JUDAS EXCOMMUNICATED, OR A VINDICATION OF THE Communion of Saints: BEING A brief Examination and clear Refutation of Mr Peter Lightfoots Arguments for proof of JUDAS his receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, (which, could he prove, makes nothing at all for a mixed Communion.)  
By JOSEPH HEMING, a Servant to all men in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Clemens. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Maximus. 
LONDON, Printed for Giles Calvert at the black Spread-Eagle near the West end of Paul's, 1649.   

To all the SAINTS OF THE Most High God In and about VTTOXITER: Salvation by JESUS.  
Precious Hearts,  
I Confess I am engaged in low and fruitless Contreversies, against which I find a reluctancy in my spirit, because they tend not so much to edification as could be Wished: but as I am bound to vindicate the lowess truth from the find aspersions. and false calumniations of Satan and his instruments; so I daily, God that low things are most beneficial for believers of lowest attainments: And what I have done in this, is for their sakes, who came out of Egypt, out of Babylon but the other day; I am unwilling they should be carried captives back again, or that those who dearly see the doors opened to them, should be any longer kept in bondage. Many weak ones have stumbled at what Mr Lightfoot hath spoken and written, though there be neither Divinity nor Reason●● it.  
I never intended this Answer of mine should have come to a p●●lick censure, had not Mr Lightfoot and his unholy Communic●●● dealt deceifully (that I say not, dishonestly) with me, in breaking some sentences, and taking up such pieces of them, as they conc●●●● might bring the truth and my person into contempt and disgrace, possessing people at home and abroad, that I wrong and abuse him, whilst be shame fully conceals my whole Answer, together with the true intent and meaning of those innocent expressions he and they so much cry out upon. Wrong be shall have none, if shame, he may thank himself.  
Most of you sufficiently know how patiently I have born wish him hither to, and my own conscience tells me, the truth hath suffered too much through my forbearance and long-suffering. He hath had his time to insult over, caluminiate, reproach, and belie it, reporting whatsoever be pleased touching my Answer to his Paper, insomuch that no any ungodly ones ●ell immediately to blaspheming, curing, railing, and trampling upon the Truth, as though it had been quite conquered. And although Rabshekehs rail make not breaches in Je●usal●ms Walls, yet many weak Christains (seeing only a few unchristianly wrested-expressions in small bits of Paper, and not knowning how little Judas his receiving or not receiving doth either advantage or disadvartage a Communion of Saints) Were abundantly discouraged, and bunded downs their necks, that the Whore which sits on many warers might go over. And now I hope it is high time for me to speak in vindication of the truth, and for satisfaction of such as are so easily serupled by false reports, and ready upon every summons from Satan ro deliver up their strong holds, not knowing they have, on every side, Salvation for Walls and Bulwarks; and to publish my Answer, most unfaithfully dealt withal by Mr Lightfoot, that ye may see it, and then judge righteously between me (or rather the truth) and him. And I would entreat those into whose hands this may come, to turn unto the Scriptures quoted (Which I hope will not be wis-printed) and strictly to examine them, and then to judge impartially: I crave no savour at the hands of any man; hough this piece Was never cut out for the public vion●●●; let me see my Erratas, and I shall endeavour to correct and amind them.  
My Antagonist takes great exceptions at a plaindealing Epistle, intended only for himself and some few Friends, for I had no thoughts of printing then, and is conceited that I have exceedingly wronged him in it; all the right I can do him, is, not to insert it here, and (though I am able to make good every jot and tittle of it) for the future to bury it in the abiss of Oblivion, if so be I am not enforced by his unjust clamours, and exotic constructions put upon it, to send it, With a large Comment upon it, after this.  
