, The commemorating, remembering, or showing forth of his death, Remembrance or commemoration is of things passed, and out of sight. Christ was in their sight, and his death yet to come: whereupon it clearly follows that the command of so doing was chiefly, and most properly of concernment unto the time to come after the death of Christ for them, and after the departure of Christ from them, For a remembrance of whom, and in commemoration of which they were to do this. This do in remembrance of me, Luke 22.19. 1 Cor. 11.24, 25. The Command to take, eat, and drink, did as well respect the present as the future time: But the command to do this( or thus, as some red it,) in remembrance of him, in my apprehension seemeth only to have respect unto the future, or time to come. For if that command had had any respect unto the time present, then must they, presently after he had done the first, have begun a New celebration of his Supper; which that they did was never once mentioned, nor as I suppose, so much as imagined. However that his command had respect unto the future, and not to that present time onely is most clear by what is said in 1 Cor. 11.25. where concerning the Taking, Blessing, and Drinking of the Cup, he not only saith, do it, but do it, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me, which had been improper speaking, if he had not meant it should be done any more after that time. Often is more then once, or twice: And if they were to do it often, then their doing of it must be future; for that was the first time that it was done. And if those words 1 Cor. 11.26. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this Cup, show ye( reading it imperatively according to the marginal rendering of the word) the Lord's death till he come, be understood as the words of Christ, then there is a clear command from Christ for a continuation of that sacred Action by frequent reiterations of it till the coming of the Lord: which undeniably must be understood of the time to come; and so the command is not to be restrained to that particular time and Action.  
But if it will not be granted that those are Christ's words, then admitting them to be the Apostles( for his they must be, if not Christ's) yet the same thing will still follow, viz. That the commemorating of the death of Christ by a frequent eating of the Supper of the Lord is a Christian Duty to be continued till the Lord come: For so saith the Apostle( if his words they must be) as oft as ye eat this bread and drink this Cup {αβγδ}, show ye, or do ye show the Lords death till he come. And I hope the Apostles words in this business will pass for a command from Christ with us; especially since he hath expressly  told us, that he received of the Lord that which he delivered unto us.  
Yet further take the words as rendered in the English Text, so as they are of least advantage towards our Hypothesis, and they will afford us these Notes. 1. That it was so early in the Church a practise for others, besides the Disciples, to whom Christ first administered it, to eat of that bread, and drink of that cup: For so saith the Apostle speaking to the Corinthians, ye eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. 2. That it was the practise of the Primitive Christians to be often at that Holy Duty: so saith he, As often as. 3. That the eating of that bread and drinking of that cup in commemoration of the death of Christ was by those Primitive Saints taken up as a custom to be continued till the coming of the Lord; ye do show( saith he) the Lords death till he come. 4. That in that their practise they had the approbation at least of the Apostle, who rectifying some miscarriages of theirs about it, doth not disannul or disallow of the practise of it, which yet sure he would have done, had he known that our Saviours words at the institution of his Supper had not been extendible beyond that present and particular Time and Action.  
Again, if any man granting ( what cannot be denied) that the words of Christ import a Command, shall object that that Command was but Personal, respecting the particular persons only of his then present Disciples; I answer, That Objection is easily refuted by the practise of the Apostles themselves taking others into fellowship with them in the performance of that sacred Action( as at Jer●salem; Acts 2.46. at Troas, Acts 20.7. at Corinth, 1 Cor. 10: 16 17.) which they would not have done, had they understood the command of Christ to be but personal. And who should understand its true dimeasions and latitude, if not they who beside the word of Christ commanding them, had the Spirit also of Christ to led and guide them in the Execution of his Commands. So that it appears from hence that this command of Christ is not to be restrained to any particular Time or Persons, but is of General concernment unto all persons in all Times, who shall stand in that Relation unto Christ that those particular persons at that particular time stood into him, viz. as visible Members of his Church, professors of Faith, believers on him, Disciples to him, is to all understanding Christians or Members of the Church of Christ, whose Duty it appears to be to commemorate the Death of Christ by a worthy Celebration of his Supper upon the account of this express Immediate, Direct and Positive command for so doing, given by Christ in his own Person.  
Again, Secondly it appears to be so by an Express, though but Mediate, Indirect and suppositive Command given from Christ by an Apostle of Christ, and that in the Text here; Let a man eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. This Command I call Mediate because given from Christ by the Mediation of Paul; Indirect, because the Direct intention of the Apostle in this Verse is to give forth an Order for another Duty, viz. Examination before Communicating; Suppositive, because his prescribing them the Duty of Examination proceeds upon supposition of its being a Duty to communicate, in order whereunto they were to Examine: But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat, &c. Let him eat, &c. but first let him examine: both are duties; but one to be done in order to& in the way of preparation for the other. Eat he must: so saith the Apostle, Let him eat, &c yet there must be an Examining of himself before his eating; But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat, &c.  
If any man think that the Apostle in saying, Let him eat, speaks but permissively, as meaning only that he may, not that he ought, as being a thing only lawful upon allowance, if done; and not Necessary upon command that it should be done; I shall desire him to tell me whether the Apostle in saying, Let a man examine himself, do speak but permissively also, as meaning only that he may, not that he ought, as being only lawful upon allowance, if done, and not Necessary upon command that it should be done. If he say that in this, the Apostle speaks but permissively, then it will follow( for any thing that is spoken in this place, and I do not remember any other place, where any thing is spoken particularly to this purpose) that it is lawful also, and shall be no sin for a man to eat of that bread and drink of that cup without examining himself: for what is but lawful and no duty to be done, may lawfully and without sinning be left undone. And then what fear of eating and drinking damnation to a mans self through an unworthy i.e. unprepared eating and drinking? But if he say the Apostle in this doth speak by way of Command, then it must follow that he doth speak by way of command in the other also. For he saith as well, Let him eat and drink as well as examine himself. And the Verbs expressing those duties of eating, and drinking( viz. {αβγδ}, and {αβγδ}) are as imperative in their Form as is the Verb expressing the duty of examining,( viz. {αβγδ}.) So that the eating of that bread, and drinking of that cup is by virtue of this Scripture as much our Duty, as it is ours or any mans duty, by the same Scripture to examine himself before he eat& drink.  
And thus we see it appears to be the Duty of every understanding Church-Member to commemorate the Death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord upon the account of Obedience to an express command given as well immediately, and positively by Christ in his own person, as Mediately and Suppositively from Christ by the Apostle of Christ.  
Secondly, Supposing that there were no such express command of Christ extant, yet it would still appear to be his duty upon the account of that Conformity which he owes to the practise of the Universal Church of Christ, especially considered in its prime Primitive purity during the times and days of the Apostles. For it cannot be imagined but that what was a general essential Duty of all Christians in those last days of Reformation, must, and upon the same account be the General Duty of all Christians in all succeeding Generations. We will therefore take a view first of the practise of the Church of Christ in those days touching this Matter, and secondly of the Ground of that their practise: and if it appear that their practise was founded upon command, then it will follow that by virtue of a command, and even that very command which put them upon that practise, we are obliged to a Conformity with them in that same practise, unless we can show either a countermand, or a dispensation granted by a competent Authority therefrom. So that the practise of the Primitive Church of Christ is a kind of Interpretative command of Christ touching things not otherwise by him commanded: upon the account whereof we, leaving off to sanctify the commanded Seventh day in Memory of the Creation, do continue to sanctify the uncommanded Eight day in memory of our Redemption.  
For their practise it is clear in Scripture( besides that cloud of witnesses that would come in from Ecclesiastical writings) that the Church of Christ in the days of the Apostles did frequently celebrate this holy Feast of the Supper of the Lord, set forth in Scripture very ordinarily under the phrase of Breaking Bread. This was the practise of the Church of Christ in Jerusalem, Acts 2.42. Those that upon Saint Peter's Sermon were converted, and by baptism added unto the Church are said to have continued steadfastly in the Apostles docirine, and fellowship, and in breaking of Bread[ i. e. eating the Lord's Supper,] and Prayer: and so again mention is made of their Breaking Bread, i.e. receiving the Sacrament, ver. 46. This also was the practise of the Church of Christ at Troas, Acts 20.7. And upon the first day of the week[ i. e. upon the Sunday, or Lord's day] when the Disciples came together to break Bread[ i. e. to receive the Sacrament] Paul preached unto them, and together with them. Paul broken Bread[ i. e. received the Sacrament] ver. 11. And thus it was the practise of the Church of Christ at Corinth, 1 Cor. 10.16, 17. The cup of blessing, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread and one body: for we are All partakers of that one bread. And the same is so evident as nothing can be more from what is said to that purpose here in this 11. Chap. from ver. 17. to the end. Nor can the contrary be demonstrated of any other Church; therefore I hence conclude, that such was the practise of the catholic Church of Christ in that age.  
Secondly, for the Ground of their practise, that can be no other then this, That it was so ordained, and ordered amongst them by those who were the first preachers to, and planters of those Churches, viz. The Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, and other Evangelists, and Ministers ordained, appointed, and sent forth by them for that work. For otherwise it is impossible to imagine how there should be in so many sundry and so far distant places of the world such an Uniformity as in the Substantials of the Faith of Christ, so in the Essentials of the worship of Christ.  
Of the Apostles and Apostolical persons so ordaining and ordering of things among their New gathered Churches in their several Quarters there are abundant Evidences in the Scripture. 
See 1 Cor. 16.1, 2.  Hence those Expressions of Paul, So ordain I in all Churches, 1 Cor. 7.17. and for this cause left I thee in Creet that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, or left undone, Tit. 1.5. and 1 Cor. 14.40. Let all things be done decently and in order, {αβγδ}, i. e. according to Order, or appointment. And in this 1 Cor. 11.34. The rest will I set in order when I come. In Acts 15. we find the Church at Antioch appealing to the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem for the determination of a controversy moved amongst them: and the Apostles accordingly making decrees, and sending their Legates, chosen Men to deliver those decrees; and those men that were sent delivering them. And in Acts 16. we find Paul in his Visitation of the Brethren settling the Observation of those decrees in other places besides Antioch, even in every city where he had preached the Word of God, delivering unto them the decrees for to keep that were ordained of the Apostles and Elders which were at Jerusalem. So that what was so generally and so early observed, and done in the Primitive Church, was observed and done by express order, direction, decree, canon, constitution, and appointment of the Apostles of Christ, either Mediately, or Immediately giving forth such order, or direction.  
Now that which the Apostles generally did, or decreed, appointed or ordered to be done in things pertaining to the Kingdom of God, i.e. the gathering, planting, settling, and ordering of Churches; they did by authority and commission from Christ, and by special Assistance and Guidance of the Holy Ghost sent down upon them for that purpose, as appears from Mat. 28.19, 20. Go ye therefore, and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to Observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and lo I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world Amen. And Acts 1.3. To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion— speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. And ver. 8. Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, or, as it is in the Margin, ye shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you; whom he had promised should come after his departure from them, to be with them for ever, John 14.16. to teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance, whatsoever he had said unto them, John 14.26. and to guide them into all truth, John 16.13. reciving of his to show unto them, ib. v. 14. Whence is that expression of theirs touching their decrees sent from Jerusalem to Antioch, Acts 15.28. It seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden then these necessary things, &c. Whereupon it follows what was by the Apostles generally done, decreed, ordained, and ordered to be done had a Divine Authority and Warrant for the Ground of it: and that their preachings and constitutions were to be looked on( and accordingly were so) received and obeied as the Laws, and Orders of Jesus Christ, according to what Christ himself had said, Matth. 10.40. He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me; and John 13.20. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I sand, receiveth, me: and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.  
