A CONFUTATION of the New Presbyterian Error.  
Showing not only how near our late Presbyterians come to the Anabaptists, in restraining the Supper of the Lord from the people, by way of Examination, as they do children from the Sacrament of Baptism, by way of Confession; but also how they agree with Papists in Auricular Confession: and that their practice is sacrilegious, new, usurped, and tyrannical.  
By Alexander Mingzeis, Minister of God's word.  
Every plant that my heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up.  Matth. 15.3. 
Printed in the Year 1648.   

A Confutation of the new Presbyterian Error.  
Drawn not only from the unwarrantableness it hath in Scripture, but also from the inconvenience thence arising.  
FOR the better clearing whereof, ariseth a threefold Question.  
The first is, to know what right Christians have to the Lords Supper.  
Secondly, what Christians are to be admitted, and who not.  
Thirdly, what power the Minister hath, to withhold the Communion from the people.  
First therefore, for the people's right to that blessed Sacrament; I conceive it to be equal with the right or interest the children of Christian parents, have to the Sacrament of Baptism, which I prove by the Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 7.14. where he hath these words: The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband, else were your children unclean, but now are they holy, saith the Apostle.  
From whence our late Presbyterians must either (with the Anabaptists) grant that the children of Christian parents, have right to the Sacrament of Baptism, without confession of faith, or else grant, that Christians that are born within the Covenant pale of the Church, have right to the Sacrament of the holy Communion, without their rigid and strict examination.  
For as our Church admits the foresaid Infants to the Sacrament of Baptism, by the virtue of the faith of their parents, so (I conceive) our Church cannot withhold any from the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord, that is borne within the Covenant, the pale of the Church, and hath a desire to it.  
But to this will be objected, first, that by the place aforenamed, is meant the legitimation of children borne in lawful wedlock, and not that children have right to the Sacrament of Baptism, much less ignorant and scandalous people to the partaking of the holy Communion.  
Secondly, that confession of faith and examination, is to be required in the worthy Receiver, before his coming to the participation of that blessed Sacrament, notwithstanding he b● borne within the Covenant, and the pale of the Church, and of Christian parents.  
To the former objection I answer, that the Apostles conclusion is not only to resolve the lawful cohabitation of a believer with an infidel, but also that their children so begotten in lawful wedlock, are interessed to the outward ordinances and privileges of the Church, else he would not have added, else were your children unclean, but now they are holy; which to be so, I prove by another express place and warrant of Scripture: as when God commanded Abraham Gen. 17.12. not only to circumcise himself and his seed, but also the stranger that was borne in his house, or bought with money; all which circumcised offspring having as free access to the external worship and service of the Sanctuary, as Abraham's own posterity. I reason from hence, That if those within the Covenant under circumcision, had right to the outward privileges of the Sanctuary, then much more have we to the ordinances of the Gospel, by reason circumcision was not only a type of baptism, but also because we are called to a greater liberty, Christ's yoke being easy, and his burden light, Matt. 11.30.  
To the second objection, I answer, that albeit confession of faith and examination is to be required ●n a worthy receiver, before he be admitted to the participation of those divine mysteries, yet is it not always such a confession as our Adversaries dream of, nor hath the Church any such power to examine as they pretend, much less to keep the Communion from the people, upon pretence of that examination and confession.  
For first for confession, Philip held it enough in the Eunuch, to believe Jesus Christ to be the son of the living God; besides that, all which are borne within the pale of the Church are interessed, as before.  
But to this it will be objected, that the Devils may go thus far, therefore etc.  
I answer, the Devils may believe in general, but they cannot apply any thing in particular to themselves. Now the rule of faith adviseth us to judge charitably of all men, therefore etc.  
As for examination, the Apostle willeth a man to examine himself, 1. Cor. 11.28. and not to be examined by the Elders or Presbytery, therefore etc.  
But to this it will be objected, that our people are not so able to examine themselves as the Corinthians were, etc.  
I answer, that appears, for some of them were drunk, and some sober, when they came to be breaking of bread, and the participation of the blessed Sacrament. And I never saw any drunken man yet in England admitted to the partaking of the body and blood of Christ: wherefore here cometh in, in the second place, to know who are worthy to receive, and who not, or who are to be admitted, and who not.  
To which, I answer, all that are interessed as before, that have a desire to it, and are able to examine themselves.  
Now in examination there is only required these two things: viz. First to know whether we be in Christ, and Christ in us; and whether we are able to discern the Lords body in that blessed Sacrament.  