All the exceptions he makes (so far forth as I can learn either from himself or others) against the particulars of my Answer, are so frivolous and groundless, that he durst not give them under his own hand, much less publish them to the World, and therefore I may very well pass them by; but yet I must needs vindicate the last particular (in the close of all,) against which he hath draws up a Charge of high Crimis and Misdemeanours: Good Friends and Readers turn to it; is begins thus, That I should super-abundantly wrong him, if I should not rank him amongst the vilest in the Kingdom, for with them, etc. for this I must pay dearly, saith he, and his profane fellow Members: But were not I a mad man, and might I not deservedly incur the name or title of a Schismatic, should I make a breach in his Church, in his Communion? and for this he calls me twenty Fools, and mad man, etc. But work, a while, and you shall see the Food, the mad man, as well as the Whetstone, Will fall to his share. He would persuade people (or some others for him) that there in that place I make him a Drunkard, a Thief, a Murderer, etc. and why may be not as well persuade them I make him a Whore? The business is in deed and in truth thus; All that are in Church-fellowship or Communion With him, are, in a Scripture sense, his Brethren and Sisters. And this I dare say, I can prove against all the devils in hell by almost (if not all out or above) an hundred Scriptures: No man that hath not a forehead of Brass or Iron can deny it. I have beside the Scripture Reason, and the consent of most Divines, whether Episcopal, Presbyterial Independent, or by what nicknames soever they are called or distinguished, on my side; if any shall deny it, they must disclaim their own principles or tenets. The very Book of Common-Prayer called all the men in all Parishes throughout England and Wales, Dear beloved Brethren, etc. I know all men of dis-engaged judgements all the Kingdom over Will vote it in the Affirmative, but I am content the matter should be tried at the tri●●●●● of his own conscience, if yet is be not seared with a hot iron.  
So then as long as be will walk in fellowship or Communion with profane, wicked, lose men and women, as Members of the saw external visible body of christ (the Church) with himself, they must and shall be his brethren and sisters: for to say, I will wal● in Church fellowship or Communion with such and such men and women, etc. and yet they shall not be my brethren and sisters, is an absierd, idle, vain, foclish, irrational, contradictory assertion 'tis to say and unsay, and in plain English, to say just nothing at all.  
And for those that have been hanged at Tyburn, etc. unless b● can prove that they were not by Raptism admitted into his Church, nor be into theirs; or that they were first excommunicated, (which be shall never do: and besides, let him but once mention Exce●●munication with Approbation and his cause is utterly lost,) or 〈◊〉 less he will eat his own words, deny a National Church in so gross a sense as ●e ●ol●s one, or join with us in order to a Reformation, let him fret and fu●●e huff and puss●rage and storm, call and miss●●●● while ●e will, they must and shall be his brethren, &c 'tis he 〈◊〉 made them so, not, therefore let none he offended with me: W●● he disclaims that Communion he pleads for, the bonds of this brotherhood will be loosed, and not before. I confess, I was once of this brotherhood myself, but now I abhor and loathe it; And yet I look upon all men whatsoever as my brethren in this sense, viz. as we are the off spring of, and have dependency upon the same eternal Being, Acts 17.28, 29.  
He is willing such at Judas was should be his Brethren-Co 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nicants; and do Drunkards, Th●eves, Murderers, Liars, etc. ex●●ed Judas in Wickedness? He is called a Devil, John 6.70. and we such worse than Devils? Behold then a Communion of w●se than Devils. What are the ends of the man's arguings? I wish be would declare them to us. But to hasten to a period, the viles● men in England (professing Faith in Christ) shall be his brethren, but it vexeth him to the heart they should be called so.  
Whereas he bla●oneth abroad, That I grant Judas received, etc. as though he had obtained his end: As I doubt not but all ●●antions men will smile at his folly, so for satisfaction of the lowest capacities amongst u●, I am willing to say again, 'tis not 〈…〉 ●ath proved it, or ever will whilst he liveth, bu● because he shall not say, what I contend for (viz a Communion of Saints) 〈◊〉 upon Judas his receiving or not receiving, Admit he did, sh●●os● in ●e granted, I say, yet that doth not in the least measure advantege his, or prejudice my cause: L●t him draw his inferences.  
When he gives ou●, be could quickly be re●●●●led to unto, he acknowledgeth the difference in affection is only on his part, and be speaks most truly, for I am willing to have the love of all man, and to live peaceably with them, so far as possibly I may; ●a●● I 〈…〉 compliancy with any man to the prejudice and dis-advantage of the truth. My very adversarious must needs confess I have b●●n so ●ar from preaching Contention, Strife and Division amongst godly man of dissenting judgements in matters of Worship, that I have endeavoured to make up all branche●, and to ●ust all names and 〈◊〉 of distinction behind my back.  
Now, good Friends and Readers, do not say I have spoken any thing in passion or bitterness of spirit, for (if I may uso Po●●ls Asterveration, 3 Cor. 1.23.) I call God to record upon my soul, I have not. I find my very bowels are moved for him; and ob● th●●●●e would smite upon his thigh, and say, What have I done? I am so far from hating his person, or seeking revenge for any injury done to me, that I profess I will lay my very hands under his fies to do him good.  