The conclusion from all which must be this, That the practise of the Primitive Churches of Christ in the Essentials of the Worship of Jesus Christ, when it is once clearly known, is binding to all succeeding Churches and Christians, in their several generations; so as that it is their Duty to be conformable in their practise unto the practise of those Primitive Churches and Christians. For what they did, they did by Order from the Apostles of Christ; and what the Apostles of Christ ordered, they did order by an Authority and Direction from Christ himself; whose Authority is cast off, and command disobeyed, whilst we act contrary to those Orders which he gave by his own Word, or by his Spirit to his Apostles, and by his Apostles to the Primitive Churches and Christians, and by them to all succeeding Churches and Christians in their Generations. So then, it being clearly known, that it was the practise of all the Primitive Churches of Christ, with all the particular Members of those Churches, frequently to meet together to celebrate the Holy Feast of the Supper of the Lord, which is an Essential part of the worship of Christ; it follows that it is the Duty of all succeeding Churches and Members of the Church of Christ, frequently to receive that Holy Sacrament. And the refusing so to do, is so far a Breaking off from communion with the catholic Church, and a disobedience to the Ordinance of Christ.  
And thus we see it appears to be the Duty of every Understanding Christian, worthily to commemorate the Death of Christ, in receiving the Holy Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord, upon the account of that conformity, which he owes to the practise of the Universal Church of Christ.  
Yet Thirdly, 
Sect. 12. No. 1.  the same thing will appear to be the Duty of every Understanding Member of the Church of Christ, upon the account of Gratitude or Thankfulness for the benefit arising to every true Christian from the death of Christ. That every true Christian is capable upon his perseverance in the Faith, of great Benefit by the Death of Christ, there is nothing more evident. Our Redemption, Justification and Glorification, with all the graces adherent, and consequent thereto, are all founded in the death of Christ. Now, by the law of nature, every Benefit obliges the Receiver thereof to all just Actions, and Expressions of Thankfulness to his benefactor. Forasmuch then as it is the Duty of every Christian to be thankful unto Christ for that Benefit that he believes and hopes to receive by his Death: and the receiving of the Sacrament is an Expression of a Christians Thankfulness for that benefit( the Cup in the Sacrament is is called the Cup of Blessing; and the whole Action is called The Eucharist, or Giving of Thanks) Therfore upon the pure account of Gratitude, were there no other Obligation thereunto lying upon him, every Christian is in duty bound to commemora e the Death of Christ by a worthy Celebration of the Supper of the Lord  
If any man yielding( as necessary every Christian must) that it is his duty to be Thankful unto Christ, for the Benefit which he receives by his Death, shall yet suppose it not Necessary this way to express his thankfulness, but think it enough for the discharge of his Duty, if he do it by words in prayer, or otherwise; I answer, that as upon a general account, he ought to do it any way that he can? So upon the particular account of Christs having ordered it this way to be done, this way necessary, whatere he do in any other way, he ought to express his thankfulness.  
That our Lord Jesus Christ hath ordered it this way to be done, is most evident from his own words repeated by the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11.24, 25, 26. speaking of taking,& eating the bread, This saith he, do in remembrance of me: and speaking of taking, and drinking the cups, This saith he again, do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as oft as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, show ye the Lord's death till he come, i.e. continue to make a grateful acknowledgement of the Benefit that ye receive thereby. So that concerning this, and the other ways of expressing their Thankfulness unto Christ, for the benefits which they receive by his death; I shall say to such as have been negligent in this way of expressing themselves Thankful, as our Saviour once said in another case, This ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. And you may even as well refuse to be thank●ul unto him at all, as refuse to express your thankfulness in that particular way which Christ hath prescribed& ordered. And your carriage in effect speaks thus much, Lord I aclowledge myself bound to be thankful unto thee for the benefits of thy death, but I do not like the particular way of expressing my thankfulness unto thee which thou hast prescribed, viz. by showing forth thy death in eating of thy Supper: if ony other way will content thee, well and good; but this way I neither like nor mean to express it. Now how inconsistent this, or any thing which is the same in effect with this, is unto true thankfulness, every man may judge. So that unless we will be guilty of high ingratitude, or unthankfulness unto Christ, for the Benefits that we receive by his Death, we must not only generally, any other way, but particularly in this very way express our thankfulness unto him for it, viz. By commemorating his death, in a worthy celebration of his Supper, which is so lively a Memorial of his dying.  
So that by a Threefold Cord( which is not easily broken) every understanding Christian is bound to commem rate the death of Christ by a worthy celebration of his Supper. And every of these three Bonds hath a divine command, either General, or Particular, Mediate, or Immediate, Express or Interpretative for the foundation of it. And divine commands which way soever given, do ever carry along with them an Obligation to the duty commanded by them. And to throw off, or wilfully neglect the Duty commanded, implies a throwing off, or a rebelling against the Authority commanding. So that either we must disown Christ from being our Lord, or else we must do our Duty in obeying his command; and do this, as he hath commanded us, in remembrance of him.  
I shall close up this Part of my Discourse with the Resolution of Mr. Perkins upon this case, How far forth men have liberty to use or not to use the Lord's Supper. In answer to which he gives three Rules, I shall only repeat his first with the reason which he subjoins unto it. His rule is. Every man of years living in the Church and being baptized is bound in conscience by Gods Commandment to use the Lord's Supper. The Commandment is expressed in these terms, Take, eat, drink, do ye this. And it binds all men in the Church, that are baptized, to the use of the Lord's Supper. This is his Rule. The Reason which he gives of the Rule is, First, if any man refuse to receive it when he may conveniently, having no just impediment, so doing he neglects and contemns the ordinance of God. Secondly, for a man to abstain, when he is called to receive it, though haply he may be excused in regard of some reason inwardly known to himself; yet his abstinence is a bad example, and may give offence to others. Thirdly, the man that may receive, and yet will not, doth in effect suspend and withhold himself from the benefit of this holy Sacrament. Thus far that Learned Casuist. case. Con. lib. 2. c. 10. qu. 1.  
To this I shall add no more at present by way of proof, but proceed to the Application of the point.  
And First, it may be useful in the way of Information. Such as are unsatisfied in the Grounds of this our Christian Duty of Commemorating the Death of Christ by a worthy Celebration of the Supper of the Lord, may hence perceive, that we have good warrant for what we do( and so are not justly chargeable with the Guilt of being Willworshippers for it.) First, it is a thing which pure Gratitude, and that both upon a General, and a Particular account obligeth us unto. Secondly, it is a thing expressly commanded by our Lord Jesus Christ, and that immediately in his own Person, as well as mediately by his Apostle. And thirdly, it is a thing which the Universal Church of Christ in all, and even in the first, and purest ages of it, hath ever Practised. And if the natural law of Gratitude, if the positive Precept of Christ, if the Universal practise of the Church have not force enough in them to constitute a Duty, and warrant a practise, then, what hath; If they have, then have we enough, not only to bear us out in our practise, but also to bind us to our Duty of Commemorating the Death of Christ by a worthy Celebration of the Supper of the Lord.  
Secondly, it may be Useful in the way of Reprehension to such as neglect the Performance of this Grand Christian Duty. Truly such persons are liable unto a very sharp Reprehension, upon sundry accounts. First, they are guilty of great unworthiness towards God, by whom they are invited to this royal Feast. See the Parable of the Marriage made by the King for his son in Mat. 22.1. to 8. When God makes a Feast and bids Guests, he expects their Company, all excuses, pleas, and pretences of occasions, and businesses whatsoever set apart: and he is highly wrath at them, when they make light of his Invitations and Provisions, turning their backs on his Table, and going their ways to follow businesses of worldly concernment. What an Unworthinesse is this in them towards God! What! cannot God furnish a Table good enough for them? Is the Table of the Lord polluted! Is even his meat contemptible! Mal. 1.12. Oh what a disrespect do they cast upon God himself? who will not vouchsafe at his Invitation, to be his Guests at a Feast of his Providing! He will say of them, as it was said of those in Matth. 22.8. The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Secondly, they are guilty of flat Rebellion against Christ, whose power they slight, and whose Authority they throw off, whilst they do thus obstinately persist in a rebellious Rejection of his command. He saith positively, Take, eat, drink, do this: and you stubbornly refuse to eat, or drink, or do any thing of this. What other in effect is this, then a professing yourselves enemies to him, and a saying with those in Luke 19.14. We will not have this man to reign over us.  
Thirdly, they are guilty of Uncharitable breaking off from communion with the Church of God. Do you believe the communion of Saints? Why then will you not communicate in receiving the Lord's Supper together with the Saints? The Saints of God, in all ages, have maintained, and kept up Christian society and fellowship, by communicating together in frequent Assemblies, at the Table of the Lord. For we being many are one bread and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread, or loaf, 1 Cor. 10.17. What testimony do you give of your holding communion with them, of your being parts of that one bread, members of that one body, that will not so much as once vouchsafe to come at that Table with the other members of that one body, to be partakers of that one bread? you come and hear the Word with them, and then, when that's done, you go your way and leave them. What would a civil Jew, or Heathen do less? Oh consider how uncharitably you grieve those, to whom by profession of the same Faith you are Brethren, whose communicating together you condemn as unchristian, whilst you profess yourselves to be Christians, and yet will hold no communion therein with them.  
Fourthly, they are guilty of gross ingratitude( a foul crime) against Christ, for the benefits of his Death. It is a sign they make small account of the Death of Christ, that regard so little the commemoration of the benefits coming by his Death. Christ hath done much, and suffered much for us. Gratitude requires the like from us to him. But, it is to be doubted, that they will do but little for him, that will not do so much as come to a Supper provided for them by Him. It is to be feared, they will suffer but little for him, that will not suffer themselves, by all his loving invitations, to be prevailed upon, to come and Sup with him. The great business of the Sacrament is the offering up unto God, a commemorative sacrifice of thanksgiving for the benefits, which we receive by the death of Christ. Oh how will they acquit themselves of the guilt of Ingratitude, that will have no share in that common Christian Eucharistical Sacrifice? Fifthly, They are guilty of high contempt of this ordinance of Christ. For what other can a continued causeless wilful neglect thereof be esteemed? especially being so engaged, and so invited, as they are, to it. What ever they reckon of it, they will find at last, that God will make little distinction betwixt a wilful neglecter of his Ordinance, and a profane contemner of it? even as he reckons of him as a Murderer of his Brother, who is not a Lover of his Brother, 1 Joh. 3.14, 15. In the case of Circumcision, The uncircumcised man child, whose flesh of his Foreskin is not circumcised, that soul( saith the text) shall be cut off from his people: he hath broken my Covenant, Gen. 17.14. Again in the case of the Passeover, the man that is clean and is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the Passeover, even the same soul( saith the Text again) shall be cut off from his people, because he brought not the offering of the Lord in his appointed season: that man shall bear his sin, Num. 9.13. And shall it not be so much more in the wilful neglect of baptism and the Supper of the Lord? if you do not contemn the Ordinance, then why do you not come to the Ordinance? if you valued it, sure you would make some use of it. Had you any regard to it, sure you would, at some time, be present at it. Wheresoever the body is, thither will the Eagles be gathered together, Luke 17.37. What is the flesh of the Son of man no meat, yea is the Blood of the Son of God no drink with you? is it not worth the Labour of coming for it? or not worth the Charge, that you must be at, that you may have it? Oh let such as make so light esteem of this sacred Ordinance take heed of being looked upon, as those that have trodden under foot the Son of God, and counted the blood of the covenant wherewith they were sanctified an unholy thing, Heb. 10.29.  
