To
Receive
the
Lords
Supper
,
the
actual
Right
and
Duty
of
all
Church-Members
of
years
not
Excommunicate
.
BEloved
Christian
friends
,
Although
I
judge
that
I
am
not
as
yet
answered
by
Mr.
Collings
,
(
there
being
enough
in
my
Book
to
answer
him
and
vindicate
it self
from
whatsoever
is
as
yet
objected
against
it
,
to
the
Judicious
and
impartial
Reader
)
yet
with
respect
unto
Mr.
Collings
,
who
is
esteemed
a
Gentleman
learned
and
worthy
according
unto
his
title
,
and
some
profitable
labours
for
the
Churches
good
.
And
also
for
the
further
satisfying
both
of
the
weak
and
plain
minded
Christians
:
As
also
the
confirming
of
those
my
friends
,
that
cordially
imbrace
my
Book
,
and
adhere
to
the
truth
asserted
therein
:
And
that
the
controversie
it self
may
come
to
some
clearer
issue
;
and
something
more
may
be
discovered
in
order
unto
peace
and
truth
,
and
reformation
in
the
Church
of
God
:
in
all
humility
and
respect
unto
different
mindes
.
I
crave
leave
once
more
soberly
and
freely
to
present
my
thoughts
unto
further
consideration
,
for
I
judge
that
Mr.
Collings
hath
been
too
hasty
in
concluding
that
my
main
principles
are
rotten
that
I
have
made
the
ground
of
my
discourse
,
by
what
he
hath
said
in
answer
thereunto
:
for
the
truth
is
,
he
hath
not
in
the
least
disabled
any
one
main
thing
I
have
asserted
,
nor
is
willing
to
keep
to
the
question
as
it
's
stated
,
nor
answer
to
any
purpose
,
where
the
main
stresse
of
Controversie
lies
;
but
trifles
about
Infants
,
and
distracted
,
and
Pagans
,
and
the
excommunicate
,
the
admitting
of
which
,
a●
such
,
not
any
in
our
times
plead
for
.
And
therefore
he
might
have
said
lesse
to
these
;
and
more
to
those
that
the
thing
in
controversie
concerns
:
namely
,
Whether
the
unregenerate
,
or
ignorant
and
scandalous
members
in
the
Church
,
being
baptized
,
and
of
years
,
not
excommunicate
,
may
be
debarred
the
Lords
Supper
,
they
expressing
their
desires
to
receive
and
proffering
themselves
.
I
answer
in
the
negative
all
along
,
that
they
may
not
be
put
by
Mr.
Collings
seems
to
be
offended
with
my
charging
the
Reverend
Doctor
with
unbrotherly
dealing
.
A
thing
,
saith
he
,
that
my self
am
more
guilty
of
;
which
I
think
is
hardly
so
,
unlesse
the
worthinesse
of
the
person
my
opinion
strikes
at
doth
so
much
the
more
aggravate
the
thing
.
As
for
my
not
taking
notice
of
Mr.
Humfreys
reflections
as
he
cals
them
:
it
may
be
better
excused
as
to
my self
and
friend
,
then
the
other
can
.
1.
Because
that
part
of
the
Book
which
concerned
the
Doctor
,
was
finished
and
gone
from
me
towards
the
Presse
,
before
ever
I
knew
of
Mr.
Humfreys
rejoinder
.
2.
When
I
did
read
it
over
,
I
thought
his
returns
(
to
such
bitter
censures
and
invectives
against
him
)
were
very
pathetical
,
yet
humble
and
melting
,
and
well
becoming
a
sober
charitable
Christian
,
and
fellow-labourer
with
the
other
in
the
holy
Gospel
.
3.
I
have
heard
many
godly
and
learned
in
the
Ministery
acknowledge
that
his
returns
are
humble
and
charitable
,
and
yet
quick
and
rational
.
As
to
Mr.
Collings
quotation
of
the
two
last
pages
of
his
rejoynder
;
I
conceive
that
Mr.
Humfrey
little
thought
that
any
would
be
so
uncharitable
as
to
take
his
Allegorical
reproof
and
caution
in
that
unfeemly
sense
that
Mr.
Collings
will
force
upon
it
;
there
being
not
any
Scripture
uncapable
of
a
rational
application
:
And
those
that
are
impartial
and
sober
,
can
judge
no
lesse
of
that
.
And
for
those
six
or
seven
dissatisfactions
of
mine
concerning
the
practice
of
some
Presbyterians
unassociated
,
I
know
not
how
I
should
have
expressed
my self
more
modestly
,
then
by
professing
my self
unsatisfied
,
giving
so
many
hints
as
I
have
clearly
done
against
those
things
I
charge
them
with
.
And
I
am
sure
if
the
main
principles
in
my
Book
stand
firm
,
(
as
I
think
they
will
for
any
thing
yet
said
against
me
)
Mr.
Collings
will
not
be
very
zealous
for
ruling
Elders
,
nor
Suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
Church
examination
of
her
members
into
actual
receiving
,
nor
leaving
out
without
any
judicial
proceedings
.
But
to
the
matter
it self
,
let
us
see
what
he
hath
said
against
that
.
First
his
demand
is
,
What
it
is
that
gives
one
right
to
the
Sacrament
of
the
Supper
,
he
knows
the
answer
will
be
Church
membership
;
either
this
alone
,
or
something
else
;
if
this
alone
,
then
Infants
and
mad
men
,
and
drunkards
must
come
say
what
they
can
,
if
they
say
not
Church-membership
alone
doth
give
a
full
right
,
then
many
of
their
arguments
fail
1.
Answ.
That
Church
membership
alone
gives
one
a
legal
right
to
the
Lords
Supper
,
according
unto
Gospel
rules
,
the
which
right
is
a
true
right
,
and
that
sufficient
unto
free
admission
of
all
in
the
Church
:
but
then
this
right
is
to
be
distinguished
into
a
real
right
in
point
of
title
,
and
a
right
of
actual
possession
and
injoyment
:
the
former
right
respects
all
Infants
born
of
Christian
Parents
,
the
latter
right
belongs
unto
all
Church-members
of
years
,
that
are
baptized
,
and
in
a
rational
and
Church
capacity
actually
to
enjoy
their
right
.
An
heir
in
his
infancy
hath
as
true
a
right
unto
his
Fathers
land
he
being
dead
,
as
an
heir
at
full
age
:
but
yet
it
doth
not
follow
that
a
childe
under
age
shall
be
left
actually
to
manage
his
right
himself
in
that
state
,
as
an
heir
at
one
and
twenty
.
We
know
the
Apostle
saith
it
,
An
heir
under
age
differs
not
from
a
servant
though
he
be
Lord
of
all
.
Yet
such
is
the
the
consequence
of
Mr.
Collings
touching
Infant
Communion
;
if
we
grant
them
a
true
right
as
members
in
point
of
title
,
and
a
remote
right
actually
to
injoy
assoon
as
they
are
in
a
natural
and
rational
capacity
,
then
saith
he
,
they
as
members
must
come
,
say
what
we
can
to
the
contrary
.
Although
Mr.
Humfrey
and
my self
have
shewed
a
clear
difference
between
Infants
and
distracted
,
and
the
ignorant
at
age
in
several
particulars
.
The
one
1.
not
in
a
natural
capacity
,
as
the
other
is
.
Nor
2.
in
a
rational
capacity
,
as
the
other
is
.
3.
The
one
not
so
under
the
obligation
of
precepts
of
publique
actuall
worship
,
as
the
other
are
.
4.
The
one
not
at
all
under
the
censures
of
the
Church
,
as
the
other
are
:
Nay
although
Mr.
Humfrey
in
his
rejoynder
tels
them
,
that
there
is
as
wide
a
difference
between
Infants
and
Ignorants
,
as
between
a
doe
not
,
and
a
cannot
,
(
speaking
of
Examination
,
and
discerning
the
Lords
Body
,
)
the
Ignorant
they
do
not
,
but
yet
they
ought
to
do
,
but
Infants
and
distracted
cannot
,
and
are
excused
;
yet
notwithstanding
all
this
widenesse
in
the
premises
,
Mr.
Collings
without
an
answer
unto
ours
,
most
peremptorily
enters
his
consent
unto
the
Doctors
weaknesse
,
and
tels
us
the
Doctor
saith
right
,
that
by
the
same
reason
we
except
against
Infants
,
&c.
we
may
except
against
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
.
Thus
you
may
see
,
let
the
premises
be
never
so
different
,
they
must
hold
to
their
conclusion
,
be
it
never
so
absurd
and
irrationall
:
and
I
would
have
them
to
take
notice
that
,
We
doe
not
except
against
Infants
and
distracted
,
as
a
punishment
or
censure
(
as
they
)
of
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
:
but
rather
we
wave
them
as
such
that
are
under
a
state
of
weaknesse
and
impotency
(
by
the
wisdome
and
providence
of
God
)
inevitable
.
We
do
not
except
against
Infants
as
not
having
a
true
right
,
but
out
of
the
consideration
of
their
natural
and
rational
incapacity
actually
to
injoy
their
right
.
We
doe
not
except
against
Infants
and
distracted
,
because
they
cannot
examine
themselves
,
discern
the
Lords
Body
,
(
as
Mr.
Collings
would
have
it
)
But
because
self
examination
,
and
discerning
the
Lords
Body
,
coming
to
receive
,
are
not
their
actual
duties
;
but
we
judge
all
these
are
the
actual
duties
of
ignorants
,
and
of
the
scandalous
in
the
Church
,
untill
they
be
excommunicate
.
And
assoon
as
Infants
are
grown
past
childehood
,
and
come
under
the
actual
obligations
of
precepts
and
worship
,
our
principles
incline
us
to
as
timely
an
admittance
of
youths
,
that
shall
voluntarily
desire
it
,
and
proffer
themselves
,
as
those
that
oppose
us
.
'T
is
certain
that
children
in
the
Church
,
1.
Come
under
family
instruction
and
correction
before
they
come
under
the
Ministerial
instructions
,
admonitions
,
corrections
,
either
of
Church
or
State
.
2.
That
children
come
sooner
under
negative
precepts
,
then
affirmative
acts
of
worship
;
it
may
be
a
sin
for
that
childe
to
lye
,
swear
,
curse
,
steal
,
when
at
that
age
it
is
no
sin
to
omit
publick
prayers
,
and
the
Lords
Supper
.
Divines
say
affirmatives
alwayes
binde
,
but
not
to
all
,
at
all
times
;
in
many
cases
God
will
have
mercy
rather
then
sacrifice
,
as
is
supposed
to
the
case
in
hand
.
But
I
could
wish
we
might
keep
close
to
the
thing
in
controversie
.
Infant
Communion
is
not
a
thing
controverted
in
our
Church
.
In
the
next
place
in
answer
to
his
.
Church-membership
t
is
very
comprehensive
,
importing
no
lesse
then
Believer
,
Saint
,
Disciple
,
Christian
,
&c.
and
therefore
needs
nothing
else
to
give
a
true
legal
right
(
according
unto
the
rule
)
unto
the
Lords
Supper
:
for
all
Believers
,
Disciples
,
Saints
by
calling
and
profession
,
when
,
and
whilest
they
were
within
,
were
never
denyed
the
Lords
Supper
.
It
's
true
a
Church-Member
may
come
under
divers
considerations
.
1.
As
an
heir
at
age
,
or
in
his
minority
,
or
under
distraction
is
still
an
heir
,
and
his
right
to
be
conceived
of
as
before
.
2.
So
,
it
is
in
the
Common-wealth
,
an●
evill
and
a
hurtful
subject
is
a
subject
,
and
hath
the
benefit
of
the
laws
thereof
,
as
any
other
subjects
of
the
same
kinde
,
though
never
so
good
and
profitable
:
so
it
is
in
the
Church
;
the
most
uncomely
members
are
members
,
and
have
as
true
a
legal
right
to
the
external
priviledges
of
the
Church
,
as
any
other
members
of
the
same
kinde
,
though
never
so
good
and
holy
.
A
difference
in
the
degrees
alters
not
the
kinde
,
for
that
whatever
belongs
unto
a
Church-member
as
such
,
belongs
unto
all
of
the
same
kinde
,
is
with
out
doubt
.
We
do
not
finde
a
different
rule
to
Church-members
of
the
same
kinde
;
if
good
or
bad
openly
offend
,
they
ought
to
be
proceeded
against
accordingly
;
and
neither
the
one
nor
the
other
should
be
denyed
an
actual
external
priviledge
of
the
Church
,
untill
the
Church
hath
given
out
judgement
against
them
by
excommunication
authoritatively
;
and
we
are
not
to
make
any
difference
in
the
Church
about
members
in
respect
of
externals
,
the
rule
being
only
one
,
and
the
same
unto
all
.
Members
,
believers
,
disciples
,
brethren
,
in
a
large
sense
are
as
truly
such
in
a
true
sense
,
as
those
are
such
indeed
,
in
a
strict
sense
.
Hence
Mr.
Collings
his
demand
,
What
it
is
added
unto
Church-membership
entitles
to
this
Sacrament
?
is
both
frivolous
and
improper
,
because
Church-membership
includes
as
much
as
can
be
added
unto
it
,
and
yet
doth
not
exclude
the
worst
born
in
the
Church
,
and
under
her
toleration
.
Nor
did
I
ever
think
that
any
man
would
be
so
perverse
(
as
he
)
to
make
reason
and
age
,
additions
to
membership
,
they
being
but
essentials
to
the
more
perfect
being
of
a
man
:
for
that
is
supposed
of
all
that
come
under
actual
precepts
of
worship
,
that
they
are
reasonable
men
,
and
of
years
.
There
is
the
Church-membership
of
Infants
,
and
of
men
,
and
of
women
,
yet
all
is
but
Church-membership
;
age
,
sex
,
and
reason
,
&c.
are
not
additions
unto
membership
:
but
a
Church-member
is
the
same
with
all
these
:
Yet
it
's
true
too
,
that
unto
all
actual
observances
in
the
Church
,
age
,
and
reason
must
necessarily
be
presupposed
.
So
again
,
knowledge
,
faith
,
and
obedience
are
not
additions
to
membership
,
but
a
Church-member
comprehends
all
these
,
in
his
sense
,
degree
or
kinde
.
And
while
they
will
acknowledge
persons
in
the
Church
Church-members
,
believers
,
disciples
,
&c.
they
must
conclude
with
me
that
Church-membership
alone
gives
a
true
legal
right
to
the
holy
Supper
,
say
what
they
can
to
the
contrary
:
so
that
the
vanity
of
this
superadding
unto
membership
unto
Sacramental
right
,
is
nothing
else
but
a
raising
a
dust
to
blinde
our
eyes
.
What
Church
either
in
the
Old
or
New
Testament
required
more
then
membership
unto
this
Sacrament
?
all
that
came
under
Circumcision
or
Baptism
,
stood
ingaged
to
keep
the
Passeover
and
the
holy
Supper
.
When
Mr.
Collings
can
give
a
clear
instance
otherwise
,
I
shall
think
my self
bound
to
return
him
thanks
.
If
any
make
enquiry
what
Church-membership
in
its
rise
and
nature
is
,
It
's
a
relative
state
of
persons
only
that
have
entred
Covenant
with
God
,
Answ.
professing
either
expressely
or
implicitly
their
voluntary
submitting
to
the
whole
administration
of
the
Covenant
.
And
this
entring
into
Covenant
is
either
personal
,
or
parental
:
Personal
,
of
those
that
are
Pagans
born
,
but
parental
in
the
Church
who
by
birth-priviledge
have
entred
Covenant
with
their
parents
.
And
this
I
call
a
relative
state
,
because
it
hath
its
priviledge
meerly
from
the
Covenant
which
God
through
Christ
hath
freely
made
unto
some
of
mankinde
and
their
seed
,
whom
he
is
pleased
to
own
and
make
his
people
,
and
to
be
unto
them
a
God
,
in
a
more
peculiar
relation
,
then
to
all
others
of
mankinde
;
for
those
whom
God
chooseth
to
approach
neer
unto
him
in
his
own
appointments
,
have
the
promise
of
being
satisfied
with
the
fatnesse
of
his
house
.
Now
then
I
judge
,
so
long
as
Covenant
relation
holds
,
membership
holds
,
and
so
long
as
membership
holds
,
the
priviledges
of
that
estate
holds
.
It
must
be
an
authority
equivalent
to
the
ground
of
membership
,
that
can
dismember
,
or
dispossesse
them
of
their
right
as
members
,
which
nothing
but
renouncing
the
Covenant
,
or
obstinacy
continued
in
,
under
the
Churches
censures
,
can
doe
it
.
But
he
goes
on
in
his
mistake
,
and
tels
his
Reader
,
That
I
hold
,
it
's
only
the
exercise
of
reason
conjoyned
unto
Church-membership
gives
all
a
right
to
the
Sacrament
,
then
it
follows
saith
he
,
That
all
such
who
are
able
to
exercise
their
reason
ought
to
come
,
and
be
admitted
.
And
then
asks
us
why
are
drunkards
excepted
against
,
pag.
22.
Here
is
but
the
same
again
which
is
already
answered
,
only
he
saith
,
Answ.
why
are
drunkards
excepted
against
,
for
they
are
Church-members
,
and
can
exercise
reason
?
In
stating
the
question
Mr.
Humfrey
hath
it
,
he
might
say
the
drunk
,
meaning
the
actual
drunk
,
as
void
of
reason
,
conscience
,
and
devotion
for
that
present
,
as
being
more
fit
to
be
thrust
among
Swine
,
then
suffered
to
come
unto
any
sacred
Ordinance
of
Worship
,
in
that
profane
sordid
brutishnesse
,
not
denying
but
the
same
man
at
another
time
when
he
is
sober
and
in
his
serious
minde
to
serve
God
as
a
Christian
,
he
being
not
excommunicated
may
and
ought
to
partake
of
every
Ordinance
in
the
Church●
a
member
.
Saith
,
Mr.
Coll.
If
he
can
but
shew
him
the
least
sh●dow
of
Scripture
to
prove
that
a
capacity
to
exerc●
reason
is
that
other
thing
which
added
unto
Church-membership
gives
one
an
actual
right
,
we
will
be
〈◊〉
bondmen
.
Membership
alone
in
its
own
latitude
comprehends
as
much
as
he
himself
wi●●
have
added
unto
it
to
give
a
true
actual
righ●
as
is
made
out
above
.
Answ.
1
And
then
2.
I
hope
Mr.
Collings
will
allo●
men
and
women
that
are
baptized
and
continue
to
adhere
to
the
true
Religion
to
b●
Church-members
,
and
if
so
,
himself
do●
grant
their
right
,
which
is
as
much
as
h●
would
have
me
prove
;
unlesse
he
think
that
Church-membership
of
persons
grow●
up
to
years
of
discretion
,
is
a
meer
not●
onal
thing
,
an
empty
nothing
,
levelling
Church-members
to
the
Pagan
world
,
as
〈◊〉
may
well
suspect
him
for
several
things
me●
withall
hereafter
;
his
often
urging
of
something
to
be
added
to
give
one
of
years
right
to
the
Sacrament
,
as
knowledge
,
faith
,
and
the
fruits
of
holinesse
,
strongly
implies
that
to
be
a
Church-member
,
disciple
,
is
nothing
,
to
give
a
right
.
It
's
the
things
he
superaddes
that
gives
the
right
to
the
Supper
;
whereas
to
Church-membership
I
know
,
and
so
may
be
,
that
his
superaddings
are
not
proper
,
nor
indeed
sense
;
for
adde
those
things
to
a
Pagan
,
and
they
wil
give
him
right
unto
Sacraments
,
●hereas
a
Church-member
imports
the
same
,
●e
they
ignorant
,
or
scandalous
,
during
that
priviledged
estate
.
Doth
the
Scriptures
speak
〈◊〉
any
such
additions
to
a
Jew
unto
his
observing
the
Passeover
in
its
season
?
Let
it
〈◊〉
proved
that
an
ignorant
Jew
lost
his
actuall
right
as
a
Jew
,
or
Church-member
,
or
●at
an
ignorant
Christian
in
the
Apostles
●ayes
,
that
was
baptized
and
within
had
no
●ight
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
Will
you
not
al●ow
as
much
of
Church
priviledge
to
a
baptized
Christian
now
,
as
was
allowed
then
?
Are
the
priviledges
of
the
same
Church
diminished
●o
her
members
?
Wherein
will
you
have
a
Church-member
not
excommunicate
differ
from
a
Heathen
,
or
the
excommunicate
?
You
allow
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
to
a
Heathen
,
the
suspended
,
Excommunicate
,
and
just
so
much
you
allow
to
a
Church-member
tollerated
,
and
no
more
,
how
doe
you
confound
things
that
differ
!
What
difference
doe
you
make
between
the
excommunicable
,
and
the
excommunicate
,
the
ignorant
,
and
such
as
offend
out
of
weaknesse
that
are
not
excommunicate
?
The
Primitive
and
Positive
suspension
as
you
call
them
,
the
proper
and
improper
,
&c.
the
punishment
de
facto
in
its
execution
,
is
all
the
very
same
,
deny
them
the
Sacrament
only
,
that
's
the
least
,
and
that
's
the
greatest
.
Whether
it
be
done
by
a
Classes
,
or
Presbytery
,
or
a
single
Minister
,
or
by
the
disco●ragement
of
some
private
Christians
,
or
〈◊〉
of
peoples
own
carelesnesse
.
The
only
po●
of
reformation
and
end
of
Discipline
is
m●
that
great
design
of
keeping
Church-members
of
years
from
the
Sacrament
,
slight●
their
Covenant
,
relation
,
obligation
unactual
observances
as
members
,
disciples
,
〈◊〉
lievers
,
&c.
as
if
they
were
no
more
un●
the
duties
of
Gospel
worship
then
Turks
a●
Pagans
.
If
Church-membership
with
u●
judged
the
same
with
those
were
added
〈◊〉
to
the
Chdrch
in
the
Apostles
dayes
;
w●
should
we
question
the
duty
&
priviledge
●●ours
,
more
then
they
of
those
times
?
I
wo●
have
Mr.
Collings
either
shew
me
a
differ●
state
of
Church-membership
;
or
else
sh●
me
a
different
rule
for
the
same
Church
〈◊〉
walk
by
,
either
let
him
doe
the
one
or
〈◊〉
other
,
or
else
be
so
ingenuous
to
yeeld
〈◊〉
every
member
his
right
,
until
the
Chur●
have
legally
dispossest
them
of
it
.
At
the
latter
end
of
the
22
page
,
Mr.
Coll.
he
draw●
up
the
question
between
both
,
and
wou●
have
it
put
to
tryal
;
but
indeed
the
questi●
is
so
wide
from
the
question
in
controvers●
and
so
much
said
already
to
clear
the
question
in
hand
,
that
I
may
well
passe
it
b●
and
see
what
we
can
finde
in
page
23.
whe●
he
is
still
upon
the
same
thing
;
and
plea●
against
me
thus
.
If
a
meer
capacity
to
exercise
reason
entitule●
〈◊〉
Church-member
to
the
Sacrament
,
then
every
Church-member
in
such
a
capacity
hath
an
undoubted
right
.
I
grant
that
every
Church-member
of
years
of
discretion
hath
an
undoubted
right
.
Answ.
I
utterly
disown
his
antecedent
,
as
not
reckoning
the
question
as
it
's
stated
:
he
should
have
put
in
this
proviso
,
Church-members
that
are
professing
the
true
religion
,
not
under
the
Churches
just
censure
.
And
had
he
done
so
he
might
have
assumed
what
he
could
,
but
he
willing
to
leave
so
much
out
of
his
antecedent
as
would
have
spoyled
his
consequence
,
●nd
prevented
him
in
urging
those
inconsequences
that
follow
upon
it
in
the
whole
page
:
although
I
must
confesse
the
cases
he
instances
in
,
have
need
to
be
spoken
unto
with
wisdome
and
tendernesse
;
so
that
the
truth
be
not
prejudiced
.
As
to
the
case
of
members
that
are
so
notoriously
scandalous
that
of
right
ought
to
be
excommunicate
,
but
are
not
,
as
he
instances
in
incest
and
adultery
immediately
before
a
Sacrament
,
he
sees
I
have
large
principles
if
I
would
admit
such
a
one
.
1.
Answ.
Either
such
are
under
the
suspicion
of
these
sins
;
Or
2.
are
under
evident
conviction
.
A
suspicion
is
not
sufficient
to
ground
Church
censures
upon
,
if
this
be
clear
upon
sufficient
proof
,
the
Christian
Magistrate
hath
to
doe
with
them
,
those
things
being
punishable
by
death
in
our
Law
.
And
such
malefactors
cannot
ordinarily
escape
the
penalty
of
the
Law
,
if
the
Magistrate
will
n●
doe
his
duty
.
The
Church
may
assoo●
judicially
excommunicate
,
as
suspend
su●
.
And
it
's
a
question
that
wiser
men
then
I
ha●
need
to
answer
.
Whether
such
scandalo●
sinners
as
Mr.
Collings
speaks
of
,
ought
no●
most
properly
to
be
punished
by
the
Judge
in
a
Christian
Common-wealth
?
according
to
the
penalties
,
the
Law
of
God
directs
i●
such
cases
?
And
whether
the
Church
has
〈◊〉
doe
at
all
with
such
or
no
in
point
of
censures
is
a
question
;
as
for
other
forts
of
sinners
that
the
Laws
of
this
Common-wealth
doth
more
indulge
:
the
Churches
cognisance
in
point
of
discipline
may
reach
,
〈◊〉
she
be
in
that
capacity
,
otherwise
she
ca●
but
instruct
the
ignorant
,
warn
the
unruly
,
re●buke
in
publick
the
open
offender
,
admonish
all
:
an●
have
patience
towards
all
men
.
Every
Christian
in
his
place
to
doe
what
in
them
lyes
to
reform
themselves
:
and
not
suffer
sinne
to
lye
upon
their
brother
.
But
as
for
that
knack
of
excommunicable
and
meerly
upon
that
account
keep
members
back
,
without
any
tryal
,
whether
their
offendings
b●
out
of
weaknesse
or
wilfulnesse
;
or
without
any
legal
proceedings
in
order
to
their
amendment
,
is
a
very
bold
part
.
Such
precedents
are
of
pernicious
consequence
in
these
times
,
where
we
have
none
to
make
our
appeal
unto
:
knowing
how
that
Brownism
hath
too
much
leavened
the
greatest
part
of
the
most
knowing
men
,
Ministers
,
and
others
,
in
the
Church
of
England
.
Well
,
let
not
any
presume
upon
sin
themselves
,
in
pretence
of
punishing
sin
in
others
.
If
you
cannot
act
orderly
according
to
clear
rule
,
make
not
such
haste
to
reform
as
to
goe
about
it
in
an
unwarrantable
way
:
as
for
Church-members
that
are
in
possession
of
their
right
according
to
law
,
doe
not
dispossesse
them
,
untill
the
Church
authoritatively
hath
given
out
judgement
against
them
.
Let
not
our
Church-men
be
more
irrational
then
our
Lawyers
for
subjects
in
the
Common-wealth
.
And
as
for
that
,
he
saith
,
Church-members
not
knowing
whether
Christ
were
a
man
or
a
woman
.
I
am
sorry
that
any
should
be
so
grossely
ignorant
.
I
thank
God
I
never
have
known
any
such
;
if
Mr.
Collings
have
,
I
hope
not
in
his
Parish
.
And
I
cannot
but
judge
it
a
reproach
of
our
Church
and
Ministry
,
if
any
such
can
be
found
amongst
us
.
But
it
's
a
lamentable
thing
notwithstanding
our
scruples
about
Sacramental
Communion
so
many
years
together
,
but
few
that
have
prepared
their
people
ever
the
more
by
doubling
their
diligence
in
catechizing
of
them
plainly
and
familiarly
,
in
publick
and
private
.
Which
I
fear
,
some
that
appear
forward
for
a
purer
Communion
,
in
seven
years
time
never
did
so
much
as
in
a
friendly
way
spend
so
much
as
an
hour
with
their
poor
ignorant
people
in
private
,
to
inform
them
better
,
and
to
know
their
conditions
,
and
incourage
them
to
learn
the
things
of
God
,
in
order
to
their
better
profiting
in
publick
administrations
.
How
long
is
it
that
we
have
been
excepting
against
poor
ignorant
brethren
,
and
yet
not
ordinary
means
used
to
prevent
it
more
then
heretofore
;
if
so
much
:
for
in
the
Bishops
times
care
was
taken
that
all
did
learn
the
Lords
Prayer
,
the
Creed
,
and
the
ten
Commandements
;
with
the
explanations
of
them
,
and
other
parts
of
the
Churches
Catechising
;
we
had
our
set
Prayers
,
that
people
were
apt
to
learn
;
but
now
in
many
places
people
never
hear
the
Lords
Prayer
,
Creed
,
nor
Commands
,
scarse
in
the
year
:
nor
have
in
use
any
common
plain
Catechism
,
&c.
Ah
,
poor
souls
,
that
care
is
not
towards
them
(
I
verily
judge
)
as
good
Shepheards
have
of
their
Masters
dumb
sheep
,
who
will
see
to
every
particular
one
that
it
be
kept
in
order
,
and
that
nothing
obstruct
its
growth
and
feeding
;
and
if
any
sheep
goe
astray
he
diligently
seeks
it
,
and
bringeth
it
to
his
fellows
;
and
when
either
flye
or
scab
doth
hinder
its
prosperity
,
he
will
not
let
it
alone
untill
the
poor
sheep
come
to
him
,
(
though
he
should
call
it
)
but
he
will
goe
to
it
,
and
gently
catch
it
,
(
although
it's
so
silly
to
flee
from
him
)
and
mercifully
help
it
:
he
will
not
let
them
goe
till
they
be
infectious
,
and
then
separate
the
broken
from
the
whole
;
but
endeavour
to
keep
every
one
in
that
order
that
all
may
fold
together
.
Act.
20.28
.
Take
heed
therefore
unto
your selves
,
and
to
all
,
over
the
which
the
holy
Ghost
hath
made
you
overseers
to
feed
the
Church
of
God
,
which
he
hath
purchased
with
his
own
bloud
.
If
you
have
that
love
to
your
Lord
and
Master
as
you
should
,
you
will
feed
his
sheep
and
lambs
,
that
they
may
fold
together
.
Reverend
Elders
we
are
fallen
into
carelesse
times
,
in
respect
of
the
Worship
of
God
;
little
or
no
care
is
taken
that
our
people
constantly
frequent
the
publick
assemblies
:
ignorant
persons
are
left
to
watch
to
themselves
;
you
have
the
more
cause
to
apply
your selves
to
them
in
private
even
from
house
to
house
,
and
be
tender
unto
them
as
a
nurse
cherisheth
her
children
:
to
insinuate
your selves
in
a
friendly
familiar
way
into
them
,
will
gain
in
them
a
reverent
esteem
of
you
in
their
hearts
,
which
will
give
you
the
advantage
of
perswading
them
to
receive
instruction
from
you
,
both
in
publick
and
private
:
It
's
an
easie
businesse
to
make
a
separation
in
your
flocks
;
and
to
cast
off
the
relation
of
Pastor
and
people
,
and
to
neglect
relative
duties
,
and
to
fill
your
people
with
prejudices
,
divisions
,
and
discontents
,
and
to
break
the
peace
and
union
of
the
whole
:
but
a
work
of
commendable
difficulty
,
when
with
care
,
prudence
,
and
diligence
you
so
apply
your selves
unto
all
,
as
they
that
must
give
an
account
unto
God
of
every
particular
soul
committed
to
your
charge
.
Remember
the
bloud
of
souls
;
and
judge
your selves
bound
to
deal
with
the
worst
of
your
people
as
members
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
while
they
remain
children
of
the
Kingdom
,
and
not
reckon
them
dogs
and
Swine
,
untill
they
be
legally
put
out
of
Church-Communion
,
and
hate
to
be
reformed
by
the
Churches
censures
.
Mr.
Pag.
24.
Collings
urgeth
against
my
principles
,
thus
;
He
must
be
able
to
discern
the
Lords
Body
from
comm●n
bread
.
But
many
men
may
be
Church
members
and
rational
,
and
yet
not
able
to
doe
this
,
therefore
something
else
must
he
added
.
The
Minor
wants
prof
,
Answ.
and
so
is
but
a
reproach
to
Church-members
,
reflecting
upon
our
Teachers
that
have
opportunity
enough
to
inform
the
meanest
capacity
of
years
more
then
so
.
And
that
reverent
and
trembling
approaching
generally
every
where
,
doth
prove
that
they
judge
otherwise
of
the
consecrated
signes
then
of
common
bread
:
why
should
Mr.
Collings
be
so
uncharitable
to
any
that
professe
their
desires
,
and
offer
themselves
reverently
in
conscience
of
this
service
;
he
knowing
that
there
is
enough
in
the
words
of
institution
,
consecration
by
Word
and
Prayer
,
the
words
used
in
the
act
of
giving
and
receiving
,
sufficiently
to
inform
the
meanest
person
that
the
elements
are
signs
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
that
they
eat
and
drink
in
remembrance
of
Christ
for
remission
of
sins
,
&c.
His
Conclusion
is
false
,
because
his
Minor
wants
proof
.
Again
,
He
brings
in
a
childe
of
five
or
six
years
old
as
able
to
exercise
reason
,
and
so
is
a
Church-member
(
if
baptized
)
and
if
these
two
things
give
a
plenary
right
,
such
ought
to
be
admitted
.
Children
minde
childish
things
ordinarily
and
nothing
else
:
Answ.
and
they
come
not
under
the
obligation
of
worship
as
men
of
age
that
have
put
away
childish
things
.
And
what
if
it
be
granted
him
,
that
they
have
some
childish
reason
,
doth
it
follow
,
that
they
have
religious
devotion
from
a
principle
of
conscience
,
as
men
of
age
ordinarily
expresse
in
most
solemn
sacred
worship
?
Let
him
answer
to
what
hath
been
said
already
,
as
to
this
particular
,
before
he
concludes
as
he
doth
;
That
what
he
hath
said
is
sufficient
to
shew
the
vanity
of
this
conceit
,
as
he
is
pleaseed
to
call
it
,
that
meer
Church
membership
with
years
of
discretion
gives
one
a
full
right
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
What
he
means
by
full
right
,
he
may
doe
well
to
explain
himself
,
I
have
told
him
plainly
enough
,
that
Church-membership
having
its
rise
from
Covenant
relation
,
gives
a
true
right
unto
all
external
Church-priviledges
during
that
relative
state
of
actual
membership
.
I
know
that
their
real
state
of
spiritual
interest
in
Christ
,
doth
put
members
into
a
higher
capacity
to
improve
their
right
for
their
spiritual
advantage
,
then
those
that
are
but
in
that
relative
state
only
,
of
visible
members
in
a
large
sense
.
Yet
the
good
improvement
of
the
one
,
doth
not
hinder
nor
take
away
the
just
right
of
the
other
.
An
ill
husbands
right
in
law
is
as
good
as
the
best
husbands
in
the
world
,
untill
by
law
his
right
be
taken
away
.
And
an
evill
member
in
the
Common-wealth
hath
as
much
priviledge
in
respect
of
the
benefit
of
the
law
while
he
is
a
member
,
as
any
other
of
the
same
kinde
,
though
never
so
good
.
The
best
subject
is
but
a
subject
;
and
the
worst
subject
is
a
subject
untill
he
be
out-lawed
,
or
convicted
of
treason
.
So
I
say
,
in
the
Church
,
the
best
and
holyest
man
that
lives
,
is
but
a
Church-member
;
and
the
worst
that
lives
,
(
he
being
baptized
,
and
adhering
to
the
true
religion
,
and
under
Church
indulgence
)
is
a
member
also
of
the
same
visible
Church
,
and
in
respect
of
his
relative
state
,
his
right
is
as
good
to
the
Sacrament
as
the
other
in
a
legal
sense
,
for
the
one
is
as
much
under
observance
as
the
other
,
all
are
Covenanters
,
and
have
entred
it
at
least
,
and
hence
stand
bound
to
the
tearms
of
Christian
obedience
.
There
is
but
one
Law
and
rule
for
good
and
bad
:
the
one
hath
received
the
Spirit
of
the
Covenant
,
that
makes
his
service
sweet
and
easie
;
the
other
is
notwithstanding
under
the
letter
of
administrations
in
a
waiting
for
a
blessing
,
and
may
not
be
released
.
Such
have
the
right
of
precept
,
which
is
a
sufficient
warranty
for
their
observance
of
the
Supper
.
The
other
not
only
that
,
but
the
right
of
spiritual
priviledge
and
blessing
through
the
real
union
and
communion
with
Jesus
Christ
.
And
Mr.
Collings
his
superadded
qualifications
to
membership
,
or
Covenanters
to
give
a
right
to
precepts
of
worship
,
is
so
flat
by
this
time
(
he
urging
it
so
often
)
that
I
shal
trouble
my
reader
with
it
no
more
;
only
take
notice
,
that
upon
the
matter
he
makes
membership
a
meer
nothing
:
for
doe
but
superadde
a
knowledge
of
the
things
of
God
,
conjoyned
with
faith
in
Christ
,
evidenced
by
the
fruits
of
holinesse
,
unto
a
Turk
,
or
any
other
Pagan
,
or
Jew
,
in
the
Infidel
world
,
it
would
give
them
the
right
of
membership
and
Sacraments
;
and
therefore
at
once
you
may
see
what
clear
conceptions
Mr.
Collings
hath
of
the
priviledges
of
Church-membership
.
In
this
page
Mr.
Collings
conceives
,
Pag.
25.
That
I
have
dealt
more
unbrotherly
with
the
friends
of
Presbyterian
Discipline
,
even
some
hundreds
of
them
,
both
learned
and
reverend
men
,
as
I
charge
the
Doctor
to
have
done
with
Mr.
Humfrey
;
and
that
by
entring
some
exceptions
against
that
discipline
.
Bar
removed
,
pag.
8
,
9
,
10.
I
have
spoke
to
this
already
,
Answ.
I
am
sorry
that
such
groundlesse
consequences
I
observed
from
the
reverend
Doctor
,
should
reflect
upon
some
hundreds
of
learned
reverend
friends
to
the
Presbyterian
discipline
.
I
had
thought
the
most
of
the
things
I
am
unsatisfied
in
,
as
being
meerly
groundlesse
,
would
not
have
been
owned
by
some
hundreds
of
such
learned
men
.
I
spoke
chiefly
of
them
that
are
Congregations
unassociated
,
and
when
Mr.
Collings
,
or
any
other
can
clear
themselves
of
what
I
charge
them
with
,
I
shal
either
make
good
my
charge
(
if
you
take
it
so
)
or
else
submit
unto
you
,
and
acknowledge
it
my
weaknesse
to
be
unsatisfied
of
the
truth
of
what
I
pointed
at
in
those
8
,
9
,
10
pages
of
my
Book
:
In
the
mean
time
Mr.
Collings
being
the
first
that
I
have
heard
of
,
that
hath
put
so
hard
a
sense
of
my
dissatisfactions
,
notwithstanding
I
have
many
Presbyterian
friends
,
learned
and
reverend
,
it
makes
me
something
question
whether
many
will
charge
it
on
me
for
unbrotherly
dealing
or
no.
I
being
but
a
private
Christian
might
do
it
in
order
to
my
own
and
divers
others
satisfaction
,
that
are
in
no
such
way
,
nor
dare
attempt
any
such
practices
,
although
we
have
made
after
the
search
of
warrant
for
those
wayes
as
well
as
other
men
,
we
not
knowing
how
to
know
the
minde
of
Christ
better
then
by
his
Word
in
these
things
,
nor
how
to
know
the
simplicity
of
truth
,
then
by
seeking
of
God
by
prayer
and
humiliation
for
guidance
and
direction
in
our
free
and
serious
debates
in
the
presence
of
the
Lord
,
amongst
our selves
in
order
unto
practice
,
the
which
we
of
great
Bowden
have
carefully
done
,
even
a
considerable
number
of
us
with
our
Minister
,
before
we
did
communicate
together
in
the
holy
Supper
:
And
we
hope
the
Lord
was
with
us
in
the
whole
,
we
are
fully
satisfied
,
and
not
ashamed
to
publish
unto
others
of
our
Christian
brethren
,
the
grounds
and
principles
we
act
from
.
Our
greatest
grief
is
,
that
we
observe
too
great
a
carelesnesse
in
our
people
to
worship
God
with
us
in
this
great
engaging
Ordinance
of
holy
Communion
in
the
Sacrament
of
the
holy
Supper
.
And
this
we
shall
further
declare
,
that
although
our
Minister
were
,
and
is
,
one
of
our
old
Non
conformists
,
and
did
indevour
to
draw
us
into
another
way
of
Communion
;
yet
such
was
our
answers
and
grounds
,
that
he
was
satisfied
therewith
.
And
doth
administer
Sacraments
freely
with
a
setled
satisfied
judgment
:
we
blesse
and
praise
our
God
for
it
.
Let
others
judge
of
us
what
they
please
;
we
judge
that
we
act
according
to
the
minde
of
Christ
,
considering
that
present
capacity
we
are
in
.
In
this
26.
page
,
he
is
pleased
to
examine
my
queries
upon
1
Cor.
11.
and
that
the
rather
it
seems
,
because
,
as
he
sayes
,
all
my
superstructure
stands
upon
the
foundation
that
I
have
there
laid
,
page
23.
at
latter
end
.
I
confesse
I
judge
the
stresse
of
all
the
controversie
hath
been
occasioned
upon
mistake
of
the
Apostles
scope
&
sense
in
that
chapter
and
therefore
have
endeavoured
by
severa
queries
upon
the
place
,
Answ.
with
my
answer
to
them
conjoyned
,
pag.