Here is one thing that I would have you, and all men, to take special notice of, namely, That Mr Light●oo● Communion Diametrically opposeth,  
1. The Scriptures, the plain Letter, 1 Cor. 5.9, 10, 11. 2 Cor. 6.14.15, 16, 17, 18.  
2. His Creed, or at least this Article of it, viz. The Communion of Saints; for I suppose he believes in God, etc. and in Jesus Christ, &c, and in the Holy Ghost, etc. the holy Catholic Church, but his Communion must be of ungodly, s●o●ndal●● and notorious sinners, and not of Saints.  
3. The Covenant, by which we are bound to endeavour a Reformation according to the Word of God, and the best Reformed Churches, who abbor such Communions.  
4. The Directory, which saith, The ignorant and the scandalous are not fit to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, pag. ●●. Yea, the Common-Prayer-Book itself, which shuts the doors against and keeps out open and notorious evil livers, till they have manifested repentance for the satisfaction of the Congregation, etc. It seems his Reformation it to bring us into a far worse condition than ever we were in, under Prelacy and Common-Prayer-Book.  
5. And lastly. The Principles, Hopes, Expectations, and joy●● Endeavours of all godly Ministers, both of the Independent (so called) and more purely Presbyterial way; who, that it not wilfully blind, will be of a Communion that thus sets itself in opposition to all that is called God, or holy in every dispentsation and form of Worship● I shall trouble you with no more at present, but earnestly entreat you seriously to consider of these things, and the Lord give you understanding in every thing, and lead you forth into the ways of Righteousness, that you may walk blameless before him in Love.  
Uttoxiter in Stafford-shire, June 2. 1649. Yours as ye are Christ's; Jos. Heming.   

JUDAS Excommunicated; OR A VINDICATION Of the Communion of Saints, etc.  
TO prove that Judas received the Sacrament, Mr Lightfoot deals with two Suppers; the one at B●thany in the house of Simon the Leper, Math. 26.6. Mark 14.3. The other at Jerusalem the Passeover night. The Supper at Bethany (saith he) was before the feast of the Passeover, Luke 22.1. namely two days before, etc. Mat. 26.2. Mark 14.1.  
Answer.  
1. I wonder a wise man should bring Luke 22.1. to prove the Supper at Bethany was before the Passeover, (though I confess it was so,) in which there is not the least mention of that Supper. Just as if I should quote Math. 2.1. to prove, that when Christ was born, his mother laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the Inn.  
2. The following Scriptures, viz. Math. 26.2. Mark 14.1 do not at all prove the Supper at Bethany to have been just two days before the Passeover; but that two days before the Passeover, the chief Priests and Scribes fought how they might take Gh●ist by craft and subtlety, etc. and at last concluded it must not be on the Feast day (viz. the feast of the Passeover) lest there should be an uproat, etc. Mark 14 1, 2.  
3. The Supper at Bethany is as likely to have been six days before the Passeover, as two. Then Jesus, six days before the Passeover, came to Bethany, etc. There they made him a Supper, Joh. 12.1, 2.  
Now here ariseth a great question between Mr Lightfoot and myself: namely,  
Which was the Supper at Bethany, That mentioned Joh. ●2. 1, 2, 3, etc. Or That John 13.1, 2, 3?  
He saith That in Joh. 13. and upon that mistaken place hath built his wood, hay and stubble. Boys and Girls, if ye can but tead English, come forth and shame this great master in Israel's Read both the Chapters, and then tell him which speaks of the Supper at Bethany. But I answer,  
That in john 12. was the Supper at ‛ Bethany, and not that in john 13. For,  
1. In john 13. Bethany is not so much as once named, but in in Chap. 12. it is, as also in Math. 26. Mark 14.  
2. In john 13. there is no mention made of the woman's pouring oil upon Christ, for which very act the Supper is remarkable, and ever shall be, Math. 26.13. Mark 14.9. not yet of Indas' his indignation; not of Christ's reproving him: all which we find in john 1●. as also in the places before quoted.  
3. In john 13.1. Now before the Feast etc. is not meant two days before, as he would have it; the words are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, meaning immediately before, &c, as Luk. 1●. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Pharisee wondered he washed not before dinner, that is, immediately before dinner.  