First, therefore we must examine whether we be in the faith, and consequently we in Christ, and Christ in us; according to that of the Apostle, 2. Cor. 13.5. Examine your own selves whether you be in the faith, prove your own selves; know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except you be reprobates? So that all but reprobates may know themselves to be engrafted into Christ, by a true saving faith, and Christ into them, that they have put on Christ and cannot put him off again: that they are baptised into Christ, and with him buried by baptism, into the likeness of his death, to the end they may rise with him unto the newness of life. They carry Christ along with them, in the participation of that blessed Sacrament; and therefore cannot choose but find him there.  
The second thing that is requisite to examine ourselves in, is to know whether we be able to discern the Lords body in that blessed Sacrament, lest in eating and drinking unworthily, we eat and drink our own damnation. Now to discern the Lords body in that blessed Sacrament, is (by faith) to see Christ set forth before us, in those blessed elements of bread and wine, and him crucified. Which calls our sins to remembrance, and ourselves crucified with Christ to them through true and unsayned repentance. This is eating of the Passeover w●th unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, Exod. 12.8. whence we must examine whether there be in us a● unfamed purpose and resolution of amendment of life, and that we will become new creatures, and so put now wine into new vessels, in laying Christ in a new tomb or sepulchre, Matth. 27 60. And whether there be in us a bunger and thirst after Christ in that blessed Sacrament, to the end we may not only be made one with Christ, but also that we may be rooted and established in him, and grow up into a holy building in the Lord, Eph. 4.15. and have all his divine gifts and graces sealed up unto us in that blessed Sacrament. So that Christ may become in us a well of water of life, springing up into life eternal, John 4.14.  
This is the worthy receiving.  
The unworthy is of three sorts: The novice, the stranger, and the scandalous.  
By the novice, I understand such, who though they be born within the Covenant and pale of the Church, yet are not sufficiently seen in the principles of Faith, and of Christian Religion, which in the Primitive times) were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who with those before named, were commanded to departed after the Sermon was ended, and the blessing pronounced, and were not suffered to be idle gazers or lookers on, when the holy Sacrament of the communion of the body and blood of Christ was to be administered.  
By the stranger, I understand such, as were of another Congregation, or Parish, who also were not to be admitted without certificate from the place and Pastor whence they came, of their life and conversation, and their sufficiency in receiving.  
The third sort that was restrained from the Communion, was the scandalous person, by which I understand the profane, and all sorts of Heathens, Gentiles, Infidels, Heretics, Sectaries, and the like. These were the dogs and hogs to whom the Sacrament of the blessed Communion of the body and blood of Christ was denied, because it is not fitting to take the children's bread, and cast it unto dogs.  
But it will be objected, that many such dogs we have now in the Kingdom: I answer, first the Minister may be mistaken in judging them to be dogs, which are saints. Secondly, I answer, that if it be understood of novices or ignorant people, than it ought to be the care and endeavour of the Minister (according to the custom of the Primitive times) to instruct and teach them in the faith, and in the Principles of Christian Religion and virtue, which being the Minister's fault that it is neglected; I do not see but he is more to be blamed then the people; for he after the example of Christ ought to carry his Lambs in his bosom, and gently drive on them that are with young; he ought by gentle persuasion and entreaty to allure and draw on the ignorant to come nearer unto Christ, and not by force and strong hand keep him of. It is for those Christ died, and dare the Minister deny him the bread and wine to whom Christ denies not his body and blood? Is Christ come into the soul and made one with it, and shall that soul be denied the outward privilege of his love? Let our new Presbyterians therefore consider, what they have done in withholding the Communion all this while from many which they know not. One saith, [I have read it in Bishop jewel, and Mr. Fox's Acts and Monuments] That the gifts of the Lord should not have been denied to the Devils, if Christ had died for them; but we deny it to Christians for whom he suffered. I pray God it be not laid to our Minister's charge, and the blood of Christ be not required at their hands, or at the least the souls of these innocents' whom they have so much discouraged. Christ saith, that it were better for one that offendeth but one of the little ones, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the bottom of the sea, then that any such offence were given.  
Thirdly, I answer, if it be understood of the stranger or scandalous, than it ought to be the care of the Elders and Churchwardens, or of any one in the Parish (in case the Minister be a stranger himself) to give timely notice unto the Minister of such an unworthy receiver, to the end he may be presented, if he repent not: but not therefore to keep the bread of life from all, because some are unworthy.  