But, methinks, I hear the tender conscience of some doubting Christian startled at this Reproof, and saying in the way of Apology for itself, Though I do forbear to come to the Table of the Lord, yet it is not out of contempt of the Ordinance, but out of a fear of the danger of unworthy receiving, and out of a sense of mine own unworthiness to receive; otherwise, the Lord knows, I would full fain come and be a guest at his Table? Twould be my happiness, that I might Feast my soul there, as it is my unhappiness, that, not finding myself worthy, I fear the danger of an unworthy receiving, and dare not come thither.  
But, let me say to thee, Dear Christian, whoever thou art, that thus arguest thyself out of thine own happiness, and forsakest thine own mercies, is it thus with thee in good earnest, as thou alledgest? Deal truly with me in the sight of God, and thine own conscience. Is not this onely a pretence, and something else, that thou listest not name, the true cause? In the bowels of Jesus Christ, I beseech thee, be true to thyself herein, and let not thine own heart deceive thee. If any thing else be the cause, then the removal of this scruple, will be something the more of labour to me, but nothing the more of satisfaction unto thee. But if this be the true, the only cause, of thy forbearing to come to the Table of the Lord, then I shall endeavour( And the Lord open thy heart as he did the heart of Lydia that thou mayst receive) an answer to thy satisfaction in this Particular.  
And to the Point, I answer plainly and distinctly, that the question is not, whether thou art worthy to commemorate the death of Christ, in receiving the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord, or whether thou canst do it so worthily as thou shouldst, but whether it be thy Duty, and thou oughtest to do it. And if it be clear to thee, that it is thy Duty, then it will not excuse thee from sin in not doing it, to say, thou wert not worthy to do it, or couldst not do it so worthily as thou oughtest. For that it is good to do it, it is clear, because God hath shewed it to thee, and required it of thee? and if so, then to him that knoweth to do good, and doth it not, to him it is sin Jam. 4.17. And that servant, which knew his Lords will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes, Luk. 12.47. Thou knowest it is thy Lords will, that thou shouldst examine thyself and so eat of that Bread, and Drink of that Cup: make this servants case now( in Luk. 12.) to be thine own: and what else can follow but this, that if thou shul'st not prepare thyself, nor do according to thy Lords will, thou shalt be worthy to be beaten with many stripes. Do it therefore, not because thou art worthy, but because it is thy duty: and be not discouraged from doing it so well as thou canst, because thou canst not do it so well as thou shouldst: For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not, 2 Cor. 8.12. O go with thy spiritual sacrifiee of praise to the Altar of God, and there offer it to thy Maker, by the hand of thy mediator, 
Heb. 13.15.  though it be not worthy of Gods acceptation for itself, yet it will be acceptable unto God by Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. 2.5. And if upon the account of thine unworthiness thereof, thou refusest to Fat, and Drink at the Lords Table, why dost thou not, upon the same account, refuse meat and drink at thine own Table! thou art no more worthy of that( if thou standest upon strict terms with God) then thou art of the Bread, and wine at the Lords Table. Thou eatest it, I suppose, because it is a necessary means allowed, and ordained by God for thy natural nourishment unto a temporal life; and to refuse it, were a tempting of God to maintain thee without it. And is not the eating of that Bread, and drinking that Cup of the Lord a Necessary means, of Gods allowing, and ordaining for thy spiritual nourishment unto eternal life! what then will be thy total refusal of it, but a tempting of God to save thee without it.  
Oh, but I fear( sayest thou) the danger of unworthy receiving. Truly there is good reason for it. For whosoever shall eat that Bread, and drink that Cup of the Lord unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himself; He runs a great hazard of judgement both temporal, and eternal, that unworthily eats of that Bread,& drinks of that Cup. But what! Is there no way to avoid the danger of unworthy receiving the Sacrament, but by an unworthy refusal of the sacrament? that were a sad straight indeed. Where sin, and any thing but a sin is proposed to choice, there any thing rather then sin is to be chosen. And where there is a necessity of sinning both ways, as in the case of an erring conscience, there the less sin is to be chosen before the greater. But where there is a possibility of escaping both, there is a necessity of avoiding all that can be. And what necessity is there of a mans sinning in this case, either one way, or other, in unworthy receiving, or unworthy refusing? he may take the middle way, and at once avoid both the sins, by a religious conformity to the institution of Christ in receiving the Sacrament of his Supper Worthily. Had there been any other way, the Apostle was so wise, he could not but have known it: and knowing it, his love to the Corinthians was so great, he could not but have acquainted them with it. But he knew no other way, but this; yea he knew there was no other besides this,& therefore to this it is that he directs them. It is indeed a great sin to eat this Bread,& drink this cup of the Lord unworthily. What then? shall we therefore sinfully abstain from eating& drinking of it at all? what's the Apostles advice in this case? not that we should abstain, no such word in all his writings; But that we should prepare ourselves worthily to receive. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup: So he. Heavy judgments befell the Corinthians for their unworthy carriages at this sacred Ordinance: what then? doth the Apostle therefore wish them forbear for the time to come? no: he rather points them what to do, that they might not be judged, upon any such account, any more, viz. To judge that is examine and prepare themselves, that they might not be judged of the Lord. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged, 1 Cor. 11.31. as if he had said, the way to avoid being judged for unworthy receiving, is to endeavour ourselves, by due preparation of ourselves, worthily to receive it. He doth not say, if we would forbear,& not come, but if we would judge ourselves before we come, we should not be judged of the Lord; for to forbear wholly from coming to the Supper of the Lord, out of a conceit, thereby to avoid being judged of the Lord, is, as if a man did fly from a Lion, and a Bear met him, or went into the house, and learned his hand on the wall and a Serpent bit him, Amos 5.19. This is to make the commandments of God of none effect by your reason, as the Scribes and Pharisees, whom our Saviour reproves for it, did by their tradition, Matth. 15.6. This is to leap out of the Frying pan into the fire, as we say, to run from one sin and mischief, into another, as ill or worse. Keep therefore that Middle way, which carries you clear from both these rocks: neither unworthily receive it, nor unworthily refuse it: but examine yourself( thats the Resolution which the Doctor of the Gentiles gives upon the Case) and so eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. You ought both to communicate, that you sin not by neglect of the Matter of the Duty to be performed; and to communicate worthily, that you do not sin in the manner of performing the duty. This ought you to do, and not to leave the other undone.  
Oh but( sayest thou still, for all this) I am so sensible of mine own unworthiness that I dare not come, because the Apostle hath said, He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, and I would be loth to eat and drink my own damnation. I answer First, It is not necessary that every man, that once eats and drinks unworthily, shall be damned. Though an unworthy eating and drinking be a deadly sin, yet sure it is not that sin unto death, which shall never be forgiven. There is mercy even for those that commit that sin, upon repentance:& what sin( I pray consider it) is not damning without repentance? There is danger enough in it to engage us to use our utmost endeavour to avoid it; but the apprehension of that danger must not make us run into another sin, for the avoiding of it.  
Secondly, There is a Twofold worthiness; a worthiness of the Person, and a worthiness of the Performances. And it is in regard of the worthiness of the Performance, not of the Person that the Apostle speaks, saying, He that e●teth and drinketh unworthily. He doth not say, He, that being unworthy eats and drinks, as if he had any respect unto personal worthiness( for if God should stand upon these terms with us, who would be sufficiently worthy for these things? If thou Lord, shouldst mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? Psal. 130.3. He stands not therefore upon personal worthiness) but this he saith, He that eateth and drinketh unworthily: clearly referring it unto the worthiness of the performance. Now it doth not follow, that a man may not do a thing worthily for manner of Performance, which he is not worthy to do in regard of any worthiness in his Person. Look not therefore so much to the worthiness of thy Person, as to the worthiness of thy performance; which, so it be such as it should, thy Receiving will be worthy, though thou in regard of thy person, beest unworthy to Receive. Here lies the root of all thy Trouble, Thou thinkest the Apostle stands upon worthiness of person, whereas he mentions nothing of that, but speaks only of the worthiness of the Performance.  
This worthiness consists in Three things. First, a conscientious preparation for the Feast by a previous examining of ourselves, intimated by the Apostle, in that expression, But let a man examine himself. Secondly, a religious inward estimation of the Feast; and Thirdly( consequent hereunto) a reverend outward Behaviour at the Feast, both intimated in the phrase of Discerning the Lords Body. And he that offends not in any of these respects, eats that bread, and drinks that cup of the Lord worthily, though otherwise, he be no more worthy, in respect of any worthiness upon his person, to eat of that bread, or drink of that cup, then John Baptist was to loose the latchet of our Saviour's show; which, who doubts but he could have worthily done? though he aclowledge himself unworthy to do it.  
But if thou wilt needs have a worthiness upon thy person to qualify thee for coming. I answer yet further, There is a twofold worthiness of the person, an inherent worthiness, which amounts from the internal excellency of the person considered in himself, and an imputed worthiness which amounts from God's gracious acceptation of a sinner through the merit of his Saviour. And upon the account of this latter, Christians may come, though they cannot( as they never shall) find themselves worthy to come upon the account of the former. Yea, the less worthy thou art in thine own eyes the more worthy 
Quare ea est dignitas quam unam& optimam afferre Deo possumus, si nostram ei vilitatem&( ut ita loquar) indignitarem offeramus, ut sua misericordia nos se dignos faciat: si animos in nobis despendeamus, ut nos in ipso consolemur: si no● humiliemus, ut ab ipso erigamur: si nos accusemus, ut ab ipso justificemur: &c. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 17. S. 42.  shalt thou be in the eyes of God, who resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble, Jam. 4.6. who satisfieth the hungry with good things, but sendeth the rich empty away, Luk. 2.53. Hence it is, that Saint Paul, well knowing that it is not of works of righteousness that we have done, but of God's mercy that he saveth us, desired so not to be found in his own righteousness, but in that which is through the Faith of Christ, Philip. 3.8, 9. And the Church of England well begins her address of her self to the Lord's Table, We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies; we be not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table, &c. O come therefore, thou tender-hearted Christian, to the Supper of the Lord: but come out of thyself, in thy Saviour; casting thyself upon the mercy of God for his gracious acceptation of thee through Christ, and not upon the account of any inherent worthiness of thine own person: which if thou shouldst once judge thyself to have, I should think that conceit a more real obstacle to thy Receiving then thy present sense of thine own unworthiness.  
Yet one step further, that if possible I may reach the bottom, of all thy fears and doubtings. Is not this that unworthiness under the sense whereof, thou sayest thou labourest, that thou canst not find in thyself such a measure of repentance and Faith, as thou conceivest requisite in him, that shall worthily receive the Sacrament? Thou dost not find thine eyes flow so freely at the sight of thine own sins, nor thy heart bleed so kindly at the remembrance of thy Saviours Wounds, as thou thinkest thou shouldst do. Thou dost not perceive thy soul to cling so closely to, and clasp its arms so fast about thy Redeemer, as thou desirest? In a word, thou thinkest thou canst not repent deeply enough, nor believe strongly enough, for one that should come to the Sacrament. Is this thy case? and doth it not wring here? is it not upon this, and this account only that thou thinkest thyself unworthy?  