4. At that Supper, john 13. Christ's hour was come. Ver●●●●● so that he was betrayed the very fame night, as 'tis evident, comparing, joh. 13.37 38, with joh. 18. 1, 2, 3. and Math. 26.34. Mark 14 30. This discourse passed betwixt Christ and Pe●●●● the very night in which he was betrayed. Now,  
5. (And last; though much more shall be added if there be occasion,) If any man of common capacity will but compare john 12. from Vers. 1. to 8. with Math. 26.6. to Versed 13. and Mark 14. 3-9. he shall find they all three speak of the same Supper at Bethany. And for what john differs from the other two Evangelists in naming Martha and La●●artes, and in saying she anointed his feet, whereas the others say, she poured it on his head, That shall be easily reconciled whensover Mr Lightfoot please; yea, and as great (that I say not greater) differences clearly manifested between Marthew and Mark in their relations of other passages, perhaps of the same Supper; but at present I refer him to Calvin, Diodat, (or almost any, other Expositor upon the place.  
I conclude, against all he hath said, or can say, yet, against whatsoever all the friends he shall make in this controversy can say for him.  
1. That there was no sop given in the Supper at Bethany let him find it me in Mat. 26. Mark 14. or john 12.  
2. That the discourse between Christ and his Disciples concerning the traitor passed that very night he eat the P●sseover at jerusalem, Mat. 26.19, 20, 21, 22-26. Mark 14. 16-22. and not at Bethany two days before. For had Ind●● been discovered at Bethany, how could the Disciples (John as well as the rest) begin to be sorrowful (wondering to hear Christ say, One of you shall betray me, Joh. 13.21, 22.) and inquire who it was, saying, Is it I? Is it I? two days after? Mat. 26.22. Mark 14.19. Luke 22.23.  
3. That Christ washed not his Disciplea feet at Bethany, but at the Supper at ferusalem, the same night he was betrayed, joh. 13.  
4. That the sop was given at an ordinary or common Supper, (which Christ had the same night before he eat the Passeover, as Calvin, Beza, Parem, Fulk, Car● wright, Pelargus, Toff●●●, Tolet, Maldonat, and divers others do affirms in their Expositions of se●veral Scriptures and which the Corin●hiant imitated 1 Cor. 〈…〉 and immediately after the sop, Satan enered into him. Joh. 13.17. and immediately after that he (Judas) went forth, Joh. 13.30. And that he came in again, is not where to be found neither can it be proved; therefore he eat not so much as of the Passeover, but only the common Supper, much less received the Sacrament.  
The reason why Mr Lightfeor hath gone against so manifest Light of Truth, the whole current or stream of orthodox, godly and learned Expositors, common sense, etc. is to me as clear as the Sun at noon days; and 'tis thus: He thought, if ever he proved Indas' received the Sacrament, he must first prove the sop was given two days before at Bethany, (which could he prove, would help his cause little or nothing,) and because those Scriptures that do indeed mention the Supper, viz. Matth. 26. Mark 14. John 12. would not serve such a malignant design he wickedly, and ('tis to be feared) contraconscientiously wrists and wrings in John 13. a place, so far from proof of his purpose, that who so hath but half an eye, may easily see it never toucheth it. The man hath not yet perfectly learned the trade of wresting and abusing Scriptures (subtly) for the the advancement of his Master's Kingdom.  
Thus the very foundation on which he builds, being found nototiously false, and rotten, and utterly razed, I might very well break off here; but I shall bestow a little pains in viewing his reasons alleged for father confirmation of his proundless assertions.  
I. It is probable (saith he) nor can be conceived that Indas should receive the sop, and so the Devil with it, and go to the high P●●eds, and bargain with them, receive a band of men Joh. 18.3. and betray his master, and all upon one night: for beside the unlikeliness of it, the text is plain, that from the t●●●e of the receiving the sop he sought o● portinity to betray him Mat 26.16. or how he might conveniently, etc. Mark 14.11. Luke 22.6. And how improper it is to say, a man seeks convenency or opportunity, when he runs upon a thing, and doth it on a sudden, I refer to any one of common capacity.  
Answer.  