14
,
15
,
16
,
17.
of
my
Book
,
to
give
you
the
sense
of
the
place
Which
I
hope
hath
,
and
will
satisfie
many
distressed
consciences
,
which
have
bee●
perplexed
too
much
through
some
mistak●
of
our
latter
Divines
;
former
ages
an●
Churches
,
(
as
some
of
my
friends
have
tok●
me
since
)
,
do
much
favour
the
sense
that
have
given
of
the
place
.
And
it
seems
t●
me
,
that
Mr.
Collings
is
put
to
a
stand
wh●●
to
say
to
it
,
as
for
that
great
thing
of
applying
the
danger
to
unworthinesse
of
persons
,
Mr.
Coll.
whi●●
troubled
us
all
,
he
confesses
he
sees
no
great
han●
is
like
to
come
of
it
,
if
it
be
granted
that
th●
Apostle
there
doth
not
primarily
speak
of
person●
unworthinesse
,
but
actual
.
And
again
,
he
saith
,
'T
is
not
much
material
to
dispute
,
whether
th●
Apostle
there
spake
of
habitual
unworthinesse
,
●
only
actual
.
That
there
is
a
personal
unworthinesse
himself
must
grant
he
saith
,
or
else
Turkes
,
an
excommunicated
persons
cannot
be
excluded
.
Here
you
may
see
a
very
fair
concession
from
Mr.
Answ.
Collings
,
I
would
we
had
found
him
as
ingenuous
in
other
things
,
that
we
might
have
been
all
of
a
minde
,
but
though
thi●
place
doth
not
prove
it
,
he
would
have
u●
conceive
that
some
other
places
doe
in
order
to
the
Sacrament
.
And
it
is
a
thing
that
I
must
grant
,
else
Turks
,
and
the
excommunicate
cannot
be
excluded
.
I
will
examine
his
Scriptures
anon
,
and
shall
first
deny
that
which
he
will
force
me
to
grant
,
his
reason
is
worth
nothing
,
or
else
Turks
,
&c.
I
grant
that
there
is
a
personal
unworthinesse
in
Turks
and
Pagans
,
and
in
the
excommunicate
also
conditionally
,
but
doth
it
therefore
follow
that
there
is
a
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
,
that
professe
themselves
a
people
in
Covenant
with
God
,
and
have
the
Lord
for
their
God
?
Here
you
may
observe
again
,
how
Mr.
Collings
is
levelling
Church-members
with
the
infidel
world
;
it
's
strange
to
me
,
that
a
Batcheler
of
Divinity
,
should
not
be
able
to
make
difference
between
a
Pagan
and
a
Christian
.
What
,
1
Cor.
7.14
.
did
he
forget
that
foederal
holinesse
that
differenceth
the
clean
from
the
unclean
?
He
queries
,
Whether
every
unregenerate
man
as
such
,
be
personally
unworthy
;
he
believes
he
is
.
I
seeme
to
doubt
,
he
saith
.
Without
doubting
that
there
is
no
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
simply
considered
in
it self
,
Answ.
for
all
such
are
in
Covenant
relation
,
the
which
relation
is
personal
,
they
are
a
consecrate
people
to
the
Lord
,
and
are
in
that
sense
holy
(
in
opposition
to
the
infidel
world
,
that
still
lyes
in
profanenesse
)
those
whom
God
hath
chosen
to
bear
his
name
,
and
are
entred
into
Covenant
with
God
Let
no
man
account
common
and
unclea●
commonizing
such
a
called
professing
peopl●
with
the
Pagan
world
,
&c.
(
as
is
the
humor
and
sin
of
these
times
:
)
for
person●
unworthinesse
cannot
be
in
the
Church
,
〈◊〉
long
as
a
persons
relative
worthinesse
remains
.
Indeed
we
may
distinguish
of
a
persons
worthinesse
in
the
Church
:
it
is
either
relative
meerly
,
or
else
real
and
relativ●
together
.
The
former
is
sufficient
for
th●
acceptance
of
the
Church
unto
all
Gospe●
Ordinances
;
the
latter
is
that
which
hat●
its
praise
of
God
,
it
being
called
the
ci●
cumcision
of
the
heart
,
&c.
the
other
but
o●
the
letter
only
,
Rom.
2.20
.
But
Mr.
Colling
saith
,
there
is
no
need
of
disputing
this
.
Although
I
know
the
main
cause
of
this
con●
troversie
occasioned
by
this
very
thing
.
T●
what
end
is
your
Bar
,
but
to
exclude
the
unworthy
?
Why
have
you
devised
such
strange
things
,
as
to
make
it
strong
meat
,
〈◊〉
seal
to
faith
,
a
strengthening
and
a
nourishing
Ordinance
,
&c.
contradistinct
from
all
:
the
rest
in
the
Church
,
excluding
it
from
being
a
means
of
conversion
,
which
you
allow
to
all
the
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
.
To
what
end
is
your
suspension
,
and
hindring
persons
more
from
this
then
any
other
?
To
what
end
are
your
proving
and
trying
of
such
that
generally
professe
the
same
religion
your selves
preach
,
though
harmlesse
and
honest
as
to
men
,
yet
may
not
be
admitted
?
I
say
to
what
end
is
all
this
,
but
that
you
are
afraid
of
personal
unworthinesse
?
And
it
is
the
only
thing
to
be
disputed
:
for
we
are
all
agreed
about
actual
unworthinesse
,
that
let
a
man
be
a
godly
man
,
yet
if
he
sin
scandalously
he
is
to
be
censured
it
,
and
so
of
the
unregenerate
,
if
they
be
obstinate
;
our
difference
about
actual
unworthinesse
,
will
be
in
what
cases
the
Church
may
exercise
the
rod
,
for
what
sins
:
but
he
tels
us
,
pag
27.
That
every
Church
member
is
by
us
to
be
lookt
upon
as
habitually
worthy
,
unlesse
by
some
actual
miscarriage
he
declares
himself
actually
unworthy
.
But
the
question
is
,
Answ.
whether
Mr.
Collings
will
grant
that
those
in
the
Church
,
that
they
finde
by
their
miscarriages
to
be
actually
unworthy
,
they
judge
to
be
habitually
worthy
;
and
let
him
tell
us
plainly
,
that
they
keep
back
no
man
from
the
Sacrament
for
habitual
unworthinesse
,
if
he
can
,
and
say
truth
,
but
for
actual
miscarriages
onely
.
Let
him
plainly
answer
me
in
that
,
and
then
I
may
tell
him
more
of
my
minde
:
in
the
mean
time
let
me
tell
him
,
that
I
much
fear
his
charity
to
Church-members
savours
of
excesse
,
and
exceeds
all
due
bounds
.
Take
habitual
worthinesse
in
his
own
sense
,
as
he
expresses
himself
in
the
same
thing
thus
,
Yet
we
believe
their
Church-membership
is
not
that
which
makes
them
thus
worthy
;
but
their
into
est
in
Christ
,
which
charity
obligeth
them
thus
believe
,
untill
by
some
fruits
they
discover
the
o●
trary
.
Then
it
will
follow
,
Answ.
That
all
Infants
born
in
the
Church
a
habitually
worthy
,
not
from
their
Covena●
holinesse
that
gives
them
the
priviledge
〈◊〉
membership
,
but
from
their
interest
in
Chr●
as
beleevers
.
Let
him
try
if
he
can
convin●
the
Antipaedobaptist
of
that
.
That
charity
which
obligeth
us
thus
〈◊〉
believe
of
all
Church-members
,
is
true
,
〈◊〉
charity
obligeth
no
man
to
believe
that
whi●
is
false
.
Then
it
follows
,
that
those
that
are
ha●
tually
worthy
from
their
interest
in
Chris●
may
fall
away
from
that
habituall
wo●
th
inesse
they
have
from
their
interest
〈◊〉
Christ
.
This
strongly
implyes
that
they
hold
th●
no
one
should
be
continued
a
member
of
th●
visible
Church
,
but
such
that
are
habituall
worthy
from
an
interest
in
Christ
.
An●
thus
you
may
see
how
their
extremity
o●
charity
runs
them
into
an
extremity
of
r●gor
and
censorious
dealing
with
Church
members
at
length
.
Let
the
impartial
Reader
judge
how
true
it
is
,
that
Mr.
Colling
hath
said
.
'T
is
not
much
material
to
dispute
whether
the
Apostle
spake
of
habitual
unworthinesse
o●
actual
,
when
all
he
drives
at
is
nothing
else
unto
his
admitting
to
the
Sacrament
.
If
I
can
but
undermine
him
in
that
one
prop
,
his
whole
building
will
fall
,
and
the
controversie
come
to
some
good
issue
,
for
what
Mr.
Collings
can
doe
in
it
,
let
him
doe
the
best
can
.
In
the
next
place
he
saith
,
he
dares
not
deny
but
the
disorderly
eating
in
the
Church
of
Corinth
,
was
an
unworthy
eating
;
and
might
be
a
cause
of
their
punishment
,
vers.
30.
We
know
God
is
very
tender
of
his
own
order
and
brings
that
instance
of
Uzziahs
case
,
&c.
This
I
take
to
be
a
good
concession
to
my
anwer
of
the
3.
&
4.
query
,
pag.
16
,
17
,
18.
Answ.
The
Bar
removed
:
But
I
see
he
is
very
unwilling
to
come
off
clearly
in
it
;
mark
,
he
doth
but
say
,
their
unworthy
eating
might
be
a
cause
of
their
punishment
.
The
holy
Apostle
saith
plainly
,
for
this
cause
many
are
weak
and
sick
,
some
dead
.
That
is
,
the
cause
is
plain
,
vers.
29.
Their
not
discerning
was
more
out
of
carelesnesse
and
profanenesse
then
simply
out
of
ignorance
.
their
eating
and
drinking
unworthily
,
which
he
further
explains
to
be
their
not
discerning
the
Lords
body
,
but
used
the
bare
elements
as
common
bread
,
not
discerning
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lord
they
were
consecrated
to
represent
,
with
other
particular
miscarriages
in
the
time
of
administration
,
for
this
cause
,
saith
our
Apostle
,
they
were
punished
;
this
were
a
cause
,
saith
our
Author
,
but
not
all
the
cause
,
for
which
they
were
punished
with
death
.
Who
shall
carry
the
sense
now
of
these
two
competitors
,
our
Apostle
,
or
Mr.
Collings
.
I
need
not
again
urge
what
have
formerly
spoke
to
this
Scripture
,
〈◊〉
Mr.
Collings
or
any
other
first
answer
〈◊〉
what
I
have
done
in
clearing
the
set
of
the
place
,
and
let
them
prove
that
were
for
personal
unworthinesse
if
th●
can
,
or
for
any
other
sins
that
they
w●
guilty
of
before
they
met
together
for
t●
time
of
administration
,
&c.
Let
them
g●●
us
some
clear
demonstrations
of
it
,
if
they
c●●
if
they
cannot
,
let
them
be
so
ingenu●
as
to
give
us
their
consent
,
and
trouble
se●ful
consciences
no
longer
with
such
kind
trifling
uncertainties
that
here
follow
〈◊〉
our
Author
.
Mr.
Collings
hath
given
us
three
argume●
to
shew
us
why
●e
cannot
digest
the
se●
that
I
have
given
of
the
1
Cor.
11.20
.
to●
end
.
He
saith
,
because
the
Apostle
,
chap.
5.
had
them
of
Corinth
,
that
they
could
not
keep
〈◊〉
feast
with
the
old
leaven
of
malice
and
wickedne●
And
bidden
them
purge
out
the
old
leaven
,
vers
7.
And
not
eat
with
one
called
a
brother
who
sh●
be
a
fornicator
,
or
idolater
,
&c.
And
agai●
chap.
10.21
.
had
told
them
they
could
〈◊〉
drink
of
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
of
the
cup
divels
.
What
then
,
why
did
he
not
mal●
his
conclusion
,
that
we
might
have
clear●
understood
to
what
end
he
quotes
tho●
Scriptures
as
a
reason
?
But
let
us
a
little
follow
him
in
thes●
Scriptures
,
and
examine
what
they
will
make
to
prove
these
two
things
:
1.
That
the
Lord
punished
the
Corinthians
for
personal
unworthinesse
.
2.
That
they
were
punished
for
some
other
sins
then
what
they
were
guilty
of
in
the
time
of
administration
:
which
is
the
main
thing
in
hand
.
As
for
1
Cor.
5.
he
tels
us
,
(
not
the
Apostle
)
that
they
could
not
keep
the
feast
with
malice
,
&c.
the
Apostle
exhorts
them
to
purge
out
the
old
leaven
,
meaning
that
of
the
incestuous
person
,
speaking
by
way
of
an
allusion
to
the
law
of
the
Passeover
,
which
were
to
purge
their
houses
of
all
leaven
against
that
feast
which
continued
seven
days
:
resemblably
he
would
have
them
purge
themselves
of
that
wicked
person
whom
they
had
indulged
amongst
them
,
and
made
the
name
of
God
to
be
evill
spoken
of
,
by
tolerating
such
sins
amongst
them
,
as
is
not
so
much
as
named
amongst
the
Gentiles
,
that
one
should
have
his
fathers
wife
,
&c.
therefore
deliver
him
to
Satan
,
purge
your selves
of
your
former
connivence
and
indulging
such
,
and
then
saith
he
,
let
us
keep
the
feast
,
but
not
with
malice
and
wickednesse
,
&c.
but
with
the
unleavened
bread
of
sincerity
and
truth
,
meaning
that
he
would
have
them
spend
their
whole
lives
so
;
the
Apostle
tels
them
what
he
would
have
them
doe
,
and
how
they
should
keep
the
feast
,
Mr.
Collins
tels
us
,
he
told
them
they
could
not
keep
the
feast
,
&c.
but
he
that
hath
but
half
an
eye
may
easily
discern
what
this
place
is
for
his
purpose
;
This
proves
that
scandalous
persons
should
be
cast
out
of
all
Christian
Communion
,
for
the
conclusion
of
the
whole
is
in
the
last
verse
,
cast
out
from
amongst
your selves
that
wicked
person
,
which
is
the
thing
that
I
all
along
contend
for
,
the
just
censures
of
the
Church
;
but
I
would
have
none
debarred
their
right
till
then
.
But
Mr.
Collings
might
have
given
us
some
probable
grounds
to
prove
that
the
feast
mentioned
,
was
the
holy
Supper
,
and
not
to
leave
us
to
such
uncertainties
;
for
if
it
be
not
meant
of
the
holy
Supper
,
what
is
this
to
his
purpose
?
Let
him
shew
us
where
the
Supper
of
the
Lord
is
called
a
feast
,
and
that
this
feast
must
needs
be
that
,
but
this
is
but
a
shift
to
hold
up
the
old
interest
.
So
hard
a
thing
it
is
to
come
off
from
the
authority
of
men
,
especially
,
when
themselves
are
ingaged
in
such
wayes
that
men
have
framed
.
But
then
he
goes
on
vers.
Answ.
11.
And
not
eat
with
one
called
a
Brother
,
This
Scripture
is
more
fully
opened
hereafter
,
as
also
the
1
Cor.
10.21
.
who
should
be
a
fornicator
,
an
Idolater
,
&c.
Mr.
Collings
should
have
cleared
unto
us
what
is
meant
by
not
eat
,
whether
,
not
eat
,
in
a
civil
friendly
necessary
sense
,
or
not
eat
,
at
the
holy
Supper
with
such
during
their
actual
abode
in
the
Church
.
If
he
mean
the
latter
,
in
reference
to
the
Sacrament
,
I
shall
demand
of
him
where
that
word
eat
alone
is
to
be
taken
for
the
holy
Supper
;
and
if
it
be
not
meant
of
the
holy
Supper
,
what
is
this
to
the
thing
in
hand
?
The
9
,
10.
verses
doe
give
us
some
light
of
the
Apostles
meaning
,
He
had
wrote
an
Epistle
to
them
,
not
to
keep
company
with
the
fornicators
of
the
world
.
But
in
this
Epistle
he
mollifies
the
former
with
some
liberty
,
else
they
must
goe
out
of
the
world
:
his
meaning
is
,
not
to
keep
company
in
a
civil
friendly
sense
unnecessarily
;
but
if
a
brother
be
such
a
one
,
keep
no
civil
friendly
company
with
him
at
all
,
no
not
to
eat
,
upon
unnecessary
occasion
.
And
so
for
that
10.
chap.
21.
They
could
not
drink
of
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
of
the
cup
Divels
too
.
The
main
sin
the
Apostle
aims
at
in
this
chapter
is
Idolatry
,
vers.
14.
These
Corinthians
being
grafted
into
the
Christian
Church
,
did
bear
up
themselves
upon
their
Church
priviledges
too
high
.
And
hence
grew
fearlesse
of
Gods
judgements
,
notwithstanding
their
manifold
sins
,
as
that
of
Idolatry
in
this
chapter
,
the
Apostle
tels
them
,
that
the
Church
of
the
Jews
was
invested
with
the
like
priviledges
as
they
are
,
and
yet
for
their
provoking
sins
God
was
not
well
pleased
with
them
,
but
destroyed
many
of
them
for
their
murmurings
,
whoredomes
,
Idolatries
,
&c.
and
therefore
warns
them
of
the
like
in
general
.
And
then
in
the
14.
verse
he
applyes
himself
unto
them
in
particular
,
Wherefore
my
beloved
brethren
fly
from
Idolatry
,
I
speak
to
wise
men
,
judge
what
I
say
,
for
this
is
the
thing
that
comes
neer
you
,
which
some
of
you
are
guilty
of
.
And
that
he
might
throughly
convince
them
of
the
hainous
nature
of
this
sin
,
he
draws
an
argument
from
the
nature
of
that
holy
Communion
they
had
together
in
the
holy
Supper
,
which
supposes
them
to
be
all
of
one
Christian
body
,
for
they
all
eat
of
one
bread
and
drink
of
one
cup
,
&c.
Hence
he
would
have
them
see
what
an
inconsistent
thing
it
were
for
them
to
be
of
this
Christian
body
,
and
of
another
Heathenish
body
too
;
in
point
of
Communion
they
could
not
be
of
both
,
of
Christ
,
and
Belial
,
this
were
a
mixture
unsufferable
,
to
drink
the
cup
of
the
Lord
at
one
time
in
the
Church
of
Christ
;
and
then
at
another
time
to
drink
the
cup
of
Divels
,
in
his
Temple
,
Will
you
thus
provoke
the
Lord
,
&c.
you
must
either
forbear
the
one
or
the
other
,
for
you
cannot
serve
God
and
the
Devil
.
And
this
he
aggravates
the
more
,
because
it
was
such
an
offence
and
scandal
to
the
weak
amongst
them
,
the
which
they
that
were
the
strongest
Christians
offended
in
,
as
the
latter
end
of
the
chapter
doth
clearly
give
it
,
and
that
about
indifferent
things
,
and
it
became
thus
sinful
in
regard
of
some
evil
circumstances
.
But
now
what
is
this
to
prove
,
that
this
sin
was
in
their
eating
and
drinking
unworthily
in
the
11
chap.
as
Mr.
Collins
would
have
it
?
for
here
you
may
conceive
,
that
at
most
the
offenders
were
but
implicitly
threatned
with
punishment
:
but
in
the
11.
ch.
they
were
already
punished
when
this
Epistle
was
sent
unto
them
,
the
which
will
trouble
Mr.
C.
to
reconcile
.
Besides
had
the
Apostle
in
ch.
11.
meant
their
actual
offending
in
the
5.
&
10.
ch.
then
he
would
have
said
,
for
these
causes
some
are
punished
,
or
for
this
and
divers
other
,
but
as
he
meant
no
other
,
so
he
writes
,
and
terminates
the
only
cause
of
their
punishment
,
was
their
profaning
the
holy
Sacrament
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lord
,
as
hath
been
spoken
to
,
For
this
cause
,
&c.
His
second
reason
to
prove
he
cannot
digest
the
sense
I
have
given
,
is
,
because
it
seems
very
absurd
to
him
,
that
a
man
who
should
but
offend
in
a
point
of
order
,
should
be
guilty
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
so
of
judgement
;
and
he
who
comes
raking
with
the
guilt
of
scandalous
sins
,
should
not
at
all
be
guilty
or
lyable
to
Gods
judgements
.
Why
will
Mr.
Answ.
Collins
thus
mince
their
sin
?
Was
their
being
drunk
,
and
their
using
a
sacred
Ordinance
of
Christ
appointed
for
so
spiritual
an
end
,
but
as
a
civil
or
common
Supper
,
but
offending
in
a
point
of
order
?
if
this
did
not
strike
at
the
very
essence
and
nature
of
the
Ordinance
,
I
know
not
what
doth
;
doth
not
the
Apostle
tell
them
plainly
,
This
is
not
to
eat
the
Lords
Supper
,
but
their
own
,
this
profanation
of
the
instituted
signs
rendered
them
guilty
of
polluting
the
very
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
that
the
signs
did
represent
,
and
will
he
say
,
this
were
but
to
offend
in
a
point
of
order
?
I
might
adde
their
offending
in
point
of
order
to
the
main
.
But
then
to
the
latter
part
,
Touching
them
that
come
in
scandalous
sins
,
that
they
should
not
at
all
be
guilty
or
lyable
to
the
judgements
of
God
.
Who
ever
said
such
a
word
?
Answ.
Doth
it
sollow
,
because
the
Corinthians
were
punished
for
no
other
cause
but
their
prophaning
this
Ordinance
;
that
therefore
I
must
needs
hold
that
they
that
come
in
other
scandalous
sins
,
are
not
lyable
to
any
of
Gods
judgements
for
their
other
sins
?
I
say
,
tribulation
,
anguish
,
and
woe
,
to
every
soul
that
doth
evill
.
And
yet
I
say
too
,
it
's
possible
a
scandalous
sinner
may
come
to
the
Sacrament
,
and
not
at
all
be
guilty
of
the
Corinthians
sinning
,
nor
as
to
his
receiving
be
lyable
to
the
judgements
of
God
;
provided
he
come
as
prepared
,
and
carry
himself
as
reverently
at
the
administration
as
he
can
:
for
his
scandalous
life
doth
not
disingage
him
from
Christian
observance
while
he
is
within
,
and
not
under
the
just
censures
of
the
Church
to
reform
him
thereby
.
I
know
for
carnal
wretched
impenitent
sinners
,
to
come
carelessely
,
and
customarily
,
is
a
great
sin
,
and
for
them
that
out
of
carelessenesse
,
and
want
of
affection
to
it
shall
neglect
it
when
they
are
invited
to
it
,
is
a
great
sin
also
,
and
both
punishable
by
the
Lord
.
I
wish
all
due
and
lawful
means
were
used
for
the
reforming
of
both
,
so
might
we
expect
a
greater
blessing
of
grace
upon
all
in
a
holy
use
of
Gods
own
appointments
:
in
the
mean
time
let
us
all
reform
what
we
regularly
can
,
and
mourn
for
what
we
are
wanting
in
.
Mr.
Collings
third
reason
is
,
because
he
cannot
conceive
that
God
should
be
so
unlike
himself
,
as
to
look
upon
one
legally
unclean
,
unworthy
to
eat
the
Passeover
under
the
Old
Testament
;
and
yet
look
upon
one
morally
unclean
as
worthy
under
the
New
?
It
is
too
bold
to
call
the
blessed
God
unto
mans
bar
:
Answ.
because
he
is
not
like
to
men
that
are
not
able
to
reach
the
reason
of
his
declared
will
.
God
cannot
be
unlike
himself
be
sure
;
but
it
's
possible
Mr.
Collings
may
be
unlike
the
truth
in
what
he
saith
pag.
28.
how
doth
he
know
that
God
lookt
upon
one
that
was
legally
unclean
as
unworthy
to
eat
the
Passeover
.
We
know
that
that
uncleannesse
was
incident
to
good
men
as
well
as
others
?
It
will
set
him
hard
to
prove
,
(
I
think
)
that
it
took
away
the
habitual
worthinesse
of
a
godly
man
,
or
that
relative
worthinesse
of
membership
,
if
not
,
such
were
not
lookt
upon
as
unworthy
of
the
Passeover
,
but
were
under
a
contingent
necessity
by
the
will
of
God
that
they
could
not
observe
it
,
but
they
should
make
the
sacrifice
unclean
:
for
by
the
will
of
God
it
was
declared
unto
them
,
that
whatsoever
they
touched
in
their
uncleannesse
should
be
unclean
.
And
we
know
it
was
a
case
the
Lord
indulged
equally
with
those
that
were
in
a
necessary
journey
,
appointing
them
another
day
of
purpose
the
next
month
;
nor
were
they
so
much
denyed
the
benefit
of
this
Ordinance
,
as
of
others
,
that
they
lost
the
profit
of
during
their
uncleannesse
,
there
being
not
the
like
provision
appointed
as
to
the
Passeover
.
Again
,
let
me
ask
Mr.
Collins
,
why
the
whole
Church
were
to
observe
the
Passeover
upon
their
lives
;
and
yet
he
cannot
deny
,
but
in
that
Church
in
their
best
estate
,
there
were
many
that
were
morally
unclean
,
in
his
sense
;
and
what
doe
my
principles
plead
for
more
in
the
Christian
Church
;
if
I
plead
but
for
the
same
now
,
that
upon
their
lives
was
injoyned
then
,
even
by
the
Lord
himself
.
I
hope
he
will
not
charge
it
upon
me
,
that
I
make
God
unlike
himself
;
but
if
he
will
make
the
New
Testament
so
contrary
to
the
Old
,
as
to
say
the
whole
Church
may
not
observe
the
Lords
Supper
,
his
opinion
will
hardly
be
reconciled
with
the
unchangeablenesse
of
the
faithful
,
true
and
living
Lord
God
.
Thus
I
have
given
you
to
understand
,
that
the
legally
unclean
were
not
lookt
upon
as
unworthy
to
eat
the
Passeover
at
all
.
And
the
sense
that
I
have
given
upon
1
Cor.
11.
pleads
no
otherwise
in
favour
of
the
morally
unclean
(
as
he
cals
them
)
then
the
Old
Testament
doth
injoyn
.
One
hint
more
:
let
Mr.
Collins
prove
that
the
legally
unclean
were
expressely
forbid
the
Passeover
.
I
am
sure
Moses
knew
of
no
expresse
prohibition
and
therefore
was
at
a
stand
when
the
case
was
brought
before
him
,
and
could
not
tell
what
to
direct
,
whether
the
unclean
might
keep
it
,
or
forbear
,
untill
he
had
enquired
of
the
Lord
what
they
should
doe
;
Besides
when
the
Passeover
was
rejourned
to
the
last
day
,
multitudes
did
eat
it
,
that
were
not
cleansed
,
and
were
accepted
of
:
And
the
Lord
said
,
2
Chron.
30.15
,
17
,
18
,
19
,
20.
If
any
man
of
your
posterity
shall
be
unclean
by
reason
of
a
dead
body
,
or
be
in
a
journey
a
far
off
,
yet
he
shall
keep
the
Passeover
unto
the
Lord
,
Numb
.
9.10
.
here
you
see
is
an
expresse
command
for
the
unclean
man
to
keep
the
Passeover
.
He
kept
the
same
Passeover
at
Gods
appointed
season
,
as
well
as
the
rest
of
the
Congregation
,
for
God
appointing
and
sanctifying
another
season
for
them
in
special
made
,
the
service
the
same
in
it self
,
and
to
them
.
And
yet
for
all
this
,
what
adoe
have
our
late
Divines
made
about
this
?
I
could
wish
we
might
hear
no
more
of
it
,
unlesse
they
can
make
better
use
of
it
then
Mr.
Collins
doth
.
Now
I
have
answered
three
arguments
that
made
him
so
hard
of
digesting
this
truth
,
That
the
Corinthians
were
not
punished
for
personal
unworthinesse
,
but
for
their
actual
offendings
at
the
time
of
administration
.
For
the
further
helps
of
this
hard
digestion
and
edification
and
satisfaction
of
my
Christian
friends
,
I
she
freely
speak
my
heart
for
the
clearing
upo●
this
in
question
,
according
to
my
measure
for
I
know
well
enough
,
that
our
mistake
about
worthinesse
and
unworthinesse
of
person
in
the
Church
hath
done
more
hurt
is
this
Church
then
all
the
Bishops
ever
did
.
Our
holy
Apostle
in
1
Cor.
7.14
.
ha●
clearly
and
sully
exprest
himself
about
hab●tual
worthinesse
,
that
if
but
one
of
marrias
state
were
a
believer
,
the
other
infidel
person
was
sanctified
by
the
believing
party
and
tels
us
that
if
it
were
not
so
,
their
children
they
had
between
them
were
unclean
but
now
are
holy
:
meaning
,
that
upon
th●
faith
,
and
entring
into
the
Covenant
of
th●
one
,
their
children
enter
covenant
with
th●
parent
,
and
upon
that
account
are
a
holy
feed
and
federate
with
their
parents
in
the
priviledges
of
the
Church
,
as
it
was
in
the
state
of
the
Jews
Church
.
Why
surely
if
the
branches
were
holy
,
then
the
root
was
holy
also
.
Now
I
say
,
how
can
it
be
imagined
,
that
the
Apostle
will
have
the
children
holy
even
of
those
persons
that
in
chap.
11.
he
judged
personally
unworthy
?
Sure
if
the
children
were
foederally
holy
,
then
their
parents
were
too
,
for
the
right
of
the
childe
is
derived
from
the
believing
state
of
the
parents
;
&
that
was
sufficient
to
free
them
from
unworthy
eating
in
respect
of
their
persons
.
And
therefore
the
Apostle
concludes
that
all
things
are
sanctified
to
the
Church
by
the
Word
and
Prayer
.
To
the
pure
all
things
are
pure
,
but
to
the
unbelieving
and
impure
is
nothing
pure
.
Here
is
a
clear
difference
between
the
professing
Church
and
the
infidel
world
:
all
is
clean
to
the
one
,
but
nothing
clean
to
the
other
.
And
therefore
the
Sacrament
could
not
be
polluted
by
the
believing
Corinths
,
in
respect
of
their
persons
.
It
will
follow
then
that
it
was
profaned
by
their
evill
actions
only
.
The
Apostle
understood
the
nature
of
the
Gospel
Church
better
then
those
I
have
to
deal
with
in
this
controversie
.
He
understood
the
right
rule
,
and
accordingly
reduced
all
unto
it
.
He
distinguisheth
between
clean
and
unclean
,
believer
and
infidel
:
all
was
clean
to
the
one
,
and
nothing
clean
to
the
other
,
that
except
the
Corinths
had
admitted
Infidels
unto
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
to
pollute
it
,
personal
unworthinesse
could
not
be
the
sin
for
which
they
were
punished
;
Heathenish
uncleannesse
the
uncircumcised
might
not
eat
thereof
.
I
tell
you
this
is
that
which
hath
undone
us
of
late
,
we
make
the
same
difference
in
the
Church
,
that
the
Apostle
made
between
the
Church
and
the
world
.
And
all
those
Scriptures
on
which
this
difference
is
declared
by
the
Apostle
,
our
Divines
usually
apply
to
the
different
state
of
persons
in
the
Church
,
the
regenerate
and
unregenerate
;
and
accordingly
would
be
dividing
their
people
,
an●
are
as
fearful
(
many
of
them
)
to
admi●
an
unsound
believer
to
the
Sacrament
as
a
uncircumcised
Infidel
,
but
I
hope
those
exorbitant
distempers
that
some
desperately
plunge
themselves
into
from
the
same
mistakes
,
will
make
sober
men
consider
a
last
.
I
know
no
such
language
used
in
Scripture
concerning
persons
of
the
Church
,
as
th●
any
Church-members
should
be
personally
unworthy
to
use
Gods
Ordinance
,
and
●serve
God
in
his
own
appointments
.
Indee●
for
persons
to
reject
the
tenders
and
invitations
of
the
Gospel
,
to
oppose
and
persecute
the
messengers
that
publish
lise
and
salvation
by
Jesus
Christ
;
such
are
said
to
be
unworthy
of
eternal
life
,
Act.
13.46
.
the
Apostle
Paul
again
tels
the
unbelieving
Jews
,
That
it
was
necessary
that
the
Word
of
God
should
have
first
been
spoken
unto
you
;
but
seeing
by
envy
,
contradiction
,
and
blaspheming
,
vers.
45.
you
put
it
from
you
,
and
judge
your selves
unworthy
of
eternal
life
,
loe
,
we
turn
to
the
Gentiles
,
for
s●
hath
the
Lord
commanded
.
So
our
blessed
Saviour
,
Matth.
10
11
,
12
,
13
,
14.
gave
the
twelve
Commission
to
Preach
,
that
the
Kingdome
of
Heaven
is
at
hand
,
&c.
they
were
rather
to
goe
to
the
lost
sheep
of
the
house
of
Israel
,
then
to
the
Samaritans
.
And
when
they
came
either
into
City
,
Town
,
or
Family
,
they
were
to
salute
it
,
and
preach
peace
unto
them
,
but
if
they
were
not
worthy
,
their
peace
should
return
;
and
to
those
that
would
not
receive
them
and
hear
their
words
,
they
were
to
shake
off
the
dust
of
their
feet
against
them
,
vers.
14.
with
a
grievous
judgement
threatned
,
vers.
15.
against
such
people
that
refuse
the
Gospel
when
it
is
tendered
unto
them
.
These
are
said
not
to
be
worthy
,
that
reject
the
Gospel
wholly
as
the
unbelieving
Jews
did
;
which
implyes
those
that
receive
the
Gospel
and
believe
the
truth
thereof
,
and
professe
their
subjection
unto
it
,
being
of
no
other
religion
then
what
the
Gospel
teacheth
,
they
may
be
said
to
be
worthy
,
whatever
they
are
for
sincerity
and
truth
:
so
again
Matth.
22.
concerning
the
invited
guests
to
the
marriage
Supper
,
(
which
set
forth
the
fat
things
of
the
Gospel
administrations
,
and
the
grace
thereof
,
)
the
messengers
were
sent
to
call
in
the
guests
,
that
were
bidden
,
but
they
made
light
of
it
,
and
would
not
come
,
and
some
went
to
their
farms
,
and
others
to
their
merchandize
,
and
others
abused
the
servants
that
invited
them
,
&c.
Then
the
King
was
wroth
and
destroyed
those
murderers
,
and
said
to
his
servants
,
The
wedding
is
ready
;
but
they
that
were
invited
were
not
worthy
,
vers.
8.
This
was
meant
of
the
unbelieving
Jews
that
totally
rejected
Christ
,
and
would
never
come
under
his
external
administrations
set
up
in
his
Church
,
in
order
to
salvation
:
they
are
said
(
you
may
see
)
not
to
be
worthy
,
or
unworthy
but
the
Gentiles
that
came
in
,
though
so●●
came
absurdly
,
and
perished
too
,
at
last
,
y●●
there
is
no
such
thing
said
of
them
,
no
the
were
worthy
,
though
they
consisted
of
goo●
and
bad
.
The
invitation
priviledged
all●
come
,
there
is
no
pleading
I
am
unworth
to
come
,
but
refusal
was
that
which
the
unworthinesse
consisted
in
only
.
From
the
hints
of
Scriptures
we
may
conceive
there
no
such
thing
as
personal
unworthinesse
●
order
to
observance
and
duty
of
perso●
in
Covenant
relation
,
which
all
are
the
have
entred
Covenant
,
though
but
in
the
parents
,
untill
they
renounce
the
Covenan●
or
for
their
hating
to
be
reformed
by
th●
Churches
just
censures
they
be
discovenante●
conditionally
,
that
if
they
never
repent
〈◊〉
return
to
their
obedience
in
a
right
way
,
the
are
gone
forever
;
Now
then
I
say
,
if
t●
Scriptures
charge
not
any
with
unworthynesse
of
person
,
but
such
as
I
have
instanced
in
,
who
can
imagin
that
the
Chur●●
of
Corinth
was
punished
for
that
?
I
would
gladly
know
of
Mr.
Collings
,
of
any
other
learned
man
,
where
the
Scripture●
threaten
punishment
against
personal
unworthinesse
simply
?
Or
where
can
they
give
an
instance
that
ever
any
wese
punished
for
habitual
unworthinesse
at
all
,
in
the
Old
or
New
Testament
?
If
you
cannot
finde
such
a
thing
in
all
the
whole
Bible
,
what
reason
can
you
have
to
judge
that
the
Corinths
were
punished
for
personal
unworthinesse
?
It
's
true
,
the
sin
of
our
natures
derived
from
the
first
man
is
punished
with
death
:
for
we
al
dye
in
Adam
,
but
this
natural
death
is
a
common
lot
appointed
for
all
,
good
and
bad
,
It
's
appointed
for
all
men
once
to
dye
,
Heb.
9.27
.
And
we
see
death
reigns
over
Infants
that
have
not
sinned
after
the
similitude
of
Adams
transgression
.
Rom.
5.
but
in
this
both
original
sin
,
and
death
that
follows
thereupon
,
is
of
unavoidable
necessity
by
the
decree
of
God
.
So
likewise
as
actual
sin
is
the
transgression
of
the
law
,
he
that
so
transgresseth
is
lyable
to
the
punishment
of
that
law
.
1
Tim.
1.9
,
10.
And
the
whole
Law
it self
is
made
for
the
lawlesse
and
disobedient
,
for
the
ungodly
and
for
sinners
,
for
murderers
,
for
whoremongers
,
for
lyars
,
and
for
perjured
persons
,
&c.
that
is
,
for
the
punishment
of
all
wilful
disobedience
of
men
.
And
so
it
is
said
of
the
Church
,
If
you
will
walk
contrary
to
me
,
I
will
walk
contrary
to
you
.
You
have
I
known
of
all
the
families
of
the
earth
,
yet
the
Lord
will
punish
them
for
their
sins
.
And
wherefore
doth
living
man
complain
for
the
punishment
of
his
sin
?
Lam.
3.39
.
all
the
punishments
threatned
in
the
Word
,
and
inflicted
either
by
God
or
man
,
were
for
actual
offendings
:
but
we
never
read
of
any
coming
to
the
Ordinances
that
were
punished
for
a
meer
want
of
regeneration
,
circumcision
of
the
heart
,
an
interest
in
Christ
,
&c.
This
is
a
case
the
Lord
hath
alwayes
pity●
and
promised
the
cure
of
unto
his
Church
forasmuch
as
no
man
can
convert
and
rene●
his
own
soul
,
of
himself
;
nay
of
thos●
that
have
the
means
,
and
use
the
ordinar●
means
of
their
salvation
,
as
the
Jews
di●
It
's
said
,
not
of
him
that
willeth
,
nor
of
b●
that
runneth
,
but
it
is
God
that
sheweth
mercy
,
R●
9.
Habitual
unworthinesse
in
that
respe●
is
unavoidable
;
and
is
the
common
state●
all
by
nature
,
as
well
them
that
are
born
the
Church
as
those
that
are
born
out
of
i●
Ephes.
2.
but
the
Covenants
of
promise
a●
made
to
the
Church
for
the
cure
of
this
d●
praved
state
.
And
the
Lord
hath
set
up
〈◊〉
Ordinances
of
Word
,
Sacraments
,
and
Pray●
in
the
Church
,
as
the
ordinary
means
fo●
men
to
use
in
their
conversion
and
salvation
revealed
in
the
promises
of
the
Covenant
the
neglect
whereof
is
usually
punishe
with
blindenesse
,
and
profanenesse
,
not
diligent
frequenting
of
them
.
But
what
i●
God
doth
punish
habitual
or
natural
u●●
worthinesse
(
it
being
an
effect
of
Adams
defection
)
What
is
that
to
the
Church
that
i●
bounded
by
a
rule
?
May
they
contrary
t●
all
rule
judge
of
it
,
and
punish
it
therefore
with
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
?
Our
blessed
Saviour
rebukes
this
rash
humour
in
men
,
saying
,
Judge
not
,
lest
you
be
judged
It
's
clear
enough
,
that
we
may
judge
of
mens
actions
,
and
finding
them
transgresfors
,
we
may
punish
their
persons
;
but
we
have
nothing
to
doe
to
judge
of
mens
persons
,
let
them
be
good
,
or
bad
,
as
to
their
persons
,
that
is
nothing
to
us
,
we
must
leave
them
to
stand
or
fall
to
their
own
Master
,
for
what
have
we
to
doe
to
judge
another
mans
servant
.
But
if
either
be
found
transgressors
so
far
as
their
offendings
come
within
the
Churches
cognisance
to
punish
,
let
them
impartially
doe
it
without
respect
of
persons
in
the
Church
.
We
read
that
those
that
are
appointed
to
judge
amongst
their
brethren
,
Deut.
1
,
16
,
17.
are
to
judge
righteously
between
every
man
and
his
brother
,
without
respect
of
persons
in
judgement
:
to
hear
the
small
as
well
as
the
great
;
not
fearing
the
face
of
any
man
,
for
the
judgement
is
the
Lords
,
and
the
cause
that
is
too
hard
for
man
to
judge
of
,
was
to
be
brought
before
the
Lord
,
and
he
would
hear
it
,
there
is
a
rule
given
to
judge
of
causes
and
actions
between
brother
and
brother
.
And
yet
in
point
of
causes
and
things
external
,
that
brethren
might
differ
in
,
these
might
be
too
hard
for
men
to
judge
of
.
How
much
more
hard
is
it
to
judge
of
the
spirits
of
men
within
them
,
whether
they
have
an
interest
in
Christ
or
no
?
surely
if
in
the
other
,
much
more
in
this
we
are
to
refer
it
to
the
Lord
;
besides
,
you
may
see
in
judging
about
things
which
concerns
the
Church
,
Matth.
18.
1.