If this be it, then know, that these things, which thou speakest of, may be considered, either as the Gifts of God, or as the Duties of man. It is Mans Duty to believe and repent; but yet repentance and faith, that is the graces enabling a man to believe, and repent, are the Gifts of God. Now consider these things, First, as the Gift of God: and it is no where set down, what measure of them it is necessary that a man should have, before he comes to the Lords Table. he that hath them in any measure, though never so little hath enough to qualify him fit for coming; though the more he have of them, the more cheerfully, may he come with them. He to whom God hath given true repentance and faith, though in never so small a measure, cannot be deemed to be a true penitent, and a true believer. And whoever said, a truly penitent and believing Christian, if otherwise competently understanding, was a person unworthy, that is, unfit and unqualified to come to the Sacrament? And if it be so, that the graces be but small in their Measure, and weak in their Power, that is so far from being a reason for thy abstaining from the Sacrament, that it is a most powerful argument to persuade thy coming to the Sacrament. That's the way to have thy graces increased both in their strength and measure. And 'tis worth thy considering, whether thy abstaining so long from the Sacrament, be not the very ground of thy so small, or no increase of grace. How shouldst thou expect, that God should give thee grace, when thou goest not God's way to have it given thee? God gives his Grace ordinarily in the way of Means. How then shouldst thou obtain the Grace of the means, whilst thou abstainest from the Means of the Grace?  
Secondly, consider these things as the Duties of man, and it is no where set down to what height, or depth, thou shouldst proceed in thy Repenting and Believing, before thou mayst come to the Lords Table. One thing is necessary, and that is sincerity in what you do, that you do truly Repent, and Believe,( and he that doth so truly, will never set himself a stint, but ever striving to repent still more deeply, and to believe still more firmly:) and if thou canst satisfy thyself touching the sincerity of thy Repenting and Believing, that thou dost truly Believe and Repent, though thou canst do neither to that height, or in that measure that thou wouldest, thou mayest satisfy thyself herein touching thy worthiness, that is thy being qualified to come and receive. I confess if thou beest a Hypocrite, then whether thou comest, or stayest away, thy case is bad. The onely thing in this case to be done, is to leave off thy hypocrisy, and be sincere in thy Duty. But if thy heart condemn thee not of any hypocrisy in these duties, but thou dost perform them sincerely, though weakly, then mayest thou have confidence towards God, 1 Joh. 3.21. For though there be much iniquity both upon thy person and performances, yet he that so loved thee, as to die for thee, will wash both thee and them from all sin, making both acceptable unto God.  
Lastly, That I may not tyre thee, instead of satisfying thee: state thy case thus: on the one side, thou hast a Command of Gods giving, to do this, which he bids thee. On the other side, thou hast a Doubt of thine own raising, that thou shalt not do it thus, as he hath bidden. Now be thine own judge, whether is better, to give to God the best obedience that thou canst to his command for the Matter of it, though when thou hast done thy best, thy obedience will be defective, in regard of that exactness required in the Manner of performing it: Or, because thou doubtest, thou shalt not do thy Duty so well as thou shouldst, quiter to fall off from thy duty, or refuse to do thy duty at all. And how knowest thou, if thou beest not wanting to thyself, but that God will so follow thee with his gracious assistance, as that thou shalt worthily perform thy duty: If not so worthily as thou desirest, yet so worthily as he will graciously accept of: And however it be, as to that, much better it were, even violently to throw off, if thou canst not otherwise satisfy thy doubt, then to incur the Guilt of wilful disobedience to the Command of God, by Neglect of thy Duty. Act like a Christian therefore, in doing that duty, which God commands thee: and doubt not, whilst thou art in a way of Duty, either of finding acceptance with God, or of receiving a blessing from God. He hath not said to the seed of Jacob seek ye me in vain, Isa. 45.19.  
I shall close up this part of my discourse with the resolution of Dr. Ames upon two cas●s of conscience. The first is this, A man is so haunted with wicked thoughts at his prayers, that at last he doubts whether he should pray at all, or no: what should he do in this case? why even violently, if he cannot otherwise, throw off at once both his thoughts, and his doubts, and betake himself to his prayers in such manner as he can.  
The second is this, and it is near the very case in hand. A man is so troubled with the consideration of his own Unworthinesse, that he hardly dares come to the Lords Table, though he do feel in himself sincere Faith and Repentance. What should he do in this case? why this scruple notwithstanding, he may and he ought to come to the Table of the Lord. Nor shall he herein act against conscience, but according to conscience. For his scruple is a rash and a groundless fear, and so cannot become obligatory unto him. Yea by using to break through such like scruples as these, the conscience becomes more steady and better settled. Thus he, lib. 1. de Conse. cap 6.  
Again Secondly, methinks I hear another alleging, that he is not in Charity, and therefore may not come to the Communion; I answer that whilst thou art not in Charity, there is some reason thou shouldst forbear. But First, there is no reaon why thou shouldst not be in Charity, Thou committest more, and greater offences against God, then any man doth, or can against thee. And this is sure, that in such wise as th●u dealest with men, in point of filthiness of their sins against thee, God will deal with thee, in point of filthiness of thy sins against him. This our Saviour hath clearly declared in Matth. 6.14, 15. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. And what a case art thou in now? Suppose God should take thee away in thine uncharitableness, and thou die with all thy sins unforgiven upon thee, what other canst thou expect, but to be delivered with him in Matth. 18.34. to the tormentors? For so, saith our Saviour, shall my heavenly Father do also unto you( even as the Lord of that unmerciful servant did unto him) if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses, ver. 35. Dost thou believe there is a Hell? and dost thou understand what the torments of Hell are? and dost thou rightly conceive of the misery of that mans condition, that is condemned to endure those Torments unto all eternity? And darest thou now die in God's debt? This, all this thou owest him, even to be damned to the pit of hell to all eternity: and this, all this thou must pay him, unless he forgive thee: and none of this will he forgive thee, unless thou forgivest all, whatever it be, that is by any other trespassed against thee. This is thy condition, if thou diest in thy uncharitableness. And if thou darest not die in this condition, Oh how then darest thou live in that condition, thou darest not die in? He that loveth not his brother abideth in death, John 3.14. And this night, for ought thou knowest may they fetch away thy soul from thee.  
Secondly, though thou shalt sin in receiving unless thou be'st in charity, dost thou think thy not being in charity will excuse thee from sinning in not receiving? As good an excuse had he, who being accused for burning down a Church, swore he had not done it, but to burn the Arch-Bishop that was in it. Wilt thou not receive the Sacrament because thou art not in charity? Thou mayst as well say, I will not pray to God, because I am a liar, and a murderer: For an uncharitable man is both. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer, 1 John 3.15. And if a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar, 1 John 4.20. Whereas, in all reason, the more sin thou hast upon thee, the more need thou hast to seek unto God by prayer to pardon thee. Oh what is, if this be not, to draw iniquity with cords of vanity and sin as it were with a Cart-rope! To heap sin upon sin, and add rebellion unto Transgression! If thou hast no better plea then this, thou wilt be judged out of thine own mouth, and thy excuse will be an aggravation of thy guilt to thy more heavy condemnation. I shall here commend to thy consideration the advice of Simon Peter the Apostle to Simon Magus, Acts 8.21, 22, 23. Thy heart is not right in the s●ght of God, Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee; For I perceive that thou art in the gull of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity. I shall conclude this part of my Discourse with the Resolution of Mr. Perkins upon the Case. Some( saith he) allege for this their practise, that they are at variance with such and such persons that have done them wrong, and whom they cannot forgive,& in this respect, they were better abstain, then come unprovided. To whom it may be said; that their unfitness in this and other respects, ought to be a strong motive to induce them, at least to use all holy endeavours to prepare themselves every day, rather then a means to keep them back. For if a man should abstain upon every occasion of vuriance, discontentment and infirmity, he should never receive, and so consequently have no benefit by this Ordinance of God. Daily preparation therefore is the more necessary, that when they be called and have opportunity, they may come as welcome Guests unto that heavenly Banquet. So he case. Conse. l. 2. c. 10.  
Yet again Thirdly, saith another, were he a holy man, that did officiate in the Celebration of the Sacrament I would receive it: but the Minister I live under is an evil scandalous man, and I cannot bring my heart to receive it of him. I answer, First, if he be really such as thou sayest, strive thou to reform him: if he will not be reformed, then maiest thou labour to remove him. For it appertaineth to the Discipline of the Church, that enquiry be made of evil Ministers, and that they be accused by those that have knowledge of their offences, and finally being found guilty by just judgement be deposed. 26. Artic. of the Church of England.  
Secondly, if thou canst neither get him to be reformed, nor removed, do not thou yet abstain from the holy Table of the Lord, for the unholiness of thy Minister, who may be a Minister of good things unto thee, although there be much evil in himself. Wilt thou refuse to eat of a good dish of meat at thy Landlords Table, because the Cook that dressed it, or the Man that served it up to the Table is a swearing, drunken, whoremasterly Fellow? Sure the wickedness of his tongue, heart, or hand, shall never either de●le the Dish, that is dressed, or presented by his hand, or the Persons that eat of it: No more shall the wickedness of the Minister either defile the Sacrament, that is by his hand prepared for thee, and reached to thee, or Thee who received from his hand, what is by him prepared and given. I give it to the Man, not to his Manners, said a Heathen Philosopher once touching an alms that he gave to a wicked person; So this Sacrament thou receivest from the Man, not from his Manners: or from the Man, as acting in his Office, as a Minister of Jesus Christ, not as practising any of his wickedness as a servant of Satan. And the Efficacy of the Sacrament depends not on the Holiness of the Minister, but on the Institution, and Promise of the Ordainer. In 1 Sam. 2. 