1. 'Tis probable all this might be done in one night; for Indas was not so far from the high Priest, the band of men not so far to seek, (see Diodat on john 18.3.) the Devil, Indas, and the Jews not so backward in driving on this damnable design, as be would insinuate, I myself have known in this betraying age five times more than this amounts unto brought about in 〈◊〉 short a night. But by the way take notice, that by Satan in Scripture is to be understood the Devil by Mr Lightfoots own confession) and not a disease, as he idly and falsely affirmed formerly in my hearing: The bare naming of this is a sufficient refutation of it, and as clear a demonstration of a Physician's folly.  
2. He (following the old trade) most shamefully abuseth Mat 26.16. Mark 14 11. when he saith 'tis plain from those Texts, That from the tune of the receiving the sop Judas sought opportunity to betray Christ: Read the Verses before and after and then tell me it you can see but the print or footsters of any such thing. Is it not plain in those places, that from that time Christ reproved Indas for his covetous indignation at the spending of the ointment, he sought opportunity, and from that reproof took occasion to betray him? 'Tis evident he sought how he might conveniently betray Christ before he received the sop. But,  
3. A man may properly be said to seek opportunity or conveniency to do that which he yet doth the same night. Now let any one of common capacity (even Mr Lightfoot himself) judge in this case.  
II. Is is plain (saith he) that Indas began his treason at Bothany, Mat. 26.14. Mark 14.10.  
Answer.  
Be it so; but did he receive the sop there? Nothing else passed at the Supper at Bothany, concerning Indas, but Christ's rebuking him for his indignation at the spending of the alabaster box of precious ointment, for which he took occasion to begin his treason.  
III. The Devil (saith he) entered into Indas' at Bethany, Luk 22.3. and Vers. 7. then came the Feast: and all the Evangelists set the treason conspiracy before the feast of the Passeover.  
Answer.  
1. Luke 22.3. speaks nothing at all of the Supper at Bethony, nor of any thing done there.  
2. Though all the Evangelists place the Conspiracy before the Passeover, yet they place not the giving of the sop at Bothany; Read Mat. 26. Mark 14. john 12, and see if you can find any such thing there. The Conspiracy is as clearly placed before the Sop, as before the Passeover.  
3. The Original (which Mr Lightfoot bids me observe) in john 13.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) however translated, whether a great part of the Supper being done, or when they were at Supper, or Supper being begun, or Supper being prepared and ready, and set on table, helps not his cause one Jot. I will give him treb leave (so he offer no violence to the Text) to translate it for his best advantage when he writes next.  
iv It is plain (saith he) be received the sop before the Feast. John 13.27, 28, 29.  
Answer.  
1. Perhaps Christ did not eat the Paschal Limb upon the same day the Jews did according to the judgement of Sealign, Causabon, and others, as I have found them quored. Moreover see Diodat on Mat. 26 17. and then the Feast the Disciples dreamed of might very well be the Jews Passover kept a day after I could speak more for proof of this from john 18.28. & 19 〈…〉 ever Mr Lightfoot will be able to answer; but at present I refer him and the Reader to the places themselves.  
2. Observe how he would dawb over his own mistake with the untempered mortar of the Disciples ignorance, what so●● of them thought proceeded from their ignorance, John 13.28. ●● If from this Scripture he will conclude, that there was another thing to the poor? The Diciples knew not (as probably they might have conjectured from the discovery of Judas two days before, and his abrupt departure then immediately upon receipt of the sop) that he was to be betrayed that night as it fell out, and will manifestly appear to any indifferent man that will but ●…gently read, and seriously consider the whole story, and then judge impartially: For all the Disciples ignorance, and Mr Lightfoot grounded upon theirs, Christ had no more Feasts.  
3. Whereas he saith, that we know the Lords Supper was given the Passeover day at night, viz. the first Sabbath of the Feast, whereon the Jews eat the Paschal Lamb. I am afraid he understandeth neither what he saith, nor whereof he affirmeth, 〈◊〉 be it so, and then,  
1. How was Christ upon the Cross on the preparation day, the day before the Sabbath, according to these Scriptures, Mat. ●●. 62 Mark 15.43. Luke 23.54. john 18.28 & 19.14.31, and 4●… Verses?  
2. How could he arise the day after the Sabbath, namely the first day of the week, Mark 16.2. Mat. 28. ●. since he lay three days in the grave? Doth the man believe (think you) that Christ eat the Passeover a day or two after he was dead! Or that he did rise the next day after he had eaten it? Spectatum ad●… risum teneatis amici? What day thinks he Christ was betrayed and taken on? Or how long was it between his taking and crucifying? I wish the man be not found tardy here.  