It
must
be
of
evill
actions
only
.
2.
Upon
sufficient
proof
.
3.
And
in
case
of
obstinacy
,
refusing
〈◊〉
hear
the
Church
,
&c.
before
any
judgement
can
issue
out
against
them
.
Tell
me
ho●
you
can
apply
this
rule
to
personal
unwor●
th
inesse
?
Can
this
be
attested
upon
Oath
?
o●
is
the
Church
able
to
convince
any
in
particular
of
it
?
Or
is
it
in
the
power
of
a●
to
reform
it
?
Hence
I
conclude
,
that
as
it●
not
applyable
unto
the
rules
of
Church
dicipline
;
so
it
is
such
an
avoidable
thing
〈◊〉
Church-members
,
that
not
any
man
of
reson
will
plead
the
punishing
of
,
with
suspe●
sion
from
the
Lords
Supper
.
If
the
Apostles
meaning
1
Cor.
11.
wenthat
the
Corinths
were
punished
for
habit●●
unworthinesse
,
and
that
whosoever
eats
as
drinks
that
is
personally
unworthy
is
gui●●
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lord
,
and
〈◊〉
eating
his
own
damnation
,
then
these
se●ral
inconveniences
and
snares
must
necessarily
follow
.
That
there
is
not
any
Minister
on
cancan
administer
the
Sacrament
clearly
in
fai●
because
he
cannot
have
a
clear
ground
〈◊〉
faith
for
him
to
believe
that
those
he
delive
,
the
Sacrament
unto
,
are
habitually
wort●
from
their
interest
in
Christ
;
so
that
〈◊〉
must
still
lye
under
the
bondage
of
fear
a●
doubt
of
his
communicating
with
others
〈◊〉
the
murder
of
Christ
,
and
eating
and
drinkin
their
own
damnation
.
That
all
weak
doubting
fearful
Christian
(
either
Ministers
or
others
)
that
are
not
groundedly
assured
of
their
interest
in
Christ
for
acceptance
in
this
service
,
cannot
come
in
faith
,
for
he
that
doubts
is
damned
if
he
eat
,
and
what
ever
is
not
of
faith
is
sin
.
Such
persons
that
are
not
upon
good
ground
assured
of
the
truth
of
their
own
worthinesse
,
cannot
be
assured
of
their
eating
and
drinking
worthily
,
but
must
of
necessity
lye
under
the
fear
of
being
guilty
of
what
is
threatned
;
and
so
eat
doubtingly
,
(
if
such
venture
to
come
,
)
which
is
sin
,
or
else
they
must
forbear
until
they
be
assured
,
or
are
fully
perswaded
of
the
truth
of
their
own
personal
worthinesse
.
And
this
would
be
the
perplexity
of
most
sincere
Christians
,
there
being
but
few
in
comparison
of
those
,
that
arrive
to
any
grounded
assurance
of
their
own
justification
,
sanctification
,
salvation
,
&c.
Hence
we
may
concive
,
that
when
Mr.
Collins
cals
the
Sacrament
strong
meat
,
he
means
because
there
is
not
any
but
strong
Christians
that
can
partake
thereof
with
satisfaction
,
peace
and
comfort
.
And
so
upon
the
matter
he
denyes
it
to
be
milk
for
babes
,
as
well
as
a
means
of
working
grace
in
those
that
want
it
.
That
all
blinde
self-conceited
Pharisees
,
and
senslesse
secure
carnal
Christians
,
formal
confident
hypocrites
,
that
never
were
acquainted
with
any
saving
work
of
grace
upon
their
spirits
may
come
to
the
Sacrament
boldly
,
for
they
doubt
not
of
their
good
estate
before
God
,
and
hence
they
shall
be
,
1.
Either
flattered
in
their
grosse
presumption
by
the
Churches
admittance
of
them
.
Or
2.
They
must
be
bard
out
by
such
ban
as
the
Scriptures
no where
make
.
That
hence
Ministers
of
the
Gospel
a●
forc'd
to
detract
un
worthily
from
Christs
authority
in
hiscommanding
this
observance
t●
the
whole
Church
,
disswading
their
people
from
this
service
due
to
Christ
more
then
fro●
any
other
whatsoever
,
and
so
will
presume
t●
loose
where
Christ
binds
;
or
else
are
force●
to
suspend
them
illegally
,
and
so
presume
t●
bind
where
Christ
doth
loose
,
&
leave
at
liberty
freely
to
serve
him
in
his
own
appointments
.
What
a
snare
doth
this
kinde
of
unworthy
eating
bring
upon
all
the
unregenerate
,
and
doubting
Christians
!
If
they
neglect
the
Sacrament
for
want
of
personal
worthinesse
,
they
sin
in
omitting
so
great
a
duty
of
publick
worship
;
if
they
observe
it
as
well
a
they
can
,
yet
being
unworthy
,
they
eat
an●
drink
their
own
damnation
,
by
being
guilty
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
as
some
say
.
What
doth
more
occasion
godly
and
tender
consciences
to
withdraw
Communion
from
our
Parochial
congregations
,
&
gather
Churches
out
of
a
Church
,
then
fear
of
personal
unworthy
eating
and
drinking
in
Sacramental
Communion
?
as
for
the
external
action●
in
the
present
administration
,
the
deportments
of
all
generally
are
such
as
are
inoffensive
,
and
they
doe
not
separate
from
us
,
for
the
most
part
,
out
of
any
other
dislike
of
publique
Worship
.
That
hence
it
is
that
we
make
the
nature
of
Sacraments
to
clash
with
themselves
,
in
that
we
will
not
suffer
them
to
meet
in
the
same
subjects
,
and
are
afraid
to
administer
the
seal
to
those
parents
,
whose
children
we
freely
administer
it
unto
:
but
the
resusal
of
the
o●●e
followed
home
,
will
soon
destroy
the
administration
to
the
other
,
for
in
all
Scripture
Churches
they
always
meet
together
in
one
and
the
same
subject
.
When
Mr.
Collins
hath
chewed
well
of
these
several
things
,
I
hope
he
will
finde
in
himself
a
better
digesting
of
that
which
I
have
given
of
the
Apostles
sense
.
And
therefore
in
the
next
place
I
shall
come
to
touch
a
little
further
of
actual
unworthinesse
in
reference
to
the
Sacrament
,
having
clearly
removed
that
miserable
mistake
of
personal
unworthinesse
in
order
to
unworthy
receiving
.
And
indeed
the
whole
controversie
will
be
brought
to
actuall
sinning
;
for
that
is
the
very
thing
the
Church
of
Corinth
was
blamed
and
punished
for
.
Then
the
dispute
will
lye
in
these
few
questions
.
Whether
any
unworthy
actions
of
persons
in
the
Church
,
makes
them
guilty
of
unworthy
receiving
more
then
of
unworthy
Communion
in
other
special
parts
of
publick
worship
,
or
no
:
Whether
the
Church
be
able
to
judge
i●
particular
,
what
persons
in
the
Church
upon
tryal
,
or
otherwise
,
will
of
necessity
be
guilty
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
ea●
judgement
to
themselves
in
the
Apostle
sense
.
Whether
the
Church
hath
power
to
suspen
Church-members
from
Sacramental
Comm●nion
,
allowing
them
the
priviledges
of
al●
the
other
Ordinances
.
I
shall
answer
in
the
negative
unto
the●●
(
under
favour
)
to
Mr.
Collins
,
or
any
othe●
that
shall
endevour
to
give
further
satisfactions
to
the
questions
.
And
to
the
first
I
ha●
hinted
at
already
in
answer
to
Mr.
Colli●
quotations
,
1
Cor.
5.
chap.
10.
all
that
b●
hath
said
from
those
Scriptures
,
doth
no●
amount
to
eating
and
drinking
unworthily
that
was
punished
,
chap.
11.
I
have
also
in
m●
Book
shewed
at
large
,
what
eating
and
drinking
unworthily
it
was
,
that
was
punished
and
which
made
guilty
of
the
body
an●
bloud
of
Christ
;
in
short
,
I
conceive
it
we●
an
open
abuse
,
or
a
Sacrilegious
profaning
holy
things
to
common
use
,
with
other
disorders
in
the
very
time
of
the
administring
the
Lords
Supper
,
practically
destroying
the
very
essence
,
and
spiritual
ends
of
Chris●●
holy
institution
.
And
upon
this
accoun●
alone
they
were
guilty
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
of
eating
judgement
to
themselves
:
not
for
any
other
cause
or
sins
they
lay
under
;
but
for
this
cause
some
are
dead
,
&c.
And
whosoever
they
are
that
eat
and
drink
the
outward
signes
,
set
apart
by
the
Word
and
Prayer
to
represent
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
unworthily
,
as
the
Corinthians
did
,
are
guilty
of
the
same
sin
,
and
lyable
to
the
same
judgements
,
but
that
all
other
sinful
actions
committed
before
they
come
,
though
not
repented
of
,
doth
make
guilty
of
polluting
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
of
judgement
,
they
demeaning
themselves
reverently
,
and
conformly
,
as
to
the
externals
thereof
:
is
to
me
not
only
doubtful
,
but
irrational
and
absurd
.
And
untill
some
better
grounds
be
produced
for
the
satisfaction
hereof
,
then
Mr.
Collins
hath
given
,
I
am
not
like
to
be
answered
in
this
very
thing
.
And
let
me
tell
Mr.
Collins
,
and
all
that
are
friends
to
his
judgement
,
that
they
must
make
out
that
very
thing
by
holy
Scriptures
,
or
else
themselves
will
be
forced
to
yeeld
the
cause
,
and
not
so
much
as
threaten
their
poor
people
any
more
with
the
murder
of
Christ
,
and
eating
and
drinking
their
own
damnation
:
for
as
to
that
which
is
visible
,
which
man
is
to
judge
of
in
the
act
of
publick
administration
,
what
fault
can
any
of
you
finde
?
I
could
wish
that
in
all
other
publick
Worship
,
all
persons
would
carry
themselves
as
reverently
,
and
be
as
serious
and
intent
in
their
attendance
upon
divine
appointment
.
It
's
a
strange
thing
to
me
,
that
although
you
cannot
charge
upon
your
people
the
profanation
of
the
holy
Supper
in
that
way
that
the
Corinths
were
punished
for
,
yet
you
fright
them
with
the
same
danger
,
and
are
more
severe
in
barring
them
from
it
,
then
ever
we
read
of
by
any
Apostles
or
Elders
in
Scriptures
.
In
all
other
duties
of
publick
worship
,
you
presse
your
people
to
be
frequent
in
;
and
to
doe
their
homage
to
God
as
well
as
they
can
,
you
will
tell
them
is
better
then
to
neglect
them
.
And
only
touching
this
publick
duty
of
the
Sacrament
,
you
tell
them
they
had
better
to
forbear
.
And
it
is
a
lesse
sin
not
to
come
,
then
to
come
,
although
they
come
as
prepared
as
they
can
.
When
this
is
a
duty
incumbent
to
all
in
the
Church
,
that
are
baptized
,
and
of
years
sufficient
to
come
under
the
obligation
of
positive
precepts
,
as
any
other
is
.
The
usual
grounds
you
have
given
will
never
hold
,
because
you
have
run
your selves
upon
such
mistakes
about
this
main
place
of
1
Cor.
11.
and
I
verily
believe
I
have
made
such
exceptions
against
the
common
interpretations
of
latter
Divines
,
that
you
will
finde
it
a
work
of
such
difficulty
to
answer
to
satisfaction
;
that
you
will
be
forc't
either
to
deny
our
Church
to
be
a
true
Church
,
or
else
let
the
controversie
fall
;
(
I
mean
as
it
consists
of
all
baptized
members
in
general
)
and
act
as
true
Scripture
Churches
have
done
both
in
the
Old
and
New
Testament
.
I
have
seen
what
a
deal
of
pains
Mr.
Collins
hath
taken
to
make
good
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
;
I
have
weighed
his
scripture
arguments
as
heedfully
as
I
am
able
,
with
the
judgement
of
the
ancient
and
modern
Divines
,
and
yet
I
cannot
discern
the
least
solid
bottome
,
for
all
that
he
hath
said
in
that
dispute
to
rest
upon
,
or
trust
in
,
for
my
own
satisfaction
,
although
God
knows
I
have
not
the
least
prejudice
against
any
authority
he
hath
made
use
of
,
but
am
willing
to
try
all
things
.
And
I
purpose
God
willing
to
examine
the
main
grounds
of
Scripture
he
hath
concluded
suspension
from
,
if
I
be
not
otherwise
prevented
hereafter
:
in
the
mean
time
I
shall
goe
on
with
this
undertaking
in
hand
.
I
confesse
were
this
true
,
that
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
,
did
of
necessity
cause
persons
to
eat
and
drink
unworthily
,
and
so
bring
judgment
:
or
that
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
amongst
us
that
are
actual
offenders
upon
other
accounts
,
must
of
necessity
eat
and
drink
unworthily
if
they
come
,
and
so
bring
judgement
upon
themselves
for
unworthy
receiving
:
there
were
some
colour
for
to
fright
men
and
hinder
them
from
coming
to
the
Sacrament
:
but
if
these
things
will
not
be
sufficiently
made
good
,
the
ground
of
all
our
fears
and
scruples
,
and
devices
is
removed
and
taken
away
,
and
we
must
conclude
,
that
so
long
as
the
outward
administration
is
carryed
on
with
reverence
and
external
holinesse
,
and
go●
order
,
sutable
to
the
institution
and
rules
〈◊〉
worship
;
that
there
is
no
other
unwort●
communion
in
this
part
of
Gods
publi●●
worship
,
then
in
the
other
parts
thereof
,
〈◊〉
so
much
,
for
the
ignorant
unregenerate
Ch●●stians
are
more
carelesse
,
and
unreverent
,
a●
sluggish
in
hearing
,
praying
,
singing
,
the●
the
Sacrament
;
I
cannot
tell
what
men
m●
say
to
this
.
I
finde
that
Mr.
Collins
h●
said
but
little
to
it
,
notwithstanding
my
●●ging
it
so
much
in
my
Book
,
he
knowi●●
that
if
it
be
not
fully
answered
,
all
that
〈◊〉
hath
said
in
favour
of
suspension
will
fall
〈◊〉
the
ground
,
and
his
book
will
be
wo●●
nothing
.
I
also
shall
in
all
humility
des●●
Mr.
Collins
,
or
any
of
his
judgement
,
to
〈◊〉
if
they
can
make
good
the
affirmative
of
t●●
next
question
.
Whether
the
Church
be
able
to
judge
〈◊〉
particular
,
Quest.
what
persons
upon
tryal
w●●
eat
and
drink
unworthily
in
the
Apostl●
sense
.
Answ.
I
say
it
's
a
thing
that
the
best
Eldersh●●
in
the
Church
of
England
cannot
certainl●
know
of
any
member
beforehand
;
for
s●●
they
finde
one
very
ignorant
of
God
,
an●
Jesus
Christ
whom
he
hath
sent
,
and
of
S●craments
and
all
other
worship
;
yet
〈◊〉
being
a
baptized
person
,
and
professing
〈◊〉
willingnesse
to
learn
,
and
to
serve
God
it
his
publick
worship
,
as
well
as
he
can
;
Upon
what
account
can
any
disswade
him
from
it
?
as
I
have
already
proved
in
my
Book
,
the
baptized
,
as
well
as
the
circumcised
,
come
under
all
observance
in
the
Church
.
The
which
I
shall
have
occasion
to
speak
more
fully
unto
hereafter
,
when
I
come
to
that
which
Mr.
Collins
hath
answered
to
that
particular
.
If
you
say
,
such
will
eat
and
drink
unworthily
in
the
Apostles
sense
.
You
cannot
be
sure
of
that
,
which
was
seldome
or
never
seen
in
our
Congregations
;
and
for
to
disswade
from
a
necessary
duty
of
worship
,
upon
such
a
fear
before
hand
,
that
was
seldome
or
never
heard
of
,
is
not
very
rational
.
I
shall
easily
grant
that
blinde
obedience
and
service
is
sinful
obedience
.
And
such
lye
under
an
unsutable
frame
of
spirit
to
attempt
any
of
the
things
of
God
that
are
holy
and
sacred
.
But
how
doth
this
impotency
and
unsutable
frame
disengage
them
from
duty
and
homage
:
especially
their
reverential
approaches
unto
Sacramental
Communion
,
being
such
as
bears
a
good
conformity
to
the
main
materials
prescribed
for
the
carrying
on
the
external
part
of
that
service
;
and
men
can
judge
but
according
to
the
outward
appearance
;
so
that
then
there
being
no
appearance
of
any
open
abuse
and
profaning
holy
things
,
the
Church
cannot
charge
them
with
any
other
unworthy
eating
or
drinking
,
then
praying
,
and
hearing
,
and
singing
,
&c.
Which
not
any
that
are
sober
doth
judge
a
ground
competent
to
disswade
from
those
duties
.
Ignorant
Church-members
of
years
,
no
objects
of
Church
censures
,
especially
when
they
are
willing
to
learn
.
Besides
,
ignorance
is
rather
a
meer
want
,
that
cannot
in
many
be
helped
for
want
of
vision
:
or
plain
instruction
;
the
which
,
though
it
be
threatned
,
and
punishable
by
the
Lord
:
yet
comes
not
within
the
verge
and
cognisance
of
men
to
punish
,
otherwise
then
it
is
punished
in
the
effects
of
it
,
yea
even
for
the
actual
miscarriage
of
such
,
&c.
Say
again
,
that
some
persons
are
known
to
be
scandalous
in
some
actual
offendings
,
and
doth
not
give
such
satisfaction
of
their
amendment
as
is
required
,
shall
the
Eldership
tell
such
persons
they
must
not
come
to
the
Sacrament
,
for
if
they
doe
,
they
will
eat
and
drink
their
own
damnation
,
be
guilty
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
in
the
Apostles
sense
;
when
they
may
be
knowing
persons
and
able
to
discern
the
Lords
body
,
and
to
carry
themselves
conformly
,
as
to
the
prescription
of
all
Sacramental
actions
appertaining
to
that
service
?
it
doth
not
follow
.
I
easily
grant
in
this
case
,
that
any
sin
indulged
in
a
mans
self
,
or
in
the
Church
,
may
hinder
Gods
blessing
upon
his
own
Ordinances
;
For
he
that
regardeth
iniquity
in
his
heart
,
God
will
not
hear
his
prayers
;
and
the
sacrifice
of
the
wicked
is
an
abomination
unto
the
Lord
;
but
it
will
not
hence
follow
,
that
such
must
not
pray
,
nor
offer
sacrifice
at
all
;
but
they
ought
to
reform
the
evill
as
well
as
doe
the
good
,
if
they
expect
that
God
should
hear
them
.
I
grant
also
,
that
every
scandalous
sinner
in
the
Church
should
be
dealt
withall
according
to
divine
rule
,
the
neglect
thereof
as
it
respects
private
members
,
or
the
publick
Officers
either
of
Church
or
Commonwealth
,
doth
leaven
accordingly
:
but
yet
I
deny
that
such
sinners
are
to
be
debarred
their
necessary
duties
of
worship
,
untill
they
be
juridically
proceeded
against
by
a
lawful
Court
of
Judicature
.
I
grant
again
,
that
every
scandalous
sinner
in
Church
is
lyable
to
the
judgements
of
God
for
his
sinful
enormities
:
but
yet
I
deny
that
those
sinful
enormities
of
swearing
,
drunkennesse
,
uncleannesse
,
lying
,
cousenage
,
dishonesty
,
&c.
is
eating
and
drinking
the
body
and
bloud
of
the
Lord
unworthily
,
which
the
Corinthians
were
punished
for
.
I
grant
again
,
that
such
scandalous
sinners
continuing
impenitent
,
cannot
communicate
in
the
Supper
without
sin
,
and
it
is
unsutable
and
inconsistent
with
their
Christian
prof●ssion
,
and
that
which
God
upbraids
sinners
oft
with
in
Scriptures
;
but
yet
this
doth
not
reach
the
Corinthians
sinning
at
the
time
of
the
administration
of
the
Supper
:
but
is
applyable
to
all
other
worship
as
well
as
to
the
Sacrament
.
For
my
part
I
cannot
yet
see
one
Scripture
alleadged
by
any
that
doth
prove
,
that
the
moral
unclean
in
the
Church
were
debarred
the
Passeover
,
or
Supper
,
more
then
the
other
parts
of
publick
worship
;
which
is
a
thing
of
necessity
to
be
proved
by
those
that
venture
to
debar
from
the
one
,
and
yet
allow
them
the
liberty
to
enjoy
the
other
.
What
the
Doctor
hath
said
as
to
that
,
hath
been
answered
,
and
what
Mr.
Ward
hath
said
,
hath
been
answered
also
,
and
what
Mr.
Collins
hath
said
,
or
can
say
a●
to
that
,
I
doubt
not
in
the
least
but
will
be
easily
answered
too
.
And
to
this
purpose
〈◊〉
shall
take
leave
to
examine
some
of
Mr.
Collins
quotations
,
pag.
101.
Ezra
6
21.
And
the
children
of
Israel
which
were
come
again
out
of
the
captivity
;
and
all
such
as
had
separated
themselves
unto
them
,
from
the
filthinesse
of
the
Heathen
of
the
land
,
to
seek
the
Lord
God
of
Israel
,
di●
eat
,
and
kept
the
feast
of
unleavened
bread
seve●
dayes
,
&c.
How
this
proves
that
the
morally
unclean
were
debarred
the
Passeover
,
〈◊〉
know
not
,
he
might
have
told
us
how
;
that
all
that
were
returned
from
their
captivity
,
that
were
of
the
true
Church
,
and
all
such
that
separated
from
Heathenish
idolatry
and
mixtures
to
the
Church
did
eat
the
Passeover
,
is
true
,
this
implyes
that
those
that
would
not
seek
the
Lord
God
of
Israel
,
continued
in
Idolatrous
practices
,
and
would
not
keep
the
Passeover
.
Can
Mr.
Collins
prove
that
some
of
the
children
of
Israel
,
that
returned
from
their
captivity
,
was
debarred
the
Passeover
for
their
moral
uncleannesse
;
or
can
he
prove
hence
,
that
they
were
all
free
from
that
uncleannesse
?
doubtlesse
if
he
take
notice
of
what
follows
in
the
9.10
.
chap.
he
must
acknowledg
there
were
many
guilty
of
moral
uncleannesse
;
and
yet
all
kept
the
Passeover
:
so
that
you
may
easily
discern
how
pertinent
this
is
for
his
purpose
.
The
next
quotation
is
2
Chron.
23.19
.
And
he
set
the
porters
at
the
gates
of
the
house
of
the
Lord
,
that
none
which
were
unclean
in
any
thing
should
enter
in
.
From
this
Scripture
he
cryes
up
a
suspension
of
some
from
some
Ordinances
that
were
not
excommunicated
,
&c.
but
he
cannot
tell
it
seemes
whether
from
the
Passeover
or
no
,
and
then
what
is
this
for
his
purpose
?
I
think
we
never
read
of
any
other
uncleannesse
in
Scripture
,
but
Heathenish
uncleannesse
,
and
legal
uncleannesse
,
that
were
not
to
enter
into
Gods
House
or
Sanctuary
;
and
as
for
Moral
uncleannesse
,
either
it
was
such
as
was
punished
by
the
Judges
according
to
their
Judicial
laws
,
or
such
as
they
were
cleansed
from
externally
by
their
continual
course
of
Sacrifices
and
offerings
,
and
hence
there
was
no
such
thing
at
all
,
nor
were
any
ever
bar'd
from
the
Passeover
upon
any
such
account
,
that
I
could
ever
finde
in
the
Book
of
God
,
and
well
might
the
Porters
charge
be
,
to
keep
out
those
that
were
unclean
in
any
thing
,
because
we
know
there
were
several
kindes
of
personal
uncleannesses
that
were
legal
,
besides
the
uncircumcised
Heathen
that
might
not
enter
into
the
Sanctuary
,
Ezek.
44.7
,
8.
nor
eat
of
the
Passeover
,
Exod.
12.
And
the
main
reason
why
those
that
were
but
legally
unclean
might
not
eat
the
Passeover
,
nor
come
to
the
Tabernacle
to
offer
his
Sacrifice
,
as
others
in
their
season
did
and
were
accepted
;
was
this
,
because
the
person
that
was
unclean
made
every
thing
he
toucht
unclean
too
,
and
he
that
neglected
his
time
for
cleansing
and
concealing
it
,
that
soul
was
to
be
cut
of
from
the
Congregation
,
he
hath
defiled
the
Lords
Sanctuary
,
Numb.
19.13
,
20.
That
of
Hag.
2.14
.
proves
the
same
.
But
I
have
answered
his
other
quotations
in
my
examine
of
the
Scripture
rule
.
I
need
not
insist
upon
these
any
longer
,
for
they
are
too
triflingly
urged
to
require
any
further
answer
.
Why
doth
he
not
shew
us
some
Scripture
to
prove
that
some
have
bin
suspended
from
the
Passeover
for
moral
uncleanness
,
and
allowed
the
liberty
of
all
other
publick
worship
?
the
which
is
the
whole
subject
of
his
great
Book
almost
.
Yet
I
am
certain
he
can
finde
nothing
for
his
turn
in
Moses
and
the
Prophets
:
And
I
think
he
hath
as
little
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
;
for
the
foundation
of
his
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
only
;
which
is
the
question
I
should
speak
unto
next
.
But
I
shall
let
it
alone
unill
I
come
in
short
to
examine
the
quotations
alledged
in
the
New
Testament
,
to
prove
the
affirmative
by
Mr.
Collins
in
the
main
body
of
his
last
Book
.
I
shall
now
go
on
with
answering
to
what
he
saith
to
mine
.
My
fift
and
sixt
queries
are
,
1.
What
is
the
remedy
the
Apostle
prescribes
to
that
Church
to
prevent
future
judgement
,
and
to
enjoy
present
benefit
.
2.
Whether
the
unregenerate
and
most
ignorant
person
,
professing
and
owning
the
true
Religion
among
them
,
were
not
in
some
capacity
so
to
use
the
remedy
,
as
to
prevent
the
judgement
,
and
to
receive
benefit
by
the
Ordinance
where
God
gave
a
blessing
,
pag.
13.
The
Bar
removed
.
I
doe
not
finde
that
Mr.
Collins
hath
much
to
except
against
,
what
I
have
answered
to
these
two
queries
in
my
Book
,
pag.
19
,
20.
He
grants
what
I
have
said
is
true
,
but
yet
he
sayes
,
in
case
of
scandalous
sinners
in
the
Church
,
self
examination
is
not
enough
,
but
there
is
something
to
be
done
by
the
Ministers
and
officers
of
the
Church
,
he
grants
self
examination
a
personal
remedy
;
but
there
are
other
Church
remedies
,
which
the
Apostle
commandeth
the
use
of
,
as
well
as
this
,
1
Cor.
5.
I
am
ready
to
yeeld
it
,
Answ.
that
there
are
Church
remedies
,
and
judge
that
his
quotation
,
1
Cor.
5.
is
so
,
for
the
reforming
scandalous
brethren
.
And
that
those
that
are
justly
delivered
up
to
Satan
,
or
cast
out
of
Christian
Communion
by
the
authority
of
the
Church
,
should
not
only
be
debarred
the
Sacrament
,
but
all
publick
Ordinances
,
and
all
civil
society
,
so
far
as
our
particular
callings
will
possibly
admit
of
;
but
yet
I
am
far
from
thinking
,
that
the
Apostle
ever
meant
that
delivering
unto
Satan
,
and
to
put
from
among
themselves
that
wicked
person
,
was
no
more
but
exclude
him
the
Sacrament
.
And
I
verily
believe
,
that
the
same
censure
that
was
put
into
execution
by
the
decree
of
the
Apostle
,
was
made
a
general
rule
for
the
Church
,
touching
their
dealing
with
all
scandalous
brethren
in
the
Church
,
as
plainly
appears
in
the
10
,
11
,
12.
verses
of
that
chapter
,
the
which
I
shall
more
clearly
speak
unto
,
when
I
come
to
examine
the
grounds
of
suspension
laid
down
by
Mr.
Collins
.
He
saith
,
He
cannot
subscribe
to
my
inclination
,
that
self
examination
,
mentioned
1
Cor.
11.28
.
must
be
limited
by
the
premises
in
the
context
,
as
the
institution
repeated
doth
import
with
some
other
directions
and
cautions
given
in
cure
of
their
malady
,
&c.
He
might
have
done
it
for
any
strength
of
reason
he
can
give
to
the
contrary
;
Answ.
for
if
those
two
things
hold
,
which
I
have
pincht
upon
,
That
the
Corinths
were
not
blamed
nor
punished
for
personal
unworthinesse
at
all
;
Nor
2.
for
any
other
actual
offendings
,
but
meerly
for
their
profaning
the
Ordinance
of
Christ
in
the
very
time
of
administration
;
for
this
cause
only
some
are
weak
,
sick
,
and
some
are
dead
,
vers.
30.
I
say
,
if
this
hold
,
as
I
believe
it
will
,
what
reason
can
any
man
have
to
judge
,
that
the
Apostle
intends
more
in
this
place
then
the
reforming
of
them
in
those
particular
sins
they
were
punished
for
,
and
blamed
for
If
they
were
punished
for
coming
to
the
Sacrament
in
an
unregenerate
state
,
or
for
want
of
the
knowledg
of
God
in
Christ
,
for
want
of
love
of
God
and
of
Jesus
Christ
,
&
of
men
,
or
for
any
other
want
,
or
miscarriage
,
save
only
this
,
so
exprest
in
the
context
,
examination
might
have
been
urged
accordingly
,
but
they
being
not
so
much
as
blamed
for
any
such
things
in
order
to
the
Sacrament
,
no
not
in
this
chap.
or
elsewhere
,
what
shew
of
reason
can
any
man
have
to
be
so
severe
in
urging
of
examination
as
a
duty
of
that
necessity
,
that
if
they
be
not
able
to
discern
the
mysteries
of
the
Kingdome
of
God
,
and
to
approve
themselves
to
God
to
be
sincere
as
to
such
particulars
,
which
are
only
necessary
for
admittance
unto
heavenly
glory
;
or
else
if
otherwise
they
come
,
they
will
but
eat
and
drink
their
own
damnation
.
When
in
my
answer
I
have
limited
this
duty
of
self-examination
to
the
context
,
as
if
the
Apostle
had
said
unto
them
;
You
being
fully
convinced
of
your
former
woeful
abuse
,
and
profaning
this
holy
Ordinance
of
Christ
,
you
must
now
judge
and
condemn
your selves
accordingly
:
and
approve
your selves
according
unto
the
right
rule
prescribed
unto
you
in
the
institution
received
from
Christ
,
understanding
within
your selves
,
what
this
holy
observance
doth
mean
,
and
so
come
and
demean
your selves
with
reverence
and
good
order
,
sutable
to
Gods
Ordinance
,
and
then
he
tels
them
they
should
not
be
judged
of
the
Lord
.
This
saith
Mr.
Collins
is
short
work
indeed
,
pag.
29.
What
though
it
be
short
of
the
ordinary
lasts
of
some
men
that
will
extend
this
duty
to
an
infinitum
;
Answ.
yet
until
Mr.
Collins
,
or
any
other
can
confute
it
,
I
shall
judge
it
right
work
,
and
no
whit
short
of
the
sense
o●
this
place
;
the
which
were
it
justly
applyed
to
ours
as
it
ought
to
be
,
they
being
members
of
the
same
visible
body
,
and
under
the
same
rule
and
priviledges
of
the
Church
;
and
not
offenders
in
that
kinde
,
I
think
a
shorte
work
would
serve
,
did
not
men
upon
mistak●
affect
to
make
themselves
more
work
the
they
have
warrant
for
from
their
Lord
.
But
thus
he
saith
,
The
wrod
in
the
Gree
will
not
be
satisfied
with
such
a
short
and
sea●
interpretation
,
Magistrates
examine
malefactor
more
strictly
,
and
the
Goldsmiths
tryal
of
his
gold
a
more
searching
tryal
,
the
Apostle
expounds
i●
2
Cor.
13.5
.
You
must
excuse
me
as
touching
the
Original
,
Answ.
I
am
not
able
to
examine
it
,
I
wish
could
,
I
am
afraid
the
truth
will
be
prejudiced
through
mine
inabilities
,
yet
as
I
a●
informed
,
this
makes
but
little
to
his
purpose
,
the
same
word
being
so
often
used
i●
the
New
Testament
,
and
that
upon
differen●●
accounts
,
as
Rom.
2.18
.
chap.
14.18
.
and
the
16.10
.
2
Cor.
7.11
.
&
10.18
.
the
13.7
.
Phil.
1.10
.
2
Tim.
2.15
.
by
some
of
these
places
you
may
see
we
are
to
approve
of
the
things
that
are
excellent
,
and
good
,
and
holy
,
so
as
to
put
forth
our
endevours
in
pursuance
of
them
,
and
to
decline
the
contrary
,
which
is
all
one
with
1
Cor.
11.28
.
the
Apostle
would
have
the
Corinths
to
approve
themselves
to
the
rules
prescribed
them
,
and
so
come
.
2
Cor.
13.5
.
is
a
different
thing
to
1
Cor.
11.28
.
there
the
Apostle
perceived
that
they
questioned
his
authority
of
Apostleship
,
and
required
a
proof
of
Christ
speaking
in
him
;
the
which
saith
the
Apostle
,
they
need
not
goe
far
for
a
proof
of
.
Christ
in
accompanying
his
Word
by
him
towards
them
is
not
weak
,
but
mighty
,
vers.
3.
and
hence
he
bids
them
examine
themselves
,
whether
they
be
in
the
faith
,
prove
your selves
,
that
Christ
is
in
you
,
and
that
would
be
a
sufficient
proof
of
Christs
speaking
in
him
,
and
of
his
Ministerial
authority
.
Thus
you
may
clearly
see
,
although
here
is
the
same
word
,
yet
it
's
used
upon
a
far
different
occasion
,
and
therefore
it
doth
not
expound
1
Cor.
11.28
.
as
Mr.
Collins
would
have
it
.
Next
he
saith
,
That
another
kinde
of
examination
is
here
required
,
hath
been
the
concurrent
judgement
of
all
Divines
,
especially
those
of
the
reformed
Churches
,
&c.
I
heartily
reverence
the
concurrent
judgement
of
all
Divines
,
and
it
is
my
grief
that
I
differ
from
them
in
some
things
,
I
wish
that
the
authority
of
man
do
not
cloud
the
truth
from
some
;
for
my
own
part
,
my
inabilities
are
such
,
that
there
can
be
no
danger
of
swaying
the
judgement
of
any
able
Divines
by
my
opinion
,
wherein
I
dissent
from
them
;
it
must
be
the
simplicity
of
truth
,
and
the
justnesse
of
what
I
maintain
only
,
that
bean
me
up
against
those
I
have
to
deal
with
in
this
controversie
.
I
am
a
meer
naked
man
that
am
ingaged
with
men
of
compleat
harness
and
arms
,
that
History
,
Arts
,
and
Tongue
can
furnish
them
withall
.
I
must
confesse
I
am
strongly
perswaded
of
the
truth
of
what
I
have
writ
in
this
controversie
;
and
that
it
is
the
onely
way
to
bring
the
Churcher
peace
and
truth
together
,
and
for
Sions
sake
I
can
have
no
rest
,
but
am
drawn
on
to
doe
things
not
so
well
becoming
my
rank
and
calling
in
the
Church
.
I
beg
your
pardon
,
I
hope
some
will
confesse
they
can
see
something
of
God
in
it
,
excuse
me
,
for
it
is
not
so
much
the
judgement
of
Divines
,
as
the
Scripture
grounds
that
will
satisfie
my
spirit
in
this
thing
.
Next
,
pag.
30.
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
But
if
they
be
to
examine
themselves
no
more
then
whether
they
discern
the
Lords
Body
,
we
conceive
it
enough
,
for
discerning
must
imply
knowledge
.
1.
To
know
the
Lords
Body
Sacramentally
.
2.
As
the
Lords
Body
.
3.
Acknowledge
of
the
sign
and
thing
signified
in
the
Sacrament
.
4.
Acknowledge
of
the
two
natures
of
Christ
,
and
of
what
he
hath
done
and
suffered
for
me
.
5.
And
of
the
nature
of
the
Sacrament
,
and
what
is
held
forth
in
it
to
the
soul
.
From
hence
(
he
saith
)
will
easily
follow
an
answer
to
the
sixt
query
,
That
ignorant
persons
though
by
profession
they
do
own
the
true
Religion
;
yet
are
not
in
a
capacity
to
examine
themselves
so
,
as
to
prevent
the
judgement
,
&c.
I
grant
that
every
one
that
comes
to
this
Ordinance
,
Answ.
1
should
be
able
to
discern
the
Lords
body
,
at
least
notionally
by
the
outward
signes
,
and
that
the
thing
signified
by
the
instituted
signes
is
the
same
,
and
that
the
bread
and
wine
is
to
be
received
in
remembrance
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
whose
bloud
was
shed
for
remission
of
sins
;
but
for
to
know
the
two
natures
of
Christ
,
and
what
he
hath
done
and
suffered
for
me
,
and
to
understand
the
nature
of
the
Sacrament
distinctly
;
and
what
is
held
out
in
it
to
the
soul
,
is
more
then
the
Apostle
taught
the
Church
of
Corinth
in
order
to
their
receiving
,
and
therefore
these
requisites
require
further
proof
before
he
can
conclude
any
thing
from
them
.
In
charity
I
judge
that
there
is
not
any
that
live
under
any
painful
Preachers
,
but
are
so
well
instructed
,
as
to
understand
that
the
Sacrament
is
a
holy
Ordinance
of
God
appointed
for
the
good
of
their
souls
in
general
.
And
that
accordingly
they
humbly
and
reverently
make
their
addresses
unto
it
to
receive
the
outward
signes
,
in
remembrance
that
Christ
shed
his
bloud
to
save
sinners
,
&c.
and
this
is
upon
the
matter
as
much
as
the
Apostle
requires
unto
worthy
receiving
,
let
it
be
proved
that
such
a
receiving
was
ever
blamed
or
punished
in
the
holy
Scriptures
:
if
it
cannot
be
proved
,
why
doe
men
bring
such
needlesse
troubles
and
distractions
in
the
Church
by
their
own
traditions
?
It
was
not
so
much
the
ignorance
of
the
Corinths
that
was
punished
,
as
their
profane
actions
,
which
they
were
guilty
of
in
the
time
of
receiving
;
it
's
a
question
whether
their
ignorance
simply
were
punished
at
all
any
otherwise
then
accompanyed
with
those
horrible
effects
,
the
which
doth
very
rarely
touch
the
worst
of
our
Congregations
in
the
Church
:
let
Mr.
Collins
better
consider
of
these
things
before
he
answer
them
:
for
although
many
of
ours
should
be
more
ignorant
then
they
of
Corinth
,
yet
so
long
as
they
doe
not
openly
profane
the
Ordinance
by
their
actual
miscarriages
at
the
time
of
worship
,
as
the
Corinthians
did
,
it
doth
not
follow
that
they
eat
and
drink
unworthily
,
and
so
their
own
damnation
,
as
they
of
Corinth
.
It
's
true
also
,
that
the
Lord
may
justly
punish
persons
for
their
ignorance
under
the
means
.
But
doth
it
follow
,
that
therefore
men
may
too
,
with
debarring
them
from
the
Sacrament
?
I
think
not
,
untill
by
some
clear
ground
of
Scripture
,
Mr.
Collins
,
or
some
other
,
can
prove
,
the
Eldership
may
.
And
I
shall
intreat
them
to
make
it
good
with
the
greatest
strength
they
can
,
for
otherwise
they
must
look
to
be
baffled
in
it
,
so
long
as
they
grant
them
Church-members
.
I
shall
now
see
what
Mr.
Collins
excepts
against
my
answer
to
the
eight
query
,
that
is
,
Whether
a
carelesse
incapable
neglect
of
self-examination
,
doth
excuse
,
and
give
a
writ
of
ease
from
that
precept
,
Doe
this
in
remembrance
of
me
.
He
saith
,
If
I
can
prove
this
an
universal
precept
,
that
concerns
every
individuall
person
,
that
is
baptized
,
and
of
years
of
discretion
,
he
may
tell
me
that
such
neglect
makes
them
doubly
guilty
,
&c.
pag.
31.
He
saith
further
,
That
he
conceives
that
precept
onely
to
concern
the
disciples
of
Christ
,
and
none
but
true
disciples
.
I
wonder
what
Mr.
Collins
will
make
of
ours
that
are
baptized
,
Answ.
and
externally
at
least
adhere
to
the
true
religion
,
are
they
Pagans
?
If
not
,
then
they
are
disciples
and
followers
of
Christ
by
profession
.
And
upon
his
own
grant
come
under
that
precept
,
Do
this
in
remembrance
of
me
.
I
am
far
from
going
about
to
divide
these
duties
;
I
would
have
them
examine
and
come
too
;
yet
the
neglect
of
the
one
doth
not
excuse
from
the
other
:
a
man
must
not
onely
goe
and
be
reconciled
with
his
brother
;
but
he
must
come
and
offer
his
gift
also
.
He
saith
,
It
will
not
much
trouble
him
,
what
I
have
said
from
Matth.
28.19
,
20.
the
Apostles
were
bound
to
call
upon
those
they
preacht
unto
,
to
observe
all
Christs
commands
,
either
that
proves
the
they
were
to
call
upon
Pagans
to
come
to
the
Sacrament
;
or
else
to
call
upon
all
to
observe
such
things
that
he
had
commanded
them
respectively
,
and
then
it
will
still
remain
to
prove
that
Christ
hath
commanded
an
ignorant
person
to
come
to
the
Sacrament
.