Sacerdos consecrat hoc Sacramentum nen virtute propriâ, said sicut Minister Christi, in ●ujus Personâ consecrat hoc Sacramentum. Non autem ex hoc ipso desinit aliquis esse M●… ist●… Christ; quod est ●… al●…— Aquin. 3. 4. 8●. Art. 5. in the same place he citeth ●. Aug. saying in lib de Corpore Dom●… In●… a F●… esia●… Catholicam, in mysterio Corpo●…& Sanguinis Domin●…, nihil à bono majus, nihilo à malo minus, perficitur Sacerdote: quia non in merito Consecrantis, said in verbo perficitur Creatoris& virtute Spiritua Sancti.  we find that Hophni and Phineas the two sons of Ely the Priest, were sons of Belial, they knew not the Lord, v. 12. they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation, v. 22. The were evil men, scandalous Priests, if ever there were any such. But where do we find in the whole store of them( from c. 2.12. to c. 4.11. where we find them slain) where, I say, do we find any prohibition given by God to the people from coming, or any reproof to any of them for coming to offer sacrifice while they were Priests? Yea, mens abhorring the offering of the Lord, because of their wickedness, which was very great before the Lord,( Ch. 2.17.) is by no contemptible Authors conceived to be the provoking cause of those heavy judgements, which befell at once both the House of Ely, and the whole people of Israel in ch. 4. And accordingly that which we red in chap. 3.11. I will do a thing in Israel at which both the ears of every one that heareth it shall tingle, Junius and Tremel. red it Facturus sum rem in Israelem, &c. I will do a thing against Israel, i.e. as they gloss the Text, not only against the House of Ely, but against the People, who because of the wickedness of the Priests, had abhorred the offering of the Lord. So then, saith a Learned Man, The offence of the Priest was no defence of the people; but as the Priests gave the offence and the People took it, so God bound them together in the same judgement. So we must know( saith he still). God will not bear the contempt of his Ordinances under any pretence whatsoever of Ministers wickedness and unworthiness; if his hand be corrupt, let thy heart be uncorrupt, though his sins be his own, yet the Sacraments be God's: he may minister comfort to thee, though he bring none to himself, &c. Thus Mr. Attersoll, in his Badges of Christianity, lib. 1. cap. 2. The same is the judgement of Mr. Perkins in his Cases of Conscience, lib. 2. ch. 8. where he delivers himself distinctly, and largely to the Point, I shall only give you a taste of his third reason for the Proof of the Point. The Sacrament, saith he, if it be administered in the name, and by the power of Christ, is the Ordinance of God being received by Faith, yea a true Sacrament of Christ; and the force and efficacy thereof, doth not depend upon the worthiness of the Minister, but upon Christ. The Letters and Epistles sent from one man to another, are authentical, and serve fully to express the mind of the Author, though the Messenger or Carrier be a wicked or naughty man. And in like manner, the sin of any man that standeth in the room of a lawful Minister doth not nullify the Sacrament, &c. So he. And this is no other then the very catholic Doctrine of the Church of England, in the forecited 26 Article, which I shall give you, and there with conclude this Part of my Discourse. Although in the visible Church the evil be ever mingled with the good, and sometime the evil hath chief authority in the ministration of the Word and Sacraments: yet forasmuch as they do not the same in their own name, but in Christs, and do minister by his commission and authority, we may use their ministry, both in hearing the word of God, and in the receiving the Sacraments. Neither is the effect of Christs Ordinance taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of Gods gifts diminished from such as by faith, and nightly do receive the Sacraments standing, or kneeling, and but with such, or such words. &c. And I cannot find in my heart to receive it so. I answer; Will a hungry man refuse good meat, because it is not dressed altogether in that manner, and dished up in that Order that he best likes of? or because of some indifferent Table Action, or Ceremony, used and practised in the place whether he is invited, which he doth not so well approve of? Why Postures of Persons in Receiving, and Forms of words in Delivering the Sacrament,( so nothing essential to the right manner of administering it be omitted,) are but as it were the dressing, and dishing up of that sacred food, things indifferent in themselves, and left at liberty by Christ to Christians, who may use their discretion therein; so that all things be done decently and in order: Nor needest thou trouble thy conscience about this matter. For consider, first whilst the Minister doth this which Christ bad him, unless thou hast power over him otherwise to order him, it will not be thy fault, if he do it not thus, as thou thinkest fit, desirest and wouldst have him.  
And if this consideration satisfy thee not, then do thou secondly consider; whether he his not doing his duty altogether for the manner thereof, exactly as he should, will excuse thee from sin, in not doing at all that duty that thou shouldst. Will it, I say, be a Plea, that will stand for good, why thou shouldst wholly omit a necessary substantial Duty of Divine Institution, because that another doth in some unnecessary Circumstantial Point vary from a prescribed human form of Administration?  
Again consider Thirdly, whether thou actest like a Christian, when thou wilt either have the Sacrament after what Fashion, and in what Posture thou likest, or else thou wilt not have it at all? Our Saviour himself was more moderate in this case. He stood not so nicely, and Scrupulously upon such Punctilio's as these, Though the Priests,& Scribes had many ways corrupted both the Doctrine, and Worship of God, yet did not be refuse( for all their Errors) to make use of their ministry. or to Communicate with them in the Worship of God. First as Mr. Hildersham observes, when he was an infant he was circumcised, and by that Sacrament incorporated into that Church, Luk. 2.21. Secondly when his mother was purified, he was brought to the Temple, and presented to the Lord, and an oblation given for him, as for other children, Luk. 2.22. Thirdly, He was content to be an hearer of such teachers as taught in that Church, Luk. 2.46. Fourthly, He was every Sabbath wont to join in public prayer with the congregation that was at Nazareth, Luk. 4.16. Fifthly, He received the Sacrament of baptism in a Congregation of that people, Luk. 3.21. When all the people was baptized, he was baptized also. Sixthly, He communicated in the Passeover with the people, and the Priests, Joh. 2.13. Seventhly, He allowed his Disciples to hear those teachers, Matth. 23.12. Yea he commanded the Leper, whom he cleansed, to go and show himself to the Priest, and offer his gift in the Temple, Matth. 8.4. Thus far he in his 35th. Lecture on Joh. 4th. Wherein he insisted on these two Doctrines.( 1) That our Saviour himself, though he were the Son of God, did use when he was here on earth to serve and worship God.( 2) That those assemblies that enjoy the word and doctrine of salvation, though they have many corruptions remaining in them, are to be acknowledged the true Churches of God, and such as none of the faithful may make separation from. 
To the same purpose speaks Mr. Perkins on the Creed, p. 178.  That with his 82d. lecture upon the same Chapter, I commend to the perusal of the Reader that is desirous of wholesome instruction. But to return, we see, that though the state of the Jewish Church was corrupt in the dayes of our Saviour, yet he made no separation from it, but communicated with it in the worship of God. No more did Melancthon at Wittenberg abstain from the communion, though he disliked Errores& superstitiones in coena, 
Alting part. 2. Probl. 18.  i.e. some errors and superstitions, as my Author saith, which it seems, were retained in their Form of administration of the Supper of the Lord. The like is said of other Protestant Divines both there, and in other places. Desire it therefore, as no doubt these did, after the best fashion that may be: but if that cannot be had, then be content, as they were, to go less, and receive it, so thou mayest but have it after any fashion that it may be had in, which fights not with the institution of Christ. So thou beest but a real partaker of the Body and Blood of Christ, what matter is't to thee, after what external Fashion it is conveyed to thee, whether in an earthen dish, and a wooden cup, or in a platter of filver, and a chalice of gold; whether with a Supplication, that thou mayest partake of the inward grace, as well as of the outward Sacrament; or with an Exhortation to be thankful for the grace designed, offered, and exhibited together with the Sacrament? whether upon thy knee, as an humble suppliant at the Throne of Grace, or in the posture of sitting, as an invited Guest unto the table of thy Lord? the effect of the Sacrament depending upon the Institution and promise of Christ ordaining it, not upon the Fashion of the Ministers giving it, or upon the Posture of the communicant in receiving it. I shall conclude this part of my discourse with the Iudgment of Mr. Calvin upon the case. Caeterum quod ad externum actionis ritum speciat. &c. i.e. But as touching the external Form of the Action, whether Believers receive the Sacrament into their Hand or not; whether they divide it among themselves, or eat every one what is particularly given craments ministered unto them, which are effectual because of Christs institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men.  
Fourthly, and Lastly, methinks I hear another yet, finding many things at which he takes exceptions in the Parochial Congregation in which he is to receive, and pleading them in excuse for his not receiving. He would gladly receive were the Congregation such as he durst receive withal: but that not being so, he holds it his best to forbear till he may receive it in a Congregation, touching which he is better satisfied. Why? whats the matter,( speak it out man) that thou darest not join with thy other Neighbours in the performance of an Act of honour to Jesus Christ; are they not Christians? it would be strange that after fixteen hundred years, in all which time the Christian Religion hath been more or less professed in this Nation, there should be yet any Parochial Gongregation in England, that were not Christian. If they be not Christians, what are they? Jews, Turks, or Pagans? besides, if Persons admitted by baptism into the Church of Christ; if Persons receiving and Professing the Faith of Christ; if Persons submitting to all the Ordinances of Christ be Christians,( as who are Christians if such be not?) then which of our Parochial Congregations, is not Christian? There may be among them some more spiritual, and some more Carnal; some that are Grown men, and others that are but Babes in Christ; some that are strong in Faith, and others that are more weak in Faith: yet all these may well enough meet in the. One Common General Difference of Christian. Some in respect of Faith, Knowledge, Purity, may be better Christians then others; yet that hinders not that others are Christians also, though neither so strong believers, nor so knowing Professors, nor so holy Livers as they, whilst they hold communion with other Christians in the Faith, Worship, and Ordinances of Christ. What thinkest thou of the Corinthians? Were they Christians? Sure they were; else the Apostle was out, when he directed his Epistle to them under the Title of the Church of God which is at Corinth, Sanctified in Jesus Christ, the called Saints, 1 Cor. 11.2. And yet Chap. 3. v. 1. He speaks of them, as Carnal persons, and even as Babes in Christ. Our Congregations then may be Christian, though there be in them, as there was in the Church of God at Corinth, a mixture of spiritual and carnal persons, grown Christians, and Babes in Christ. And Christians they are sure; for were they not so they would not join with thee in an Act of Religious Worship to Jesus Christ. and if such they be, then why dost thou refuse to join with them?  
Perhaps thou'lt say, though they be called Christians by themselves, and brethren by others, yet they are Unbelieers, Fornicators, Covetous, Extorioners, Idolaters, Railers, Drunkards, &c. And with such I may not by the Apostles rule, keep company, not Eat, 1 Cor. 5.11. But must come out from among them and be separate, 2 Cor. 6.17. Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, Eph. 5.11. but withdraw myself, from every Brother, that walketh disorderly, and have no company with him, 2 Thess. 3.6. For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an Infidel? and what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols? 2 Cor. 6.14, 15, 16.  
But, I answer to thee again. First, Take heed, whilst thou judgest others to have no Faith, thou show not thyself to have no Charity: and then thou'lt be as unfit to be there, as any of the worst of them thou namest. Admit they have been such as thou sayest; were not the Corinthians such,( some of them at least) till thy were washed in the laver of Baptisine, sanctified by the grace of the spirit, and justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. 6.11. And yet they came together into one place to eat the Lords Supper, 1 Cor. 11.20. Yea but they are such, sayest thou: How knowest thou that? Say I again. He that was last week, a whoremaster, a drunkard, &c. May have since then( especially upon his examining of himself in order to his Receiving) he may I say, for ought thou knowest, since last thou sawest him, have seen, and sorrowed for his sin; he may have humbled himself before God, and may have had the Pardon granted to him in his Conscience, and be come to have the Seal set to it in the Sacrament. And if this be so, why should it trouble thee? And why may it not be so? The spirit blows when, and where it lists: several Persons are called at several hours, and upon several occasions. Saul was going to Damaseus to persecute the Christians, and before he came there, he was turned like that other Saul, into another but better man, and became a Preacher of Christ. And why may not this be thy Neighbours case? And whether it be so or no, it is the most safe and charitable way to believe it so to be, whilst thou knowest nothing to the contrary. Charity beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things, 1 Cor. 13.7.  
Secondly, Consider that the King in the Parable found fault with the Man that came to the Wedding Feast, not having his Wedding garment on: but he found no fault with the other Guests for coming, fitting down, and eating at the same Table, or mess with the Man that had not on his Wedding garment, Mat. 22. And that King it seems was content with but reasonable Guests, who out of such a houseful as were got together from the high ways and hedges rejected but one. Though the choice ones at this Feast be few, yet the called thereunto are many.  