Thus Mr Lightfoots premises being weighed in the balance of Verity, and found lighter than Vanity, what shall become of his conclusion? But to trace my Gentleman a little further?  
And it is plain, saith he, the premises considered, at the Supper at jerusalem he sat down with the twelve, of which judas was one, Mat. 26 20. Mark 14.17. Luke 22.14. He taxeth Judas for Treas●…, Mark 24.18. Luke 22. 2●.  
Answer. I. 'Tis true, he sat down at Jerusalem with that twelve, of whom Judas was one, in the common or ordinary Supper: And.  
2. 'Tis as true, that there (as Mr Lightfoot doth most righteously affirm for the truth, to the deeper wounding of his cuase) lie t●●ed Judas for Treason, gave him the sop, and discovered 〈◊〉 and not at Bethany two days before.  
Mr Lightfoot. He delivered the S●or●mont to all; Mat. 26. 26. Mark 14.23. Luk. 22 19 and they all drank of it, Mark 14.23.  
Answer, II. The 〈◊〉 doth nor say, he delivered it to th●● worse, but to all, namely, to all present, for Indas had gotten the s●●p, and was goes forth.  
2. It is had been said, he gave it to the twelve, yet that would prove nothing; for in 1 Cor. 15.5. 'tis said, He [Christ] was seen of Cophus, and them of the twelve, though he was ●●on only of theelaven, Mat. 28.16, 17. Mark 16.14.  
TWO Mr Lightfoot shall be so vain as to say (behind my bick, ●●cording to his usund custom) Matthes was then 〈◊〉 in the room of Indas, and therefore there were twelve.  
I answer That is notoriously salts, for Christ's app●●ting was before his ascension, and not after: but Mathias; was no● 〈◊〉 till after his aseention, Acts 1.9, 10, 21, & 25, Verses, to the end of the Chapter, how then could he be chosen when Christ uppeared?  
3. Whereas he affirmeth, that Christ gave the Sacrament to Judas, I fear he doth him more injury than ever he will be able to account for at his tribunal. Did not he usually except Judas? Have I not chosen twelve, and one of you it a Devil? (Joh. 6.70) Ye are clean, but not all, Joh. 1.10, 11. And again Vers. 1●. I speak not of you all, I know whom I have chosen, etc. But to those he gave the Sacrament, he saith without exception,  
1. This is my body which is given for You. This is the ●●ly of the New Testument in my blood which is send for You? Luk. 12.19.20. Surely Christ could not safely say so to Judas whom he 〈◊〉 to be a Devil, eternaly lost.  
2. I will not drink hence forth of this fruit of the vine, nugal that day I drink is new with you in my Father's Kingdom, Mat. 16.19. Had Christ means Indas' as well as the rest (as be 〈◊〉 has been present, since he excepts him not) he had been ●…ly ●…ken, for he was never like to come there, understand the Father's Kingdom how you will.  
3. Luk. 22.28, 29 30. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations: And I appoint to You a Kingdom, as my Father hath appointed to me: That ye may eat and drink at ●…y table in my Kingdom, and sit on twelve Thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. But,  
1. judas had not continued with him in his temptation. Neither,  
2. Can Christ appoint to him any other Kingdom, but that of wrath and darkness. Nor,  
3. Was he ever like to sit at Christ's table in his Kingdom; much less sit on a throne in the judgement of the twelve tribes, who is himself to be judged as a devil.  
4. Math. 26.31. All ye shall be offended because of me this night. This is the same All to whom the Sacrament was delivered. Let Mr Lightfoot take heed how he traduce Christ himself, by affirming judas was one of that All he administered the seal and spoke these words to. And let him not think to evade any of these Scriptures by saying judas has received the Sacrament and was gone forth, unless he be able to prove it.  
Mr Lightfoot. I cannot conceive how any shadow can be to gainsay his receiving.  
Ans. He doth well to blame the dulness of his own conception. The cause he seethe not, is that darkness which dwells in him.  
Mr Lightfoot.— only to vapour out another business—  
Ans. The business he meaneth depends not upon Judas his receiving or not receiving; and that he, and others, may believe it doth not, I will here grant that Judas did receive the Sacrament, now let Mr Lightfoot do his worst.  