It
's
very
true
,
Answ.
1
for
to
avoid
the
trouble
,
he
is
not
willing
to
reach
the
argument
,
as
you
may
see
pag.
23.
Bar
removed
,
the
argument
was
drawn
from
the
charge
of
Christ
to
his
Apostles
in
order
to
them
,
that
came
under
baptism
,
not
to
the
Pagans
they
preached
unto
;
but
to
them
that
by
their
preaching
were
converted
and
added
unto
the
Church
by
baptism
.
Christ
chargeth
them
to
teach
his
Church
to
observe
,
and
doe
all
whatever
he
hath
commanded
them
,
and
loe
he
will
be
with
them
alwayes
.
Where
are
the
Apostles
bid
?
to
teach
the
Heathen
as
such
?
to
observe
all
that
he
hath
commanded
?
He
gives
his
statutes
and
his
judgements
unto
Israel
,
as
for
the
Heathen
they
have
not
known
his
laws
.
This
very
charge
of
Christ
is
just
the
language
of
God
to
the
Church
in
Moses
and
the
Prophets
,
upon
the
like
encouragement
of
a
blessing
.
As
Circumcision
brought
all
the
uncircumcised
under
all
observances
of
the
old
administration
,
even
the
Passeover
,
upon
their
lives
.
So
baptism
layes
the
same
ingagement
upon
all
the
baptized
to
come
under
all
observances
of
the
New
Testament
administration
,
that
of
the
holy
Supper
,
as
well
as
others
;
hence
the
Apostle
commends
the
Church
of
Corinth
for
remembring
him
in
all
things
;
and
for
keeping
the
Ordinances
as
he
delivered
them
unto
them
,
1
Cor.
11.2
.
and
it
is
not
good
to
distinguish
and
dispute
away
duty
,
where
the
Scriptures
gives
such
a
general
warranty
.
I
know
not
well
what
he
means
by
Christs
commanding
respectively
;
if
he
judge
that
ours
are
within
,
as
the
Church
of
Corinth
were
,
without
doubt
they
are
both
under
the
observance
and
discipline
of
the
Church
.
If
he
judge
that
ours
that
are
ignorant
,
and
scandalous
,
are
without
;
then
what
hath
he
to
do
to
judge
those
that
are
without
?
there
is
no
hope
to
amend
them
by
discipline
,
or
ground
to
baptize
their
children
,
or
to
justifie
the
main
foundation
of
our
Church
.
As
I
said
in
my
Book
,
pag.
23.
The
Bar
removed
,
so
I
say
again
,
that
Jesus
Christ
commands
nothing
for
the
hurt
of
his
visible
subjects
,
they
observing
it
according
to
their
present
capacity
:
Can
an
instance
be
given
in
the
Old
or
New
Testament
of
any
any
that
came
under
Circumsion
or
Baptism
,
that
as
private
members
were
admitted
to
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
,
and
yet
were
forbidden
the
other
Sacrament
,
the
Passeover
or
the
Lords
Supper
.
To
this
Mr.
Collins
answers
,
with
a
meer
trifle
,
telling
us
,
That
it
will
pose
me
,
to
prove
that
those
that
had
touched
the
dead
body
of
a
man
might
come
at
no
ordinance
,
but
he
can
prove
they
might
not
come
to
the
Passeover
,
Numb
.
9.
Enough
hath
been
said
to
this
already
,
Answ.
I
need
but
repeat
Numb.
19.13
,
20
,
22.
The
truth
is
,
what
ever
the
unclean
did
touch
,
or
what
ever
toucht
him
,
were
unclean
,
Hag.
2.
Vers
.
22
Nay
such
persons
that
neglected
the
Law
,
for
their
purification
,
were
to
be
cut
off
from
the
Congregation
,
because
he
had
defiled
the
Sanctuary
of
the
Lord
.
I
might
run
through
the
several
kindes
of
uncleannesse
,
and
shew
you
how
they
were
separated
both
from
civill
as
well
as
holy
society
:
but
those
that
are
acquainted
with
Scriptures
will
be
satisfied
in
this
thing
.
Nay
as
I
have
noted
before
,
the
Lord
appointed
and
consecrated
a
season
on
purpose
for
the
unclean
to
keep
the
Passeover
,
but
not
so
of
any
other
Ordinance
:
they
were
deprived
of
in
the
time
of
their
uncleannesse
.
Mr.
Collins
sayes
,
Nor
is
that
whimzy
of
mine
,
pag.
25.
at
all
better
,
by
which
I
prove
the
receiving
of
the
Sacrament
a
duty
incumbent
upon
all
,
because
included
in
the
first
Table
,
he
sayes
it
will
pose
me
,
to
prove
that
this
duty
of
receiving
is
commanded
in
the
first
Table
;
if
it
were
,
yet
he
hopes
preaching
of
the
Word
is
so
also
,
which
yet
is
not
a
duty
enjoyned
to
all
,
but
to
those
only
who
are
appointed
thereto
.
If
that
of
mine
must
goe
under
the
reproach
of
a
whimzy
with
Mr.
Collins
,
Answ.
I
know
as
reverend
and
as
able
Divines
as
Mr.
Collins
appears
to
be
,
that
doe
judge
,
that
the
affirmative
part
of
the
second
Commandement
includes
all
Gods
institute
worship
,
which
at
any
time
he
hath
,
or
shall
prescribe
to
be
done
.
And
except
Mr.
Collins
will
deny
the
holy
Supper
to
be
a
part
of
Gods
instituted
worship
;
it
must
come
under
this
prescribed
worship
as
well
as
any
other
,
there
being
no
part
exprest
in
the
command
more
then
another
,
it
's
enough
to
prove
,
that
all
in
the
Church
come
under
the
precepts
of
worship
;
the
Sacrament
being
so
,
they
are
bound
to
that
as
well
as
all
other
:
but
then
he
seems
to
grant
the
thing
,
yet
he
hopes
so
is
preaching
of
the
Word
,
&c.
It
's
true
,
and
as
I
had
said
in
my
Book
,
pag.
25
,
That
all
Ministers
what
ever
are
bound
hence
to
preach
&c.
And
what
need
we
have
the
same
again
,
but
that
he
had
rather
puzle
then
satisfie
the
weak
?
We
know
that
which
lays
an
injunction
upon
Ministers
to
preach
,
or
administer
,
&c.
doth
also
injoyn
all
their
people
to
hear
and
receive
as
private
Christians
,
the
Commandement
doth
not
confound
relative
duties
,
although
Mr.
Collins
of
purpose
doth
to
deceive
his
Reader
.
And
me
thinks
it
might
make
him
blush
to
call
that
a
whimzy
in
me
,
which
is
so
ordinarily
delivered
by
as
reverend
men
as
himself
,
and
a
great
deal
more
.
But
the
Judicious
Reader
may
easily
judge
what
poore
shifts
he
is
put
unto
,
that
excepts
against
the
truth
.
Let
Mr.
Collins
give
us
some
rational
account
why
persons
in
the
Church
are
lesse
ingaged
unto
this
part
of
instituted
worship
then
all
others
,
that
all
of
the
Jews
Church
,
should
come
under
the
Law
of
the
Passeover
,
without
exception
,
good
and
bad
.
And
he
to
plead
no
duty
to
the
holy
Supper
of
persons
in
the
Church
too
:
they
being
not
worse
then
the
carnal
Jew
.
I
see
not
but
upon
the
same
ground
he
exempts
them
from
this
duty
,
he
may
exempt
them
from
all
others
that
are
essential
to
a
Church
state
,
and
so
consequently
not
only
unduty
them
,
but
unchurch
them
too
.
For
what
he
hath
said
before
implies
no
lesse
,
where
he
is
bold
to
undisciple
them
,
to
evade
this
argument
,
we
draw
from
the
command
of
Christ
,
Matth.
28.20
.
The
Doctor
was
somewhat
sharp
with
my
much
respected
friend
Mr.
Humfrey
,
for
making
the
act
of
receiving
,
the
principal
,
and
examination
but
an
accessory
,
in
my
vindicating
of
him
I
hinted
two
or
three
things
.
1.
That
the
duty
of
self-examination
is
but
a
private
duty
.
And
the
private
is
to
be
subordinate
to
the
publick
.
2.
This
duty
of
examination
was
prescribed
occasionally
as
a
remedy
to
that
particular
case
,
of
making
a
breach
upon
the
materials
of
divine
institution
and
order
.
And
we
may
safely
say
,
the
end
is
most
principal
,
the
means
lesse
.
3.
Where
a
true
Church
doth
not
so
offend
as
Corinth
did
,
this
duty
is
not
so
to
be
urged
upon
them
,
as
to
the
Church
of
Corinth
.
But
it
's
clear
,
there
is
not
the
same
offending
in
the
Church
of
England
,
as
there
was
at
Corinth
.
Therefore
that
duty
is
not
to
be
urged
upon
ours
with
the
same
necessity
of
danger
of
eating
and
drinking
unworthily
,
as
to
the
Church
of
Corinth
.
Unto
these
Mr.
Collins
hath
some
exceptions
.
1.
Whether
it
be
sense
or
no
,
he
cannot
tell
,
that
I
say
,
self-examination
is
a
private
duty
,
and
so
subordinate
to
the
publick
,
and
then
sayes
,
who
denyes
it
?
But
yet
he
questions
,
whether
upon
an
incapacity
,
or
neglect
of
the
private
,
the
publick
be
a
duty
;
for
where
a
private
duty
is
commanded
in
order
to
prepare
us
for
the
publick
,
we
cannot
without
sin
perform
the
publick
before
we
have
performed
the
private
;
cleansing
were
the
unclean
persons
private
duty
:
yet
till
it
was
done
,
he
might
not
come
to
the
Passeover
.
1.
Answ.
Though
I
grant
self-examination
a
requisite
duty
unto
a
profitable
receiving
,
and
judge
the
neglect
thereof
sinful
;
yet
so
long
as
the
publique
administrations
are
carryed
on
with
reverence
and
good
order
,
beseeming
Gods
worship
externally
;
I
would
gladly
know
wherein
the
Eldership
is
any
further
concerned
.
2.
What
though
an
incapable
neglect
of
the
private
,
doth
hinder
the
profitable
use
of
the
publick
,
and
that
it
cannot
without
sin
be
performed
,
doth
it
therefore
follow
that
such
persons
in
the
Church
may
neglect
the
publick
worship
without
sin
?
if
not
,
whether
is
the
greatest
to
obey
,
and
doe
as
well
as
they
can
with
sin
;
or
to
cast
off
all
care
o●
duty
wholly
?
it's
easily
answered
in
all
other
duties
,
and
but
a
meer
begging
the
question
to
deny
it
in
this
of
the
Sacrament
,
a●
to
that
instance
of
his
,
Cleansing
was
the
unclean
persons
private
duty
,
yet
till
it
was
done
,
he
might
not
eat
the
Passeover
.
1.
Answ.
It
's
a
question
whether
cleansing
were
a
private
duty
only
,
could
an
unclean
per●o●
make
himself
clean
?
by
what
law
,
is
a
query
?
Numb.
6.9
,
10
,
11.
&
19.19
.
speak
the
contrary
.
2.
Grant
it
were
,
might
they
enter
into
the
gates
of
the
Sanctuary
to
offer
unto
God
any
other
sacrifice
until
they
were
cleansed
?
In
Hezekiahs
Passeover
of
the
2.
month
,
many
did
eat
the
Passeover
that
was
not
clean
,
and
were
accepted
.
We
know
they
might
not
;
for
it
was
accounted
a
defiling
the
Sanctuary
,
a
thing
threatned
with
death
,
or
perpetual
banishment
from
the
Congregation
.
His
instance
doth
rather
prove
,
that
the
justly
excommunicate
ought
not
to
be
admitted
to
the
publick
Ordinances
of
Worship
,
untill
they
be
lawfully
admitted
upon
their
satisfying
the
Church
by
repentance
.
Then
to
prove
persons
in
the
Church
not
excommunicate
may
not
take
the
Sacrament
untill
they
have
performed
that
private
duty
of
examination
.
I
have
said
enough
,
to
prove
that
the
neglect
of
this
private
duty
of
examination
in
order
to
receiving
,
doth
not
reach
the
neglect
of
that
duty
of
cleansing
in
order
unto
the
whole
worship
of
God
.
In
his
32.
pag.
he
is
nibling
at
my
next
thing
,
wherein
I
would
have
this
private
duty
of
examination
occasionally
prescribed
as
a
remedy
,
or
a
means
to
that
particular
case
of
offending
.
And
therefore
they
were
to
approve
themselves
according
to
the
rules
of
institution
and
good
order
,
and
so
come
in
doing
the
good
,
and
declining
the
evill
they
had
been
punished
for
,
&c.
To
this
purpose
,
I
said
the
end
is
more
principal
,
the
means
lesse
.
Unto
this
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
No
man
can
receive
the
Sacrament
without
sin
,
neglecting
the
due
means
to
make
him
a
worthy
receiver
.
He
had
thought
due
means
must
be
necessarily
supposed
to
the
end
.
Who
will
deny
what
he
saith
to
this
?
Answ.
But
what
is
this
to
answer
the
thing
?
May
the
main
duty
of
publick
worship
be
neglected
,
unlesse
a
man
be
able
to
use
all
due
means
in
order
to
a
more
comfortable
and
profitable
receiving
?
If
not
,
let
them
so
come
,
as
well
as
they
can
,
rather
then
the
main
of
Gods
worship
shall
be
omitted
.
By
this
which
hath
been
answered
unto
Mr.
Collins
his
weak
exceptions
:
I
hope
the
impartial
Reader
may
clearly
judge
upon
what
bottome
we
infer
free
admission
,
namely
,
the
authority
of
Christs
command
.
Besides
,
you
may
take
notice
of
the
pitiful
shifts
that
our
adversaries
are
put
unto
,
to
dispute
against
the
authority
of
Christs
commands
:
Let
them
consider
,
He
that
breaks
the
least
of
his
commands
,
and
teacheth
men
so
,
shall
be
accounted
least
in
the
Kingdom
of
Heaven
;
Nay
,
if
they
shall
wittingly
thus
offend
in
one
,
they
are
guilty
of
all
.
My
last
query
is
,
Whether
there
be
any
thing
in
the
Nature
,
language
,
actions
or
end
of
the
Sacrament
in
1
Cor.
11.
or
elsewhere
incongruous
to
the
unregenerate
receiving
in
the
Church
?
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
Whether
in
1
Cor.
11.
there
be
any
thing
or
no
,
he
will
not
dispute
,
it
is
enough
he
findes
it
elsewhere
,
and
he
conceives
there
is
something
contrary
to
the
receiving
of
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
,
which
is
the
question
,
for
the
Church
judgeth
not
of
secret
things
.
What
he
hath
said
to
this
,
Answ.
hath
been
sufficiently
answered
already
:
he
hath
nothing
new
,
but
the
old
taken
for
granted
,
which
hath
been
denyed
according
to
the
stating
of
the
question
.
I
am
glad
he
is
so
sober
,
as
to
say
,
the
Church
judgeth
not
of
secrets
;
then
I
hope
he
will
not
proceed
to
censure
any
of
his
people
,
but
for
scandalous
sins
persisted
unto
obstinacy
,
if
he
,
or
his
Eldership
doe
,
they
undertake
to
judge
of
secrets
.
But
then
he
comes
more
particularly
to
the
question
.
As
first
,
Touching
the
institution
,
for
saith
he
,
Christ
gave
it
to
none
such
,
he
means
Christ
gave
it
to
none
that
were
ignorant
or
scandalous
.
1.
Christ
gave
it
to
none
but
the
twelve
,
that
were
impowered
with
Commission
to
Preach
and
baptize
,
heal
the
sick
,
and
to
cast
out
Devils
,
&c.
What
then
,
must
none
but
such
be
admitted
?
this
would
be
a
good
argument
to
deny
not
only
the
cup
,
but
the
whole
administration
from
the
Laity
.
But
2.
The
question
is
,
whether
the
Apostles
in
their
ordering
of
particular
Congregations
,
gave
any
direction
to
exclude
any
that
came
under
Baptism
from
the
holy
Supper
,
and
yet
allowed
them
the
priviledge
of
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
.
The
Scripture
speaks
of
thousands
that
submitted
unto
baptism
,
and
continued
stedfast
in
the
Apostles
doctrine
and
fellowship
,
and
in
breaking
of
bread
,
and
in
prayers
,
which
are
the
main
essentials
of
worship
:
and
this
is
spoken
of
the
whole
,
assoon
as
they
were
baptized
.
Act.
2.32
.
And
the
Church
of
Corinths
are
commended
for
keeping
the
Ordinances
.
It
was
a
profaning
of
this
of
the
Supper
they
were
blamed
and
punished
for
.
And
for
grosse
ignorance
amongst
them
,
we
need
not
doubt
of
it
,
and
other
scandalous
and
disorderly
conversation
;
but
what
is
this
of
his
,
but
●o
insinuate
unto
the
world
,
that
the
bap●ized
in
the
Church
that
are
either
ignorant
,
or
in
some
things
scandalous
are
not
of
the
Church
:
the
old
road
of
Brownism
.
But
then
he
saith
secondly
,
The
Sacrament
is
contrary
to
such
in
the
nature
of
it
,
for
it
is
strong
meat
,
and
the
seal
of
the
righteousnesse
of
faith
.
That
it
is
strong
meat
onely
,
Answ.
we
deny
;
it
remains
for
him
to
prove
if
he
can
,
his
say
so
is
no
proof
,
yet
that
's
his
great
argument
.
He
had
need
commence
Doctor
before
we
credit
his
bare
word
;
but
he
gives
his
reason
for
it
in
his
Book
,
pag.
104.
Strong
meat
belongs
to
men
of
age
,
who
by
reason
of
an
habit
have
their
senses
exercised
to
discern
good
and
evil
,
Heb.
5.13
,
14.
But
the
Sacrament
is
strong
meat
;
therefore
it
doth
not
belong
to
those
that
are
babes
in
knowledge
.
But
I
deny
his
minor
;
he
saith
it's
evident
,
he
gives
his
reason
,
That
meat
which
is
of
ha●dest
digestion
and
concoction
;
and
which
not
duly
digested
,
proves
most
pernicious
to
the
body
,
is
strong
meat
:
but
such
is
the
Sacrament
of
the
Lords
Supper
.
I
deny
his
minor
again
:
he
proves
it
,
1
Cor.
11.28
and
tels
us
,
This
meat
is
not
tasted
,
nor
digested
well
without
the
knowing
of
the
greatest
mysteries
of
religion
in
some
measure
,
namely
;
1.
The
union
of
Christ
with
the
Father
.
2.
The
union
of
the
two
natures
in
the
person
of
Christ
.
3.
The
mystical
union
of
the
soul
with
Christ
.
4.
The
mysterious
exercise
of
faith
in
applying
the
soul
to
the
pronise
,
&c.
and
this
is
all
his
proof
,
the
which
amounts
just
to
as
much
as
his
say
so
:
as
to
his
quotation
,
1
Cor.
11.28
.
enough
hath
been
spoken
already
to
shew
the
vanity
of
his
high
flown
conceptions
:
And
indeed
a
most
pernicious
perplexing
tenent
to
poor
,
doubting
,
weak
,
unsatisfied
Christians
,
should
it
be
believed
.
I
have
alwayes
been
taught
,
that
Sacraments
are
the
lowest
condescensions
of
the
love
of
Christ
to
his
weakest
babes
,
they
being
suted
so
familiarly
to
our
bodily
senses
,
as
it
were
with
Thomas
,
his
seeing
and
feeling
the
body
of
Christ
was
more
effectual
to
make
him
believe
,
then
the
testimony
of
their
word
who
preached
Christ
was
risen
indeed
.
But
the
next
he
saith
,
The
Sacrament
is
the
seal
of
the
righteousnesse
of
faith
;
and
hence
it
seemes
incongruous
to
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
that
have
not
faith
.
The
question
is
of
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
Answ.
the
which
may
be
discernable
by
these
Characters
of
ignorant
,
and
scandalous
in
part
,
and
know
that
I
have
nothing
to
say
in
behalf
of
them
that
hate
instruction
,
and
that
persist
in
their
vile
abominable
doings
,
after
admonition
and
due
conviction
unto
obstinacy
.
Let
such
be
declined
and
avoided
as
unworthy
of
all
Christian
Communion
,
and
spare
not
;
but
for
those
that
are
yeelding
sinners
,
and
are
ready
to
condemn
themselves
upon
all
occasions
,
if
being
wisely
dealt
withall
,
expressing
themselves
willing
and
desirous
to
amend
;
these
I
think
should
have
the
benefit
of
all
the
Ordinances
,
as
the
ordinary
means
of
their
salvation
.
But
now
to
his
assertion
,
That
the
Sacrament
is
the
seal
of
the
righteousnesse
of
faith
.
We
know
that
Sacraments
which
had
their
Original
from
God
unto
Abraham
,
Gen.
17.
were
tokens
of
the
everlasting
Covenant
of
grace
,
made
with
Abraham
and
his
seed
,
God
having
deputed
him
to
be
a
father
of
many
Nations
.
And
that
all
the
Nations
of
the
earth
shall
be
blessed
in
him
,
&c.
Circumcision
was
appointed
to
be
a
token
unto
Abraham
in
this
comprehensive
sense
,
that
not
only
they
that
were
his
seed
by
natural
descent
,
but
those
also
that
shall
embrace
the
profession
of
the
faith
of
Abraham
,
shall
be
blessed
with
him
,
even
they
,
and
their
natural
issue
also
.
And
the
Apostle
,
Rom.
4.4
.
descants
much
upon
this
large
Covenant
,
or
promise
made
unto
Abraham
,
in
the
warranty
of
the
Gentiles
engrafting
into
the
stock
of
Abraham
by
faith
;
the
which
the
Jews
stumbled
at
,
and
fell
into
prejudices
and
discontents
upon
the
Gentiles
embracing
of
the
Gospel
,
concluding
it
false
,
because
they
imbraced
it
,
that
were
always
left
of
God
,
and
so
abominable
to
the
Church
as
naturally
descended
from
Abraham
and
the
Prophets
,
&c.
The
Apostle
disputes
this
thing
with
them
,
and
saith
,
Is
he
a
God
of
the
Jews
only
,
is
he
not
of
the
Gentiles
also
?
Yes
of
the
Gentiles
also
,
chap.
3.29
.
And
he
tels
them
their
fleshly
priviledges
,
according
to
the
Law
,
will
not
continue
them
the
people
of
God
without
faith
in
Christ
.
And
by
faith
in
Christ
the
Gentiles
are
made
the
people
of
God
unto
Justification
,
opposing
faith
unto
works
chiefly
in
point
of
Justification
,
as
in
the
beginning
of
the
4.
chapter
is
expressed
in
that
instance
of
Abraham
and
David
.
It
was
not
works
,
but
faith
,
that
was
reckoned
unto
Abraham
for
righteousnesse
in
his
uncircumcised
state
:
and
hence
he
argues
Abraham
to
be
a
father
of
the
uncircumcision
,
as
well
as
of
the
circumcision
;
because
he
received
the
token
of
circumcision
,
a
seal
of
the
righteousnesse
of
that
faith
he
had
in
his
uncircumcision
,
that
he
might
be
the
father
of
all
that
believe
,
that
righteousnesse
might
be
imputed
to
them
also
,
and
a
father
of
the
believing
circumcision
too
,
&c.
Now
then
what
was
the
main
thing
that
Abraham
is
thus
commended
for
,
and
blessed
for
?
Why
it
's
said
,
He
believed
God
,
and
that
was
imputed
unto
him
for
righteousnesse
.
But
then
we
may
enquire
,
what
was
the
thing
he
believed
God
would
be
as
good
as
his
word
to
him
in
?
Answer
.
It
'
was
this
,
that
God
had
made
him
a
father
of
many
Nations
,
though
he
had
no
child
;
yet
he
believed
against
hope
,
&c.
And
this
was
imputed
unto
him
for
righteousnesse
.
We
know
that
Abraham
after
the
flesh
was
not
a
father
of
many
Nations
;
that
is
not
the
sense
,
but
he
is
so
in
a
spiritual
sense
by
religion
and
saith
,
and
that
's
the
thing
the
Apostle
drives
at
,
to
prove
him
a
father
of
all
that
come
in
unto
his
religion
and
faith
;
And
that
all
such
are
of
him
,
and
blessed
with
him
.
And
doubtlesse
Abraham
that
saw
this
day
of
Christ
and
rejoyced
,
so
understood
it
,
that
all
the
Nations
of
the
Earth
should
be
blessed
in
him
,
by
faith
;
and
this
blessednesse
to
begin
in
his
own
natural
family
;
and
to
be
extended
unto
all
Nations
in
time
.
And
hence
that
is
true
,
I
will
be
thy
God
,
and
the
God
of
thy
seed
in
their
generations
for
ever
,
Gen.
17.7
.
and
that
he
should
be
the
father
of
many
Nations
,
and
that
they
should
be
blest
in
him
,
&c.
This
is
the
everlasting
Covenant
of
Grace
that
Abraham
believed
,
and
this
is
the
faith
that
circumcision
was
a
token
of
,
and
did
confirm
the
truth
of
,
to
him
and
all
that
are
in
him
by
religion
for
ever
,
even
to
them
and
theirs
:
and
I
doubt
not
but
the
Sacrament
seals
to
the
same
faith
still
in
reference
to
them
that
have
entered
the
same
Covenant
,
and
professe
their
subjection
to
the
laws
and
administration
thereof
,
but
I
have
not
exprest
my self
in
this
so
fully
and
clearly
,
as
I
could
wish
,
I
shall
have
occasion
to
doe
more
in
it
hereafter
.
This
by
the
way
to
give
a
hint
,
what
the
Apostle
means
,
in
calling
circumcision
a
seal
of
the
righteousnesse
of
that
faith
that
Abraham
yet
had
in
uncircunacision
,
it
being
too
ambiguously
left
and
applyed
by
Mr.
Collins
in
order
unto
Church-members
unregenerate
.
Mr.
Collins
hath
two
or
three
things
more
in
the
32.
pag.
but
finding
nothing
in
them
that
doth
trouble
us
about
the
question
in
hand
,
I
passe
them
by
,
though
it
's
true
,
he
takes
the
boldnesse
to
deny
,
yet
he
doth
not
give
any
ground
or
reason
why
,
but
takes
all
for
granted
still
,
though
I
have
rationally
cleared
the
contrary
in
my
answer
to
the
query
,
pag.
36
,
37
,
38
,
39.
Bar
removed
.
I
shall
now
see
what
he
excepts
against
my
6.
proposition
,
pag.
30.
31.
I
conceive
that
Sacraments
in
general
,
and
this
in
particular
were
instituted
for
the
spiritual
good
of
the
Church
of
Christ
,
comprehensively
taken
in
which
every
particular
member
is
included
.
First
he
grants
as
much
,
pag.
33.
and
then
addes
,
his
jus
ad
rem
,
and
then
queries
,
how
this
proves
that
therefore
every
particular
member
ought
in
his
present
state
come
to
it
,
and
coming
ought
to
be
admitted
.
If
the
proposition
be
true
,
Answ.
as
is
granted
it
is
,
then
it
will
follow
that
all
Church-members
should
be
encouraged
unto
the
pertaking
of
that
which
is
for
their
spiritual
good
.
And
it
's
most
injurious
for
any
to
deprive
any
of
that
spiritual
good
,
that
proffer
themselves
,
or
discourage
them
so
to
doe
.
But
he
hath
two
things
to
except
against
the
consequence
.
He
saith
,
Was
not
the
Passeover
so
appointed
,
yet
he
thinks
unclean
persons
might
not
come
during
their
uncleannesse
?
But
now
there
is
no
such
uncleannesse
in
the
Gospel
Church
to
hinder
any
.
Answ.
1
They
were
no
more
debarred
the
Passeover
then
all
other
publick
worship
,
nor
so
much
,
for
provision
was
made
for
them
in
that
case
,
not
in
the
other
.
And
as
that
of
Moral
uncleannesse
was
no
hinderance
then
,
so
not
now
,
as
hath
been
shewed
,
and
hence
his
first
exception
is
worth
nothing
.
But
then
2.
he
tels
us
,
That
some
reverend
men
think
the
excommunicate
person
is
yet
a
member
of
the
Catholick
Church
,
and
shall
not
be
baptized
upon
his
repentance
:
and
he
owning
the
true
religion
,
and
being
baptized
,
his
repentance
being
supposed
,
the
Sacrament
is
for
his
good
;
but
it
will
not
therefore
follow
,
he
ought
in
that
state
of
his
excommunication
to
come
to
the
Sacrament
.
It
's
not
material
to
the
question
,
Answ.
1
whether
the
excommunicate
be
dismembred
or
not
;
it
's
sufficient
to
my
purpose
,
that
he
be
dispossest
of
all
external
priviledges
of
the
Church
during
his
impenitency
,
in
that
condition
he
is
justly
sentenced
unto
,
to
debar
him
the
Sacrament
.
And
I
think
all
parties
are
agreed
in
this
,
and
in
this
case
I
deny
that
the
Sacrament
is
for
his
good
,
while
he
is
under
the
last
remedy
and
Ordinance
of
Christ
for
his
amendment
or
utter
ruine
.
Then
if
you
suppose
his
repentance
and
satisfying
the
Church
,
he
ought
to
be
loosed
from
that
sentence
,
and
received
into
Church
communion
again
.
That
the
justly
excommunicate
are
absolutely
dismembred
is
too
harsh
to
affirm
,
untill
we
be
able
to
judge
that
he
hates
to
be
reformed
under
the
Churches
just
censures
,
adding
unto
his
incorrigible
sinning
,
not
only
obstinacy
,
but
Apostasie
.
And
then
he
is
undone
for
ever
.
For
what
the
Church
bindes
on
earth
,
is
bound
in
heaven
;
though
the
Churches
main
end
is
onely
to
reform
and
heal
a
diseased
member
.
Therefore
though
I
should
grant
him
not
absolutely
dismembred
,
and
yet
deny
him
the
Sacrament
;
it
doth
not
follow
that
Church-members
under
Church
indulgence
or
forbearance
,
may
be
denyed
the
Sacrament
.
These
are
two
different
cases
.
And
therefore
doth
not
in
the
least
hurt
my
first
proposition
.
My
second
proposition
is
,
That
the
Church
of
Christ
consists
of
good
and
bad
.
And
this
Mr.
Collins
grants
me
also
.
And
it
having
such
a
dependence
on
the
first
,
that
it
compleats
for
my
opinion
this
argument
.
The
holy
Supper
is
instituted
for
the
spiritual
good
of
every
particular
member
of
the
Church
.
But
this
Church
of
Christ
consists
of
good
and
bad
,
regenerate
and
unregenerate
;
therefore
the
holy
Supper
is
instituted
for
the
spiritual
good
of
good
and
bad
,
regenerat●
and
unregenerate
,
and
consequently
is
to
be
administred
to
them
in
order
to
that
good
.
I
conceive
that
both
propositions
bein●
granted
,
the
conclusion
cannot
be
denyed
.
My
third
is
,
That
the
unregenerate
in
th●
Church
are
the
only
immediate
objects
of
the
pr●mise
of
the
first
grace
.
Mr.
Collins
answers
unto
this
thus
,
That
b●
h●d
rather
say
,
that
the
unregenerate
are
objects
〈◊〉
the
first
grace
,
then
of
the
promise
of
that
grace
,
〈◊〉
the
promises
profit
not
any
without
faith
,
and
h●●
the
unregenerate
should
apply
the
promise
,
he
ca●not
tell
.
1.
Answ.
In
granting
them
objects
of
the
fin●
grace
,
he
grants
them
to
be
objects
of
the
promise
of
that
grace
.
Unlesse
the
first
grace
is
not
at
all
to
be
lookt
for
from
the
promise
.
2.
Nor
promised
unto
any
at
all
.
3.
Or
else
given
to
some
to
whom
God
never
promised
it
.
The
which
things
to
affirm
would
be
point
blanck
against
the
Scriptures
.
So
that
the
question
is
,
whether
Mr.
Collins
doth
own
any
such
thing
as
promises
of
giving
the
first
grace
at
all
.
For
if
there
be
any
such
promises
at
all
made
to
the
Church
in
general
,
they
must
of
necessity
immediately
respect
some
proper
object
that
hath
not
that
grace
,
of
,
and
in
it self
;
it
is
want
and
misery
that
is
the
proper
object
of
grace
and
mercy
:
But
why
should
Mr.
Collins
expresse
himself
thus
doubtfully
in
such
a
main
thing
.
Doth
he
not
baptize
all
Infants
upon
this
account
chiefly
that
the
promise
is
to
the
Parents
and
children
?
surely
if
they
be
not
objects
of
the
promises
of
the
first
grace
,
the
most
of
ours
every
where
are
objects
of
no
promises
that
Sacraments
seal
;
for
it
's
too
certain
,
that
they
and
theirs
have
not
a
true
sincere
purifying
faith
to
apply
the
other
promises
of
salvation
.
This
is
certain
,
if
they
be
not
objects
of
the
promises
of
the
first
grace
,
they
cannot
be
objects
of
the
promises
of
crowning
that
grace
with
glory
:
exclude
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
from
the
promise
of
the
first
grace
,
and
you
exclude
them
from
all
.
And
then
judge
what
will
follow
.
And
where
he
saith
,
The
premises
profit
not
any
without
faith
,
shall
the
want
of
a
fincere
faith
make
the
faithfulnesse
of
God
without
effect
?
God
forbid
.
Let
God
be
true
in
what
he
hath
promised
to
the
Church
in
general
,
and
indefinite
terms
,
and
every
man
a
lyar
,
Rom.
3.3
,
4.
We
know
of
the
Jews
that
were
the
greatest
enemies
unto
Christ
,
a
remnant
of
them
were
sanctified
and
saved
,
according
unto
Act.
2.39
.
Peter
tels
the
wicked
Jews
that
were
guilty
of
the
innocent
bloud
of
Christ
,
that
the
promise
is
to
them
and
their
children
,
before
he
knew
whether
they
would
repent
or
no.
What
faith
had
they
when
Peter
told
them
so
?
not
so
as
much
ours
have
that
generally
believe
that
Christ
i●
the
only
Saviour
of
the
world
.
These
Jews
denyed
this
,
yet
being
of
the
visible
Church
as
descended
from
Abraham
,
the
Apostle
make●
them
and
their
children
objects
of
the
promises
;
and
hence
perswades
them
to
repent
o●
what
they
had
done
against
Christ
,
&
be
baptized
for
remission
of
sins
,
&c.
And
so
many
〈◊〉
received
his
word
were
baptized
indeed
,
and
submitted
themselves
to
the
obedience
o●
faith
.
What
though
the
unregenerate
cannot
actually
apply
those
promises
by
faith
unto
themselves
?
Doth
it
follow
that
therefor●
they
are
not
objects
,
or
susceptives
of
them
in
a
passive
sense
,
God
being
free
in
making
these
promises
unto
them
,
and
by
his
Spirit
in
the
use
of
his
own
appointments
to
apply
them
effectually
unto
whom
he
will
,
of
such
that
have
not
faith
to
apply
them
:
Forasmuch
as
not
any
can
in
astrict
sense
believe
,
until
he
be
impowered
with
regenerating
grace
:
No
,
nor
then
,
without
the
concurrence
of
a
divine
aid
to
apply
the
promises
made
to
such
a
blessed
state
to
their
own
comfort
and
salvation
.
Besides
,
the
promises
of
the
first
grace
are
not
only
free
,
but
absolute
,
not
so
depending
upon
condition
of
faith
in
a
strict
sense
,
as
many
other
promises
doe
:
yet
not
so
absolute
,
but
that
the
ordinary
means
of
salvation
ought
to
be
observed
diligently
in
order
●o
attainment
of
the
first
grace
:
for
God
will
●e
enquired
after
by
the
house
of
Israel
,
for
the
grace
of
the
New
Covenant
,
Ezek.
36.
My
fourth
proposition
is
,
That
the
whole
●dministration
of
the
Covenant
belongs
to
those
in
he
Church
,
that
are
the
immediate
objects
of
the
●bsolute
promises
,
in
order
to
the
Lords
putting
these
●romises
into
execution
.
Mr.
Collin●
saith
,
If
the
argument
be
good
,
it
's
●etcht
from
the
right
,
which
an
interest
in
the
Co●enant
promises
gives
one
to
the
seals
of
it
.
And
●hen
it
must
hold
universally
,
and
if
the
unregene●ate
world
without
be
as
much
objects
of
the
first
●ace
,
as
those
within
,
there
is
no
reason
for
that
●striction
.
It
seems
,
Mr.
Answ.
Collins
would
not
have
the
●romises
of
first
grace
be
limited
unto
the
Church
,
but
would
have
the
unregenerate
●ut
of
the
Church
as
much
objects
as
those
within
:
for
indeed
he
is
ready
at
every
pinch
●o
level
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
to
the
●n
fidel
world
.
Therefore
I
shall
endevour
to
clear
unto
you
the
difference
in
this
particular
,
briefly
;
●t
may
be
I
may
publish
more
of
this
hereaf●er
.
It
is
evident
,
that
the
whole
Covenant
of
grace
is
made
unto
the
Church
in
general
terms
without
any
exception
of
persons
in
●t
,
as
is
clear
,
Jer.
31.
Heb.
8.
Ezek.
36.
A
●ew
Covenant
I
will
make
with
the
house
of
Judah
and
Jerusalem
:
in
which
Covenant
th●
promise
of
the
first
grace
is
most
expresse
an●
full
:
the
state
of
the
Jews
Church
cons●●ing
most
of
carnal
members
,
that
were
proper
objects
of
the
promises
of
first
grace
Why
the
Gentile
world
as
carnal
,
and
b●miserable
,
yet
this
Covenant
containing
th●
first
grace
was
never
made
to
them
at
all
,
b●
upon
condition
of
faith
,
and
grafting
them selves
into
the
same
visible
body
:
as
they
a●
Infidels
and
without
,
They
are
aliens
from
〈◊〉
Common
wealth
of
Israel
,
strangers
to
the
Coven●
of
promises
,
and
without
all
hope
:
and
with●●
God
in
the
world
,
Ephes.
2.12
.
How
can
the
be
said
to
be
as
much
objects
of
the
promi●
of
the
first
grace
that
are
without
,
as
the●
that
are
within
;
when
they
are
alienat●
from
all
,
during
that
Infidel
state
?
It
's
t●●
there
is
a
promise
,
that
all
the
Nations
〈◊〉
the
earth
shall
be
blessed
in
Abraham
;
but
i●
runs
in
conditional
tearms
,
as
they
are
i●
him
,
they
must
first
be
brought
into
him
and
be
of
the
true
Church
that
Abraham
wa●
father
of
,
before
they
can
be
blessed
in
him
and
so
the
Apostle
expounds
it
,
They
that
a●●
of
faith
,
are
blessed
with
him
,
and
ye
are
all
,
eve●
the
whole
Church
,
Jews
and
Gentiles
,
th●
children
of
Abraham
by
faith
in
Christ
Jesus
.
And
not
any
others
in
the
world
that
remained
in
their
infidel
estate
.
This
difference
is
clearly
intimated
by
the
Apostle
Peter
,
Act.
2.39
.
when
he
speaks
of
the
Jews
that
were
of
the
Church
by
nature
as
descended
from
Abraham
,
he
tels
them
plainly
,
The
promise
is
to
them
and
their
children
,
speaking
in
the
present
tense
.
But
then
speaking
of
the
Gentiles
,
he
saith
,
the
promise
is
intended
unto
them
also
,
but
with
another
restriction
then
to
the
Jews
,
even
unto
as
many
as
it
shall
please
the
Lord
our
God
to
call
of
them
,
at
any
time
for
the
future
,
and
to
none
else
:
they
of
the
infidel
world
must
be
externally
called
at
least
,
and
planted
into
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
by
baptism
,
before
they
and
theirs
can
be
children
of
the
promise
,
and
in
Covenant
relation
.
As
the
Pagan
world
is
without
the
promise
of
the
first
grace
,
so
we
know
they
are
without
the
ordinary
means
of
working
that
grace
,
if
they
be
as
much
objects
of
the
promise
of
first
grace
,
as
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
.
What
's
the
reason
the
Lord
denyes
them
the
ordinary
means
of
putting
them
into
execution
?
The
Apostle
saith
,
If
our
Gospel
be
hid
,
or
withheld
from
persons
or
people
,
it
's
hid
to
them
that
perish
.
Our
own
experience
will
convince
us
,
that
those
that
are
without
are
not
so
much
objects
of
the
promise
of
first
grace
as
them
within
:
because
we
see
the
fruit
of
it
in
the
Church
in
every
age
and
time
,
in
the
conversion
of
many
;
but
scarse
any
age
of
a
hundred
generations
we
have
heard
of
any
conversions
in
some
part
of
the
Pagan
world
.
Hence
I
judge
there
is
a
real
difference
between
the
Church
and
the
Pagan
world
;
in
respect
of
the
one
they
are
objects
of
the
promises
,
the
other
without
promise
and
hope
,
and
God
in
the
world
;
and
me
thinks
Mr.
Collins
,
and
the
friends
of
his
judgement
,
(
they
being
godly
,
sober
,
Orthodox
Divines
)
should
be
satisfied
with
this
difference
,
I
have
only
hinted
at
in
short
;
for
my
part
,
I
think
there
is
nothing
more
clear
,
and
easie
to
be
made
out
from
holy
Scriptures
,
were
not
men
of
his
judgement
too
much
learned
with
Brownism
,
destroying
that
which
our
fir●
reformers
have
planted
.