And therefore I utterly deny in the third and last place, that the Church, much less any private Minister in particular, hath any such power to withhold the Communion from all, under pretence of some unworthy receivers; or that they have any such power, to lay burden or yoke upon the people's necks of a new invented and tyrannical discipline: for Christ and his Apostles did not practise it, the primitive times, for aught I know, did not dream of it, and the true reformed Churches are not privy to it. For Christ gave the Sacrament to Judas which was a Devil, a thief, a murderer, and a traitor. The Apostle bore with the Corinthians unworthy receiving (though otherwise he checked them for it) but we hear not of any new charge he laid upon them to be examined by the Ministry or Presbytery, but that they should examine themselves, as being in the faith, and living within the pale of the Church: but I must confess, our late Presbyterians are grown wiser than either Christ or his Apostles. The Primitive times used no such custom, but did as before is specified, which use all the true reformed Churches following, except against none, but as before is declared; and if any be ignorant, they take the more pains with him, by instructing and teaching him, as before.  
And therefore I do not only conclude this withholding people from the Communion, under pretence of examination, to be anabaptistical, but also new, usurped, sacrilegious, Antichristian, and tyrannical; and such a yoke as neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. First I say, it is sacrilegious, being worse than Church-robbing; for the one doth but bereave the congregation of corporal things, the other of spiritual, the one of temporal, the other of eternal; the one robs the body, the other the soul, the one of things of small value, and which endure but for a time, the other of Christ, of inestimable value, and which endureth for ever. The wolf (saith our blessed Saviour) cometh but for to steal and to devour, but many such wolves are entered into our Church this day, who are come to us in sheep's clothing, but inwardly show themselves what they are, and by their fruits of pride, ambition, vainglory, and covetousness, they may be known. I writ not here against the ancient, grave or Orthodox Divines, but against our new Doctors, and late upstarts in the Church, who pretending great purity and reformation, have brought all into disorder and confusion, and in stead of bringing souls nearer unto Christ, have driven innumerable thousands farther from him, through their unadvised and rash proceed in the same against them.  
Secondly, I say that this new yoke of tyrannising over the souls and consciences of the people, is not only new usurped, but also Antichristian: And as it is like unto Anabaptists in Sacramental confession, so it is like unto Papists in auricular. For as the Papist will admit none to the eating of their breaden God, or wafer cake, before he hath made confession of his sins, so our new Presbyterians will admit none to the partaking of the holy Communion before he have gone through the pikes of a new invented and tyrannical discipline, having neither warrant in the word of God, nor any track of example either in the primitive times, or true reformed Churches, so fare as ever I have read or understood.  
Thirdly, and lastly, as it is sacrilegious and Antichristian, so is it tyrannical, and contrary to the Apostles advice, which is, that we should not rule as Lords over God's heritage, but with meekness, etc. Which I prove from the inconveniences thence arising being twofold. First, in that it discourages people from coming to Christ, in that it drives them further from him.  
First, I say it discourages people from coming into Christ, by thus withholding the Supper of the Lord from them, because they know they have right to it, as being within the Covenant, and borne within the pale of the Church, and of Christian Parents; and therefore if they have right to Christ in whom they believe, why should they not much more have right to the outward ordinances? And therefore as long as they are unlawfully kept and detained from thence, they will not come to the Ministry of the word, though we preach with the tongue of men and Angels, though I confessed should not be so, but the best of the Saints, and chosen children of God have somewhat of nature in them; for if a man's person be once disaffected, his doctrine will ever hardly be liked, be it never so powerful or effectual. Besides what innumerable poor souls have been very near driven to despair, because they have been judged (as they have conceived) unworthy of the body and blood of Christ, or communion with him in that blessed Sacrament: with tears I have been told they have been kept from it, and with tears of joy they have come to it again. Now is not this an offending of Christ's little ones, and the weak brethren, for whom Christ died: Is not this a Lording it over the souls and consciences of men? Is not this a pushing and shoving of the weaker cattle from the Fountain of living waters? is not this a shutting up of the Kingdom of God against all, and neither will go in ourselves, nor suffer them that are entering to go in? or is there not a woe proclaimed and doth belong to them that do so? Christ will have mercy and not sacrifice, Math. 9.13. our new Doctors will have sacrifice and not mercy. Christ saith, come unto me all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, Math. 11.28. they drive all away. Christ will not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax, Matth. 12.20. they do both. Christ requires faith but as big as a grain of mustard seed, Matth. 17.20. they will have it as big as a mountain. Nay they are worse than good Hezekiah the King, for he prayed for them that came not prepared with the due preparation of the Sanctuary, 2. Chro. 30.19. but they drive them away, and keep all back, in thus withholding etc.  
But by this with holding the Communion from the people, while they are duly prepared it rather should fit them then discourage them. I answer, yes; if but new Presbyterians could also give grace and incline their hearts, than they might keep the Communion from them at their pleasure; but we must not do evil upon uncertain and unwarrantable grounds, that good may come of it.  