Mr Lightfoot.— which will be as soon blown over as this.  
Ans. I believe him; for this business is not yet blown over. He that doth it, must have a stronger breath than Mr Po●…r Lightfoot.  
Mr Lightfoot.  
For the fancy is to make a noise of only the Saints receiving—  
Answer.  
Hear O Heavens, and give ear O Earth, how reproachfully the man calls that a fancy all the Scriptures bear witness to the most precious truth. Come, let us reason together a little, Mr Lightfoot: Do you believe there is a Communion of Saints? If so, how dare you call it a fancy? If you know no such Communion, (but Oh that you knew it, or rather were known of God in it) may I not justly number you amongst those Iu●● 10. who speak evil of things they know not? What? Is your Communion of Christ and Belial, light and darkness, precious and vile, Saints and Devils? Can two walk, together, except they be agreed? (Amos 3.3.) And do you think there will ever be any concord or agreement between these? Why would you have the dirt and filth of the Nation bound up in the same bundle with the precious Sons of Zion? Why will you not allow jesus Christ the most precious materials living stones, to build him a house, a temple withal? Come, deal faithfully with your own soul, and tell me whether the Communion of Saints be a fancy or not and give me leave to open my heart as freely to you, and in so doing tell you, that I am afraid your Fellowship is in and with Darkness; but assure yourself the light will find you out at length, if not to your conversion (but oh that it might be to that) yet to your utter shame and confusion of face, in the presence of those Saints you daily reproach and wound, yea, and Christ through their sides. Oh that I could hear you say, this expression dropped from your pen before you were ware of it, and that in truth not in hypocrisy; or that you would smite upon your thigh, and say, What have I done?  
Mr Lightfoot. Which if we could prove, than we might gather particular Churches.  
Answer.  
So then by his own confession, if we can but prove none but Saints (i.e. such as have upon them visible or external sanctity) should receive the Sacrament, we may lawfully gather together into a particular (he means Independent) Congregation. Will the man stand to this think you? I fear, not. If he will, I dare say that shall hereafter be proved an abundanti, both from the Scriptures, the constitution and practice of the primitive Churches, the Confessions of Faith of the most Churches in Christendom, and the universal consent of such godly Divines both ancient and modern, as he himself durst not but judge sound and orthodox. And the lawfulness of gathering particular Congregations (though I am not gathering any) I shall defend against all Mr Lightfoot hath to say on the contrary: I wish be may 〈◊〉 in the mean time forget what he hath spoken; but if be he should I shall relieve his memory.  
Mr Lightfoot. And so make a gain of that godliness—  
Ans. Who gains most, man? those that gather such Churches, or such as get sat parsonages of two or 300 l. per annu●●, and leave them when they can get better, as having a clearer call, or a better air, etc. Take heed how you go about to stamp an odium upon the ways of God, you may pay dearly for it one day.  
Mr Lightfoot. Which by steps would set us in such an opposition to the wicked—  
Ans. Whom M● Lightfoot never intends to oppose, but countenance, associate, and have communion with, as appears by what he hath written, and daily speaks on their behalf.  
Mr Lightfoot. As that we would leave them neither wealth, life, not liberty. Look of the actions, beginning and ending of Muncer and his holy crew, set down by Sleidan.  
Ans. 1. This is but the man's old trade of calumniating, lying, and belying, I wish he would leave it; But in the mean time I dare pawn my life, that generation of men he intends shall not, touch so much as one hair of his head, much less his wealth, life or liberty. I am afraid some of his unholy crew (for why should I separate him from those with whom he will have communion? he must and shall go with them; '●is for fellowship with unholy ones he contends, let him deny it if he can,) would touch theirs, if ever it lay within their reach. But by the way take notice, Mr Lightfoot is an Independent, and knows not of it; be but now condemned Liberty of conscience in matters of worship, and yet here he pleads for Liberty, even for the Wicked, Liberty in the grossest fence, Liberty with the Mischief: But what a miserable condition are those poor men (commonly known by the nickname of Independents) in? one while they are cried out upon us the only men that would have Liberty, ye● a Toleration of Wickedness, Blasphemy, heresy, Sects, Schisms, etc. another while they are set in such an opposition to the wicked, as that they would leave them neither wealth, life nor liberty. I am unwilling to put a strange interpretation upon Mr Lightfoot's Liberty, I would therefore have him to unriddle himself, and then happily he and I may agree. In the mean time I propound this quer●● to his consideration; viz. Whether there be not a world (as I may say) in England as well as a Church? and whether such (viz. Independents, Anabaptists, Seekers. Presbyterians; for by such names he knows may godly men:) may not be tolerated in that world to enjoy their consciences in relation to the Ordinances of Christ (security being given in point of civil subjection) who may not be tolerated in the Church? and whether we have not better grounds in the Word of God to walk in Church-fellowship with godly men and women, though of different judgements, than with those wicked ones he so hotly contends for?  