I
must
confesse
it
's
nothing
becoming
my
calling
and
abilities
to
challenge
any
learned
reverend
men
;
yet
I
doubt
not
but
through
the
assistance
of
Gods
grace
,
to
maintain
this
difference
I
have
in
short
laid
down
,
against
all
the
contradiction
of
sober
Orthodox
men
:
provided
they
will
dispute
it
from
the
authority
of
holy
Scriptures
,
and
what
may
be
clearly
and
rationally
deducted
thence
.
Next
Mr.
Collins
is
pleased
to
put
my
proposition
into
form
,
pag.
34.
Those
to
whom
the
absolute
promises
of
the
Covenant
belong
,
to
those
the
whole
administration
of
the
Covenant
;
and
so
the
seals
belong
.
But
to
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
and
of
years
the
promises
belong
.
Ergo.
He
saith
,
Let
but
[
belong
]
in
each
proposition
be
understood
in
the
same
sense
,
and
the
answer
is
easie
,
and
the
argument
weak
,
&c.
I
will
yeild
him
that
which
he
desires
,
Answ.
and
take
it
in
that
sense
which
is
most
large
,
namely
,
that
the
promises
of
first
grace
belong
to
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
then
he
denies
the
major
,
and
saith
,
That
by
this
argument
Heathens
may
come
to
the
Sacrament
.
I
say
no
,
unlesse
Mr.
Collins
can
prove
that
the
Heathen
are
as
much
objects
of
the
absolute
promises
in
the
Covenant
,
as
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
.
I
think
when
he
hath
performed
that
task
soundly
and
undeniably
,
I
shall
yeild
the
argument
weak
,
and
think
the
worse
of
my
cause
:
but
untill
then
,
he
must
give
me
leave
to
think
the
argument
strong
,
for
any
thing
he
hath
yet
said
in
answer
of
it
.
He
only
saith
it
,
That
no
promise
doth
so
belong
to
any
unregenerate
man
,
as
his
portion
which
he
may
cleare
and
make
use
of
it
in
his
unregeneracy
.
What
thinks
Mr.
Collins
then
of
the
baptizing
the
Infants
of
such
,
Answ.
1
the
usual
practise
of
our
Church
?
How
can
he
perswade
such
to
offer
their
children
unto
baptism
,
if
no
promise
belong
to
him
to
make
use
of
as
his
?
is
not
his
childes
baptism
a
considerable
use
?
The
absolute
promise
of
the
first
grace
to
the
unregenerate
,
is
the
main
encouragement
to
the
use
of
means
for
the
attainment
of
grace
:
This
is
that
which
opens
a
door
of
hope
unto
all
,
and
as
they
are
sinners
destitute
of
the
work
of
grace
,
they
may
rightly
goe
to
God
and
pray
for
a
new
heart
,
and
for
his
Spirit
to
beget
regenerating
grace
it
their
gracelesse
spirits
.
Oh
turn
thou
us
Lord
,
and
we
shall
be
converted
unto
thee
,
for
thou
never
saidst
to
the
seed
of
Jacob
,
Seek
yee
my
face
,
in
vain
.
And
we
are
the
seed
of
thy
Church
and
people
,
whom
thou
hast
promised
to
be
a
God
unto
,
and
to
make
us
thy
people
,
for
thy
names
sake
,
forsake
us
not
,
but
put
forth
〈◊〉
work
of
thy
mighty
power
,
to
open
our
hear●
to
receive
the
grace
of
thy
promise
,
we
〈◊〉
objects
of
,
and
without
which
we
are
undou●
I
say
ask
,
and
you
shall
have
;
for
the
Lor●
will
give
his
Spirit
to
them
that
ask
it
.
An●
this
I
hope
is
of
good
use
to
the
unregenerate
it
's
a
special
ground
to
pray
for
renewing
grace
themselves
;
and
likewise
for
other
that
have
grace
to
pray
for
them
,
as
Minister
for
their
people
,
and
parents
for
their
children
,
&c.
Exclude
them
from
these
promises
and
you
exclude
them
from
your
prayers
,
for
we
have
no
warrant
to
pray
for
that
which
God
doth
not
promise
to
give
.
My
fifth
proposition
,
That
the
Sacraments
being
visible
representations
of
Christs
death
,
on
which
those
promises
are
founded
,
and
by
which
they
●ne
confirmed
,
the
use
of
the
Sacraments
belongs
to
those
whom
those
promises
doe
immediately
respect
.
Unto
this
he
hath
nothing
considerable
,
but
what
hath
been
answered
already
;
only
he
grants
the
main
of
this
.
And
yet
sayes
,
that
Sacraments
are
seals
as
well
as
signs
.
1.
Sacraments
are
seals
as
they
are
signes
,
Answ.
and
not
otherwise
.
2.
They
are
but
representatives
of
the
real
seal
that
confirms
the
absolute
promises
,
namely
the
death
of
Christ
,
and
so
not
seals
properly
,
but
by
way
of
resemblance
,
giving
the
name
to
the
signs
,
that
is
only
proper
to
the
thing
signified
,
namely
,
the
death
of
Christ
,
it
being
all
one
to
imagine
the
Sacraments
real
seals
of
the
Covenant
,
with
real
presence
.
If
I
mistake
not
,
hence
it
will
follow
,
That
which
the
death
of
Christ
is
a
seal
of
,
Sacraments
are
seals
of
:
but
the
death
of
Christ
is
a
seal
of
the
promises
of
first
grace
,
which
respect
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
:
therefore
the
use
of
these
seals
belong
to
them
.
I
see
not
but
that
the
Sacraments
,
as
they
are
seals
to
confirm
the
truth
of
the
Covenant
,
in
which
are
included
promises
of
first
grace
to
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
the
unregenerate
may
use
the
seals
for
their
incouragement
to
wait
upon
God
,
in
the
use
of
that
and
all
ordinary
means
,
in
hope
of
the
blessing
of
regenerating
grace
,
according
to
what
is
promised
in
the
Word
,
and
sealed
in
the
Sacrament
;
who
else
should
use
the
seals
,
if
not
those
that
have
a
right
unto
what
is
sealed
,
should
not
?
But
then
he
saith
,
It
is
false
,
that
the
use
of
the
Sacraments
belongs
to
such
as
the
promises
of
first
grace
doe
respect
,
for
then
the
use
of
the
Sacrame●
belongs
to
Heathens
:
but
the
use
of
it
belongs
〈◊〉
those
only
who
by
faith
apply
the
promises
.
So
long
as
any
creatures
are
without
to
letter
,
Answ.
and
external
administration
of
th●
Covenant
,
and
have
not
so
much
as
accepted
of
the
outward
tender
,
and
made
e●trance
therein
by
baptism
;
they
are
strange
from
the
Covenant
of
promise
,
and
without
a
literal
ground
of
hope
;
and
without
Go●
I
have
shewed
the
difference
already
:
〈◊〉
though
I
have
granted
elsewhere
,
that
th●
Heathen
are
objects
of
the
promise
of
〈◊〉
grace
in
some
remote
sense
,
yet
it
's
hard
〈◊〉
say
of
any
Nation
in
special
,
so
long
as
th●
Lord
is
pleased
to
withhold
the
ordina●
means
of
their
conversion
from
them
,
th●
they
are
objects
of
that
promise
.
This
is
certain
truth
,
where
the
Lord
hath
a
peop●●
to
save
,
he
will
either
send
his
Word
to
〈◊〉
them
;
or
bring
them
under
the
Word
by
so●
providence
or
other
to
that
end
:
as
for
tho●
that
are
left
to
wander
in
their
own
Idolitrous
wayes
,
there
is
no
hope
to
such
,
If
〈◊〉
Gospel
be
hid
,
it
's
hid
to
them
that
perish
.
An●
whereas
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
The
Sacrament
belongs
only
to
those
who
by
faith
apply
the
promise●
.
Alas
,
this
he
takes
for
granted
,
although
be
knows
we
have
denyed
it
upon
confiderable
ground
.
Take
faith
in
his
sense
,
can
any
man
imagine
that
all
the
people
of
the
Jews
were
able
by
faith
to
apply
the
promises
?
yet
they
were
all
bound
to
keep
the
Passeover
:
Conceive
how
improbable
it
were
,
that
all
that
submitted
unto
baptism
in
the
Apostles
age
,
were
able
by
a
true
saith
to
apply
the
promises
:
yet
none
were
denyed
the
Supper
that
came
under
Baptism
.
Doth
Mr.
Gollins
think
,
that
all
in
our
Church
are
able
by
a
true
sincere
faith
to
apply
the
promises
?
Yet
we
administer
baptism
unto
their
children
,
a
seal
of
the
same
promises
,
upon
the
account
of
their
parents
.
And
I
verily
judge
that
the
parents
are
in
as
good
a
capacity
for
the
holy
Supper
,
as
their
children
are
for
holy
baptism
;
If
the
childes
right
may
be
derived
more
remote
,
then
much
more
the
Parents
of
that
childe
as
being
a
generation
neerer
that
right
.
If
the
promise
include
the
grand
childe
,
much
more
his
own
childe
;
And
wherein
is
the
holy
Supper
a
different
seal
of
the
Covenant
from
baptism
?
So
that
in
giving
Baptism
to
their
child
,
you
clearly
yeeld
their
right
to
use
the
Supper
,
provided
they
be
not
excommunicated
.
But
Mr.
Collins
argues
against
me
thus
,
in
his
late
Book
,
pag.
104.
Those
who
if
they
were
Heathens
might
not
be
baptized
,
though
they
be
baptized
,
and
in
the
Church
ought
not
to
be
admitted
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
But
those
who
are
ignorant
and
scandalous
,
if
they
were
Heathens
,
should
not
be
baptized
.
Ergo
,
I
grant
his
minor
is
true
,
Answ.
that
ignorant
and
scandalous
Heathens
should
not
be
baptized
.
But
I
deny
his
Major
,
that
ignorant
and
scandalous
Christians
are
Heathens
.
Suppose
them
unbaptized
,
which
they
are
not
;
for
I
will
suppose
that
their
Covenant
relation
holds
still
,
though
they
were
unbaptized
,
they
being
the
issue
of
persons
in
the
Church
,
and
they
never
as
yet
have
renounced
the
Covenant
,
but
adhere
to
the
publick
administration
thereof
:
which
may
be
the
case
of
some
in
these
exorbitant
time
for
there
are
many
a
growing
up
to
year
of
discretion
,
that
through
the
delusion
〈◊〉
their
parents
are
unbaptized
,
the
which
〈◊〉
think
are
no
Heathen
,
being
Christians
born
nor
cut
off
from
Covenant
relation
,
no●
Church-membership
,
notwithstanding
their
parents
wickednesse
to
dispute
them
ou●
of
the
Covenant
,
and
consequently
ou●
of
the
Church
,
and
so
from
baptism
a
priviledge
thereof
:
but
they
ought
to
be
baptized
when
ever
themselves
,
or
any
other
o●
their
friends
desire
it
for
them
,
upon
the
account
of
membership
,
it
not
being
their
fault
it
hath
been
neglected
so
long
,
but
their
parents
.
And
I
say
likewise
of
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
born
in
the
Church
,
were
they
unbaptized
,
the
Church
ought
to
use
all
means
possible
,
to
perswade
them
unto
it
as
their
special
duty
to
engage
them
unto
better
obedience
,
and
Church
discipline
for
their
amendment
.
The
children
of
Israel
were
uncircumcised
a
great
many
of
them
while
they
were
in
their
travel
in
the
Wildernesse
;
their
uncircumcision
did
not
discovenant
nor
unchurch
them
;
but
they
were
al
circumcised
when
they
came
to
Canaan
.
God
was
angry
with
Moses
for
neglecting
the
circumcising
of
his
sons
,
but
yet
their
Covenant
relation
held
,
they
must
be
circumcised
.
And
I
think
here
is
nothing
against
reason
in
all
this
.
But
then
there
is
not
the
like
reason
for
Heathen
to
be
baptized
,
that
are
ignorant
and
scandalous
,
because
they
are
strangers
from
the
Covenants
of
promise
,
have
no
such
priviledge
as
Covenant
relation
,
they
are
unclean
,
and
untill
they
embrace
the
faith
of
the
Gospel
,
and
express
themselves
real
in
their
acceptance
of
it
,
and
promise
to
joyn
themselves
with
the
visible
professing
body
of
Christ
,
they
may
not
be
received
.
These
are
two
huge
different
things
,
which
Mr.
Collins
all
along
levels
to
the
same
,
and
therefore
his
argument
fals
to
nothing
.
And
I
would
have
Mr.
Collins
,
and
all
others
that
professe
themselves
friends
to
the
Church
of
England
,
to
beware
how
they
maintain
that
Baptism
makes
Church-members
:
it
's
true
of
those
that
are
of
the
Pagan
world
by
nature
,
they
can
in
no
wise
be
made
members
of
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
but
by
lawful
baptism
:
but
those
in
the
Church
that
are
born
of
Christian
parents
are
members
born
,
they
being
comprehended
in
the
same
Covenant
with
their
parents
.
But
Mr.
Collins
in
proof
of
his
major
saith
,
It
is
against
reason
to
say
the
contraray
.
A
not●ble
proof
indeed
!
Let
him
shew
us
wh●
reason
it
's
against
,
to
say
,
that
Church-members
unbaptized
,
ought
to
be
baptized
up●●
lower
personal
qualifications
then
Heathen
.
I
come
to
my
next
proposition
,
That
the
in
the
Church
whom
we
cannot
exclude
from
C●●venant
relation
,
that
are
of
years
,
must
not
be
excluded
from
the
Sacrament
,
because
Sacrament
are
seals
of
Covenant
love
to
that
people
the
are
in
possession
of
Covenant
administrations
.
Mr.
Collins
in
answer
to
this
,
is
fallen
upon
the
old
businesse
again
,
and
wonders
her
years
of
discretion
comes
in
,
for
he
saith
,
the
argument
is
to
prove
a
right
to
Covenant
seals
,
for
s●●
as
are
in
Covenant
relation
.
Now
children
are
〈◊〉
Covenant
relation
,
that
exception
plainly
implyes
,
say
he
,
that
Covenant
relation
is
not
enough
to
give
right
to
Covenant
seals
.
And
so
he
sayes
,
I
have
answered
my self
.
Mr.
Answ.
1
Collins
is
more
happy
then
others
,
i●
such
an
answer
be
judged
a
sufficient
one
,
because
years
of
discretion
,
is
no
essential
o●
Covenant
relation
,
but
of
a
man
,
putting
him
into
an
actual
capacity
to
perform
act●
of
worship
,
the
which
until
then
he
is
not
under
the
obligation
of
actual
observance
.
I
have
spoken
enough
to
this
already
.
Why
is
not
Covenant
relation
enough
?
I
never
thought
so
;
but
maintain
that
Covenant
relation
gives
right
to
Covenant
seals
unto
parents
and
children
.
I
hope
I
am
as
clear
in
this
point
as
most
are
.
It
's
an
handsome
shifting
of
an
answer
,
to
say
,
I
have
answered
my self
:
The
argument
lies
to
answer
still
.
If
Sacraments
be
seals
of
covenant
love
to
a
people
in
possession
of
covenant
administrations
,
then
such
a
people
ought
to
use
these
seals
of
Covenant
love
unto
them
in
remembrance
thereof
,
untill
they
be
legally
dispossest
of
the
same
.
But
ours
are
in
Covenant
relation
,
and
in
possession
of
the
Ordinances
of
the
Covenant
.
Therefore
it
belongs
to
them
to
make
use
of
the
seals
of
Gods
love
in
remembrance
of
his
goodnesse
towards
them
.
Untill
you
can
discovenant
them
it
's
a
weak
thing
to
goe
about
to
dispriviledge
them
in
the
externals
of
the
Church
;
especially
the
Ordinances
being
the
Ordinary
way
and
means
of
attaining
the
grace
of
the
Covenant
.
In
his
35.
pag.
he
tels
us
,
That
Sacraments
are
not
seals
of
the
everlasting
Covenant
,
but
seal
to
the
acceptation
of
the
Covenant
to
which
faith
must
be
supposed
.
I
have
alwayes
thought
that
the
Covenant
made
with
Abraham
and
his
seed
,
Answ.
and
so
often
published
and
repeated
,
and
explained
to
the
Jews
Church
,
and
applyed
to
the
Gospel
Church
,
Heb.
8.
had
been
an
everlasting
Covenant
of
grace
;
and
that
Sacraments
seal
to
this
Covenant
:
And
that
not
only
the
new
Covenant
,
but
the
seals
thereof
belong
unto
the
visible
Church
.
And
that
the
agreement
or
Covenant
between
the
Father
and
the
Son
,
for
the
elect
,
had
been
a
different
thing
from
the
Covenant
made
unto
the
Church
,
which
Sacraments
seal
.
If
that
were
not
an
everlasting
Covenant
that
Circumcision
was
a
fign
and
seal
of
,
I
must
confesse
I
am
out
:
but
I
am
sure
it
's
that
which
I
have
been
alwayes
taught
,
and
never
heard
it
denyed
,
but
by
Anabaptists
,
and
such
like
Heterodox
spirits
.
It
's
true
,
this
everlasting
Covenant
is
to
be
entred
into
by
those
the
seals
are
to
be
applyed
unto
;
and
this
entrance
or
acceptance
is
either
personal
or
parental
.
An
alien
upon
profession
of
faith
,
and
desiring
to
joyn
himself
to
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
by
baptism
,
and
so
to
come
voluntarily
under
the
Laws
of
Christ
,
is
to
be
received
,
he
hath
accepted
of
the
laws
of
the
Covenant
.
But
for
those
that
are
in
the
Church
by
nature
,
and
professe
no
other
religion
and
worship
but
the
true
,
are
all
supposed
to
have
such
a
faith
at
least
as
doth
argue
their
acceptance
of
the
Covenant
,
during
their
abode
in
the
Church
,
the
which
is
sufficient
to
ingage
them
unto
Christian
obedience
,
and
doth
entitle
them
to
external
Church
priviledges
;
although
this
is
not
enough
in
order
to
their
justification
and
salvation
:
but
yet
the
external
part
is
the
way
prescribed
for
the
attainment
of
the
internal
blessings
of
the
everlasting
Covenant
,
even
to
as
many
in
the
Church
that
Jesus
Christ
was
sent
into
the
world
to
seek
and
to
save
,
by
giving
them
repentance
and
remission
of
sins
.
Hence
it
is
very
necessary
to
distinguish
of
a
twofold
acceptation
;
one
common
that
accepts
of
the
external
part
of
the
Covenant
,
which
reprobates
doe
with
the
elect
,
the
other
is
internal
and
special
,
when
God
by
his
Spirit
opens
the
heart
,
and
inclines
the
will
to
receive
the
grace
of
the
Covenant
unto
eternal
life
:
the
former
is
that
which
gives
right
to
the
external
priviledges
of
the
Church
;
the
other
to
the
internal
blessings
of
grace
and
glory
.
The
former
hath
the
promise
of
the
first
grace
,
the
other
the
promise
of
increase
in
grace
,
and
the
reward
of
glory
.
If
that
be
true
of
Mr.
Collins
,
That
Sacraments
seal
to
the
acceptation
of
the
Covenant
which
supposes
faith
:
It
's
sufficient
for
our
opinion
,
because
all
in
the
Church
doe
accept
of
the
Covenant
,
and
have
faith
.
And
we
doe
not
plead
for
Heathens
untill
they
believe
and
come
under
baptism
.
But
surely
the
death
of
Christ
confirmed
the
everlasting
Covenant
,
out
of
which
faith
with
the
fruits
thereof
freely
flow
.
And
I
think
Sacraments
are
no
other
wayes
seals
,
then
they
are
signs
of
his
death
;
as
it
is
said
,
This
cup
is
the
new
Covenant
in
my
bloud
,
the
cup
was
not
really
the
new
Covenant
,
but
a
sign
thereof
,
representatively
;
as
I
have
hinted
before
:
Yet
surely
,
saith
Mr.
Collins
,
those
that
are
in
a
state
of
unbelief
,
are
not
in
Covenant
,
though
they
may
be
objects
of
Gods
first
free
grace
.
Answ.
If
they
be
not
in
the
everlasting
Covenant
,
they
cannot
be
said
to
be
objects
of
Gods
first
free
grace
:
for
doubtlesse
God
gives
grace
to
none
that
are
out
of
that
Covenant
,
himself
grants
that
the
elect
are
enrold
in
the
everlasting
Covenant
,
and
many
of
them
may
be
in
the
Church
,
I
hope
,
though
in
a
state
of
unbelief
in
his
sense
;
and
doubtlesse
it
is
for
the
elects
sake
that
we
have
an
external
administration
,
a
Church
consisting
of
most
bad
,
that
his
elect
may
be
gathered
out
of
all
sorts
of
sinners
,
and
others
left
without
excuse
,
is
this
wise
contrivance
of
the
ever
blessed
God
.
And
hence
this
mingled
state
of
good
and
bad
must
grow
together
untill
the
harvest
,
experience
doth
tell
us
what
precious
wheat
hath
sprung
out
of
the
roots
of
wicked
tares
.
And
wicked
tares
have
sprung
out
of
the
roots
of
the
choycest
wheat
:
let
that
convince
us
.
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
That
argument
about
baptism
hath
been
answered
again
and
again
.
The
argument
is
this
,
If
parents
that
are
ignorant
and
scandalous
in
the
Church
,
be
so
much
in
Covenant
as
to
give
their
children
right
unto
holy
baptism
,
a
seal
of
the
Covenant
,
then
themselves
have
right
to
the
holy
Supper
,
it
being
but
the
seal
of
the
same
Covenant
.
The
antecedent
is
granted
by
Mr.
Collins
,
and
all
that
are
friends
to
his
judgement
,
and
yet
they
deny
the
consequence
,
because
they
say
more
is
required
to
the
Lords
Supper
,
then
unto
Baptism
.
Unto
this
I
answer
.
It
cannot
be
proved
,
that
in
in
the
Apostles
days
more
was
required
unto
the
Supper
then
to
baptism
of
persons
of
years
:
it
's
clear
enough
,
that
which
prepared
them
for
baptism
brought
them
into
the
Church
.
And
that
being
once
within
,
they
had
the
priviledges
of
the
Church
accordingly
,
is
without
question
.
Lesse
is
required
unto
Covenant
seals
of
persons
born
in
the
Church
,
(
they
being
free
born
to
all
the
priviledges
of
this
spiritual
Corporation
)
then
of
those
that
are
aliens
and
strangers
by
birth
;
these
obtain
their
freedom
upon
the
terms
of
faith
and
repentance
.
The
ignorant
and
scandalous
are
in
as
good
a
capacity
of
the
Supper
of
the
Lord
,
as
their
children
are
of
the
baptism
of
the
Lord
,
they
being
under
Church
indulgence
.
First
,
They
are
in
an
active
capacity
of
exercising
the
understanding
heart
and
conscience
,
memory
,
with
all
the
externals
required
unto
that
service
,
their
children
are
meerly
passive
for
the
other
.
Secondly
,
Parents
are
in
possession
of
the
feals
of
themselves
,
but
their
children
before
baptism
are
not
.
Parents
in
the
Church
derive
as
much
right
from
their
Ancestors
,
as
their
children
doe
untill
they
be
discovenanted
,
if
not
more
,
as
being
a
generation
neerer
that
right
.
If
parents
Covenant
relation
be
sufficient
to
give
right
to
the
seals
for
his
childe
,
then
surely
for
himself
.
Besides
the
contradiction
in
the
other
opinion
of
Mr.
Collins
;
as
first
,
he
pleads
the
Covna●nt
for
the
parents
unto
their
childrens
baptism
;
and
then
disputes
them
out
of
Covenant
in
his
admission
unto
the
holy
Supper
.
They
shall
be
accounted
believers
as
to
the
one
,
but
unbelievers
as
to
the
other
.
The
promise
is
to
them
and
their
children
in
order
unto
baptism
,
but
then
in
order
to
the
holy
Supper
,
there
is
no
more
promise
belongs
unto
them
then
unto
Pagans
.
And
there
is
no
promise
made
to
any
that
have
not
faith
to
apply
them
;
and
so
exclude
children
from
the
promise
too
at
last
,
for
they
have
not
such
a
faith
as
to
apply
the
promises
.
Thus
you
may
see
he
is
a
Presbyterian
in
practice
;
and
an
Anabaptist
in
opinion
.
For
if
his
judgement
be
true
about
baptism
,
then
it
's
false
about
the
holy
Supper
;
if
his
judgement
be
true
about
the
Supper
,
then
it
's
false
about
baptism
:
for
both
are
the
same
seal
of
the
same
Covenant
exhibited
,
only
by
different
figns
.
People
had
need
be
well
setled
and
satisfied
of
themselves
in
these
times
,
that
keep
their
station
in
the
Church
,
where
they
have
such
Teachers
,
and
meet
with
such
opinions
that
destroy
all
.
The
truth
is
,
our
straightnesse
in
the
one
,
and
largenesse
in
the
other
,
doth
destroy
it self
;
and
doth
occasion
most
intelligent
Christians
,
either
to
fall
off
from
Infant
baptism
,
or
else
to
restrain
it
to
those
that
are
judged
fit
to
be
received
into
holy
Communion
in
the
Lords
Supper
.
Had
it
not
been
for
our
own
scruples
about
admitting
to
the
Supper
,
casting
off
the
most
of
Church-members
from
Communion
,
under
the
notion
of
ignorant
and
scandalous
,
we
had
never
known
of
these
exorbitances
in
the
Church
,
which
now
we
suffer
under
by
the
separations
.
It
is
an
easie
thing
for
Mr.
Collins
to
say
the
argument
is
answered
again
and
again
,
not
telling
us
by
whom
;
nor
how
.
But
if
it
be
not
better
answered
then
he
hath
done
it
in
his
answer
to
Mr.
Barksdel
,
he
must
answer
it
again
,
or
else
it
must
be
unanswered
,
and
cleave
close
unto
him
still
as
such
a
Church-rent
that
he
will
never
free
himself
of
,
unlesse
he
alter
his
judgement
:
which
he
will
finde
the
readiest
way
of
the
two
.
In
his
15.
pag.
to
Mr.
Barksdels
10.
argument
for
free
admission
he
puts
in
three
exceptions
.
He
grants
children
are
baptized
in
their
parents
right
;
but
yet
can
see
no
reason
,
why
it
should
necessarily
be
the
immediate
parent
.
True
,
for
sometimes
it
may
fall
out
,
Answ.
that
both
parents
may
be
excommunicate
,
or
turn'd
Apostates
:
in
these
cases
it
's
not
necessary
;
but
otherwise
being
of
the
true
Christian
Church
and
faith
,
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
being
in
actual
Church-membership
,
and
baptized
;
give
as
true
a
legal
right
to
their
childs
baptism
,
as
any
other
member
what
ever
:
so
long
as
their
own
right
holds
,
their
childs
right
doth
also
,
and
that
immediately
from
them
,
is
to
the
sober
unquestionable
.
Indeed
if
parents
be
never
so
really
godly
and
unbaptized
,
their
childrens
right
to
baptism
must
either
be
derived
from
Ancestors
,
or
else
have
none
at
all
,
a
visible
peofession
of
faith
in
persons
baptized
gives
a
true
right
for
their
childe
to
the
Sacramental
seal
,
and
consequently
for
themselves
to
the
same
seal
of
the
Supper
;
there
was
the
same
danger
for
the
neglect
of
the
Passeover
,
as
for
circumcision
.
He
saith
further
,
There
is
no
self-examination
prerequired
unto
baptism
:
but
to
the
Supper
a
man
must
examine
himself
,
and
so
let
him
come
.
Philip
put
it
upon
the
Ethiopian
Eunuch
,
Answ.
to
examine
whether
he
believed
with
all
his
heart
or
no
in
order
unto
baptism
.
And
I
think
that
was
more
then
the
other
of
Paul
to
the
Corinths
.
Baptism
to
men
of
years
was
upon
the
condition
of
a
personal
faith
,
without
which
they
might
not
be
baptized
,
implyed
by
this
,
If
thou
believest
with
all
thy
heart
,
thou
mayst
,
otherwise
not
,
but
there
is
no
such
thing
in
order
to
the
Supper
:
they
were
to
examine
themselves
,
and
so
come
,
it
cannot
be
reasonably
conceived
of
,
that
if
they
neglected
this
private
duty
,
they
should
not
come
,
for
it
was
their
duty
to
come
together
to
celebrate
the
Supper
,
but
not
to
profane
it
for
the
worse
.
Profession
of
faith
was
a
publick
duty
in
order
to
baptism
,
without
which
they
could
not
be
baptized
:
but
examination
but
a
private
duty
left
to
God
and
our
own
consciences
,
which
no
publick
officers
have
to
doe
with
concerning
others
,
but
to
instruct
and
to
exhort
unto
the
duty
,
&c.
they
have
not
the
like
warrant
to
require
an
account
whether
the
private
hath
been
performed
,
much
lesse
to
debar
them
upon
a
supposal
of
non-performance
,
or
prejudge
of
their
incapacity
before
hand
,
and
so
discourage
from
coming
together
,
for
which
we
have
not
one
syllable
of
warrant
:
but
I
have
spoken
enough
to
this
already
.
Remember
the
abuse
of
the
Brazen
Serpent
.
He
saith
,
The
children
of
the
legally
unclean
were
not
forbid
circumcision
,
but
the
unclean
man
might
not
eat
the
Passeover
.
The
unclean
during
his
uncleannesse
,
Answ.
1
might
not
circumcise
his
child
,
circumcision
being
instituted
a
token
of
the
Covenant
,
which
an
unclean
man
might
no
more
defile
and
make
unclean
,
then
any
other
religious
service
.
And
what
though
it
were
to
be
done
the
eight
day
,
it
might
be
rejourned
for
a
week
upon
the
same
reason
as
the
Passeover
was
for
a
month
,
and
circumcision
in
another
case
for
forty
years
:
we
know
the
rule
in
cases
of
necessity
,
God
will
rather
have
mercy
then
sacrifice
.
There
is
no
legal
uncleannesse
in
the
Church
now
,
and
therefore
this
doth
not
so
much
as
reach
the
argument
;
and
indeed
his
other
two
,
are
as
little
for
his
turn
:
he
must
finde
a
better
answer
then
so
,
or
tell
us
where
to
finde
one
,
or
else
the
argument
will
cleave
so
close
that
he
will
be
forced
to
narrow
Infant
baptism
unto
the
holy
Supper
,
or
enlarge
the
Supper
unto
Infant
Baptism
,
or
be
irrational
and
absurd
in
so
flat
a
contradiction
,
as
hath
been
hinted
.
And
to
prevent
some
mistake
,
let
me
intreat
the
Reader
carefully
to
consider
,
That
although
I
have
said
,
that
more
is
required
unto
the
Supper
then
unto
Baptism
.
It
is
to
be
understood
in
the
Church
of
persons
that
are
Church-members
by
nature
.
But
of
Aliens
,
I
conceive
more
is
required
of
them
unto
baptism
,
then
of
Church-members
unto
the
Supper
,
especially
when
they
were
members
by
birth
priviledge
.
The
ground
is
this
,
because
a
publick
profession
of
faith
is
necessary
for
the
admitting
of
a
Heathen
into
the
visible
Catholick
Church
,
by
baptism
.
And
so
of
his
entring
the
Gospel
Covenant
for
himself
and
seed
:
but
to
them
that
are
in
Covenant
by
birth
,
it
is
otherwise
,
their
Covenant
right
remains
untill
it
be
forfeited
by
renouncing
the
Covenant
,
or
hating
to
be
reformed
by
the
Churches
just
censures
.
And
while
they
are
in
the
Covenant
,
and
in
the
Church
,
they
may
not
be
denyed
the
external
priviledges
thereof
,
although
they
be
transgressors
of
the
Covenant
,
&c.
But
to
proceed
,
and
come
more
close
to
the
query
in
hand
,
namely
,
Whether
there
be
any
thing
in
the
nature
,
end
,
action
,
language
of
the
Sacrament
,
incongruous
to
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
receiving
,
in
1
Cor.
11.
or
elsewhere
.
To
which
I
have
in
the
general
,
shewed
a
congruity
between
the
Sacrament
and
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
;
And
have
answered
unto
Mr.
Collins
exceptions
against
me
.
Now
we
come
more
directly
to
the
query
,
and
to
what
is
excepted
against
us
.
I
must
confesse
in
pag.
36.
Bar
removed
,
there
is
a
great
mistake
,
but
who
were
faulty
in
it
,
I
cannot
well
tell
,
the
19.
line
is
out
of
place
,
and
is
to
be
prefixed
to
my
three
arguments
,
to
prove
the
Sacrament
a
converting
Ordinance
,
pag.
40.
for
that
which
follows
page
36.
line
19.
is
to
demonstrate
a
sutablenesse
or
congruity
in
the
Sacrament
to
the
unregenerate
mans
receiving
,
where
the
particulars
of
the
question
are
examined
and
cleared
.
And
hence
Mr.
Collins
followes
the
mistake
,
and
makes
himself
merry
with
those
three
new
arguments
,
as
he
had
thought
they
were
:
but
he
findes
the
first
as
old
as
Pauls
steeple
.
And
the
third
proves
a
Monkies
right
to
the
Sacrament
,
in
his
pag.
35
,
36.
I
confesse
my
nature
inclines
me
too
much
to
give
him
returns
sutable
unto
his
vein
of
levity
,
Answ.
but
I
shall
rather
choose
to
keep
to
the
question
and
inform
the
Reader
again
,
touching
this
question
in
hand
.
I
laid
down
the
nature
of
the
Sacrament
to
be
a
visible
Gospel
,
representing
Christ
and
him
crucified
to
the
outward
senses
of
the
body
,
to
that
end
that
they
might
be
the
in
lets
of
the
soul
to
give
the
application
of
the
benefits
of
Christs
death
to
the
heart
and
conscience
.
And
I
thought
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
have
as
much
need
of
the
use
of
all
their
senses
to
understand
Christ
and
him
crucified
,
and
to
apply
the
benefits
that
come
by
him
,
as
the
regenerate
and
more
,
they
being
more
dull
to
understand
,
or
to
be
affected
with
the
benefits
and
blessings
that
come
to
sinners
by
vertue
thereof
.
Unto
this
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
Bravely
concluded
!
from
need
to
right
is
wide
concluding
.
I
conclude
from
the
nature
of
the
Sacrament
,
Answ.
1
&c.
That
therefore
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
have
need
to
be
allowed
the
use
of
all
their
senses
,
to
let
in
the
knowledge
of
Christ
as
the
regenerate
,
they
being
more
dull
,
&c.
And
hence
I
conceive
a
congruity
unto
such
,
he
sayes
,
from
need
to
right
is
wide
concluding
.
The
question
is
not
to
prove
a
right
,
but
a
congruity
,
or
rather
to
free
the
unregenerate
from
the
charge
of
incongruity
,
&c.
unto
which
Mr.
Collins
excepts
nothing
against
the
nature
of
it
.
In
spiritual
things
unto
the
Church
,
I
much
question
whether
it
be
wide
concluding
from
need
to
right
.
I
am
sure
need
and
wants
are
the
only
objects
of
Gods
free
bounty
in
giving
Christ
,
and
all
he
gives
with
him
,
With
him
the
fatherlesse
and
desolate
finde
mercy
.
If
any
want
wisdome
,
let
them
ask
it
of
God
who
gives
freely
.
What
though
from
need
to
right
doth
not
alwayes
hold
in
the
Courts
of
men
;
it
's
a
good
plea
in
the
Court
of
free
grace
,
and
well
taken
when
sinners
come
off
,
in
the
use
of
Gods
own
appointments
,
for
the
obtaining
of
a
blessing
of
supply
unto
their
necessities
.
In
the
next
place
,
we
are
to
examine
what
Mr.
Collins
excepts
against
the
end
of
the
Sacrament
,
as
I
have
exprest
my self
,
pag.
37.
The
Bar
removed
,
as
touching
the
query
in
hand
,
The
end
of
the
Sacrament
is
to
put
the
Church
in
minde
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
and
that
satisfaction
made
by
him
,
by
which
all
the
saving
blessings
of
the
Covenant
are
procured
unto
faln
man
.
Christs
bloud
was
shed
for
many
,
for
remission
of
sins
.
That
he
might
gather
into
one
the
children
of
God
scattered
abroad
in
all
the
world
,
and
ages
thereof
;
is
the
end
of
his
death
,
Joh.
11.52
.
And
the
Sacrament
is
to
be
observed
in
remembrance
of
this
,
by
all
in
the
Church
that
professe
they
hope
to
be
saved
by
the
merits
of
his
death
;
which
the
unregenrate
does
whom
we
cannot
exclude
from
being
the
sheep
Christ
dyed
for
;
and
therefore
it
's
as
proper
and
congruous
for
such
to
be
put
in
mind
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
by
the
Sacrament
,
for
their
spiritual
good
as
others
,
regenerating
grace
being
a
blessing
of
the
Covenant
procured
by
the
death
of
Christ
,
as
well
as
salvation
is
.
Unto
this
Mr.
Collins
answers
somewhat
feebly
,
1.
Restraining
the
benefits
that
come
by
the
death
of
Christ
,
unto
those
only
that
have
a
lively
hope
,
purifying
themselves
,
as
God
is
pure
,
&c.
2.
He
queries
,
How
if
such
be
ignorant
of
what
Christ
is
,
and
did
;
how
can
such
doe
it
in
remembrance
of
him
?
3.
Or
how
if
by
bloudy
Oaths
and
blasphemies
profane
his
bloud
.
How
can
they
doe
it
in
a
practical
remembrance
of
him
?
That
the
unregenerate
as
such
,
Answ.
have
not
a
lively
hope
,
&c.
I
grant
,
but
that
they
have
a
warrantable
hope
,
as
professing
the
true
Christian
Religion
,
relying
upon
the
mercy
of
God
through
the
merits
of
Christs
death
,
Christ
being
the
right
object
of
all
hope
;
which
is
a
good
encouragement
for
such
to
use
the
means
in
hope
of
a
blessing
;
forasmuch
as
not
any
man
in
special
can
exempt
himself
from
the
saving
benefits
of
his
death
,
whom
they
by
the
outward
signs
are
put
in
minde
of
,
every
Sacrament
.
As
before
he
would
not
have
them
objects
of
the
promises
of
first
grace
,
because
they
have
not
faith
to
apply
the
promises
,
&c.
So
now
he
will
have
none
to
have
any
ground
of
hope
to
receive
the
saving
benefits
that
are
procured
for
sinners
by
the
death
of
Christ
,
(
which
Sacraments
represent
)
but
those
in
the
Church
,
that
have
a
lively
hope
.
Doth
Mr.
Collins
think
,
thas
a
man
may
have
faith
to
apply
the
promise
before
he
hath
grace
?
Or
doth
he
think
those
promises
have
no
object
?
Or
that
any
shall
have
grace
to
whom
it
is
not
promised
in
the
Church
?
So
likewise
,
if
none
but
those
that
have
a
lively
hope
can
receive
benefit
by
the
death
of
Christ
;
then
it
will
follow
,
1.
That
the
first
regenerating
grace
is
not
a
benefit
that
flows
from
the
death
of
Christ
,
except
a
man
can
have
this
lively
hope
before
he
be
regenerate
.
2.
That
regeneration
,
as
it
is
a
benefit
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
belongs
to
none
but
regenerate
persons
that
have
a
lively
hope
;
and
then
we
shall
exclude
the
unregenerate
from
all
benefit
or
hope
by
Christ
;
unlesse
they
can
convert
themselves
;
which
they
cannot
;
and
so
exclude
them
from
the
day
of
grace
and
mercy
,
and
make
them
aliens
from
the
Common-wealth
of
Israel
,
strangers
to
the
Covenant
of
promise
,
and
without
hope
and
God
in
the
world
;
equal
with
the
Pagan
world
;
which
upon
grosse
mistake
he
hath
done
all
along
in
this
present
Controversie
.
But
I
hope
enough
hath
been
spoke
to
satisfie
my
Reader
,
as
to
that
particular
.
And
therefore
the
unregenerate
being
so
much
concerned
in
the
benefits
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
which
Sacraments
are
remembrancers
of
,
it
's
very
meet
and
sutable
they
should
partake
of
the
signes
,
that
are
so
much
concerned
in
the
thing
represented
and
exhibited
thereby
.
Unto
his
second
I
If
they
be
so
ignorant
,
Answ.
they
ought
to
be
instructed
better
,
which
hath
been
spoken
to
already
.
Hardly
can
any
be
excepted
against
for
ignorance
that
are
intelligent
,
if
a
Minister
will
doe
his
duty
to
instruct
them
in
a
plain
familiar
way
.
And
for
such
as
are
scandalous
,
they
should
be
dealt
withall
in
a
regular
way
,
for
their
amendment
,
that
their
actual
miscarriages
indulged
doe
not
leaven
the
whole
,
and
hinder
the
blessing
of
every
Ordinance
from
themselves
.
And
although
a
practical
remembrance
may
be
desired
of
all
;
yet
in
the
visible
Church
we
shall
alwayes
meet
with
many
loose
carnal
wretched
sinners
,
that
will
offend
scandalously
,
and
so
abuse
the
grace
of
Gospel
Ordinances
to
their
utter
ruine
,
if
the
Lord
prevent
it
not
by
giving
them
his
grace
to
repent
.
The
Sacrament
is
a
means
to
ingage
unto
amendment
,
as
proper
as
any
other
Ordinance
,
untill
they
be
Juridically
cast
out
.
Nothing
else
can
disoblige
them
from
duties
of
publick
worship
,
as
the
Sacrament
is
.