Thirdly, be they as bad as thou makest them, yet eanst thou find any there, whom thou knowest to be a greater sinner, and a more wicked person then thyself? If thou canst not( as, sure thou canst not, unless thou beest a stranger at home, that thou dost not know thyself) then how groundless is the reason of thy ab●… king from the Communion, because others come thither that are greater sinners then thou, when thine own conscience tells thee thou art the chief of sinners? Not to come to the Sacrament upon such account as this, is as if a man should have refused to go to the Pool of Bethesda because such a multitude of Impotent folk, blind, halt, withered, &c. lay there waiting for the moving of the waters, Joh. 5.3. or should refuse to come at a physician for help, because so many other sick folks come to him for healing.  
Fourthly, Thou art not better then thy Saviour,& he refused not to Eat with Publicans and sinners. 
Cogitent hic Christum convivantem cum suis An pudebit eos illie discumbere ubi vident Christum non pudere? An illo sanctiores& mundiores erunt? So Mr. Brightman on Apoc. 3. v. 20.  Take heed therefore that thou offend not against his Example( his example is a rule,& a law in many cases) by resusing to eat with such( as he refused not to eat withal) if such shall presume to come to his Table. Perhaps thou'lt say, his going amongst them and eating with them was to the intent he might, by conversing with them, have opportunity of converting them: But say I again, admitting that to be part of his Intent, how knowest thou, that to be all his intent? It might, for ought thou knowest, be his intent to teach thee Charity in communicating with such as he did Communicate withal. And doth not your coming together, and going together present you with many fair opportunities of ministering good to their souls? yea the very observing of your reverend and Religious behaviour at that Christian Duty may strike a Reverence into their hearts, and be a means to work them into some Real religiousness, who perhaps before were Formal enough. Oh but thou'lt say, Our Saviour did not eat the Sacrament with such; he eat it with none but his Disciples, I answer: First that it is observed from Joh. 2.13, 23. That he did eat the Sacrament of the Passeover with such. Secondly for the Sacrament of the Lords Supper: it is not expressed that he did eat that Sacrament at all, even with his disciples. But admit he did,( both because I see 
See Bucant 48. loc. come. A juinas concludes he did, citing Sr. jerome, saying, Dominus Jesus Christus ipse conviva& convivium; ipse comedens& qui comeditu●. a. 3. q. 81. Concl.  Authors both ancient, and modern, agreeing on it, and not without some reasons and because there is some obscure intimation of it, in Matth. 26.29. making it probable that he did) yet had he not a worse communicant at the same table with him, then any of those for whose presence sake thou refusest to come at his Table? I mean Iudas 
St. Aug. affirmeth in 62. Tract. in Joh. and after him Aq. 3 q 81. a●t. 2. determines that Judas cum aliis discipalis corpus domini& sangainem sus●… pit, i.e. did receive the body and blood of the Lord with the other Disciples. Saurum cibum mens persida tetigit& sceleratum as panis sancisficatus intravit. D. Cyp. de Can. D.  a Traitor, a devil, and known to be such to him from the beginning; had he not Peter with him, who he knew would deny him and forswear him? yea, did he not know that all his Disciples would prove deserters to him and forsake him? Matth. 26.32, 34. and yet he eat the Sacrament with them. Thirdly Is that a good reason why thou shouldst not eat the Sacrament with those that are Disciples to Christ? because Christ eat it with none but those that were his Disciples? And sure thy Neighbours are Disciples to Christ, though perhaps no great Proficients in Christianity; otherwise, we must go seek out a new meaning of {αβγδ}, i. e. make Disciples of all Nations, Heathens and all, Baptizing them, &c. Matth. 28.19, 20. compared with Joh. 4.1.  
Fifthly, Because they will sin in coming, wilt thou to mend the matter, sin in abstaining? Thou wilt say, it is against thy conscience to come and receive together with such. But say I, such a conscience, as dictates disobedience to a commanded Duty, is an Erring conscience. Thou must therefore, if thou wilt not continue in sin, reform thy conscience and perform thy Duty.  
Sixthly, If others offend thee in coming, thou offendest others, as good as thyself( for ought thou knowest) in abstaining: for thou breakest Communion with them; and by abstaining from communicating among them, as unlawful for thee, thou concludest them under the sin of an unlawful communication: and so makest the hearts of the righteous sad, whom God hath not made sad, Ezek. 13.22. And their Offence is but an offence unjustly taken by thee, not justly given by them; for how should a man give just offence, in doing that duty 
Bonae res neminem scandalizant nisi malam mentem Tertul. See Dr. Steward Serm. on 1 Cor. 10.32. p. 16.& p. 30.  which he should sin in not doing? but thy Offence is an offence justly given by thee to them, not unjustly taken by them at thee: for who can but be justly offended to see a man pretending conscience against his duty? besides, thy abstaining is an Offence in another sense: for it is a means to make others stumble, offend, and wound their own consciences by neglecting of their duty, which is a grievous sin: See Aqui. 22 dae. q. 43. art. 1. Ames. de. Consc. l. 5. c. 11.  
Yea, but sayest thou still, after all this, what have you to say to the Apostle? Why to your collection from the Apostle, I answer that it is a mere mistake, the Apostle doth indeed, in 1 Cor. 5.11. interdict the Corinthians that free encouraging converse with Christian professors, that are guilty of retaining any of those sensual heathen fins used by idolaters, and doth command them that with such an one they should not enter into any friendly commerce, so much, as to eat with him, much less to admit him to the Sacrament, or the Feast that attended that until he should reform. But the Apostle doth not forbid them, or any of them to come together, and receive the Sacrament, because of any such coming to receive it with them. This you think to be the Apostles meaning here. But here is no thing, nor word of this, either here, or any where else in all his writings. Why but you'l say, How then shall we avoid mingling with them, and cating with them, if we abstain not from coming, and eating with them, when they come to eat? I answer, by not suffering them to come and mingle, and eat with you. The Apostle himself tells the Corinthians, and you in them, what to do in this case, in ver. 13. Put away from yourselves that wicked person. Let the Censures of the Church be inflicted on him: and let him, and all such Christian Professors, as are guilty of such sins, be excommunicated, debarred, and kept back from the Communion, let them not be suffered so far to mingle with Christians, as to eat with them at the Table of the Lord.  
But you'l say we have no power to hinder them from coming into our company at such Times, and eating with us at those Holy Feasts. To this I answer. First, If you have not the power of an Authoritative excommunication, yet you have the Power of Brotherly Admonition, and may by that discreetly managed, either keep them from coming, or bring them into some fitness, to come. And which of you that are so minded do so? And how will you answer your not so doing? Secondly, 
See Aqu. 22 dae. q. 107. art. 1. 2 dum.  If you have no power to hinder them from coming, then it shall not be your sin, if they come: nor shall you sin in doing what you ought, because they will be where, and be doing what they ought not. If the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father, neither shall the parishioner bear the iniquity of his neighbour. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him, Ezek. 18.20, The soul that sinneth, it shall die, ib. ver. 4, 20.  
Thirdly, your want of power, to hinder another from doing what he should not, will not excuse you from sin, in not doing, what you should, and have Power to do. You have Power to come yourselves, and eat, though you have not Power to keep him away from coming, and eating with you. And he that hath not Power to do all he ought, yet ought to do all that's in his Power. And how you will Answer your neglect of doing, what our Saviour expressly hath commanded you to do, would do well to be considered. Thus much in Answer to your mistake from the first place.  
Your mistake from the second place, viz. 2 Cor. 6.17. is this, You think the Apostle there commands or exhorts Christians to come out from among and be separate from, i.e. forsake and abstain from coming at Christian Assemblies, especially when they come together, into one place to eat the Supper of the Lord, because of some unbelieving, ignorant, or wicked Christians being there. Why, but the Apostle saith no suchword, nor speaks of any such thing in that place. What? can it be imagined that the Apostle should exhort Christians to division, and schism, which he so dehorts even these very Corinthians from 1 Cor. 1.10. and reproves them for, 1 Cor. 11.18, 19, 20, 21, 22. and exhorts the Romans to mark them which caused divisions, and offences, contrary to the doctrine they had learned and avoid them? Rom. 16.17. The Apostle having in an elegant Antithesis largely set forth the disparity of conditions betwixt the Corinthian Christians, and the either Heathen Infidels, or temporising heretics, betwixt whom there is as little real concord, fellowship, or communion, as betwixt righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness, Christ and Belial, a Believer, and an Infidel, the Temple of God, and the Idols Temple, from thence draws, and by way of exhortation presseth on them this conclusion, that they should rid themselves out of so wicked company, and unclean conversation, by no means complying with them so far as to go to their Idol Temples, and Feasts with them, but with all strictness to abstain from such society. Now what argument can be drawn from the Apostles exhorting of Christians to forsake the society of Idolatrous Heathens, to move Christians to forsake the society of such as are called to be Saints? or what reason can be drawn from the Apostles dehorting Believers from going with Infidels to the Idols Feasts, to prove that it is unlawful for any man that professeth faith in Christ, to go together with other professors of the same faith, to the Table of the Lord, of which the Apostle speaks not one word in that place? Because the Apostle dissuades Christians from having communion with Infidels, or heretics in that which was simply, and in itself evil and unlawful; will you therefore conclude that Christians ought to withdraw themselves from having communion with Christians in that which is lawful, and good, and a necessary Duty? wherein lies the force of the argument? is it because the Christian Churches are as unlawful for Christians to worship in, as Idol Temples considered as such? Sure this is not it, however some brainsick o●es do fancy little less. Is i● because the Lords Table is as unlawful to be partaken of, as the Table of Divels? this is not it sure neither. No man that names the name of Christ will say thus. Is it then because wicked Christians are as unlawful to be joined withal, in a Religious Christian Duty, as Heathens in their superstitious Idol worship? why but this cannot be it neither. The Apostle saith not so here: nor doth he, or any other say so any where else, either in words, or effect. And if there were any ground for it, then it would as well conclude against your joining with them in Prayer or hearing the word, as in Receiving the Sacrament, which sure is no more a Christian Duty, then the other; and I hope you are not yet so much a Separatist. So that the whole argument from this Scripture against receiving the Sacrament in mixed Assemblies of Christian professors is a mere mistake.  
No other, or better, is that which is drawn from, Eph. 5.11. where Christians are forbidden to have fellowship with the unruitful works of darkness. Do you think the Apostle meant, in this place to prohibit Christians to receive the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord in mixed Congregations? why, here's not one word spoken of this matter in all that Chapter. The Apostle in verse 3. &c. dehorts the Ephesians from Fornication, and those other abominable, and unnatural filthinesses and uncleannesses, which both the Heathens, and some temporising heretics practised; from the mean inconsistency of such practices with true Christianity ver. 5. and from the obnoxiousness of the practisers thereof to the wrath of God, ver. 6. In consideration whereof he exhorts them not to be partakers with them, v. 7, not to have fellowship with them, v. 11. But what's all this to the business of receiving the Sacrament in a mixed Congregation? May not a man join with his Neighbour in the performance of a Duty, because he may not join with him in the perpetration of a villainy? May he not be a partaker together with him of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, because he may not be a partaker with him in his practise of Heathen filthiness, and uncleanness? may he have no fellowship with him in commanded Acts of Holinesse, because he may have no fellowship with him in the unfruitful works of darkness? And yet this is all the reason( for ought I can see) that can be drawn from this Scripture to dissuade men from receiving the Sacrament in a mixed Congregation. Which how weak it is any man may see, that is but satisfied in this, that it is one thing to communicate with a man in a Duty, and another thing to communicate with him in a Sin: and the sinfulness of the one cannot make the other sinful, especially since the Duties are but specifically the same, not in dividually: they severally act their Singular Duties, though both at one time, in one place, and after the same external manner: so that the receiving of the one, is no more the receiving of the other, then my eating of my portion of meat, is your eating of your portion of meat, though we be both at one time, at one Table, and be partners at one and the self same mess. To argue therefore that it is unlawful for me to do right, to receive the Sacrament, as I ought, because it is a sin for another to do wrong, to receive otherwise then he ought, is a mistake and hath not foot hold in this Scripture.  