2. To that of Muncer, and his holy crew, I answer, as I may not take upon me to justify the actions, beginnings and end of all men of this or that form of worship; so it becomes not Mr Lightfoot (did he rightly understand himself) to judge of this or that form or way, by the carriage of, or Gods dealing with the corrupter sort that profess it: For at that rate of judging what would become of Christian Religion, set on foot by Christ and the twelve, amongst whom there was one Devil? (for Communion with which he pleads.) Must the Gospel itself be condemned, because many men of corrupt minds have dishonoured it? Or the old legal Administration, because of the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram? Or will Mr Lightfoot undertake for all of his own way, be it Episcopacy or Presbytery? If so, I presume I shall find him work enough. This may satisfy any sober spirited man; yet I add moreover, That I have as little ground to believe Sleidan in all he reports of those men (he himself being an Adversary to them and their way) as I have to believe wh●; Mr Edward's wrote in his book of Lies (commonly called Gangrana) against such as were not of the same judgement with himself: or what the Papists writ of us who live not in their abominations. But,  
3. Whilst he is condemning one wicked and unholy crew, he is pleading for Communion with another; let special notice be taken of this. It seems that way wherein (to the great grief of the Saints) there have been, are, and will be found many ungodly ones, must be utterly condemned, whilst that wherein all the unclean beasts in a Nation live, is vindicated. But for Mu●c●r, and his holy crew (is Mr Lightfoot ironically calls them) they might very well have been of his own Church.  
Mr Light●●ot● But more of this shortly.  
Answer. As much as you will, and as shortly as you e●●● 〈◊〉 ever it come to my hands, you shall not stoy long for an Answer, though I need say no more; but that as fast 〈◊〉 any of 〈◊〉 Churches of jesus Christ purge our the old leaven out off and east out corrupt Members, as Adulterers, Fornicators, Drunkards, covetous, etc. you may take them into your fruternity, there's none will be offended with you, I think; for my part, I will not.  
Now before Mr Lightfoot and I part, let me tell him,  
1. That he shall never whilst he live be able to prove Indas ●●ceived the Sacrament, scarcely the Passeover; and yet I can and do, grant him both, without the least prejudice to that righteous cause I maintain, 〈◊〉 shall be more full manifelled hereafter, if the Lord give me time and strength.  
2. That I should super-abundantly wrong him, If I should not rank him amongst the vilest in the Kingdom, for with them no will have Communion, us a Member of the same external visible body, by virtue of which relation they are all his brethren and sisters, so that he hath his brother Dru●●ard, brother Thief, brother Murderer, brother Liar, etc. sister Whore, sister Witch, etc. yea, all that have been hanged at Tyburn, and all o●her B●llow● in England ever since he was born and baptised into that fellowship he pleads for, have been his brethren and sisters, lot him, or any man else, upon good grounds, deny it if he can. Precious Hearts, ye that live godly in Christ jesus, being in him dead to sin, and begotten unto good works, if ye will be of this fraternity, Mr Lightfoot, and his unholy crew, will be friends with you: but the Lord keep you from such an unsanctified fellowship, and gather you up into that Union and Communion with himself and his Christ, that can make you one spiritual Body, even the Body of Christ, Rom. 12, 4, 5.1 Cor. 12.12. Then shall ye be called trees of Righteousness, the planting of the Lord, and he shall be glorified in you, by you, and amongst you,   

A POSTSCRIPT.  
Mr Lightfoot gave out, that he would print this Answer of mine as though that had been an invincible Reply; I confess, if he had done to, he might have put himself to some cost, and I might have sustained much wrong; but now I have grevented both, and I know no cause he hath to be offended with me.  
FINIS,