I
confesse
it
is
a
sad
and
a
lamentable
condition
,
that
such
wretched
miserable
persons
are
in
,
that
wofully
abuse
the
Grace
of
the
Gospel
,
and
make
such
desperate
returns
for
such
exceeding
rich
grace
and
mercy
,
abusing
the
patience
and
long-suffering
of
God
which
should
lead
to
repentance
.
How
dare
any
profane
persons
bear
up
themselves
upon
the
name
of
the
Lord
,
and
hope
they
shall
be
saved
by
Jesus
Christ
,
and
yet
live
in
licentious
courses
,
and
hate
instruction
,
and
will
not
have
Christ
to
rule
over
them
by
his
Word
and
Scepter
!
Why
,
consider
this
,
yea
that
forget
God
,
lest
he
tear
you
in
peices
,
and
there
be
none
to
deliver
;
doe
not
flatter
your selves
the
more
because
you
are
in
the
visible
Church
;
for
so
long
as
you
are
but
chaffe
and
tares
,
you
are
lyable
every
moment
to
be
pluckt
up
and
burnt
in
unquenchable
flames
.
What
though
thou
mayst
escape
the
censures
of
the
Church
;
be
sure
thou
shall
not
escape
the
judgement
of
God
,
if
thou
continuest
thy
rebellion
against
him
.
It
may
be
thou
art
spared
for
the
sake
of
some
precious
wheat
of
Gods
Elect
,
whom
he
will
cause
to
spring
out
of
thy
roots
,
though
a
wicked
tare
thy
self
,
and
thy
ancestors
before
thee
.
Remember
Judas
that
desperate
Traytor
,
and
son
of
perdition
that
was
false
to
the
Lord
Jesus
:
his
false
heart
and
unworthy
actions
to
his
Lord
whom
he
religiously
professed
,
made
him
swell
untill
he
burst
asunder
,
and
all
his
bowels
gushed
out
.
If
thou
wilt
swear
,
blaspheme
,
be
drunk
,
and
scoffe
at
godlinesse
,
and
live
an
idle
filthy
voluptuous
life
,
and
yet
hope
to
be
saved
by
Christ
,
and
professest
thy self
a
Christian
;
it
may
be
thou
hadst
as
good
have
been
that
Judas
,
as
such
a
wretch
as
thou
art
,
adding
obstinacy
unto
thy
former
rebellion
,
untill
the
wrath
of
the
Lord
and
his
jealousie
smoake
against
thee
,
bringing
all
the
plagues
written
in
his
Book
upon
thee
,
and
blot
out
thy
name
from
under
heaven
.
Either
doe
what
in
thee
lies
to
walk
up
to
thy
profession
of
the
true
Religion
that
Sacraments
oblige
thee
unto
;
or
else
be
sure
thy
profession
will
rather
aggravate
thy
abominable
doings
,
and
sink
thee
deeper
in
the
bottomelesse
pit
,
then
be
any
plea
for
thee
at
the
Judgement
seat
of
Jesus
Christ
:
for
he
will
say
unto
all
such
false
hearted
profane
Christians
at
the
last
,
Depart
from
me
ye
workers
of
iniquity
,
&c.
In
the
next
place
we
come
to
the
Sacramental
Actions
,
he
says
,
I
have
argued
learnedly
,
when
I
say
the
unregenerate
have
a
hand
to
take
,
and
a
mouth
to
eat
,
which
the
reverent
Doctor
denyed
,
because
they
have
not
faith
,
&c.
I
desired
him
to
prove
that
faith
was
that
hand
,
but
Mr.
Collins
hath
prevented
him
,
and
given
his
proof
of
it
in
John
6.54
,
53
,
56.
compared
with
vers.
40.35
,
50.
Ephes.
4.17
.
Joh.
3.36
.
The
6.
of
John
doth
prove
,
Answ.
that
a
sincere
saving
faith
in
the
person
of
Christ
is
of
absolute
necessity
unto
salvation
.
Christ
is
the
bread
of
life
,
which
came
down
from
heaven
to
give
life
unto
the
dead
world
:
he
that
believes
in
him
shall
never
hunger
and
thirst
more
,
but
shall
have
everlasting
life
,
and
be
raised
up
at
the
last
day
.
And
the
very
humane
body
of
Christ
,
as
consisting
of
flesh
and
bloud
,
without
which
he
could
not
have
been
made
a
perfect
Sacrifice
for
sin
,
nor
satisfied
the
justice
of
God
for
mankinde
that
had
sinned
;
was
this
bread
of
God
,
which
whosoever
believed
not
,
hath
no
part
in
.
But
what
is
this
to
prove
that
faith
is
the
only
hand
to
receive
the
outward
signs
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
our
Lord
?
Doth
it
follow
that
the
same
faith
is
as
necessary
to
receive
an
outward
sign
,
as
the
benefits
that
come
by
Christ
unto
salvation
?
This
chapter
proves
no
such
thing
,
it
having
no
reference
at
all
to
the
Sacrament
of
the
holy
Supper
:
for
these
words
were
spoken
long
before
the
Sacrament
of
the
Supper
was
instituted
and
ordained
.
I
hope
the
real
flesh
and
bloud
of
Christs
humane
body
is
not
to
be
received
under
the
forms
of
bread
and
wine
;
nor
indeed
at
all
,
for
it
's
the
Spirit
of
Christ
that
quickeneth
:
the
flesh
profiteth
nothing
The
words
of
Christ
unto
his
,
they
are
Spirit
,
and
life
.
I
am
sorry
the
Papists
should
see
our
Divines
applying
this
6.
of
John
to
the
Sacrament
.
I
say
still
as
before
,
that
taking
and
eating
are
bodily
actions
,
and
to
be
understood
according
to
the
rules
of
institution
,
which
the
unregenerate
Christians
are
capable
to
doe
,
and
act
as
well
as
any
.
And
it
remains
still
to
prove
,
by
Mr.
Collins
favour
,
that
take
and
eat
,
&c.
is
meant
of
faith
to
be
the
hand
and
mouth
to
take
and
eat
with
;
his
quotations
are
drawn
too
much
awry
to
speak
his
opinion
.
I
must
demand
further
proof
,
or
else
he
will
not
clear
the
thing
I
am
sure
.
I
grant
that
unto
actual
receiving
of
the
signes
,
there
should
be
in
every
one
both
a
knowing
and
a
believing
that
Christs
bloud
were
shed
for
many
,
for
remission
of
sins
,
and
that
themselves
take
and
eat
the
outward
elements
of
bread
and
wine
in
that
remembrance
,
in
hope
that
they
are
of
that
unmber
which
Christ
laid
down
his
life
for
.
I
grant
it
necessary
,
that
every
one
that
comes
to
the
Lords
Table
,
come
in
the
warranty
of
faith
,
and
to
be
fully
perswaded
of
the
lawfulnesse
of
their
own
receiving
,
for
whatsoever
is
not
of
faith
is
sin
.
And
hence
all
the
Church
as
professing
themselves
Christs
subjects
,
must
plead
for
their
warranty
Christs
command
,
Doe
this
in
remembrance
of
him
.
I
grant
it
good
and
lawful
for
them
that
truly
can
,
in
the
act
of
receiving
,
to
exercise
an
act
of
faith
in
appropriating
and
applying
the
true
,
real
,
spiritual
bread
of
life
,
Jesus
Christ
,
himself
,
with
all
the
saving
benefits
of
his
death
unto
their
souls
;
but
yet
I
deny
that
this
is
of
necessity
required
of
all
that
come
thither
to
serve
Christ
in
his
own
Ordinance
.
I
grant
that
the
outward
signes
are
holy
in
a
relative
sense
,
as
respecting
their
end
,
and
so
are
objects
of
faith
,
and
of
the
minde
:
but
as
they
are
signs
simply
and
elementary
,
they
are
only
objects
of
the
outward
senses
,
and
not
of
faith
properly
.
I
grant
that
the
Sacraments
are
of
fingular
use
,
for
the
encrease
and
growth
in
grace
of
the
most
eminent
Christians
in
the
Church
;
and
yet
have
their
special
use
for
the
weakest
babes
in
the
Church
,
for
knowledge
and
Christian
obedience
,
even
the
worst
of
members
(
as
it
is
Gods
Ordinance
)
may
receive
good
by
it
where
God
is
pleased
to
give
his
blessing
,
as
in
all
his
other
Ordinances
set
up
in
his
Church
for
the
spiritual
good
thereof
.
Mr.
Collins
had
thought
the
taking
,
eating
,
and
drinking
the
outward
signs
must
be
spiritual
by
faith
,
he
sayes
.
I
think
there
is
but
few
of
his
minde
in
Answ.
this
:
for
certainly
nothing
more
clear
the●
that
to
take
,
eat
and
drink
of
the
signs
i●
natural
and
bodily
,
which
is
necessary
to
be
done
,
by
every
one
from
the
words
of
institution
.
And
as
they
are
elements
or
creature
fit
to
eat
and
drink
,
they
are
properly
objects
of
the
outward
senses
,
and
not
of
faith
,
as
I
said
before
,
which
natural
actions
are
appointted
unto
a
spiritual
end
,
which
end
requires
the
exercise
of
the
minde
,
memory
,
heart
and
conscience
,
faith
in
Christ
being
supposed
in
all
that
are
baptized
and
admited
thither
,
I
mean
a
profession
of
faith
〈◊〉
be
saved
by
Jesus
Christ
at
least
.
And
ho●
Mr.
Collins
can
prove
,
that
all
the
actions
about
giving
and
receiving
must
be
spiritual
by
faith
I
know
not
,
unlesse
he
can
tell
how
to
make
a
Sacrament
of
every
action
abo●●
the
Sacramental
administration
;
the
which
to
doe
will
finde
him
some
work
.
Let
hi●
prove
,
that
take
,
and
eat
,
is
a
sign
of
our
spiritual
taking
and
eating
by
faith
,
which
is
more
easie
to
be
proved
then
the
other
,
that
to
take
and
eat
must
be
spiritual
by
faith
:
for
then
all
natural
actions
are
needlesse
,
if
faith
be
all
that
is
meant
.
And
if
those
actions
be
significant
,
and
instruct
the
receiver
to
receive
Christ
by
a
particular
applicatory
act
of
faith
,
I
hope
the
unregenerate
have
as
much
need
to
be
taught
and
encouraged
unto
this
by
the
Sacrament
as
any
.
I
know
n●●
incongruity
in
this
.
I
said
in
my
Book
,
pag.
38
,
39.
The
language
of
the
Sacrament
was
in
general
and
indefinite
terms
.
This
cup
is
the
New
Testament
in
my
bloud
,
shed
for
many
for
remission
of
sins
,
&c.
Mr.
Collins
asks
,
who
those
many
are
?
and
answers
himself
,
and
saith
,
disciples
of
Christ
.
It
's
true
,
Answ.
1
Christs
Disciples
are
of
those
many
Christ
shed
his
bloud
for
.
And
what
doth
Mr.
Collins
conceive
of
Church-members
baptized
,
and
not
excommunicate
?
Are
not
they
Christs
disciples
?
if
not
,
let
him
prove
them
Infidels
if
he
can
.
When
the
Lord
Jesus
said
he
shed
his
bloud
for
many
,
he
means
not
only
his
disciples
in
present
being
,
that
are
called
and
sanctified
,
but
the
whole
number
of
his
elect
in
all
ages
and
places
of
the
world
,
for
remission
of
sins
,
and
the
Sacramental
cup
,
is
a
token
and
seal
thereof
,
to
be
received
at
all
times
by
the
Church
in
that
remembrance
.
And
I
doubt
not
but
Christ
has
a
great
number
of
his
Elect
alwayes
of
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
.
What
incongruity
in
all
this
?
Besides
,
some
other
things
,
I
said
,
It
sounds
very
harsh
in
the
Church
,
to
exclude
this
Ordinance
of
Christ
from
being
a
means
of
converting
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
they
being
the
most
proper
objects
of
converting
grace
,
as
held
out
in
in
the
promises
,
for
the
putting
of
which
into
execution
,
all
the
Ordinances
in
the
Church
seeme
to
be
subservient
.
And
I
verily
believe
,
this
Ordinance
of
the
holy
Supper
,
had
never
been
denyed
to
convert
in
the
Church
,
had
not
Divines
run
themselves
upon
such
great
mistake
about
habitual
unworthinesse
from
1
Cor.
11.
That
very
mistake
hath
occasioned
this
:
for
if
the
unregenerate
eat
and
drink
unworthily
as
the
Corinths
did
,
and
were
punished
for
,
of
necessity
then
it
were
rational
to
deny
it
a
converting
Ordinance
:
for
as
the
Reverent
Doctor
argues
rationally
from
that
,
thus
,
Natural
men
are
guilty
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
ea●
and
drink
judgement
to
themselves
,
and
shall
we
think
,
that
that
sinful
act
in
unworthy
receiving
shall
be
so
blest
of
God
,
as
to
become
a
means
of
conversion
to
them
,
&c.
This
must
needs
be
a
consequence
of
the
other
mistake
,
That
being
removed
,
men
will
easily
yeeld
the
other
.
Mr.
Collins
tels
us
of
twenty
arguments
of
Mr.
Gillespy
,
that
it
is
not
for
conversion
,
the
which
he
sayes
,
I
have
not
yet
answered
.
I
must
confesse
it
;
neither
doe
I
know
what
they
are
,
for
I
have
not
his
Book
.
My
friend
Mr.
Humfrey
hath
promised
to
answer
those
arguments
:
Which
I
believe
will
be
easie
enough
to
doe
,
unlesse
they
be
stronger
then
the
strongest
of
Mr.
Collins
in
his
answer
to
Mr.
Barsdale
,
upon
the
same
argument
,
pag.
14.
the
latter
end
of
his
Book
,
the
which
argument
of
his
I
shall
examine
anon
.
Let
us
first
see
what
he
hath
excepted
against
mine
.
Which
I
think
are
so
much
for
the
probability
of
the
affirmative
,
that
the
negative
must
remain
doubtful
,
unto
the
impartial
intelligent
Reader
.
That
one
special
end
of
the
work
of
the
Ministery
in
general
,
is
for
conversion
of
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
will
hardly
be
denyed
.
But
to
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
the
main
essentials
of
that
work
of
the
Ministery
in
the
Church
are
of
necessity
,
as
Word
,
and
Prayer
,
and
breaking
of
Bread
,
Act.
2.42
.
Therefore
one
special
end
of
the
Sacrament
,
as
it
is
an
essential
part
of
that
work
,
is
for
the
converting
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
.
The
major
proposition
is
bottomed
from
Ephes.
4.8
,
10
,
11
,
12
,
13
verses
.
Christ
ascended
far
above
the
heavens
,
that
he
might
fill
all
things
.
And
he
gave
some
Apostles
,
and
some
Prophets
,
and
some
Evangelists
,
and
some
Pastors
and
Teachers
;
for
the
gathering
of
Saints
,
for
the
work
of
the
Ministery
,
for
the
edifying
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
till
we
all
come
into
the
union
of
faith
,
and
of
the
knowledge
of
the
Son
of
God
,
unto
a
perfect
man
;
unto
the
measure
of
the
stature
of
the
fulnesse
of
Christ
.
1.
Here
it
is
plain
that
God
hath
ordained
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
the
hands
of
Pastors
and
Teachers
in
the
Church
,
to
edifie
the
body
of
Christ
,
untill
the
whole
number
of
his
elect
be
united
to
him
,
and
made
compleat
,
&c.
And
we
know
there
is
alwayes
in
the
Church
,
objects
of
conversion
as
well
as
of
the
promises
,
to
which
the
work
of
the
Ministry
is
intended
to
unite
them
unto
Christ
,
&c.
And
this
is
to
be
done
by
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
general
,
without
any
distinction
of
parts
,
the
whole
work
together
without
exception
of
any
part
,
is
for
conversion
in
the
Church
,
as
is
clear
from
this
place
.
Now
unlesse
Mr.
Collins
,
or
any
other
what
ever
,
can
give
us
some
clear
Scripture
to
exclude
a
part
of
this
work
from
that
end
of
conversion
,
they
must
allow
this
end
of
conversion
to
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
general
,
but
as
that
was
never
performed
as
yet
,
so
I
think
never
will
by
any
:
only
men
take
the
boldnesse
to
separate
that
which
the
holy
Ghost
doth
joyn
together
,
upon
meer
mistake
about
unworthy
receiving
.
And
it
is
a
rule
that
Mr.
Collins
doth
justifie
from
Matth.
7.6
.
Where
the
Scriptures
d●
not
distinguish
,
we
must
not
distinguish
.
If
a
principal
end
of
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
the
Church
be
intended
for
conversion
in
general
,
then
the
particular
parts
of
that
work
;
for
the
particulars
are
included
in
the
general
.
And
the
most
comprehensive
sense
i●
to
be
taken
of
all
Scripture-expressions
,
unlesse
some
other
Scriptures
put
some
limitations
of
that
sense
;
and
when
any
man
ca●
shew
me
a
Scripture
that
excludes
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
,
from
this
principal
end
of
conversion
in
the
Church
,
I
will
have
done
with
this
Argument
.
And
untill
then
,
the
Argument
is
of
more
force
then
all
the
authority
of
men
(
meerly
)
can
in
the
least
overthrow
.
We
should
distinguish
of
preaching
the
Gospel
unto
Pagans
,
that
are
aliens
to
the
Common-wealth
of
Israel
;
and
of
the
work
of
the
Ministry
consisting
of
the
whole
administration
of
the
Gospel
,
intended
only
for
the
spiritual
good
of
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
:
unto
Infidels
the
preaching
of
the
Gospel
is
appointed
the
ordinary
way
and
means
to
convert
them
unto
the
faith
,
and
bring
them
into
the
Church
;
but
those
that
are
in
the
Church
as
they
are
objects
of
the
promises
,
and
under
the
obligation
of
all
observances
,
which
Infidels
are
not
,
so
they
are
under
greater
advantages
of
converting
them
unto
sincerity
of
faith
,
and
the
power
of
godlinesse
by
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
general
,
of
which
Infidels
are
allowed
but
a
part
.
The
minor
proposition
is
evident
,
that
to
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
,
it
's
necessary
that
the
main
essentials
of
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
the
Church
be
performed
,
as
publishing
not
only
the
Word
of
institution
,
but
the
History
of
Christs
death
and
passion
,
with
exhortations
sutable
to
the
Ordinance
in
hand
,
according
to
the
practise
and
custom
of
our
own
Church
,
with
solemn
prayers
and
praises
considerably
meet
for
so
waighty
an
Ordinance
;
unto
which
are
adjoyned
instituted
signes
to
be
given
and
taken
in
remembrance
of
the
death
of
Christ
;
all
which
concurring
together
in
the
act
of
administration
,
doth
comprise
upon
the
matter
the
main
essentials
of
publick
worship
,
wherein
the
work
of
the
Ministry
doth
chiefly
consist
;
so
that
I
cannot
conceive
how
the
premises
can
be
denyed
by
any
:
therefore
the
conclusion
doth
necessarily
follow
,
That
the
Sacrament
,
as
it
is
an
essential
part
of
the
work
of
the
Ministry
,
is
for
conversion
in
the
Church
.
But
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
This
argument
is
worth
nothing
.
But
why
did
he
not
shew
the
weaknesse
of
it
then
,
his
bare
say
so
is
no
answer
.
But
he
sayes
,
Let
it
be
proved
that
therefore
Christ
hath
appointed
it
for
conversion
;
if
it
were
,
doubtlesse
the
excommunicate
should
not
be
debarred
.
I
have
made
good
the
premises
,
Answ.
1
the
conclusion
needs
no
proof
.
If
the
same
instruments
of
the
Spirit
unto
conversion
be
in
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
,
as
at
the
other
parts
of
the
Ministerial
work
in
the
Church
,
then
we
must
allow
the
fame
effect
to
the
one
as
to
the
other
,
both
being
the
Ordinance
of
God
,
and
performed
by
persons
in
the
Office
and
Function
of
the
Ministry
.
But
in
the
administration
of
the
Sacrament
,
are
the
same
instruments
of
the
Spirit
,
unto
conversion
,
as
Word
,
Prayer
,
&c.
Therefore
the
Sacrament
is
appointed
for
conversion
in
the
Church
.
Whereas
he
sayes
,
Then
doubtlesse
the
excommunicate
should
not
be
debarred
,
it
is
no
consequence
,
because
converting
of
sinners
,
is
not
all
the
ground
why
God
commands
his
Church
to
observe
all
things
of
his
prescribing
,
but
his
own
glory
,
in
commanding
what
he
will
,
because
he
will
:
Besides
,
2.
Bar
removed
,
pag.
70
,
71
,
72
,
73.
The
excommunicate
should
be
put
out
of
all
Church
Communion
in
all
other
parts
of
publick
worship
,
as
well
as
from
the
Sacrament
,
as
I
have
made
it
out
in
my
answer
unto
Doctor
Drake
,
which
is
not
yet
answered
by
any
.
3.
This
implyes
that
the
unregenerate
are
not
to
doe
any
thing
by
way
of
duty
,
but
what
is
for
conversion
,
not
be
diligent
in
their
callings
,
shew
mercy
,
and
doe
justly
,
&c.
because
these
duties
are
not
appointed
to
convert
them
.
Next
,
all
men
confesse
that
the
Word
and
Prayer
,
as
they
are
publick
Ordinances
of
God
,
are
for
conversion
in
the
Church
.
But
without
the
Word
and
Prayer
sanctifying
,
and
setting
apart
the
elements
of
Bread
and
Wine
,
there
can
be
no
Sacrament
.
Therefore
the
Sacrament
,
as
consisting
in
Word
and
Prayer
,
is
converting
.
This
Mr.
Collins
tearms
,
A
thread-bare
argument
that
hath
a
great
hole
in
it
.
For
though
the
Word
and
Prayer
are
means
of
conversion
,
and
they
doe
constantly
attend
the
Sacrament
,
yet
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
the
Sacrament
quà
Sacrament
is
so
;
nor
is
there
any
need
for
conversion
,
that
the
unregenerate
should
be
at
it
,
for
they
may
hear
,
and
pray
,
and
not
receive
.
Why
did
not
Mr.
Collins
really
discover
a
hole
in
the
argument
by
some
solid
answer
,
but
fancy
a
hole
before
it
be
made
:
he
confesses
the
Word
and
Prayer
are
means
of
conversion
,
and
so
grants
my
major
:
and
upon
the
matter
grants
my
minor
,
by
saying
,
that
Word
and
Prayer
doe
constantly
attend
the
Sacrament
,
but
yet
he
is
not
willing
to
yeeld
the
conclusion
;
which
is
not
very
rational
,
I
concluding
no
more
then
what
he
grants
in
the
propositions
.
But
he
saith
,
It
will
not
follow
,
that
the
Sacrament
quà
a
Sacrament
is
converting
;
either
he
must
mean
,
that
the
giving
and
receiving
without
word
and
Prayer
,
is
the
Sacrament
,
quà
a
Sacrament
,
or
that
giving
and
receiving
the
signes
,
in
relation
to
Word
&
Prayer
conjoyned
,
is
the
Sacrament
,
quà
a
Sacrament
.
If
he
means
the
former
,
let
him
prove
that
giving
and
receiving
the
signes
of
Bread
and
Wine
without
Word
and
Prayer
is
the
Sacrament
.
If
the
latter
,
then
in
his
granting
the
premises
he
yeilds
the
conclusion
,
and
thus
you
may
quickly
see
what
a
great
hole
the
hath
made
in
this
argument
.
But
then
he
saith
,
Nor
is
there
any
need
for
conversion
,
that
the
unregenerate
should
be
at
it
,
for
they
may
pray
,
and
hear
,
and
not
receive
.
No!
Answ.
is
there
no
great
need
of
converting
the
unregenerate
?
I
had
thought
they
have
great
need
to
take
the
advantage
of
every
Ordinance
in
the
Church
,
appointed
for
their
spiritual
good
,
and
in
order
to
conversion
.
And
have
not
they
as
much
need
to
enjoy
the
benefit
of
instituted
signes
,
conjoyned
to
the
Word
and
Prayer
,
to
represent
the
death
and
passion
of
Jesus
Christ
unto
the
outward
senses
,
which
are
the
inlets
to
the
understanding
,
heart
and
conscience
,
as
any
others
?
But
then
he
sayes
,
They
may
hear
,
and
pray
,
and
not
receive
.
It
's
true
,
(
so
may
any
other
)
doth
it
therefore
follow
,
that
none
may
receive
?
or
that
hearing
and
praying
in
order
to
receiving
,
is
sufficient
without
taking
,
and
eating
and
drinking
the
institute
signes
in
remembrance
of
the
death
of
Christ
?
Or
would
he
have
them
to
hear
and
pray
,
in
order
to
receiving
,
and
then
turn
their
backs
upon
Gods
holy
Ordinance
,
after
they
have
prayed
unto
God
for
his
blessing
upon
it
?
The
Reverend
Doctor
said
,
That
presence
might
answer
this
end
,
unto
which
I
answered
,
If
bare
presence
,
much
more
actual
receiving
.
But
now
Mr.
Collins
sayes
,
That
they
cannot
promise
them
,
that
their
presence
will
do
them
good
,
but
they
are
sure
,
he
saith
,
their
receiving
will
not
.
And
hence
concludes
my
consequence
is
naught
.
Who
can
promise
before-hand
,
that
any
other
Ordinance
in
the
Church
shall
doe
the
unregenerate
good
by
their
presence
at
the
time
,
shall
they
not
therefore
give
their
presence
?
It
's
the
language
of
Scripture
,
that
all
in
the
Church
are
to
keep
Gods
statutes
and
judgements
for
their
good
.
But
he
is
sure
their
receiving
will
doe
them
no
good
.
I
wonder
how
he
dare
limit
the
holy
One
,
and
detract
so
injuriously
from
the
wisdome
,
power
,
and
grace
of
Christ
in
his
own
appointments
.
He
hath
confessed
before
,
that
the
Sacraments
were
instituted
for
the
spiritual
good
of
the
visible
Church
of
Christ
in
general
,
and
that
this
Church
consists
of
good
and
bad
;
and
now
he
sayes
the
Sacrament
wil
doe
the
unregenerate
no
good
.
Doth
he
think
the
unregenerate
are
not
of
the
visible
Church
,
that
Sacraments
were
instituted
for
the
good
thereof
?
The
judicious
Reader
may
easily
discern
how
consonant
he
is
to
his
own
judgement
,
in
more
things
then
this
.
But
this
antecedent
of
his
,
That
he
is
sure
their
receiving
will
doe
them
no
good
,
is
sufficient
to
publish
to
the
world
,
that
my
consequence
is
naught
,
&c.
in
answer
to
the
Doctor
.
But
why
doth
Mr.
Collins
give
us
his
argument
for
the
negative
?
He
turns
me
over
to
Mr.
Gillespy
,
that
hath
twenty
arguments
.
I
suppose
himself
may
use
some
of
them
in
his
answer
to
Mr.
Barkesdales
9.
argument
,
wherein
he
seemes
to
make
a
shew
of
silenceing
all
men
,
that
hold
the
Sacrament
a
converting
Ordinance
,
pag.
14.
And
because
the
argument
which
he
answers
unto
,
is
the
same
with
mine
,
I
shall
crave
leave
of
Mr.
Barksdale
,
to
examine
in
brief
the
strength
of
his
,
because
he
thinks
he
hath
done
enough
at
once
to
shew
thevanity
of
our
opinion
.
1.
He
argues
from
the
absurdities
that
will
follow
:
Then
it
is
as
proper
to
go
to
the
Heathen
and
call
them
to
a
Sacrament
,
in
order
to
their
conversion
,
as
to
preach
the
Gospel
unto
them
.
It
concerns
Mr.
Collins
to
prove
that
every
Ordinance
in
the
Church
instituted
for
the
good
thereof
,
Answ.
1
doth
belong
unto
Heathen
and
such
,
and
may
be
used
for
their
good
.
Let
him
prove
that
the
unbaptized
Heathen
are
as
much
in
Covenant
relation
,
and
under
the
obligation
of
all
Christian
observance
,
as
the
unregenerate
Christian
.
Let
him
prove
that
whatsoever
is
for
conversion
in
the
Church
,
is
for
the
good
of
Heathens
as
well
as
preaching
the
Gospel
.
The
exercise
of
discipline
is
for
converting
an
offending
brother
,
doth
it
follow
that
Church
discipline
is
to
convert
Heathens
,
to
whom
it
never
was
intended
or
appointed
?
Besides
,
we
know
the
unbaptized
is
not
to
eat
thereof
;
were
there
the
like
ground
to
the
unregenerate
Christian
,
I
should
be
satisfied
.
Thus
you
may
see
even
in
the
very
thing
wherein
he
would
charge
absurdity
upon
us
,
it
will
return
upon
himself
,
by
putting
no
difference
between
the
Church
of
Christ
,
and
the
Infidel
world
.
He
sayes
,
If
the
Sacrament
be
a
converting
Ordinance
,
there
can
be
no
personal
unworthinesse
sufficient
to
debar
any
from
it
,
then
come
Turks
,
Indians
,
Papists
,
excommunicate
persons
,
&c.
This
is
but
the
same
again
in
other
words
,
Answ.
which
I
have
answered
again
and
again
all
along
:
here
is
a
plain
levelling
the
Church
with
the
world
again
,
as
if
the
same
personal
unworthinesse
were
in
the
Church
as
is
in
the
world
;
doth
it
follow
that
because
no
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
is
sufficient
to
debar
any
from
the
Sacrament
,
but
only
actual
,
persisted
in
unto
excommunication
,
that
therefore
there
is
no
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
unclean
Pagan
world
,
that
lies
in
unbelief
?
They
must
first
receive
the
Doctrine
of
the
Gospel
,
before
they
can
be
brought
into
the
Church
where
the
Sacraments
are
to
be
administred
.
And
as
for
those
that
are
in
Covenant-relation
,
and
in
possession
of
Church-membership
,
it
's
true
,
personal
unworthinesse
can
be
no
bar
,
because
in
a
relative
sense
,
there
is
no
such
thing
in
the
Church
:
but
I
have
said
enough
to
this
already
.
He
saith
,
If
it
be
a
converting
Ordinance
,
he
can
see
no
reason
why
the
Communicant
should
be
bound
to
examine
himself
,
and
so
eat
,
or
whether
he
hath
skill
to
discern
the
Lords
body
.
The
Word
and
Prayer
are
converting
Ordinances
,
Answ.
and
yet
he
may
see
reason
enough
to
urge
upon
such
,
preparation
,
and
caution
,
prerequisite
and
concomitant
in
those
duties
of
hearing
and
praying
,
(
if
he
examine
the
Scriptures
)
in
order
to
a
blessing
;
the
same
may
be
said
of
the
Sacrament
,
if
Mr.
Collins
be
not
too
perverse
.
But
then
he
comes
to
speak
distinctly
to
the
argument
.
He
distinguisheth
between
converting
by
accident
,
or
by
institution
designed
unto
that
end
,
in
an
Ordinancel
;
hearing
of
the
Word
is
such
,
faith
comes
by
hearing
,
Rom.
10.
Hear
and
your
soul
shall
live
,
let
any
shew
us
a
Scripture
speaking
to
this
purpose
concerning
the
Lords
Supper
.
'T
is
true
,
faith
comes
by
hearing
,
Answ.
and
hearing
by
the
Word
of
God
.
But
doth
it
follow
that
all
other
Ordinances
are
excluded
from
being
a
means
of
working
sincere
faith
in
the
Church
,
when
they
are
joyned
with
the
Word
in
the
work
of
the
Ministry
,
as
hath
been
said
already
?
That
of
Rom.
10.
proves
,
that
it
is
not
possible
that
any
should
call
upon
the
name
of
the
Lord
in
whom
they
have
not
beleived
.
And
how
should
they
believe
in
him
,
of
whom
they
have
not
(
so
much
as
)
heard
of
?
And
how
shall
they
hear
without
a
Preacher
,
&c.
which
is
spoken
to
the
case
of
Heathens
that
never
heard
of
Christ
.
Such
must
of
necessity
hear
Christ
,
before
they
can
believe
in
him
.
And
this
faith
comes
by
hearing
,
and
this
hearing
by
the
Word
of
God
,
by
a
Preacher
sent
.
This
was
the
ordinary
means
of
bringing
persons
into
the
Church
,
that
were
Pagans
born
;
and
then
being
within
,
they
had
the
benefit
of
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
,
for
their
edification
and
salvation
.
What
then
,
will
it
follow
hence
,
that
persons
born
in
the
Church
,
that
draw
in
the
knowledge
of
Christ
by
education
and
tradition
in
their
youth
,
cannot
believe
or
have
faith
in
any
other
way
but
by
hearing
only
?
The
promise
is
,
that
whosoever
shall
call
upon
the
Name
of
the
Lord
shall
be
saved
,
in
opposition
to
those
that
never
heard
of
his
Name
.
Salvation
is
of
the
Christian
Church
,
as
once
of
the
Jews
,
unto
which
promise
of
Salvation
all
the
Ordinances
set
up
in
the
Church
are
subservient
.
The
work
of
the
Ministry
was
to
be
carryed
on
by
the
Pastors
and
Teachers
fixed
unto
their
several
flocks
in
the
Church
,
which
they
are
constantly
to
attend
upon
for
the
spiritual
good
thereof
;
as
they
which
must
give
an
account
thereof
unto
their
Lord
;
and
it
concerns
them
faithfully
to
carry
on
the
whole
work
of
their
Ministry
accordingly
towards
their
whole
flock
,
and
not
to
make
Heathens
of
them
,
&
then
content
themselves
onely
with
preaching
unto
them
on
the
Lords
day
,
and
the
work
is
done
,
as
if
there
were
no
more
care
to
be
taken
with
Church-members
,
then
with
Pagans
,
nor
no
more
means
to
be
used
for
their
spiritual
good
then
they
would
use
unto
Heathen
,
whom
the
work
of
the
Ministry
was
never
intended
for
.
And
whereas
Mr.
Collins
cals
for
proof
,
Where
are
the
like
Scriptures
to
prove
the
Sacrament
a
converting
Ordinance
,
as
is
preaching
and
hearing
?
I
answer
him
by
distinguishing
thus
,
hearing
of
faith
preached
was
and
is
the
ordinary
means
of
sincere
believing
in
the
Church
,
of
which
the
Sacrament
is
a
special
part
.
Befides
,
the
Sacrament
cannot
be
administred
without
hearing
the
Word
of
God
,
and
prayer
,
with
the
use
of
other
senses
,
as
it
is
the
visible
compendium
of
the
whole
Gospel
holding
forth
Christ
crucified
for
remission
of
fins
.
But
to
speak
a
little
unto
his
other
quotation
,
Isai
.
55.
Hear
and
your
souls
shall
live
.
This
was
spoken
unto
the
Church
he
will
say
;
I
grant
it
was
,
and
more
then
this
too
,
as
that
chapter
shews
.
That
first
they
were
invited
to
come
unto
God
in
whom
all
spiritual
blessing
was
to
be
had
,
for
the
satisfying
of
every
empty
thirsty
soul
;
and
disswaded
from
thinking
to
be
satisfied
elsewhere
-
Secondly
,
exhorted
unto
several
duties
.
1.
To
hearken
diligently
unto
what
the
Lord
had
said
unto
them
,
and
be
satisfied
with
good
.
Then
2.
incline
your
ear
and
come
unto
me
,
that
you
may
be
satisfied
with
the
fatnesse
of
my
house
:
They
were
to
hear
,
and
come
to
God
too
in
all
holy
obedience
;
for
in
the
Scriptures
men
are
said
not
to
hear
,
when
they
will
not
regard
to
doe
what
the
Lord
hath
commanded
them
,
so
hear
that
your
souls
may
live
,
hear
and
doe
is
the
language
of
the
holy
Ghost
to
the
Church
usually
.
3.
Then
to
seek
God
while
he
will
be
found
,
and
to
call
upon
him
him
while
he
is
neer
,
seek
him
in
all
his
own
appointments
and
Ordinances
,
where
he
hath
promised
his
presence
.
4.
Then
is
subjoyned
,
Let
the
wicked
forsake
his
way
,
and
the
unrighteous
man
his
thoughts
;
And
let
him
return
unto
the
Lord
,
and
he
will
have
mercy
on
him
,
&c.
Therefore
you
may
easily
conceive
here
is
not
only
hear
,
and
your
soul
shall
live
,
but
all
other
duties
of
worship
and
observance
are
required
also
in
the
Church
,
in
order
to
a
blessing
of
spiritual
life
,
and
there
are
promises
of
grace
and
mercy
unto
the
Church
in
that
same
chapter
upon
their
doing
their
duties
enjoyned
:
the
which
doth
make
good
the
distinction
above
;
We
know
in
the
Church
,
Not
the
hearers
of
the
Word
,
but
the
doers
thereof
shall
be
blesied
in
their
deed
;
persons
in
the
Church
are
bound
to
observe
and
doe
all
that
Christ
in
his
Word
hath
commanded
;
upon
that
account
they
have
the
promise
of
his
gracious
presence
;
and
if
the
Sacrament
be
an
Ordinance
of
Christ
for
the
good
of
his
Church
;
why
may
we
not
exspect
the
presence
of
Christ
,
in
blessing
this
for
the
spiritual
good
of
his
Church
as
all
the
rest
?
Mr.
Collins
must
give
stronger
reasons
to
deny
it
a
converting
Ordinance
then
these
,
or
else
he
had
better
have
said
nothing
:
me
thinks
Mr.
Gillespie
might
have
furnished
him
with
a
greater
strength
then
so
.
Next
he
saith
,
Either
the
Word
alone
(
read
at
the
administration
)
is
to
convert
,
or
Word
and
signes
making
up
the
Sacrament
;
if
the
Word
only
,
he
thinks
wicked
men
may
stay
and
hear
that
,
if
we
say
more
,
we
must
prove
it
.
This
,
Answ.
as
it
is
no
argument
to
prove
the
negative
,
so
it
need
not
be
answered
:
for
his
main
thing
in
this
,
is
to
bid
us
prove
that
the
Sacrament
is
a
converting
Ordinance
in
the
Church
:
the
which
I
conceive
is
clearly
done
already
.
And
when
Mr.
Collins
is
able
to
exclude
the
Sacrament
from
the
work
of
the
Ministry
in
the
Church
;
and
exclude
Word
and
Prayer
in
order
to
the
Sacrament
from
that
work
,
(
and
end
of
converting
)
in
the
Church
;
and
can
exclude
this
Ordinance
,
from
being
a
spiritual
instrument
in
the
hand
of
the
Spirit
of
Christ
to
quicken
whom
he
will
,
and
can
exclude
the
unregenerate
from
Covenant
relation
,
and
membership
,
and
allow
them
no
other
priviledge
in
the
Church
for
their
spiritual
good
,
then
unto
Infidels
,
&c.
I
say
,
when
he
hath
performed
this
task
soundly
and
substantially
;
it
's
possible
he
may
make
the
vanity
of
our
opinion
(
that
are
for
the
affirmative
)
to
appear
,
and
put
us
upon
further
proof
:
untill
then
let
the
Judiclous
Reader
judge
of
the
arguments
between
us
,
whether
ours
or
his
be
most
rational
and
satisfactory
;
as
they
are
deducted
from
general
rules
of
Scripture
and
reason
.
And
by
this
time
I
have
given
you
an
account
of
all
that
Mr.
Collins
hath
excepted
against
the
first
part
of
my
book
.
I
doe
not
know
of
any
material
thing
I
have
omitted
to
answer
in
particular
:
but
indeed
not
so
much
for
any
great
cause
I
had
thus
to
doe
,
in
what
he
hath
said
to
loosen
the
foundations
and
principles
upon
which
my
whole
building
stands
,
but
from
a
desire
further
to
clear
up
the
thing
in
controversie
,
and
to
reduce
the
controversie
into
a
narrower
compasse
.
In
the
close
of
Mr.
Collins
answer
,
he
collects
about
seven
rotten
pillars
,
as
he
cals
them
,
out
of
the
whole
of
mine
,
and
pens
them
down
as
he
pleaseth
,
and
then
bids
others
judge
of
them
,
taking
it
for
granted
that
he
hath
discovered
them
to
be
rotten
and
false
,
And
that
my
Book
hath
not
much
truth
in
any
one
page
of
it
.
It
's
possible
that
there
may
be
some
things
in
my
Book
,
that
are
doubtful
,
Answ.
1
and
that
upon
the
piercing
tryal
of
some
grave
Divines
of
deeper
Judgements
,
may
be
discovered
unsound
or
rendered
weak
;
but
I
am
confident
that
Mr.
Collins
hath
made
no
such
discovery
in
any
one
thing
that
he
hath
excepted
against
.
I
humbly
conceive
,
that
whosoever
undertakes
to
answer
the
main
grounds
and
principles
I
build
upon
for
free
admission
to
the
Sacrament
,
they
must
deny
our
Church
and
Baptism
,
or
else
destroy
themselves
by
their
own
inconsistences
,
let
their
parts
be
what
they
will
.
And
I
wonder
that
any
of
the
Presbyterian
judgement
,
should
contend
with
me
,
for
they
doe
but
discover
their
own
nakednesse
,
and
give
occasion
unto
Brownists
and
Anabaptists
to
reproach
us
;
so
that
I
professe
I
am
afraid
to
speak
what
I
should
in
some
things
.
I
shall
give
you
a
breviate
of
the
principles
I
build
upon
in
the
managing
of
this
in
controversie
.