Such another mistake is that again, which you draw from the Apostles commanding the Thessalonians to withdraw themselves from every Brother that walketh disorderly, 2 Thess. 3.6. to Note him, and have no company with him. ver. 14. Hence you conclude that, you ought rather to forbear coming to the Lords Table, then come thither together with any disorderly walking Brother. Why, but this is a more mistake; The Apostle saith no such word. He commands them indeed to withdraw themselves from every Brother that walketh disorderly, but he doth not command them to withdraw themselves from the Table of the Lord. He commands them to have no company with him, but he doth not command them to forsake the Assembling of themselves together to Commemorate the death of Christ in the Supper of the Lord because of him. And say, I beseech you, in good sadness, Do you think in your conscience that the Apostles meaning was, that the whole of Christ in Thessalonica could so oft abstain from coming to the Table of the Lord as there should be any disorderly walking Brother among them, and so long as he should continue in his disorderly walking? what were this, but to evacuate, and disannul the Ordinance of Christ? For supposing, what is very excusable, that there might be a succession of persons, in that, or any other Church, that should be guilty of disorderly walking, or some other scandalous wickedness, rendering them unfit for Christians to have company with them, if because there were so, that Church must abstain from the Lords Table, it would then follow, that the Apostle, in such case, should command the Thessalonians, or other Church, never to meet together in one place to eat the Supper of the Lord, so long as they should live. The absurdity of which consequence hath reason enough in it to persuade, that the Apostle had some other meaning in his words quiter different from this. Why but you perhaps will say, How could the Thessalonians, or any other Church of Christians otherwise avoid having company with such disorderly scandalous persons if all might come, as who would not come that were convinced that it were the Duty of all to come, that profess themselves Christians? To this the answer is very easy, the company of such disorderly persons at sacred Duties might by the Thessalonians, and may by any other Church( where there is an establishment of Discipline) be avoided, by keeping such scandalous, disorderly persons out of their company, not suffering them to have company with them. For all may not come to the Sacrament that will, and when they will Christ hath left a power in his Church to take in,& turn out, as occasion shall be. And such as are untaken in by baptism, or have been turned out by Excommunication, or are under any other natural, or legal incapacity may not come. And when any shall deserve to be withdrawn from, the withdrawing which the Apostle speaks of, is to be understood of the censuring and excommunicating of such person, the putting away from themselves, and delivering up unto Satan such wicked person. His meaning never was to command any Christian to disobey the command of Christ, because of any other scandalous Christians disobedience in a disorderly and unchristian walking. If you shall again object a want of power in our Parochial Congregations of withdrawing in such wise and by such means from such disorderly walking Brethren, I must refer you for satisfaction to what I spake before in answer to the same objection from 1 Cor. 5.11. by which I still abide.  
And now having cleared( I hope) the Apostles meaning from your mistakes, I shall only add, that if it were so to be wished as nothing more on earth, that every one that Names the Name of Christ would depart from all iniquity, that all the Lords people were Really as well as Relatively Holy, that righteousness might have no Fellowship with unrighteousness, nor Light have any communion with darkness, that is, that there were no impure and wicked Livers within the Pale of the Church for Righteous and Holy persons to communicate withall, even in the common Duties of religious Worship. But withall I must profess to believe, that He that will never receive the Sacrament, till he may receive it in a Congregation of such Elect Saints of God as are all Really as well as Relatively Holy, may seek long, ere he shall find such a Congregation, and stay long, ere he be sure the Congregation that he is to receive withall be such. In the mean time, it will not be amiss for him to consider( because death may perhaps surprise and take him away from the Society of Men, before he shall have found out, and joined himself with such a society of Saints) it will not, I say be amiss for him to consider, whether this will be hereafter a good plea, in excuse for his Negligence in not doing the known will of his Lord, to say, Lord, I confess I was invited to thy Supper, and knew it was my duty to come, but because I disliked some of thy Guests that were to be there in company with me, therefore I forbore, and would not come, choosing rather to disobey thy Command, and refuse thy Supper, then to accept thine Invitation, and come to thy Supper with such Company. And if this will be but a sorry Plea, then beware of such Principles, as will put on such Practices, as will have no better pleas, then such to defend or excuse them. But and if that He, having first mistaken, and then misapplied to himself what the Apostle speaks in 1 Cor. 2.15. touching the spiritual mans judging all things, shall, upon the account thereof, presume himself able to find out, and discern such a Congregation of Elect ones, as he may safely join himself withall, it would do well for him, in the mean time to consider, how he will wipe off from himself the Guilt of making a division from the Congregation, which hitherto he hath held communion withall, and of giving offence unto such Brethren, as he leaves behind therein, and of casting a stumbling block before others not so discerning as himself, that take occasion by his example to divide also, and separate themselves therefrom, to join with such as he himself condemns, viz. Papists, Anabaptists, Ranters, Quakers, &c. We unto the world because of offences: for it must needs be that offences come: but wo to that man by whom the offence cometh, Matth. 18.7. It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the Sea, then that he should offend one of these little Ones, Luk. 17.2. And withal let him assure himself, that however it be, that the spiritual man in the Apostles sense, do judge, or discern all things, yet his making a sckisme or rent in the Church by his dividing and separating himself, is no good proof of his being that spiritual man which the Apostle speaks of. For whereas there is among you envying and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? for while one saith, I am of Paul, and another I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal? 1 Cor. 3.3, 4. But beloved remember ye the words which were spoken before of the Apostles of our Lord Iesus Christ, how that they  told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts, these be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the spirit judas, v. 17.18, 19.  
I shall give you for a close to this Part of my discourse the judgement of Zacharias Ursinus( no friend to promiscuous communion,) upon the point,& that is, that ubi non viget usus Disciplinae Ecclesiasticae, &c. i.e. where the Church hath no power of debarring profane persons from the Supper of the Lord, there it sinneth not in admitting them to it. Adding that when such do thrust themselves into the communion of Saints, they do indeed profane the Sacrament, but to themselves only, not to the Church, or to the Saints that do communicate together with them. And moreover he saith, Minister Ecclesiae ubi non viget excommunicatie excusatus est, &c. i.e. that the Minister of the Church where the power of excommunication is not in force, is excused, so he do not willingly give the Sacrament to those that abuse it, but do earnestly warn them, and desire to prevent the abuses. So he, Explic. Catechet. qu. 82. 
Cum ergo sieve per negligentiam praepositorum, sieve per aliquam excusabilem necessitatem, sieve per occultas obreptiones, invenimus in Ecclesiâ malos, quos Ecclesiasticâ disciplinâ corrigere aut coercere non possumus, tunc nec ascendat in cor nostrum impia& perniciosa praesumprio, qua existimemus, nos ab his esse separandos, ut peccatis corum non inquinemur, atque ta post nos trahere conemur quoddle mundos sanctesque discipulos ab unitatis compage, quasi à malorum consortio segregatos: veniant in mentem illae de scriptures similitudines,& divina oracula vel certissi●… a exempla, quibus demonstratum& pronunciatum est, malos in Ecclesia permixtos bonis usque in finem saeculi tempusque judicii futures,& nihil benis in unitate ac participatione Sacramentorum, qui eorum factis non corsenserint, obsuturos. D. Aug. d. Fid.& operib. cap. 5.   
Hitherto we have seen how the Point is Useful in the way of Information, and of Reprehension. Come we now in the third, and last place to Exhortation. And if it be so, that it is the Duty of every understanding Christian to commemorate the death of Christ by a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord, why then let us, every one of us, who are such, do our duty in this point, let us answer Gods call; observe his command; come at his invitation; and do this which our Saviour hath bidden us, in remembrance of him.  
To such as are backward, and cool towards the perforformance thereof, I shall make bold in the way of motive, to present these considerations following. First, Consider I pray you, that whilst we are commemorating the death of Christ, we are in the way of duty, and whilst we are in the way of Duty, we are in the way of Blessing. Though none of our performances, the best of them not accepted, can merit any thing for the worth of them at the hand of God, yet being done in obedience to his command, they have a Blessing entailed on them by his most gracious promise. O come to the Lords Table poor creature; the Lord bestows blessings there( and its good being where something is to be gotten) thou mayest go away from thence with blessing; yea, I can assure thee, that if thou comest thither such as thou shouldst, and carriest thyself there so as thou shouldst, thou shalt be blessed, though not for yet in thy dead.  
Secondly, Consider, that what is our Duty is also our Honour. How do we think ourselves honoured, when some great Person is pleased to condescend so low as to look upon us, and bid us to his Table? When Haman had been at one banquet of the Queens preparing, and was invited against the next day to another, this filled his heart with joy and gladness he went forth( as it's said Est. 5.9.) That day joyful, and with a glad heart. And when he came home, so big was he with the conceit of the honour done him, that he could not contain, but sends and calls for his Wife and Friends to tell them of his honour, and glory, and promotion which had befallen him at court, And Haman said moreever( ver. 12.) yea Esther the Queen did let no man come in with the King unto the bauquet that she had prepared, but myself: and to morrow I am invited unto her also with the King. Such account do men naturally make of being invited to, and entertained at the Tables of grrat Persons. Oh what an honour it is to them? why sure it must be a much greater honour to be invited to, and be entertained at the Table of God himself, to be a Guest at his board on whom ten thousand times ten thousands of Angels do attend. Oh who would loose such an honour as this? to eat and drink at Gods Table, in the House of God? Methinks there should be little need of bidding us do, what is such an Honour to the doers of it. 'twere worth an Ambition, so little need one would think there should be of Exhortation to it, consider I bescech you, seriously of it: what is your Duty, is also your dignity: your service in this is even your honour. This honour, as it is written, have all his Saints.  
Thirdly, consider the freeness of the Invitation, it extends to all conditions of Persons. Kings and Great men of the earth, they use to invite none to their Tables but Princes and Great men. Gods Table is a Free Table: free for the meanest, as well as for the greatest; for every one that hungers, and thirsts after the Lord Jesus Christ, and communion with him. Ho, every one that thirsteth come ye to the waters of life. Every one: this is Gods language in his invitations, Isa. 55.1. Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, Matth. 11.28. If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink, Joh. 7.37. And the Spirit and the Bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is a thirst, Come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely, Rev. 22.17. The invitation you see is general and free: Oh why now should any stay back from that Feast whereunto all are so freely invited?  