But they have power so to do, having the keys committed to their charge, and the dispensation of the word and Sacraments.  
I answer, they have the keys (some of them) it may be supposed, but not to open hell and shut heaven. Neither is the dispensation of the word & Sacraments committed to their charge to be disposed of at their pleasure, but at the will and pleasure of the Almighty, and as occasion, time, place, and persons, shall call for the same and desire it. They are Ministers of the word and Sacraments, not Lords.  
But the Sacraments are but outward ordinances, and in themselves indifferent, therefore etc.  
The minor is proved by that of Matthew, whereas Christ saith expressly (speaking of the bread) This is my body, not that I therefore take the bread properly to be Christ's body but a type and figure of the same; howbeit they are so united in the worthy receiver, that they can be no more severed than the shadow and the substance, or the kernel and the shell. Now we may find by the shadow that there is a body, so likewise the Sacrament of the holy Communion puts us in mind of the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of his body and blood; therefore saith Christ, Do this in remembrance of me. And the Apostle as often as we eat of that bread and drink of that cup, we show or set forth the Lords death until his coming again. And can the bride or beloved spouse but rejoice to think and hear of her beloved, especially to be made one with him, as she is in that blessed Sacrament, which being the shell that is broken, in the distributing thereof, she comes to the kernel Christ himself, whom her soul seeketh, and in whom she is delighted. Now let our new Presbyterians call the Sacrament an outward ordinance alone, and a thing indifferent, they may easily receive hereby (if they will not be wilfully blinded and shut their eyes) how indifferent it ●s, and what they have kept the people from all ●his while: viz. from the communion and participation of their blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.  
Lastly, I prove this withholding the Communion from the people, under pretence of examination, to be merely tyrannical, as it drives people further from God. But because I have sufficiently spoken of this before, therefore I come now to exhort my brethren to desist and leave off this new kind of discipline and government in the Church: first, because it is new usurped, and tyrannical. Secondly, because it hath no warrant in the word of God, nor by the practice and example of the primitive times and true reformed Churches. Thirdly, because it sways too much with common baptism and Popery, and to be contented to be ruled by the word of God, and the custom and practice of the primitive times, and all true reformed Churches. Which consists first, in being diligent in Catechising the youth of their several Parishes and Congregations, and so laying the grounds of saith and principles of Christian Religion, and virtue among them.  
Secondly, in being diligent to teach the word of God among the elder sort of people, and how they ought to come to the partaking of the Sacrament of the holy Communion, how they ought to be prepared for it, the benefit which they are to receive thereby, and the danger that will and doth ensue, in case they eat and drink unworthily.  
Thirdly, in case he find any merely ignorant indeed, to take a little the more extraordinary pains with him, both in public and private, so he will be content to be taught, but in case he prove obstinate and hate to be reform, than he may note such an one, and not give him the Communion, until he come in and yield himself to wholesome instruction and government: for though he be interessed as before, yet not being able to examine himself whether he be in the faith, or to discern the Lords body in that blessed Sacrament, and his obstinacy makes him altogether uncapable of that blessed Sacrament; therefore the key or censure of the Church is to be used against such an one: but in case there be any measure of faith in the party, and that he can give but any competent account of the same, and have a desire being of years, the Sacrament is not (in my opinion) to be denied him, because Christ gins to be new form in him, he thirsts after the water of life. He is the smoking fl●x which Christ will not quench until such time as he hath brought judgement into victory; seeing the Sacrament of the holy Communion serveth not only to sign and seal our salvation, but also convey grace to the worthy receiver, and nourish it in him. But in case any in the Congregation (being qualified as before) do receive unworthily, the Minister not being privy to it, the fault is not the Ministers, but the parties receiving, and his blood shall be upon his own head, because the Minister hath told him the danger of unworthy receiving. But what if the Minister do suspect any of scandal or insufficiency, will it be objected?  
I answer, he hath power to keep the party bacl from receiving until such times as his suspicion be better informed and his doubt cleared. But this he must take heed of, that nothing be done of malice, but upon just grounds and probable.  
But what if the Minister be altogether a stranger?  
I answer, than he is to use the advice and direction of the Elders and Churchwardens, until such time as he be better acquainted; but not therefore to leave the administration of the Sacraments, no more than he doth of preaching the word of God. And let him know this withal or resolve with himself, that when he hath done all that he can, he shall still find chaff among the good corn, goats amongst the sheep, a Judas amongst the Apostles, and one without his wedding garment at that heavenly banquet. And therefore it is not all the examination and trial in the world that we can use, that will make all worthy Receivers; but the blessing and event must be left and reserved to God only, to whom be praise and dominion, now and for ever. Amen.  
FINIS.