That
the
Eternal
God
hath
created
all
mankinde
for
himself
,
and
hath
decreed
the
blessed
and
everlasting
happinesse
of
some
,
with
all
the
wayes
and
means
for
that
end
,
with
his
eternal
purpose
not
to
give
special
grace
unto
the
rest
,
but
in
his
wisdome
and
providence
,
doth
so
order
and
dispose
of
the
means
effectually
,
in
respect
of
sin
and
the
punishment
thereof
,
to
the
infinite
glory
of
his
Justice
,
in
the
just
condemnation
of
the
wicked
world
.
That
for
the
Elects
sake
,
Christ
was
promised
after
the
fall
,
and
came
into
the
world
,
as
the
only
means
of
Gods
putting
into
execution
his
eternal
purposes
concerning
their
salvation
,
the
whole
creation
and
race
of
mankinde
is
preserved
successively
in
their
generations
,
for
the
being
and
gathering
of
Gods
Elect
unto
grace
and
glory
.
That
Jesus
Christ
is
the
only
meriting
and
procuring
cause
of
the
Gospel
Covenant
,
freely
made
and
published
unto
some
of
mankind
,
of
free
choice
.
That
this
Covenant
of
grace
,
is
of
a
large
comprehensive
extent
,
including
the
parents
,
and
their
children
in
their
generations
for
ever
,
to
them
that
have
entred
into
it
by
profession
and
baptism
,
and
doe
not
renounce
i●
or
apostate
from
it
.
That
the
Covenant
of
Grace
consists
it
promises
of
giving
the
first
regenerating
grace
.
Secondly
,
in
promises
of
growth
in
grace
.
Thirdly
,
In
promises
of
rewarding
graces
with
comfortable
blessings
temporal
and
spiritual
in
this
life
,
and
with
eternal
glory
i●
the
world
to
come
.
That
the
Church
of
God
on
earth
,
is
so
constituted
by
the
will
and
pleasure
of
God
,
that
in
it
might
alwayes
be
sutable
objects
o●
those
different
promises
included
in
the
Gospel
Covenant
,
unto
which
the
natural
issue
of
Christians
in
the
visible
Church
doth
well
agree
.
That
Sacraments
,
as
they
represent
the
death
of
Christ
,
are
seals
confirming
the
truth
of
the
whole
Covenant
of
grace
made
and
published
to
the
visible
Church
only
.
That
Sacraments
are
instituted
and
intended
only
for
the
Churches
use
,
in
order
to
the
spiritual
good
thereof
in
general
,
which
includes
the
use
of
every
one
in
particular
.
That
all
in
the
Church
come
under
the
the
obligation
of
all
instituted
worship
prescribed
,
of
which
Sacraments
are
a
principal
part
.
That
Covenant
relation
is
either
personal
,
or
parental
;
the
former
founded
upon
profession
of
faith
and
holy
baptism
,
the
later
derived
really
and
wholly
by
succession
.
That
a
positive
profession
of
faith
explicitely
is
necessity
unto
admission
unto
Church-membership
of
those
that
are
Heathens
born
,
but
Church-membership
is
the
birth
priviledge
of
all
born
of
Christian
parents
in
the
Church
.
That
to
be
Saints
,
Believers
,
Disciples
,
a
Brother
,
and
within
,
is
understood
by
Church-membership
.
That
during
the
state
of
Church-membership
,
every
member
ought
to
enjoy
the
external
priviledges
of
that
Church
,
whereof
he
is
a
member
in
particular
,
untill
he
voluntarily
fall
away
by
final
apostasie
,
or
be
justly
cast
out
of
all
Church
Communion
by
an
authoritative
act
of
Church
censures
.
That
those
that
derive
their
Church-membership
from
that
great
Charter
of
Covenant
relation
with
the
Church
,
and
have
it
confirmed
by
the
authority
of
the
Church
,
baptizing
them
as
members
of
the
visible
body
of
Christ
,
cannot
be
legally
put
out
of
Church
communion
,
at
the
pleasure
of
some
few
Elders
of
themselves
,
unlesse
deligated
so
to
act
from
a
National
Assembly
of
Presbyters
.
Though
the
right
of
discipline
may
be
inherent
in
every
lawful
Presbyter
,
yet
the
exercise
thereof
is
proper
only
unto
those
that
are
intrusted
therewith
by
the
representatives
of
the
whole
.
Irregular
actings
and
good
ends
cannot
stand
together
;
to
doe
evil
that
good
may
come
,
is
not
only
dangerous
but
damnable
.
The
state
of
unregeneracy
and
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
doth
not
bar
any
one
from
the
Sacrament
,
nor
doth
come
within
the
verge
of
the
Church
to
judge
of
or
correct
in
the
least
.
Actual
unworthinesse
persisted
in
unto
obstinacy
,
is
the
only
object
of
Church
censures
of
persons
in
the
Church
;
yet
all
actual
unworthinesse
doth
not
necessarily
run
persons
upon
eating
and
drinking
the
Lords
Supper
unworthily
,
in
the
Apostles
sense
.
There
is
no
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
,
in
a
relative
sense
,
in
reference
to
the
Sacrament
,
or
any
uther
Ordinance
,
but
the
carelesse
neglect
thereof
is
most
unworthy
and
punishable
.
Not
to
discern
the
Lords
Body
,
is
,
not
to
put
a
difference
between
common
bread
and
the
instituted
signes
,
set
a
part
by
Word
and
Prayer
,
to
represent
the
death
of
Christ
for
remission
of
sins
.
Examination
is
a
private
duty
to
be
performed
between
God
and
the
conscience
unto
a
profitable
receiving
,
having
a
special
eye
to
the
rules
of
the
whole
administration
,
making
their
approaches
there
accordingly
,
externally
at
least
.
There
is
a
real
difference
to
be
put
between
the
unregenerate
Christian
,
and
an
unregenerate
Infidel
,
the
Church
and
the
world
,
believer
and
unbeliever
;
the
confounding
of
these
hath
run
us
into
Brownism
of
late
.
The
whole
Church
is
in
Covenant
with
God
,
and
are
the
immediate
objects
of
the
promises
;
but
the
world
lies
in
wickednesse
,
and
under
wrath
,
without
the
promises
of
the
Covenant
and
hope
and
God
in
the
world
.
The
whole
Church
are
under
all
Gospel
observance
;
the
whole
work
of
the
Ministry
as
the
ordinary
means
of
their
conversion
and
salvation
:
The
Pagan
world
for
the
most
part
never
had
the
advantage
of
so
much
as
any
part
of
that
work
,
the
Gospel
being
hid
to
them
that
perish
.
Salvation
is
of
the
Christian
Church
,
but
no
salvation
out
of
it
.
How
can
they
call
on
him
in
whom
they
have
not
believed
?
and
how
can
they
believe
in
him
of
whom
they
have
not
heard
?
And
there
is
salvation
in
no
other
Name
,
whatsoever
,
save
only
in
Jesus
Christ
.
That
the
legally
unclean
were
not
so
much
debarred
the
benefit
of
the
Passeover
,
as
other
Sacrifices
or
spiritual
observances
in
that
Church
.
That
the
Moral
uncleannesse
then
,
was
no
more
bar
to
the
Passeover
,
then
unto
all
other
observances
in
the
Church
.
Nay
that
was
either
punished
by
the
Judges
,
according
unto
their
Judicial
proceedings
,
or
otherwise
cleansed
from
it
,
by
a
continual
course
of
Sacrifices
.
And
therefore
no
bar
at
all
against
any
.
That
no
persons
in
the
Church
of
the
Old
Testament
,
or
in
the
Churches
of
the
New
,
read
of
in
Scriptures
,
were
ever
debarred
the
Passeover
,
or
the
Sacrament
of
the
holy
Supper
,
and
allowed
the
benefit
of
all
the
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
.
Hence
I
cannot
but
conceive
that
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
alone
,
usually
called
the
minor
Excommunication
,
is
but
a
humane
invention
in
the
Church
.
More
is
required
to
the
Lords
Supper
then
to
Baptism
in
the
Church
,
yet
lesse
is
required
to
the
holy
Supper
of
them
that
are
Church-members
,
then
of
Heathens
unto
Baptism
.
We
must
distinguish
of
real
and
relative
personal
worthinesse
,
The
whole
visible
Church
not
under
Church
censures
are
personally
worthy
in
a
relative
sense
.
And
hence
there
is
no
personal
unworthinesse
in
the
Church
.
2.
Of
believing
in
a
large
sense
,
and
of
believing
in
a
strict
sense
;
both
to
be
accounted
true
believers
in
Scripture
sense
:
The
denomination
of
a
Believer
is
as
well
derived
from
a
right
object
believed
on
,
as
from
the
right
and
holinesse
of
the
Subject
believing
.
3.
Of
entring
into
the
Covenant
,
and
of
continuing
in
the
Covenant
.
The
former
is
proper
for
Infidels
:
the
latter
concerns
the
Church
;
for
it
is
supposed
that
all
in
the
Church
have
entred
the
Gospel
Covenant
.
And
in
the
Church
we
must
distinguish
of
transgressing
the
Covenant
,
and
renouncing
the
Covenant
,
of
breaking
,
and
renewing
it
;
and
whosoever
is
entred
into
the
Covenant
,
comes
under
the
whole
administration
thereof
,
and
cannot
be
disobliged
from
any
observance
thereof
,
but
by
the
binding
power
of
the
Keys
of
Christs
Kingdome
exercised
Juridically
.
Beloved
Friends
,
I
have
now
given
you
an
account
of
the
most
of
my
principles
that
I
build
upon
,
and
conclude
free
admission
to
the
holy
Supper
from
.
And
I
judge
they
are
such
that
have
their
rise
from
the
holy
Scriptures
;
or
are
rational
deductions
drawn
from
thence
,
which
are
not
in
the
least
loosened
nor
shaken
by
Mr.
Collins
,
nor
any
other
of
his
judgement
;
nor
I
think
never
will
,
notwithstanding
his
forwardnesse
of
spirit
in
the
close
of
his
Book
,
to
cry
up
a
victory
,
when
he
has
not
so
much
as
routed
me
in
any
one
thing
in
all
my
Book
,
which
argues
a
bold
conceited
vapouring
spirit
a
little
too
much
.
Therefore
now
in
short
,
I
shall
collect
some
of
his
main
strength
and
magisterial
principles
made
use
of
to
undermine
the
foundations
of
mine
,
either
exprest
or
implyed
.
He
denyes
that
Church-membership
alone
doth
give
a
full
right
to
the
Sacrament
,
therefore
superaddes
knowledge
,
faith
,
and
the
fruits
of
holinesse
to
give
one
right
:
all
which
say
I
is
included
in
Membership
.
And
his
superadding
will
give
a
Pagan
right
.
He
affirms
that
he
looks
upon
all
Church-members
habitually
worthy
from
their
interest
in
Christ
,
until
they
discover
the
contrary
by
their
actual
offendings
.
Then
say
I
,
he
holds
,
That
all
Infants
are
habitually
worthy
from
their
interest
in
Christ
,
and
commonly
fall
away
from
that
state
of
grace
.
He
sayes
,
'T
is
not
much
material
,
whether
the
Corinths
were
punished
for
habitual
unworthinesse
or
no
,
and
yet
upon
the
matter
,
that
the
whole
he
disputes
against
.
He
saith
the
unregenerate
are
personally
unworthy
,
and
therefore
cannot
receive
.
He
sayes
there
is
no
promise
belongs
to
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
,
that
have
not
faith
to
apply
it
;
and
that
they
are
rather
objects
of
the
first
grace
,
then
of
the
promise
of
that
grace
;
and
that
the
Heathen
are
as
much
objects
of
the
promises
of
first
grace
as
the
unregenerate
part
of
the
Church
.
And
doubts
whether
any
promise
belong
to
men
as
unregenerate
;
if
so
,
then
Heathen
may
come
to
the
Sacrament
.
He
puts
no
difference
between
the
unregenerate
in
the
Church
and
the
Pagan
world
,
in
respect
of
promises
,
titles
,
duties
,
priviledges
,
except
it
be
the
baptizing
their
children
:
he
undisciples
them
,
unduties
them
,
uncovenants
them
,
in
reference
to
the
holy
Supper
,
and
yet
will
have
them
Church-members
,
and
present
their
children
unto
baptism
.
He
says
,
That
Sacraments
are
strong
meat
,
which
weak
Christians
are
not
able
to
digest
,
and
that
they
are
seals
of
faith
only
.
He
denyes
the
Sacrament
to
be
a
converting
Ordinance
,
because
then
Heathens
should
come
,
&c.
And
will
not
have
the
unregenerate
Christians
to
come
under
any
duty
,
but
what
is
converting
.
He
affirms
that
in
an
unlearned
Congregation
,
a
single
Minister
may
suspend
from
the
Sacrament
,
he
being
the
ruling
part
of
the
Church
,
&c.
And
yet
in
all
other
thing
seeme
to
bear
himself
much
upon
the
authority
of
men
.
With
such
like
things
as
these
he
thinks
he
hath
loosened
all
that
I
have
built
upon
,
and
hence
thinks
that
the
whole
will
fall
;
but
he
must
take
a
great
deal
of
pains
more
then
yet
he
hath
done
,
if
he
think
to
be
the
man
that
must
give
satisfaction
in
this
Controversie
.
And
I
believe
he
must
speak
a
great
deal
more
then
hath
been
spoken
by
any
,
if
in
the
least
he
can
make
good
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
,
more
then
from
any
other
part
of
holy
Communion
in
sacred
worship
,
I
mean
of
Church-members
of
years
of
discretion
,
as
the
question
is
stated
.
He
must
not
think
that
the
authority
of
men
will
carry
the
thing
,
it
being
a
businesse
of
this
consequence
,
that
on
which
the
peace
and
settlement
depends
;
which
can
never
be
as
to
our
condition
,
so
long
as
men
make
habitual
worthinesse
in
a
real
sense
,
that
which
alone
gives
one
right
to
the
Sacrament
.
2.
And
set
up
the
distinction
of
Believer
and
Infidel
in
the
Church
.
3.
And
level
the
unregenerate
part
of
the
Church
with
the
world
in
respect
of
Covenant
relation
,
promises
of
first
grace
,
work
of
the
Ministry
,
feals
of
the
Covenant
,
&c.
Such
like
interferings
in
a
visible
Church
doth
destroy
it
,
and
pluck
up
the
very
foundation
on
which
the
Church
of
England
stands
.
My
constant
prayer
to
the
Lord
is
,
and
shall
be
,
that
he
will
so
favour
us
with
the
blessings
of
his
people
,
as
to
give
us
Magistrates
and
Ministers
,
that
may
be
tender
in
protecting
and
defending
the
Vine
which
himself
hath
planted
.
And
it
's
pity
that
Mr.
Collins
and
divers
others
of
his
judgement
should
not
see
where
truth
and
the
Churches
peace
lyes
.
I
have
done
with
him
,
as
to
what
he
hath
excepted
against
my
Book
in
particular
;
I
shall
very
briefly
examine
his
strength
for
Suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
.
FINIS
.
I
shall
in
the
next
place
annex
a
short
Answer
to
,
or
an
Examination
of
Mr.
Collins
Quotations
and
Arguments
for
that
which
he
cals
A
Juridical
Suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
,
the
main
Subject
of
his
late
Book
.
BEloved
Friends
,
I
am
sorry
that
our
Author
should
take
such
a
deal
of
pains
,
to
make
good
that
thing
that
hath
,
and
doth
so
much
trouble
and
hinder
the
edification
and
peace
of
the
Church
;
and
hath
been
the
occasion
of
the
extirpation
of
the
Churches
Discipline
;
and
the
main
impediment
of
an
establishment
of
Discipline
at
the
present
.
And
how
impossible
it
is
,
that
the
Church
of
England
should
be
preserved
and
secured
in
a
Church
state
,
from
the
common
reproaches
of
adversaries
upon
his
principles
,
let
them
that
are
sober
judge
;
when
himself
is
equalling
the
most
of
her
members
to
the
Infidel
world
,
disobliging
them
from
duties
of
instituted
worship
and
observance
,
under
this
pretence
,
that
they
are
unbelievers
,
and
no
disciples
,
nor
brethren
that
are
within
;
and
hence
he
will
allow
them
just
as
much
priviledge
in
the
Church
,
as
he
doth
unto
Pagans
;
except
baptizing
their
Infants
,
which
he
will
hardly
doe
upon
their
own
parents
faith
,
but
upon
their
remote
predecessors
.
And
thus
he
makes
a
great
stir
about
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
;
and
by
this
groundlesse
censure
,
doth
hinder
or
make
invalid
other
necessary
commands
of
Jesus
Christ
,
to
the
great
prejudice
of
the
Church
of
Christ
;
As
namely
,
the
benefit
of
Gods
Ordinance
of
Sacrament
,
and
just
excommunications
according
to
the
practice
of
Apostolical
Churches
,
when
this
suspension
was
not
known
nor
heard
of
.
And
therefore
I
having
spoke
so
much
already
in
defence
of
this
priviledge
and
and
right
of
a
Church-member
,
and
that
being
already
ingaged
in
this
Controversie
,
give
me
leave
further
to
answer
to
what
I
can
finde
urged
against
the
friends
of
my
judgement
that
hath
not
as
yet
been
spoken
unto
,
as
may
satisfie
the
plain
minded
Christian
,
that
is
not
able
to
unravel
so
many
subtil
needlesse
syllogisms
,
that
Mr.
Collins
abounds
with
in
his
elaborate
Book
.
But
I
intend
brevity
;
And
therefore
expect
not
my
answer
unto
every
thing
,
but
to
his
main
grounds
he
hath
laid
for
suspension
.
In
stating
of
the
question
Mr.
Collins
sayes
;
1.
As
to
suspending
of
some
persons
from
the
Supper
;
he
means
no
more
then
a
denyal
of
that
Ordinance
from
some
,
pag.
1.
2.
He
distinguisheth
of
Suspension
,
To
be
either
Juridical
,
or
Pastoral
,
Positive
,
or
Primitive
.
3.
Of
a
Presbytered
Church
he
saith
,
They
finding
some
of
their
members
grossely
ignorant
or
seandalous
,
not
excommunicated
in
the
Name
of
the
Lord
Jesus
,
are
to
warn
them
to
forbear
coming
to
the
Lords
Table
for
a
time
,
and
if
they
presse
in
to
deny
it
them
,
declaring
the
Church
hath
no
Communion
with
them
,
pag.
3.
I
shall
speak
unto
that
suspension
he
cals
Juridical
and
Positive
only
;
Answ.
1
for
if
I
can
break
him
in
the
proof
of
that
,
his
other
will
appear
to
be
a
dream
.
But
to
the
question
,
1.
He
saith
,
They
mean
no
more
by
suspension
then
a
denyal
of
that
Ordinance
of
the
Supper
from
them
,
for
a
time
.
Then
2.
In
case
they
will
come
,
to
deny
it
them
,
declaring
the
Church
hath
no
communion
with
them
.
Here
you
may
take
notice
,
how
clear
Mr.
Collins
is
in
stating
the
question
.
1.
He
makes
suspension
no
more
but
a
de●yal
of
the
Sacrament
from
some
for
a
time
.
And
then
secondly
the
Church
declares
they
have
no
Communion
with
them
:
so
that
he
in
stating
the
question
layes
foundation
for
a
Suspension
,
and
Excommunication
both
:
For
if
excommunidation
consists
not
in
putting
out
of
all
Church
Communion
,
I
know
not
what
it
is
.
He
so
confounds
these
,
that
I
know
not
how
to
take
him
.
And
therefore
I
must
query
him
a
little
further
about
the
question
stated
.
I
query
whether
a
Minister
with
his
Parochial
Lay
Elders
be
a
Presbytery
that
can
saspend
their
members
Juridically
.
I
judge
this
but
the
same
with
a
Pastor
denying
the
Sacrament
at
his
private
will
and
pleasure
.
Such
Elders
have
no
more
to
do
with
the
exercise
of
discipline
then
with
the
administrations
of
all
publique
worship
.
They
have
not
so
much
as
a
name
,
nor
the
lineaments
of
an
Office
known
in
Scripture
.
And
it
is
a
businesse
of
the
like
difficulty
to
prove
lay
rulere
in
the
Church
,
distinct
from
Ministerial
rulers
,
as
to
prove
Juridicall
Suspension
from
the
Sacrament
only
distinct
from
Excommunication
.
I
query
whether
in
suspending
of
members
from
the
Sacrament
,
their
proceedings
be
according
to
that
known
rule
,
Matth.
18.15
,
16
,
17
,
&c.
and
how
they
can
apply
that
rule
unto
the
ignorant
,
that
are
not
scandalous
,
they
may
doe
well
to
tell
us
.
I
query
what
difference
they
make
between
a
Juridical
suspended
member
,
and
those
that
keep
away
out
of
carelesnesse
or
dislike
of
their
proceeding
in
order
unto
receiving
.
I
query
again
in
what
relation
doth
a
suspended
member
stand
in
reference
unto
holy
Communion
in
the
other
parts
of
Gods
worship
.
Has
he
a
Communion
with
you
as
a
Church-member
,
upon
the
account
of
his
duty
and
Church
priviledge
,
or
as
you
will
allow
the
presence
of
a
Heathen
in
order
to
conversion
?
If
you
say
,
but
as
a
Heathen
,
whom
you
will
allow
the
benefit
of
converting
Ordinances
in
the
Church
;
then
your
suspension
is
the
same
with
excommunication
;
for
you
allow
an
excommunicate
person
as
much
benefit
of
converting
Ordinances
as
a
Heathen
.
And
if
you
say
,
hearing
and
praying
,
&c.
You
allow
as
a
members
duty
and
priviledge
,
then
in
those
acts
of
worship
you
hold
communion
with
them
as
members
of
the
same
body
with
you
,
then
how
is
it
that
you
declare
unto
such
in
the
name
of
Christ
,
and
the
Church
,
that
you
have
no
communion
with
them
,
as
Mr.
Collins
hath
stated
it
?
If
in
the
third
place
you
say
,
The
Church
declares
she
will
have
no
Communion
with
such
in
the
Sacrament
as
a
member
onely
;
limiting
her
none
Communion
to
that
,
and
from
no
other
holy
Communion
in
worship
as
a
member
,
then
you
will
make
a
disagreement
in
acts
of
worship
,
which
are
all
acts
of
holy
Communion
,
and
make
a
ren●
in
that
which
is
uniform
in
it self
;
by
God●
appointment
all
acts
of
worship
being
of
Gods
own
prescribing
,
and
are
incumben●
unto
all
that
are
in
Covenant
relation
with
him
,
as
all
Church-members
are
untill
they
be
legally
dismembred
,
conditionally
;
the
Churches
censures
binding
persons
under
wrath
,
untill
they
penitently
return
unto
Christian
obedience
.
If
Church-membership
be
not
a
sufficient
title
to
claim
the
benefit
of
a
Sacrament
,
as
I
have
stated
it
,
cleared
and
proved
it
,
we
should
rather
begin
the
reforming
of
our
Church
at
membership
(
if
we
can
tell
how
)
then
at
the
Sacrament
,
the
Sacrament
being
the
undoubted
right
of
every
Church-member
.
If
suspension
put
persons
out
of
all
Church
Communion
in
acts
of
holy
worship
,
then
they
are
considered
as
in
the
state
of
Heathens
,
which
is
all
one
with
excommunication
.
And
therefore
Mr.
Collins
hath
taken
a
great
deal
of
pains
to
prove
I
know
not
what
,
unlesse
it
be
excommunication
under
the
name
of
Juridical
suspension
,
and
then
what
will
become
of
suspension
?
it
will
fall
of
it's
own
accord
without
any
further
disputing
.
Doubtless
if
there
be
such
a
Church
censure
as
suspension
,
distinct
from
excommunication
,
then
we
should
finde
something
of
it
in
the
Scriptures
:
And
in
what
cases
it
should
be
exercised
;
if
it
be
a
lesser
censure
,
then
in
reason
we
should
have
some
hints
from
Scriptures
,
for
what
sins
,
or
for
what
want
of
qualifications
prerequisite
unto
the
Sacrament
more
then
any
other
Ordinance
of
Worship
.
Now
Mr.
Collins
saith
,
If
he
can
but
prove
it
in
any
case
how
ignorant
,
heretical
or
scandalous
soever
,
&c.
pag.
4.
Mr.
Botemans
challenge
will
be
answered
.
True
,
but
that
still
remains
to
doe
;
and
if
Mr.
Collins
fail
in
the
stating
of
the
question
,
it
's
ten
to
one
he
is
at
as
great
a
losse
in
his
proof
.
Therefore
I
will
suppose
,
that
that
suspension
which
Mr.
Boteman
would
have
proved
,
is
this
,
that
a
Minister
with
his
two
Elders
have
power
,
in
the
Name
of
Christ
to
deny
the
Sacrament
to
those
that
are
Church-members
and
in
possession
of
the
Sacrament
,
and
allow
them
the
priviledge
of
all
the
other
Ordinances
of
Worship
and
Communion
in
the
Church
,
as
members
of
the
same
Church
.
And
I
believe
Mr.
Boteman
and
I
shall
never
see
nor
hear
that
suspension
proved
by
any
whatever
,
from
the
Scriptures
.
And
I
think
that
the
thing
he
endeavours
to
prove
:
either
he
means
this
,
or
else
the
same
with
excommunication
,
if
he
wil
allow
them
no
other
Communion
with
the
Church
then
unto
Heathens
.
Now
I
come
to
examine
his
proof
:
and
his
principal
examination
is
this
.
To
those
whom
the
Sacrament
may
not
lawfully
be
given
,
it
may
lawfully
be
denyed
.
But
there
be
some
baptized
persons
in
the
Church
,
to
whom
it
may
not
lawfully
be
given
.
Ergo
,
His
Major
is
granted
,
Answ.
let
us
see
how
he
can
prove
his
Minor
;
Namely
,
that
there
are
or
may
be
some
baptized
persons
not
excommunicate
to
whom
the
Sacrament
may
not
lawfully
be
given
.
His
first
proof
of
this
is
Matth.
7.6
.
Give
not
that
which
is
holy
unto
Dogs
,
neither
cast
you
your
pearls
before
Swine
,
lest
they
trample
them
under
their
feet
,
and
turn
again
and
rent
you
.
He
is
a
great
deal
more
large
upon
this
proof
,
then
he
is
profitable
or
pertinent
to
the
businesse
:
I
shall
endtvour
first
to
give
the
sense
;
and
then
to
examine
the
main
of
his
,
for
he
is
too
large
for
me
to
transcribe
.
I
conceive
then
,
That
this
Text
of
our
blessed
Saviour
is
chiefly
spoken
by
way
of
counsel
and
caution
unto
his
Disciples
and
followers
in
general
,
respecting
all
that
were
then
present
hearers
of
him
at
his
Sermon
upon
the
Mount
,
that
gave
credit
unto
his
Doctrine
,
and
acknowledged
his
Person
:
and
whereas
he
would
not
have
them
give
that
which
is
holy
to
the
dogs
,
he
means
private
reproofs
and
admonitions
;
because
those
were
perillous
times
in
regard
of
the
cruel
carping
In
fidel
Pharisees
and
Jews
,
that
were
such
deadly
enemies
unto
him
,
and
unto
all
that
should
speak
on
his
behalf
:
therefore
in
reference
to
the
safety
of
their
persons
,
he
warrants
their
silence
,
rather
then
to
put
their
persons
upon
such
imminent
danger
of
being
rent
by
that
untoward
generation
of
malicious
enemies
of
Christ
;
and
especially
,
Christ
knowing
that
they
were
given
up
to
a
spirit
of
blindenesse
and
hardnesse
of
heart
,
that
they
should
not
repent
;
and
therefore
whatever
Pearls
of
Divine
Truth
were
cast
unto
them
for
their
good
,
were
to
no
purpose
,
they
would
but
slight
and
scorn
them
,
and
trample
them
under
their
feet
;
so
that
the
reason
is
double
,
why
he
warrants
their
filence
to
such
dogs
;
not
only
the
safety
of
their
persons
,
but
the
unprofitablenesse
of
their
reproofs
and
holy
admonitions
;
they
will
but
trample
them
under
feet
,
&c.
Good
reason
had
our
blessed
Saviour
thus
to
caution
his
Disciples
;
for
,
if
I
mistake
not
,
Christ
himself
not
long
before
was
led
by
such
kind
of
wretched
people
,
unto
the
brow
of
a
hill
,
thinking
to
have
thrown
him
down
headlong
;
but
by
a
divine
power
escaped
through
the
midst
of
them
.
If
you
compare
Matth.
4.
with
Luke
4.
't
is
probable
that
it
was
before
this
Sermon
.
1.
That
it
was
meant
of
private
admonition
or
reproof
,
is
clear
,
because
it
was
before
the
twelve
were
so
much
as
all
called
,
much
lesse
sent
publickly
to
preach
.
2.
It
cannot
be
meant
of
publick
Ordinances
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
because
then
the
old
administrations
were
in
form
,
which
all
were
injoyned
to
observe
;
And
the
new
administrations
were
not
then
in
being
.
3.
It
could
not
be
meant
of
the
Lords
Supper
,
because
it
was
not
instituted
then
,
nor
of
two
or
three
years
after
;
therefore
those
whom
he
preacht
unto
,
and
meant
by
the
word
yea
,
could
not
be
in
a
capacity
to
give
that
holy
thing
at
all
.
4.
By
Dogs
and
Swine
cannot
be
meant
Disciples
,
and
those
that
were
followers
and
adherers
unto
Christ
,
for
to
them
is
this
counsel
and
moderate
merciful
caution
given
.
I
do
not
deny
,
but
this
place
is
applyable
unto
all
times
in
the
Church
upon
the
same
or
like
reason
and
occasion
,
but
I
think
this
place
is
nothing
at
all
to
the
Controversie
in
hand
,
for
I
know
of
none
that
will
plead
for
the
admission
of
such
that
will
rent
you
for
giving
them
the
holy
Supper
.
And
as
that
is
no
reason
why
they
should
deny
it
to
ours
,
so
not
the
sense
of
the
place
,
as
by
dogs
were
not
meant
professors
and
followers
of
Christ
then
,
so
not
now
;
but
by
dogs
must
needs
be
understood
cruel
persecutors
of
Christ
&
the
truth
of
precious
doctrine
that
he
taught
,
and
was
believed
by
many
.
And
therefore
when
he
first
sent
forth
his
Disciples
to
preach
the
Kingdome
of
heaven
only
to
the
Jews
,
Christ
gives
them
the
like
counsel
,
Behold
,
Matth.
10.
I
send
you
as
Sheep
among
Wolves
,
be
ye
therefore
wise
as
Serpents
,
and
innocent
as
Doves
.
And
when
they
persecute
you
in
one
City
,
flee
to
another
.
And
shake
the
dust
off
your
feet
against
those
that
will
not
receive
you
:
but
are
ready
rather
to
rent
you
.
You
see
our
blessed
Saviour
compares
the
unbelieving
Jews
,
Scribes
and
Pharisees
,
and
Priests
unto
Wolves
,
which
are
a
kinde
of
wilde
dogs
:
the
which
strengthens
the
sense
I
have
given
.
Tell
me
where
the
Prophets
or
Apostles
are
forbid
to
warn
,
reprove
,
admonish
the
Church
(
though
never
so
corrupt
)
in
their
publick
dispensations
,
or
forbid
to
administer
the
holy
Sacraments
unto
them
;
from
the
like
reasons
as
in
the
Text.
The
Prophets
were
to
give
warning
,
and
tell
the
people
of
their
sins
,
and
of
Gods
judgements
for
their
sins
,
the
Pastors
and
Elders
of
their
several
flocks
are
to
feed
the
flock
of
God
,
and
to
teach
them
all
observances
prescribed
by
their
Lord
.
And
see
that
their
people
know
,
observe
,
and
doe
all
things
that
Christ
commands
,
ruling
over
them
as
the
heritage
of
their
Lord
,
and
not
as
if
they
were
of
Belial
,
Dogs
and
Swine
,
whom
they
may
shut
out
of
doores
,
and
starve
them
at
their
pleasure
.
Having
given
this
sense
,
which
I
doubt
not
but
is
nearer
the
mark
,
and
lesse
lyable
unto
exceptions
then
Mr.
Collins
his
sense
will
appear
to
be
.
And
is
applyable
to
men
of
reproveable
spirits
now
,
and
in
the
Church
too
unto
private
Christians
,
that
upon
their
necessary
journey
,
or
otherwise
may
possibly
meet
with
such
that
will
not
bear
reproofs
,
be
it
performed
with
never
such
wisdom
,
but
will
either
fly
in
the
face
,
or
reproach
and
scorn
their
reprover
.
In
such
like
cases
,
Christ
doth
warrant
his
peoples
silence
.
Indeed
Mr.
Beteman
hath
done
well
upon
this
text
;
and
although
it
were
not
very
civil
for
Mr.
Collins
to
print
his
brothers
Sermon
without
his
consent
,
and
that
at
second
hand
too
,
himself
not
hearing
it
at
all
.
Yet
I
doubt
not
but
his
printing
of
that
Sermon
hath
done
much
in
taking
off
,
what
he
so
freely
asperses
and
reproacheth
him
with
,
in
his
long
narrative
preface
.
But
in
such
cases
as
before
the
Church
,
(
were
she
in
a
capacity
)
might
use
her
power
to
reform
such
rayling
dogged
offenders
.
Mr.
Collins
queries
1.
What
is
meant
by
that
which
is
holy
,
which
was
forbid
to
be
given
.
2.
Who
are
the
Dogs
and
Swine
here
spoken
of
.
3.
To
whom
this
precept
is
directed
.
His
answer
to
the
first
is
,
That
all
holy
things
and
pearls
are
here
forbid
,
&c.
which
the
Scripture
doth
not
elsewhere
plainly
allow
to
be
given
unto
Dogs
and
Swine
.
Secondly
,
He
sayes
he
hopes
it
will
easily
be
granted
to
concern
such
holy
things
as
God
hath
betrusted
us
Ministers
to
give
out
:
His
reason
is
,
For
is
is
to
men
Christ
spakes
.
How
can
Mr.
Collins
be
assured
,
Answ.
1
that
all
holy
things
are
here
meant
,
when
Christ
saith
only
to
private
men
that
he
preacht
unto
;
Give
not
that
which
is
holy
unto
the
dogs
?
Were
private
hearers
in
a
capacity
to
give
all
holy
things
?
This
interpretation
will
please
some
men
in
these
exorbitant
times
,
that
put
no
difference
between
persons
in
the
Office
and
Function
of
the
Ministry
,
and
private
gifted
men
.
Private
reproofs
,
instructions
,
admonitions
,
is
that
which
is
holy
,
and
answers
the
Word
,
for
Christ
doth
not
say
,
give
not
all
holy
things
(
speaking
in
the
plural
number
)
as
Mr.
Collins
doth
;
nor
doth
he
say
,
give
not
that
which
shall
be
holy
hereafter
unto
the
dogs
,
within
my
Church
,
as
Mr.
Collins
would
have
it
,
but
he
saith
,
Give
not
that
which
is
holy
,
&c.
speaking
in
the
present
tense
;
and
then
judge
whether
the
holy
Supper
be
here
meant
,
that
was
not
yet
instituted
,
nor
prophesied
of
.
Nay
,
see
how
our
Author
is
intoxicated
with
his
own
fancy
,
that
he
fetches
first
such
a
compasse
to
include
it
in
;
and
then
so
narrows
the
text
again
,
that
he
excludes
all
other
holy
things
out
of
it
,
and
will
allow
no
other
thing
to
be
meant
but
the
holy
Supper
only
,
which
is
not
to
be
given
unto
dogs
,
saith
he
;
this
is
a
fine
fetch
to
prove
suspension
indeed
,
if
it
would
hold
,
't
is
certain
the
Sacrament
was
not
spoken
of
in
this
text
at
all
.
Whereas
he
saith
,
He
hopes
it
will
be
granted
him
,
that
the
text
concerns
all
such
holy
things
as
are
betrusted
unto
Ministers
by
God
himself
;
for
it
is
men
that
Christ
speaks
unto
.
See
his
reason
,
Answ.
we
must
grant
him
that
the
text
concerns
all
holy
things
which
Ministers
are
intrusted
with
to
dispense
,
because
they
were
men
that
Christ
spoke
to
,
as
if
all
men
were
intrusted
with
publike
Ordinances
.
And
he
cannot
prove
that
any
of
his
hearers
were
in
Office
to
dispense
holy
things
;
if
he
could
he
would
have
said
Ministers
for
men
,
but
I
shall
proceed
and
come
to
his
second
query
,
What
is
meant
by
Dogs
and
Swine
.
His
answer
to
this
is
something
large
,
in
giving
the
opinion
of
the
learned
;
but
I
shall
not
meddle
with
his
authorities
;
but
to
what
himself
saith
in
his
15
,
16.
pages
,
wherein
he
shews
,
that
the
Scriptures
call
some
men
dogs
in
several
respects
;
but
I
shall
only
examine
those
which
concern
the
argument
in
hand
,
namely
,
who
are
Dogs
and
Swine
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
whom
Ministers
are
forbid
to
give
the
Sacrament
unto
,
and
allow
them
the
benefit
of
all
the
other
Ordinances
.
To
his
1
,
2
,
3.
account
,
let
the
indifferent
reader
look
unto
his
quotations
,
and
he
will
be
satisfied
,
that
they
concern
not
the
argument
in
hand
.
His
4.
is
,
Wicked
men
both
in
the
Old
Testament
,
Prov.
26.11
.
and
in
the
New
,
2
Pet.
2.22
.
are
called
dogs
,
because
as
the
dog
filthily
licks
up
his
vomit
again
,
&c.
That
of
Solomon
is
this
,
Answ.
As
a
dog
returns
to
his
vomit
,
so
a
fool
returns
to
his
folly
.
Every
fool
is
not
a
wicked
man
,
yet
every
wicked
man
is
a
fool
in
Scripture
sense
I
think
:
but
it
doth
not
follow
,
that
every
wicked
gracelesse
man
is
a
dog
,
though
he
may
have
some
properties
like
the
properties
of
a
dog
,
but
this
is
a
different
property
from
that
in
the
text
,
and
nothing
to
the
purpose
.
That
of
Peter
is
meant
of
Apostates
,
falling
from
the
Truth
and
profession
of
faith
once
embraced
,
like
those
that
St.
Paul
prophesies
of
,
men
shall
arise
from
among
your selves
,
speaking
perverse
things
,
and
shall
draw
disciples
after
them
,
such
as
these
Peter
speaks
of
,
that
turn
from
the
Truth
unto
Error
,
and
upon
that
account
take
upon
them
to
be
Teachers
,
that
they
may
vent
their
damnable
heresies
,
&c.
and
so
fall
away
from
the
true
Church
,
either
to
their
former
vomit
of
Heathenism
,
or
to
wallow
in
the
mire
of
their
former
sensuality
;
such
need
not
to
be
suspended
,
that
fall
off
from
the
Church
of
themselves
.
This
will
not
reach
the
argument
in
hand
as
to
our
case
.
His
5.
is
,
Heathens
are
called
dogs
,
Mat.
7.27
.
and
we
will
yeild
the
argument
so
far
.
His
last
is
,
Sinners
in
general
are
called
dogs
,
Phil.
3.2
.
Beware
of
dogs
,
where
he
means
false
teachers
,
rightly
called
dogs
,
saith
Musculus
.
This
is
fine
,
Answ.
false
Teachers
are
rightly
called
Dogs
from
his
quotation
,
as
he
prove●
by
reverend
Musculus
;
and
yet
this
he
quotes
to
prove
that
sinners
in
general
are
called
dogs
.
What
,
are
all
sinners
in
general
false
Teachers
?
Then
the
grossely
ignorant
are
too
;
And
if
false
Teachers
that
pervert
and
trouble
the
Church
be
rightly
called
dogs
,
then
offending
brethren
that
adhere
to
the
doctrine
and
profession
of
the
Church
are
but
falsely
called
dogs
;
for
they
are
to
be
admonished
as
brethren
.
Let
Mr.
Collins
shew
us
some
Scriptures
to
prove
that
Church-members
,
disciples
or
any
one
that
is
called
a
brother
,
and
within
,
that
is
an
object
of
Church-censures
,
is
any
where
called
a
dog
.
Doth
not
himself
say
,
that
one
that
was
excommunicate
was
to
be
admonished
as
a
brother
,
according
unto
2
Thes.
3.15
?
And
doth
not
the
Apostle
allow
a
disorderly
member
the
title
of
a
brother
?
And
would
not
have
such
counted
an
en●my
,
or
dog
,
(
which
Mr.
Collins
makes
of
all
sinners
in
general
)
as
before
:
And
so
himself
too
,
if
he
be
a
sinner
,
which
I
believe
he
will
confesse
that
he
is
:
but
me
thinks
if
Mr.
Collins
will
allow
a
disorderly
stubborn
sinner
under
excommunication
to
be
a
brother
,
(
for
so
he
takes
that
quotation
)
then
he
hath
little
reason
to
count
a
member
under
the
indulgence
of
the
Church
a
dog
,
or
a
swine
.
The
truth
is
,
he
is
so
miserably
out
,
I
think
he
did
not
know
what
he
writ
;
and
he
had
need
have
a
better
head
then
mine
to
bring
all
his
ends
together
in
this
argument
,
they
are
so
wide
one
from
another
;
and
the
Church
and
World
so
confounded
into
one
,
that
I
cannot
tell
what
to
make
of
him
;
For
if
we
say
,
(
saith
he
)
that
by
dogs
are
meant
the
Heathen
,
as
Mark.
7.27
.
Then
either
those
only
,
or
those
amongst
others
.
(2)
.
If
we
say
the
latter
,
then
they
yeeld
it
.
What
doth
he
mean
by
Heathen
amongst
others
,
Answ.
but
the
ignorant
and
offending
brethren
in
the
Church
?