Fourthly, Consider the Universality of the welcome that is given to the Guests at this Feast. Poor people are apt to be possessed with a disheartening modesty, when invited to a Feast, whereat they must be companions with their betters, and to stay away out of an apprehension, that though bidden thither, yet they shall be looked lightly on when there. It is not so here Brethren. Outward pre-eminences cease at Gods board: all are equals there. He that first brought up the Feast, made no difference among his guests, but gave to them all, and to them all alike. And so it is to this day; none hath more honourable part or portion then another( for we are all partakers of that one loaf, 1 Cor. 10.7.) all are entertained alike. 'tis a communion of Saints: be you but such, though your outward condition be never so mean, you are as good a Guest, as the best that is bidden: and so you come prepared as you should, you shall be as kindly received, and as welcome made as the most honourable person that is at the Feast.  
Fifthly, Consider the Excellency of the Cheer provided at that Feast. Men are ordinarily apt to say, at such, or such a Feast we are sure to have good Cheer, I'll not miss that Feast by any means: Now certainly if the goodness of the cheer have any attractivenesse in it, to draw men to the Feast, here is Cheer at this Feast incomparable good beyond all that ever was, or can be at any other. mark here how in the Text it is set forth, under the titles of Bread and wine, the chiefest and choicest of mans nourishments and refreshments, either by way of meat, or drink. When Abraham returned from the slaughter of the kings( Gen. 14.18. He had an Entertainment given him by Melchizedeck King of Salem. And what think you did that King of Peace entertain this returning Conqueror withall? Why, Melchizedeck King of Salem brought forth Bread and Wine. Bread, and Wine are furniture for the Table of a King. 'tis a royal entertainment that you are like to have at Gods Table. Heres Bread to satisfy your hunger, and heres wine to alloy and quench your Thirst; Let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup: Not barely let him eat Bread, and drink of a Cup, but with an Article pointing at the eminency, and excellency of this Bread, and Cup above and beyond all other, {αβγδ}, let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup, let him refresh himself with that most excellent Bread and Wine. And truly such is the Bread and Wine, in the Supper of the Lord, if you consider them according to the Sacramental Nature thereof. For as such, they are to the worthy Receivers thereof the very Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. When saith the Apostle Paul( 1 Cor. 10.16.) The Cup of Blessing, which we bless is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ? The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? that is, most assuredly it is so. And so it is to the worthy Receiver thereof, who really, though spiritually eats the Flesh, and drinks the blood of the Son of Man. Oh how desirous now methinks should every one be to be feeding on those Celestial Delicacies! Methinks I should hear every man saying in his heart to Jesus Christ, in the words, though not in the sense of those Jews in Joh. 6 34. Lord evermore give us this bread.  
Sixthly, consider the Benefits, that may come to you, by eating of that Bread, and drinking of that Cup. They are many; but that I may not be tedious I will mention but Four. The First, is the strengthening of thy Soul by the increase of thy Grace. Hast thou little Grace in thee? and is that little weak? and wouldest thou have it more, and more strong? O come then to the Lords Table, feed, feed hearily on the Lords Body there broken for thee: that will as verily add increase to thy Grace and make it more; and add strength to thy grace stronger, as thy body( if capable thereof) receives increase and strength from the bread which thou eatest, He that eateth me, even he shall live by me, Joh. 6.57.  
The second is the refreshing of thy Soul, with the pardon of thy sin. 
Qui manducaverit hoc corpus fiet ei remissi● peccatoram. D. Ambr. 4. l. de● Sacram. cap. 5  Is thy soul wounded with, and sick of sin? and is it thirst after the Pardon of sin? Oh come then to the Lords Table, drink, yea drink hearty of the Cup of the Lord, of the Blood of the Lord there poured forth for thee. That will cleanse and heal thy wounds, and that will revive and refresh thy soul, 
Cor nostrum esca ista confirmat& potus iste laetificat cor hoins D. Ambros. lib de iis qu● mysteriis initiantur. c. 9. Defaecatis animis carnis ejus edalium non est horrori said honori, p●ut●… queen sancti& sanct●… cantis sanguinis spiritus delectatur. D Cyprian de Caen. Dom Cyp●i●mus, Augustimus& alii de usu Caenae lo●…, quod sit consolationis ci 〈…〉 ulum cordis. M●… Consil: Theolog. 〈◇〉. 1 p. 47.  No wine more healing, or more refreshing to a wounded or fainting Body, then the blood of Christ to a soul that bleeds under the sense of sin, and thirsts after it's Pardon for sin. And this is offered to the right prepared comer; this is exhibited to the worthy receiver of that sacred Seal. The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin, 1 Joh. 1.7.  
The third is the more near Uniting of thy Soul with thy Saviour. Eat of that Bread, and drink that Cup of the Lord worthily, and Christ by that means will be brought to dwell in you, and you in Christ; You will be brought to be one with Christ 
Haec accepta atque hansta, id efficiunt, ut nos in Christo,& Christus in nobis sit. D. Hilar. de Trin. l. 8. said& nos ipsi, corpus ejus effecti, Sacramento,& re Sacramenti connectimur& unimur D. Cyprian. d● Coen. Dom.  and Christ with you. He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him, Joh. 6.59. Now he that worthily receives these pledges of the love of Christ, he that eats of that Bread and drinks of that Cup in a right manner, he spiritually eats the flesh of Christ and drinks his blood, and is really made a Partaker of them. So now as there is an union betwixt the eater, and the thing eaten, resulting from the eating of it! just so there is an union betwixt Christ, and those that eat his flesh, and drink his blood resulting from their participation of him: they both grow into one mystical body. The difference is, that the union betwixt the elements eaten and the body of the eater is natural and carnal: but the union betwixt Christ and the soul of the worthy Communicant, is surpernatural, and spiritual. Oh then wouldest thou be one spirit with Christ? wouldest thou be joined to the Lords body; become flesh of his flesh, 
In illa mistica distributi●ne spiritalis alimoniae hoc impertitur, hoc sumitur sumitur ut accipientes virtutem coelestis cibi, in carnem ipsius, qui caro nostra factus est transeamus. lo Mag. Ep. ad Eccl. Constantinop.  and bone of his bone? wouldst thou be more nearly united unto Christ, and be one with Christ? come then with right affections, and due preparation unto the Lords Table and there thou shalt have that blessed conjunction wrought betwixt thy soul and thy Saviour. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 1 Cor. 10.16  
The Fourth and last is, The immortality of both your soul and body. Other food feeds at the best but onely unto a temporal life, but this food feeds to a life eternal. 
Nec jam ad elaborata impensis& arte convivia populi invitantur, said immortalitatis alimonia datur, a communibus cibis differens, corporalis substantiae retinens speciem, said virtutis divinae in visibili effieientia probans adesse praesentiam. D. Cyprian, de Gaen. Dom.  I am the living bread which came down from heaven, If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world, Joh. 6.51. And he that eateth me, even he shall live by me, ib. ver. 57. well now he that rightly participates of the Sacramental signs the Bread and Cup here spoken of in the Text, he eats the flesh of the Son of God, and drinks his blood: and he that doth so, hath life eternal. Who so eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day, Job. 6.54. Oh now wouldst thou not lie down for ever under the Dominion of Death? nor be held an everlasting prisoner to corruption? feed then on this living Bread, this bread of life, this bread which gives life: feed thyself spiritually on the Lord Jesus Christ, eat his Flesh, and drink his Blood: and feed thyself Sacramentally on this Bread and Cup which the Text here speaks of, and thou shalt have thy wish. This food sets those that 

Christus mihi eibus, Christus mihi potus; quomodo morietur cvi cibus vita est? quomodo deficict, qui, habuerit vitalem sabstantiam? D. Ambros.  
Corpus Christi edimus ut vitae aeterne possimus esse ●articipes. lo madge Iste cibus e●ss, a quibus sumitu● immortales 〈◇〉 incorruptibiles facit. D. Aug.   partake of it free from the bonds of mortality and corruption: it renders them immortal and incorruptible. He that eateth of this bread shall live for ever, Joh. 6.58. This Bread can be taken by none but him that believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. Now He that believeth on the Son of God hath everlasting life, Joh. 6.47. and though die he must for a while, yet he shall not die for ever, Joh. 11.26. but shall be raised up to a life eternal at the last day, Joh. 6.40, 54.  
To conclude this Point then. If any hope of a Blessing; or any sense of Honour; If freeness of Invitation, Assurance of Welcome, or Excellency of Entertainment may be prevalent with us, we have enough, for we have all these, to draw us to this Feast of good things: To the end then that we may have our Graces increased, our sins pardonned, our souls united unto Christ here, and both our souls and bodies confirmed by Christ in an eternal enjoyment of life hereafter, let us, as the Apostle here exhorts us, eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup.  
Eat of that bread! and drink of that Cup! Why ther's enough, yea too many, some will say no doubt, ready enough to do that, without half this bidding. They cannot be kept from it, so little need is there of exhorting them to it. Truly I am of the same mind: yet forasmuch as the Duty is General, equally belonging unto all that profess themselves Christians, I cannot but exhort all that profess themselves Christians, to the Duty.  
But then I must beseech all, to whom I give this Invitation, to consider that the Duty of Receiving the Sacramental Bread and Wine is not to go alone by itself, but is to be Ushred in by another Duty, namely, that of self-examination. And my exhortation is to be understood as reaching unto both. For these hath the Apostle joined together; and set the one in order before the other, to show that the one is to be done, as a Preparatory Act in Order to our more Christian Performance of the other. And what God hath put together, let no man part asunder: but do what God hath ordered, and do it in Gods order: Eat indeed of that Bread and drink of that Cup: But first examine himself before he do either. For so lye the Words, and the Duties thereby commanded in the Text. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. And so I should pass from the primary and substantial Duty of the Text, to that which is Subordinate and Circumstantial, in it viz. that of Examining a mans self, touching which, the Point that I have laid down is this.  
In order to a worthy celebration of the Supper of the Lord, it is the Duty of every Communicant to examine himself before he eat of that bread and drink of that cup: but let a man examine himself.  
In the handling of this Point, should be shown, First that it is requisite that every Communicant do Prepare himself for the Lords Table, by self examination. Secondly wherein that preparation doth consist. But there is so much and so well spoken of this by other more able Persons, that I am willing to refer the Reader for his Instruction unto them, and to spare him the trouble of reading any thing further( of this nature) of mine. The Lord sanctify to him and me what hath already been said.  
Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, To the onely wife God our Saviour be glory, and Majesty, Dominion and power, now, and for ever. Amen.   

The Author's Prayer:  
ALmighty and everlasting God, which makest us both to will and to do those things that be good and acceptable unto thy Majesty, vouchsafe I humbly pray thee, Thy gracious Acceptation to what thou hast enabled Thy weak and unworthy Instrument to perform in this Treatise. And be pleased so to prepare and dispose the heart of every one that shall red it, that he may be capable of receiving profit by it: yea do Thou so sanctify and bless it unto him, that he may have cause to bless and glorify Thee for it. If I have herein built upon thy foundation any thing that shall deserve to be burut, O let thy Purgatory fire pass upon it, but let thy servant be saved. If any good shall hereby redound unto any of thy either doubting or deceived people, not unto me, O Lord, not unto me, but unto thy Name be the Glory. Remember me, O my God, with the favour that thou bearest unto thy people, and spare me according to the greatness of thy mercy, even through him that loved me, and gave himself for me, Christ Jesus thy dear and only Son, my ever blessed Lord and only Saviour, To whom with thyself, and thy most Sacred Spirit, Three Persons in One God, be all Honour, Glory, and Praise ascribed for ever. Amen.  
FINIS.