Thus
you
see
they
must
be
the
dogs
in
the
text
,
or
else
he
will
make
Heathens
of
professing
Christians
in
the
Church
to
doe
it
.
I
but
if
we
say
that
the
Heathen
are
the
only
dogs
to
whom
only
holy
things
should
be
denyed
,
then
holy
things
may
be
given
unto
Persecutors
and
the
Excommunicate
.
1.
Answ.
I
have
denyed
that
all
holy
things
are
there
meant
,
and
given
my
reasons
.
2.
That
the
text
is
not
directed
unto
Ministers
properly
,
but
unto
private
Believers
or
hearers
of
Christ
.
3.
That
which
is
holy
,
is
to
be
understood
of
private
reproofs
and
admonitions
,
which
for
the
safety
of
their
persons
,
living
amongst
such
Dogs
,
and
Wolves
,
as
the
unbelieving
cruel
Pharisees
,
Priests
and
people
of
the
Jews
,
then
so
called
by
Christ
.
And
here
they
are
cautioned
not
to
meddle
with
them
,
&c.
4.
This
counsel
is
directed
unto
the
whole
Church
or
Brotherhood
touching
their
dealing
with
others
,
that
were
Persecutors
and
fierce
dogged
enemies
to
the
Christian
profesfion
;
and
is
not
at
all
applyable
to
persons
in
the
Church
,
in
respect
of
publick
administrations
,
the
which
all
in
the
Church
are
commanded
to
observe
;
nor
is
our
Saviours
reason
of
any
force
for
any
in
the
Church
,
(
lest
they
turn
again
and
rent
you
)
nor
applyable
to
the
publike
Ordinances
;
for
there
is
not
any
that
will
rent
you
for
administring
unto
them
the
Word
,
Sacrament
,
and
prayer
,
in
the
Church
;
if
any
will
doe
so
,
let
the
Church
judge
them
for
it
.
5.
I
grant
that
by
dogs
is
meant
cruel
persecutors
,
that
at
any
time
shall
rent
and
ruine
the
persons
of
those
that
professe
the
true
Christian
Religion
.
And
this
may
be
done
by
some
that
are
not
Heathens
,
for
there
are
many
mis-believers
and
false
teachers
,
that
where
they
are
backt
with
power
,
(
as
in
the
Papacy
)
are
cruel
dogs
against
the
Professors
of
the
true
Religion
:
but
yet
it
does
not
follow
,
that
any
that
profeesse
themselves
members
of
our
Church
are
the
dogs
meant
in
the
text
.
It
's
true
,
we
have
had
our
differences
amongst
our selves
,
about
some
circumstances
and
inconvenient
Ceremonies
,
about
the
ordering
of
Worship
.
And
our
first
Reformers
put
us
in
a
way
for
discipline
,
confirmed
by
the
Supreme
Authority
of
this
Nation
.
And
those
that
had
the
exercise
of
the
Churches
discipline
,
have
been
severe
in
punishing
those
that
have
not
been
obedient
unto
her
commands
;
and
we
know
they
abused
their
power
in
some
cases
too
much
,
under
the
pretence
of
singular
good
ends
:
Namely
,
the
order
,
peace
,
unity
,
and
edification
of
the
whole
,
to
prevent
the
common
mischief
of
factions
,
schisin
,
divisions
,
erroneous
doctrine
,
and
the
like
,
without
which
,
in
a
Church
these
evils
will
abound
.
Now
I
say
,
it
is
not
very
handsome
for
Mr.
Collins
,
that
professes
himself
a
younger
son
of
the
Church
,
to
account
the
Rulers
of
our
Church
Persecutors
;
much
lesse
the
common
people
for
adhering
unto
their
Governours
and
Teachers
:
as
they
shall
have
better
Rulers
,
and
Teachers
,
I
question
not
but
we
shall
finde
them
better
disposed
;
how
ever
this
is
a
far
different
case
to
the
cruel
unbelieving
Jewes
,
and
Hereticall
bloudy
Papists
,
and
yet
neither
of
them
Pagans
.
6.
I
affirm
,
That
as
all
other
Scripture
,
so
this
,
in
special
,
is
written
for
our
learning
and
use
;
and
it
alwayes
holds
in
the
same
,
or
like
cases
,
or
reason
.
Whether
unto
the
desperate
irreproveable
Ruffian
in
the
Church
,
or
of
the
bloudy
Persecutors
out
of
the
Church
,
Jews
,
Turks
,
or
Papists
:
and
yet
I
say
also
,
that
whomsoever
upon
tasting
of
them
,
we
finde
them
of
peaceable
spirits
,
whether
they
be
in
the
Church
or
out
of
the
Church
,
we
should
reprove
,
instruct
,
admonish
and
warn
every
sinner
,
to
flye
the
wrath
to
come
:
And
this
we
ought
to
doe
towards
all
,
in
our
places
and
callings
as
private
Christians
.
And
hence
I
conceive
that
Mr.
Collins
is
hugely
mistaken
,
that
stretcheth
the
metaphor
of
dogs
,
to
any
kinde
of
sinners
that
the
Scriptures
compare
to
dogs
,
for
other
kinde
of
properties
of
dogs
,
as
worthlesnesse
,
greedinesse
,
barking
,
or
licking
up
their
vomit
,
&c.
the
text
is
of
such
dogs
that
will
tear
and
scorn
you
for
the
best
counsel
you
can
give
them
for
the
good
of
their
souls
.
And
me
thinks
,
that
the
same
ground
Mr.
Collins
goes
upon
to
allow
all
the
other
holy
things
unto
Heathens
,
the
Excomunicate
,
&c.
might
satisfie
him
,
as
rationally
to
allow
the
Sacrament
unto
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
in
the
Church
:
all
that
he
pleads
to
the
other
is
from
some
other
Scripture
warrant
;
and
I
appeal
unto
the
Impartial
to
judge
between
us
,
whether
Pastors
and
Teachers
of
their
respective
flocks
,
be
not
as
much
bound
by
Christs
command
to
administer
the
holy
Supper
unto
their
particular
flocks
,
consisting
of
Church-members
,
disciples
,
baptized
and
not
excommunicated
,
as
to
administer
the
other
holy
Ordinances
unto
Heathen
,
the
Excommunicate
,
&c.
I
think
I
have
said
enough
as
to
the
former
from
Mat.
28.20
.
to
give
full
satisfaction
.
Let
me
tell
our
Author
and
the
world
,
that
although
it
be
sufficiently
taught
in
the
holy
Sciptures
to
deny
the
unbaptized
and
Excommunicate
the
holy
Supper
;
yet
this
text
in
debate
doth
not
forbid
it
at
all
to
those
that
are
without
,
or
under
Church
censures
;
much
lesse
doth
it
forbid
the
Sacrament
to
those
that
are
within
,
which
is
the
thing
Mr.
Collins
quotes
it
to
prove
.
And
thus
in
short
I
have
answered
to
the
main
of
Mr.
Collins
strength
,
as
touching
this
place
.
And
I
humbly
conceive
have
broke
his
argument
drawn
from
this
text
to
make
good
his
principal
Syllogism
,
pag.
4.
That
there
may
be
some
baptized
persons
in
the
Church
,
not
cast
out
,
to
whom
the
Sacrament
may
not
lawfully
be
given
.
And
he
must
quit
himself
a
great
deal
better
(
then
in
his
book
)
to
make
good
his
two
propositions
from
this
text
,
before
he
can
conclude
any
thing
for
his
purpose
.
And
truly
I
think
it
was
an
acceptable
service
(
both
to
God
and
the
poor
Church
)
in
Mr.
Boteman
,
who
so
presently
addrest
himself
to
redeem
a
captive
text
,
so
wofully
wrested
to
perplex
and
disturb
the
poor
Churches
peace
,
in
seting
up
an
invention
of
men
,
which
Jesu●
Christ
commanded
not
.
And
for
his
assumption
,
That
the
Sacrament
is
a
holy
thing
,
and
a
Pearl
;
and
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
cast
out
,
who
in
Scripture
phrase
are
Dogs
and
Swine
.
Ergo
,
&c.
It
's
true
,
Answ.
1
the
Sacrament
is
a
holy
thing
;
but
it
doth
not
therefore
follow
,
that
it
i●
that
which
is
holy
(
meant
in
the
Text
)
nor
forbid
to
be
given
upon
that
reason
our
Saviour
gives
,
for
fear
of
being
rent
,
&c.
And
though
it
be
granted
that
there
are
some
in
the
Church
that
are
such
kinde
of
dogs
,
that
are
irreproveable
,
that
will
not
endure
a
private
reproof
,
it
will
not
follow
that
therefore
they
are
not
to
be
reproved
Ministerially
by
persons
in
Office
in
their
publick
preaching
;
nor
that
they
may
not
authoritatively
be
reproved
and
admonished
,
and
censured
by
the
Church
Juridically
,
for
their
desperate
rayling
dogged
miscarriages
:
if
there
be
any
such
offending
brethren
,
why
are
they
not
dealt
withall
according
unto
the
right
rule
,
Matth.
18.
1
Cor.
5.
If
any
persons
in
the
Church
be
objects
of
Excommunication
,
I
judge
such
are
;
and
then
judge
whether
Suspension
be
sufficient
,
where
Excommunication
should
and
ought
to
take
place
,
provided
they
be
obstinate
:
otherwise
Church
admonition
may
be
a
sufficient
remedy
to
reform
such
scandalous
sinners
.
Hence
judge
how
pertinent
this
text
is
made
use
of
to
prove
suspension
of
some
from
the
Sacrament
,
that
as
members
of
the
Church
may
be
allowed
Communion
with
the
Church
,
in
all
other
spiritual
acts
of
worship
!
How
this
proves
Suspension
of
some
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
I
leave
to
the
freedome
of
your
own
Judgements
to
judge
of
.
In
the
next
place
(
without
any
wrong
to
the
Author
)
I
shall
examine
his
third
Scripture
argument
deducible
from
1
Cor.
5.
rather
choosing
to
follow
the
Apostles
order
in
this
Epistle
,
because
by
answering
of
this
first
,
it
will
save
me
some
labour
in
my
answer
to
his
second
,
1
Cor.
10.17
.
His
Argument
is
this
,
It
is
unlawfull
for
the
Officers
of
the
Church
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
such
with
whom
it
is
unlawful
for
themselves
or
their
brethren
to
eat
.
But
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
cast
out
,
with
whom
it
may
be
unlawful
for
the
Church
to
eat
.
Ergo.
I
question
the
truth
of
his
first
proposition
,
Answ.
1
by
distinguishing
of
a
friendly
familiar
unnecessary
eating
,
and
of
a
true
necessary
eating
.
Now
in
a
civil
sense
,
I
may
not
have
friendly
unnecessary
familiarity
with
scandalous
brethren
,
though
not
cast
out
,
but
may
withdraw
from
all
friendly
unnecessary
familiarity
from
such
,
as
a
means
to
bring
them
to
shame
;
but
it
does
not
follow
therefore
,
that
I
upon
my
necessary
occasions
in
my
Calling
must
shun
such
,
but
that
I
may
set
such
a
one
a
work
,
and
admit
him
to
my
Table
he
being
not
cast
out
,
though
scandalous
,
or
a
poor
man
may
work
for
a
scandalous
rich
man
,
and
eat
at
his
Table
with
him
,
&c.
or
upon
a
journey
,
and
divers
such
cases
,
with
relations
,
&c.
Therefore
the
same
persons
that
I
may
not
eat
with
,
the
same
persons
I
may
eat
with
,
so
that
if
the
Apostle
in
1
Cor.
5.11
.
mean
but
civill
eating
,
his
first
proposition
is
not
good
,
nor
very
clear
,
which
he
would
have
his
Reader
to
believe
without
any
doubt
,
or
proof
.
If
we
may
eat
with
a
scandalous
brother
not
legally
cast
out
as
before
,
then
we
may
have
company
,
and
eat
with
such
at
the
Sacrament
,
because
giving
and
receiving
at
the
Sacrament
is
our
necessary
duty
as
professing
Christians
,
and
Church-members
,
which
I
have
sufficiently
proved
before
;
the
which
the
worst
offenders
in
the
Church
may
not
carelessely
neglect
,
so
long
as
they
are
in
a
Church
capacity
to
receive
,
and
that
capacity
remains
untill
the
Church
authoritatively
have
put
them
out
of
Church
Communion
as
Members
.
And
then
,
and
not
until
then
,
are
scandalous
brethren
,
disobliged
from
publick
duties
of
worship
:
and
hence
his
argument
that
he
draws
from
the
lesser
to
the
greater
is
fallacious
:
and
that
must
needs
be
the
bottome
of
his
argument
:
For
there
is
but
few
Interpreters
otherwayes
expound
it
,
but
of
a
civil
eating
.
And
himself
seems
most
confident
in
that
argument
in
its
place
.
And
therefore
he
should
have
proved
his
main
proposition
;
namely
,
That
it
is
unlawful
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
those
in
the
Church
not
Excommunicate
,
with
whom
in
some
cases
it
is
unlawful
to
eat
in
a
civil
sense
.
And
for
to
take
it
,
for
not
to
eat
at
the
Sacrament
only
properly
,
as
it
's
too
difficult
to
prove
,
so
it
would
follow
,
that
he
will
prove
the
same
,
by
the
same
;
for
then
the
sense
of
his
proposition
is
this
:
That
it
is
unlawful
to
give
the
Sacrament
unto
such
that
we
may
not
give
the
Sacrament
unto
:
but
there
is
some
not
cast
out
we
may
not
give
the
Sacrament
unto
.
Ergo.
Take
his
argument
in
what
sense
you
can
,
there
is
nothing
in
1
Cor.
5.
to
stand
upon
,
or
in
the
least
to
make
it
good
:
his
proof
of
his
Minor
fals
too
short
.
I
will
grant
him
,
1.
That
there
may
be
such
in
the
Church
,
that
the
Apostle
cals
old
leaven
.
2.
That
it
is
unlawful
for
the
Church
to
connive
at
their
wickednesse
,
that
was
that
old
leaven
,
and
keep
the
Feast
of
the
Lords
Supper
with
them
:
but
what
's
this
for
his
purpose
?
himself
saith
it's
a
plain
case
,
that
the
Apostle
did
chide
the
Corinths
,
in
that
they
did
not
cast
out
the
incestuous
person
,
that
leavened
their
Communion
,
by
Excommunication
,
pag.
35.
in
this
he
sayes
true
,
and
they
of
Corinth
put
this
Decree
into
execution
,
concerning
the
incestuous
person
,
as
the
only
remedy
to
purge
themselves
of
that
leaven
that
sowred
the
whole
,
by
their
connivence
and
sinful
indulgence
.
What
then
?
Does
it
follow
because
they
were
chidden
for
their
neglect
of
exercising
Church-censures
,
therefore
they
were
chidden
for
admistring
the
Sacrament
unto
him
before
he
was
Juridically
put
out
of
all
Communion
with
them
?
If
the
Apostle
had
understood
that
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
only
,
had
been
a
sufficient
remedy
to
purge
the
Church
,
and
reform
the
sinner
,
then
doubtlesse
he
would
have
blamed
them
for
admitting
him
to
the
Sacrament
,
and
he
would
have
given
the
remedy
in
prescribing
a
rule
to
suspend
him
from
the
Sacrament
only
:
but
as
their
whole
Communion
was
leavened
by
their
sinful
indulgence
,
so
they
were
urged
to
cast
that
scandalous
person
out
of
all
Christian
Communion
,
sacred
and
civil
,
with
such
a
one
,
no
not
eat
;
but
how
doth
this
prove
,
that
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
excommunicated
,
with
whom
it's
unlawfull
to
eat
the
Sacrament
?
But
he
goes
on
with
his
proof
of
his
second
thing
.
That
it
is
not
lawful
to
communicate
with
scandalous
sinners
,
let
us
therefore
keep
the
Feast
,
not
with
the
old
leaven
of
malice
and
wickednesse
:
from
hence
is
easily
gathered
,
saith
he
,
that
Christians
ought
not
to
keep
the
feast
with
scandalous
sinners
.
True
,
I
say
so
too
,
Answ.
where
a
Church
is
in
a
capacity
to
deal
with
the
scandalous
Juridically
,
and
thereby
put
them
out
of
all
Christian
Communion
,
as
the
Church
of
Corinth
did
.
But
I
deny
still
,
that
they
were
blamed
for
admitting
such
unto
Gods
Ordinances
before
they
were
Juridically
by
the
censures
of
the
Church
separated
from
the
Congregation
,
Search
and
see
if
you
can
finde
one
syllable
of
a
sentence
in
this
chapter
tending
that
way
.
Mr.
Collins
makes
a
great
deal
of
doe
about
keeping
the
Feast
,
but
at
last
I
think
he
fastens
upon
a
good
honest
safe
interpretation
,
pag.
38.
from
Isai.
25.6
.
Where
the
Lord
promiseth
to
make
a
feast
of
fat
things
unto
all
people
,
Gentiles
,
as
well
as
Jews
;
by
which
,
saith
he
,
is
promised
all
Gospel
Ordinances
,
and
a
holy
Communion
with
them
,
in
all
his
Ordinances
,
&c.
and
hence
the
Sacrament
is
a
part
of
this
Feast
,
&c.
pag.
39.
But
if
that
be
the
sense
,
Answ.
then
upon
his
own
confession
the
Sacrament
is
but
a
part
of
that
Feast
;
Why
,
how
doth
this
prove
then
,
that
we
ought
not
to
keep
the
Feast
with
scandalous
sinners
,
when
Mr.
Collins
allows
scandalous
sinners
the
liberty
of
all
the
other
dishes
and
parts
of
this
Feast
:
but
being
aware
of
this
,
he
addes
,
that
the
Lord●
Supper
is
the
only
proper
Feast
of
this
Feast
,
that
's
his
sense
;
first
he
will
be
honest
,
and
let
every
Gospel
Ordinance
have
a
share
in
this
Feast
,
and
then
attributes
all
to
this
one
,
and
makes
it
the
proper
Feast
of
the
Feast
they
was
to
keep
.
And
he
tels
us
,
Doubtlesse
it
must
be
so
,
because
some
Communion
with
on
incestuous
person
in
other
Ordinances
may
be
allowed
.
Thus
you
see
,
let
the
Scripture
say
what
it
will
;
and
although
Mr.
Collins
is
forced
to
confesse
his
assent
unto
a
rational
sense
,
you
may
see
how
his
private
opinion
and
fancy
draws
him
off
again
,
and
makes
him
venture
to
give
the
denomination
of
this
Feast
to
the
Lords
Supper
only
;
and
it
must
be
so
,
because
against
his
own
reason
and
sense
he
will
have
it
so
;
is
that
a
reason
to
make
it
good
,
for
some
Communion
with
an
incestuous
person
in
other
Ordinances
may
be
allowed
,
directly
contrary
to
the
Apostles
decree
,
and
direction
,
when
he
commands
them
,
To
put
out
from
amongst
your selves
that
wicked
person
,
verse
the
last
.
But
still
the
very
main
thing
of
his
argument
wants
proof
,
That
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
,
not
Excommunicate
,
with
whom
it
is
unlawful
for
the
Church
to
eat
.
In
his
proof
of
this
,
he
must
make
good
these
several
things
.
That
in
this
5.
chap.
1
Cor.
the
Church
was
blamed
for
eating
with
the
scandalous
brother
before
the
Churches
tryal
and
censure
of
Excommunication
was
inflicted
.
That
the
Church
was
not
leavened
for
their
carelesse
connivence
,
and
tolerating
such
a
scandalous
brother
,
but
only
for
admitting
of
him
to
the
Sacrament
.
That
the
Church
of
Corinth
had
done
their
duty
,
if
they
had
only
suspended
him
from
the
Lords
Supper
.
That
we
are
as
much
forbid
the
company
and
civil
friendly
familiarity
in
eating
and
drinking
with
a
scandalous
brother
not
cast
out
,
as
with
an
Excommunicate
person
.
I
shal
refer
my self
to
those
that
are
learned
&
sober
,
if
it
be
not
of
necessity
to
prove
those
things
,
before
he
can
conclude
from
this
Chapter
,
that
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
cast
out
,
with
whom
it
may
be
unlawful
to
eat
the
Sacrament
,
or
that
the
unexcommunicate
members
should
be
suspended
from
the
Sacrament
,
and
allowed
the
liberty
of
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
as
members
.
But
Mr.
Collins
in
stead
of
making
good
his
Argument
,
he
trifles
about
making
that
word
Feast
,
to
be
meant
only
the
Sacrament
,
after
he
hath
granted
it
was
but
a
part
thereof
,
as
it
is
one
Ordinance
with
the
other
of
Gospel
Worship
.
He
quotes
Mr.
Gillespy
,
that
tels
us
this
Feast
cannot
be
restrained
unto
the
Lords
Supper
only
.
And
Mr.
Rutherford
,
that
understands
it
of
Church
Communion
in
the
dainties
of
the
Gospel
.
And
Ravenella
,
that
sayes
it
is
taken
for
all
Gospel
Worship
,
from
Zach.
14.16
,
17
,
18.
and
yet
he
will
goe
beyond
his
own
Authors
,
and
prove
with
reason
beyond
them
all
,
that
by
this
Feast
is
meant
the
Sacrament
only
.
I
confesse
I
had
thought
(
to
prevent
tediousnesse
)
to
have
past
by
his
reasons
;
but
lest
he
should
be
wise
in
his
own
conceit
,
I
shall
take
some
notice
of
them
.
All
he
sayes
amounts
to
this
,
surely
it
were
not
a
civil
Feast
,
nor
a
Mosaical
Feast
,
but
meant
of
some
spiritual
Gospel
Feast
;
and
the
Supper
is
a
part
of
the
Gospel
Feast
,
the
relation
the
text
hath
to
the
Passeover
,
and
the
liberty
of
Communion
with
an
incestuous
person
in
the
other
Ordinances
.
1.
Is
he
sure
that
all
Mosaical
Feasts
were
then
out
of
use
?
2.
That
their
Feasts
of
Charity
may
have
no
reference
to
this
Feast
?
Jude
tels
us
,
that
scandalous
loose
heretical
persons
in
the
Church
were
spots
in
their
Feasts
of
Charity
.
And
this
scandalous
person
is
said
to
leaven
them
,
and
nothing
more
opposite
to
their
Feasts
of
Charity
then
to
feast
together
with
malice
and
wickednesse
.
3.
Is
there
no
difference
to
be
put
between
that
one
Sacrifice
of
Christ
himself
once
for
all
,
and
the
Paschal
Lambe
an
outward
sign
thereof
,
that
the
Apostles
analogie
must
needs
be
restrained
unto
the
Sacrament
succeeding
?
The
rest
have
been
answered
.
Let
him
prove
that
the
Sacrament
is
any
where
called
a
Feast
:
it
doth
not
become
him
to
give
Jesus
Christ
a
nick
name
.
I
must
confesse
for
my
own
part
,
I
most
incline
to
those
that
understand
by
keeping
holy
Communion
in
the
Profession
of
the
Gospel
thoughout
the
whole
course
of
our
lives
,
not
denying
but
that
the
Sacrament
is
involved
in
this
General
of
a
holy
life
.
And
my
reasons
are
these
.
The
Apostles
motive
thus
to
keep
the
Feast
,
holds
unto
all
holy
duties
,
and
to
all
times
:
for
Christ
is
always
our
Passeover
that
was
sacrificed
for
the
Church
.
We
have
alwayes
cause
of
purging
out
the
old
leaven
out
of
our
own
hearts
and
lives
,
and
purging
of
our selves
from
all
sinful
connivence
and
indulging
of
scandalous
brethren
that
leaven
the
whole
,
when
Church
discipline
is
carelessely
out
of
coldnesse
neglected
.
The
rule
or
remedy
prescribed
in
the
text
,
as
touching
scandalous
offenders
to
amend
them
,
is
upon
that
particular
occasion
,
drawn
out
into
a
general
that
holds
always
,
as
I
shall
make
good
in
answer
unto
his
next
argument
drawn
from
this
text
.
But
what
if
I
should
grant
him
what
he
can
never
prove
that
by
Feast
is
meant
the
Sacrament
only
,
will
it
follow
that
scandalous
brethren
must
only
be
left
out
,
or
barely
denyed
the
Sacrament
only
,
when
the
Apostle
chides
the
Church
of
Corinth
,
for
not
grieving
it
so
,
as
to
provoke
them
unto
zeal
,
to
put
away
that
person
from
among
them
,
vers.
2.
Besides
,
if
such
scandalous
sinners
in
the
Church
,
as
the
Apostle
reckons
up
ver.
11.
ought
not
to
be
excommunicate
,
then
not
any
at
all
,
and
is
it
safe
for
the
Church
to
deny
such
the
Sacrament
only
,
whom
they
ought
to
Excommunicate
and
put
out
of
all
Communion
whatsoever
?
Suppose
the
Church
had
done
no
more
,
but
put
that
wicked
person
from
the
Sacrament
,
doe
you
think
they
had
put
that
Apostolical
sentence
into
execution
,
vers.
4.5
.
Let
him
prove
that
ever
any
Church
in
the
Apostles
age
suspended
their
members
from
the
Sacrament
only
,
as
he
would
have
it
.
The
truth
is
,
he
affects
to
draw
up
many
syllogisms
,
but
he
is
not
able
to
prove
any
one
of
them
.
I
could
wish
he
would
either
study
his
things
better
,
or
else
give
over
his
writing
about
this
controversie
.
His
second
Argument
from
this
text
is
this
,
If
there
be
some
in
the
Church
not
yet
cast
out
by
Excommunication
,
who
are
Fornicators
,
or
covetous
,
or
Idolaters
,
or
Raylers
,
or
Drunkards
,
or
Extortioners
,
then
there
may
be
so●e
in
the
Church
with
whom
a
Christian
ought
not
to
eat
the
Lords
Supper
.
But
there
may
be
such
in
the
Church
.
—
Ergo
,
He
sayes
the
Minor
will
easily
be
granted
,
the
Major
is
grounded
on
1
Cor.
5.11
.
And
he
further
sayes
,
all
that
can
be
said
in
this
case
is
,
that
the
eating
there
forbidden
is
not
eating
the
Lords
Supper
:
so
saith
the
friends
of
my
opinion
.
If
no
more
can
be
said
and
proved
but
that
,
Answ.
1
it
's
enough
to
break
his
argument
.
But
he
is
a
little
too
confident
,
and
looks
too
overly
upon
the
Text.
For
1.
the
proof
of
his
major
doth
not
say
that
in
the
Church
of
Corinth
there
were
such
.
But
if
a
man
that
is
called
a
Brother
,
be
a
Fornicator
,
&c.
which
implyes
that
there
may
be
such
in
a
true
Church
,
as
well
as
a
Brother
that
was
an
incestuous
person
.
Suppose
that
there
be
such
in
a
true
Church
,
doth
not
the
Apostle
reminde
them
of
the
rule
,
how
the
Church
should
deal
with
such
,
namely
,
as
with
the
incestuous
person
,
with
such
,
no
,
not
to
eat
,
vers.
11.
and
then
gives
the
reason
,
vers.
12.
for
what
have
I
to
do
,
to
judge
them
that
are
without
?
Doe
not
ye
judge
them
that
are
within
;
but
them
that
are
without
God
judgeth
;
therefore
put
from
among
your selves
that
wicked
person
.
There
was
one
of
their
Church
that
was
actually
guilty
,
others
might
be
:
as
any
shall
be
guilty
of
such
and
such
scandalous
sins
at
any
time
in
the
Church
,
the
Church
ought
to
judge
them
by
putting
them
out
of
all
Communion
,
as
in
that
particular
case
of
incest
.
If
such
as
the
Apostle
nominates
for
scandalous
brethren
be
not
objects
of
excommunication
,
not
only
my self
but
all
reformed
Churches
in
Christendome
are
hugely
out
.
Can
any
have
the
least
shew
of
reason
to
conceive
,
that
the
Apostle
should
be
so
severe
against
an
incestuous
person
,
and
the
Church
for
not
putting
him
away
from
among
them
,
vers.
2.
and
say
nothing
to
their
conniving
and
indulging
an
Adulterer
,
Idolater
,
&c.
That
were
then
such
guilty
persons
known
amongst
them
,
as
he
for
incest
;
or
that
suppose
there
were
such
,
can
we
imagine
that
they
were
suspended
from
the
Sacrament
only
,
as
a
sufficient
punishment
for
those
sins
,
as
Mr.
Collins
would
;
And
so
uppon
the
matter
lose
this
Ordinance
of
Excommunication
,
except
it
be
for
incest
?
Beloved
Friends
,
I
beseech
you
mark
the
Apostles
order
and
scope
,
and
you
may
easily
conceive
his
sense
;
he
had
wrote
an
Epistle
unto
them
before
,
not
to
company
with
fornicators
,
covetous
,
Extortioners
,
or
Idolaters
of
the
world
,
but
upon
this
occasion
of
a
members
miscarriage
in
the
Church
,
in
this
Epistle
he
mollifies
with
lenity
his
former
Epistle
,
and
tels
them
now
,
yet
not
altogether
forbear
company
with
such
&
such
of
the
world
,
for
then
you
must
goe
out
of
the
world
,
but
now
I
have
written
unto
you
,
not
to
keep
company
,
not
to
eat
,
upon
another
stricter
account
,
if
a
Brother
be
such
a
one
as
an
Infidel
Pagan
is
,
put
them
out
of
your
Communion
altogether
.
And
thus
he
drawes
out
a
general
rule
from
this
particular
case
of
the
incestuous
person
;
leaving
the
Infidel
world
to
the
judgement
of
God
,
but
sets
up
a
judging
in
the
Church
for
the
destruction
of
the
flesh
,
that
scandalous
Brethren
may
be
reformed
,
and
their
souls
saved
in
the
day
of
the
Lord
Jesus
;
as
I
have
spoke
already
.
And
if
I
mistake
not
,
Reverend
Calvin
speaks
to
the
same
purpose
,
upon
the
same
place
,
in
his
12.
chap.
4.
book
.
5.
Section
Of
his
Institutions
.
Upon
the
second
end
of
Excommunication
.
'T
is
true
,
he
sayes
,
in
the
administration
of
the
Supper
choise
is
greatly
requisite
,
which
yet
(
saith
he
)
cannot
be
had
but
by
the
Jurisdiction
of
the
Church
.
Then
in
the
second
end
,
least
(
as
it
is
wont
to
come
to
passe
)
with
the
continual
company
of
the
evill
,
the
good
should
be
corrupted
.
This
end
the
Apostle
touched
,
when
he
commanded
the
Corinths
to
put
the
incestuous
person
out
of
their
company
.
A
little
leaven
(
saith
he
)
corrupts
the
whole
.
And
he
foresaw
herein
so
great
a
danger
that
he
forbad
him
all
fellowship
,
and
so
applyes
the
11.
verse
to
the
same
with
the
incestuous
person
.
If
any
Brother
be
either
a
whoremonger
,
or
an
Idolater
,
&c.
with
such
a
one
I
grant
you
not
leave
,
so
much
as
to
eat
.
Therefore
you
may
clearly
conceive
that
Calvin
applyes
that
particular
instance
to
be
spoke
of
all
other
,
the
Apostle
names
in
the
11.
verse
:
this
Reverend
Author
would
have
none
debarred
the
Sacrament
,
but
by
the
Jurisdiction
of
the
Church
,
nor
have
any
Excommunicate
for
lesser
sins
,
when
the
severity
of
words
authoritatively
will
amend
them
:
but
when
they
grievously
offend
the
Church
;
they
ought
for
a
time
to
be
deprived
of
the
Communion
of
the
Supper
,
till
they
have
given
assurance
of
their
repentance
;
his
ground
is
1
Cor.
5.5
.
thus
explaining
himself
,
for
against
the
Corinthian
Paul
useth
not
only
rebuking
of
words
,
but
driveth
him
out
of
the
Church
,
&c.
What
's
this
but
Excommunication
?
and
yet
Mr.
Collins
quotes
this
very
place
to
prove
suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
in
his
pag.
140
,
141.
If
he
deal
thus
with
his
authority
,
he
makes
such
a
noyse
withall
,
no
wonder
they
be
not
all
of
his
opinion
.
Then
he
quotes
Vrsin
,
which
I
desire
in
brief
to
to
give
you
an
account
of
,
he
concludes
that
Vrsin
is
for
suspension
.
1.
Because
he
makes
Excommunication
the
last
remedy
.
2.
Because
he
hath
given
fourteen
reasons
to
prove
that
scandalous
persons
ought
to
be
kept
from
the
holy
Supper
.
1.
He
hath
not
a
word
of
suspension
.
Answ.
2.
Must
the
last
remedy
necessarily
imply
suspension
,
why
not
severity
of
words
,
private
and
publike
admonition
,
&c.
And
to
his
second
,
he
gives
fourteen
arguments
to
prove
that
the
Power
of
the
Keys
is
necessary
in
the
Church
.
And
Mr.
Collins
tels
his
Reader
they
are
to
keep
the
scandalous
from
the
Sacrament
:
but
he
deals
with
his
Author
as
he
doth
with
Scriptures
.
But
as
touching
this
Reverend
Author
,
for
my
purpose
;
1.
He
admits
of
no
other
proceedings
in
the
discipline
of
the
Church
,
but
according
to
that
known
rule
Matth.
18.15
.
and
that
in
all
cases
of
scandal
and
open
ungodlinesse
.
2.
Not
to
proceed
unto
Excommunication
,
but
in
point
of
obstinacy
persisted
in
.
3.
He
defines
Excommunication
to
be
the
banishing
of
a
grievous
transgressor
,
or
an
open
ungodly
and
obstinate
person
from
the
fellowship
of
the
faithful
,
by
the
judgement
of
the
Elders
,
and
consent
of
the
Church
,
and
by
the
Authority
of
Christ
,
and
by
the
holy
Scriptures
,
and
then
sayes
,
when
the
Church
pronounceth
of
any
that
they
are
not
godly
,
they
must
be
excommunicated
,
and
not
admitted
unto
the
Sacrament
,
&c.
in
his
5.
question
upon
the
Keyes
of
the
Kingdome
.
Thus
you
may
conceive
this
quotation
of
his
,
directly
proves
that
Excommunication
is
that
which
debars
scandalous
sinners
from
the
Sacrament
,
and
not
suspension
,
as
Mr.
Collins
would
falsely
have
it
be
.
By
this
time
the
Reader
may
easily
judge
what
foundation
Mr.
Collins
hath
deducted
his
argument
from
:
he
first
mistakes
the
text
,
and
then
rayses
his
argument
;
and
thus
he
hath
built
a
Castle
in
the
ayr
.
And
before
he
can
conclude
any
thing
to
suspend
scandalous
brethren
from
the
Sacrament
,
from
1
Cor.
5.11
.
he
must
prove
that
those
that
the
Apostle
speaks
of
,
were
not
Excommunicate
,
or
that
he
speaks
to
the
case
of
scandalous
brethren
in
the
Church
,
in
the
want
of
Church
Discipline
.
I
must
confesse
with
grief
of
heart
,
that
his
Minor
is
true
,
that
there
are
such
scandalous
sinners
in
o●●
Church
,
that
the
Apostle
doth
instance
i●
1
Cor.
5.11
.
and
not
Excommunicate
;
but
where
doth
any
Scripture
forbid
to
keep
company
,
not
to
eat
,
as
in
case
they
were
Juridically
Excommunicate
?
A
difference
must
be
made
between
a
Brother
under
Church
toleration
,
and
a
brother
under
Church
Excommunication
,
or
else
Church
censures
are
meerly
superfluous
;
and
to
n●
purpose
,
if
we
be
as
much
bound
to
withdraw
Communion
to
the
one
,
as
to
the
other
,
in
respect
of
holy
and
civil
fellowship
together
.
So
that
his
dispute
about
not
keep
company
,
not
to
eat
,
with
scandalous
Brethren
not
Excommunicate
,
is
nothing
at
all
to
the
Text
,
nor
to
his
Argument
,
for
we
are
all
agreed
in
this
,
that
the
Excommunicate
person
may
not
come
to
the
Sacrament
,
nor
during
that
censure
,
may
we
keep
company
,
and
as
Calvin
renders
it
,
the
Apostle
would
not
grant
them
leave
so
much
as
to
eat
with
such
,
(
the
necessity
of
relation
excepted
)
but
as
touching
an
offender
in
the
Church
not
Juridically
proceeded
against
,
Mr.
Collins
doubts
not
,
nor
any
that
are
sober
,
but
upon
our
necessary
occasions
as
our
several
callings
lead
us
unto
,
we
may
keep
company
,
we
may
eat
,
and
take
more
liberty
of
familiarity
with
such
then
with
Heathens
,
did
we
live
amongst
them
as
the
Corinthians
did
.
Yet
doubtlesse
all
unnecessary
intimate
friendly
familiarity
is
to
be
declined
with
scandalous
brethren
,
the
Church
not
being
in
a
capacity
to
judge
them
,
or
neglects
her
duty
through
carelesnesse
:
but
this
is
more
then
this
text
will
bear
too
,
but
yet
is
consonant
unto
other
parts
of
holy
Scriptures
,
&c.
From
the
Apostles
scope
in
this
chapter
,
I
shall
assert
these
things
.
That
Church
censures
are
of
such
necessity
,
that
without
which
the
well
being
of
a
true
Church
cannot
be
.
If
the
Church
of
Corinth
were
leavened
with
indulging
of
one
scandalous
Brother
,
what
may
we
judge
of
our selves
that
tolerate
and
connive
at
thousands
for
want
of
the
severity
of
true
discipline
?
If
the
Church
of
Corinth
was
thus
chidden
by
the
Apostle
for
their
neglect
of
Discipline
unto
one
scandalous
member
,
What
chiding
deserve
they
that
have
pluckt
up
the
discipline
of
the
Church
,
and
have
laid
all
wast
,
and
left
our
offending
Brethren
to
perish
in
their
sinful
courses
,
for
want
of
the
right
way
and
remedy
to
reform
them
that
their
souls
may
be
saved
?
That
a
true
Church
of
Christ
may
possibly
have
such
scandalous
members
in
it
,
as
the
Apostle
enumerates
in
the
11.
verse
.
That
scandalous
persons
in
the
Church
,
ought
to
have
the
title
of
Brethren
,
and
to
be
differenced
from
the
Infidel
world
,
vers.
11.
That
lesse
familiarity
in
civil
and
sacred
Communion
is
allowed
to
the
Excommunicate
,
then
unto
scandalous
sinners
out
of
the
Church
,
vers.
10
,
11.
That
the
Apostle
urgeth
a
general
rule
for
the
excommunicating
of
all
scandalous
brethren
in
the
Church
,
upon
that
occasion
of
the
incestuous
person
.
That
the
main
and
proper
end
of
Excommunication
,
is
the
reforming
of
a
sinner
,
and
salvation
of
his
soul
.
Here
is
not
one
word
in
this
Chapter
for
Suspension
from
the
Sacrament
only
;
Nay
,
the
Church
is
not
blamed
for
their
giving
the
Sacrament
to
that
incestuous
member
,
but
for
not
punishing
him
for
his
sin
by
excommunication
:
hence
we
may
doe
things
that
are
commanded
and
lawful
with
scandalous
brethren
not
cast
out
by
Excommunication
.
Although
this
incestuous
person
was
in
Church
Communion
and
fellowship
with
them
in
all
the
Ordinances
,
yet
the
Apostle
in
the
10.
chapter
tels
them
vers.
17.
We
being
many
are
one
bread
and
one
body
,
for
we
are
all
partakers
of
that
one
bread
,
meaning
the
Sacrament
;
and
the
incestuous
person
was
one
of
that
all
,
and
they
were
commended
for
keeping
the
Ordinances
of
the
Church
,
chap.
11.2
.
and
not
blamed
nor
punished
for
any
such
cause
,
as
their
admitting
of
an
incestuous
person
;
nor
was
he
punished
with
others
that
the
Lord
was
angry
with
,
for
the
profaning
his
Ordinance
in
the
very
time
of
that
observance
;
therefore
it
's
not
well
doing
in
one
that
is
scandalous
and
not
cast
out
,
that
doe
leaven
the
whole
,
but
his
doing
and
living
in
that
which
is
wicked
,
and
being
let
alone
through
Church
negligence
,
that
leavens
the
lump
.
The
Apostle
no
where
saith
,
if
one
that
is
called
a
Brother
be
an
ignorant
person
or
unregenerate
,
or
one
that
cannot
pray
ex
tempore
,
&c.
with
such
doe
not
eat
,
but
he
instances
in
scandalous
sins
only
.
I
confesse
Mr.
Collins
hath
a
great
many
words
about
this
,
no
not
eat
with
such
,
which
had
he
applyed
to
a
Brother
Excommunicate
,
it
would
be
yeelded
him
;
but
his
argument
is
a
different
thing
;
for
it
's
of
a
Brother
not
cast
out
by
Excommunication
.
1.
Can
any
disoblige
a
brother
from
his
necessary
duties
of
instituted
Worship
,
that
is
not
under
the
binding
power
of
the
keyes
of
Christs
Kingdome
?
2.
Are
we
as
much
to
decline
friendly
familiarity
to
a
scandalous
brother
within
,
and
not
so
much
as
brought
to
his
tryal
,
as
to
one
that
is
cast
out
for
continuing
obstinate
in
his
sin
?
3.
As
the
case
doth
not
hold
so
much
as
to
necessary
company
,
and
civil
eating
,
(
as
hath
been
hinted
)
much
lesse
will
it
hold
in
duties
of
commanded
worship
.
Christs
commands
are
of
more
force
to
oblige
his
visible
subjects
,
then
the
private
prohibitions
of
a
single
Pastor
with
his
intruded
Elders
.
It
's
true
,
they
can
excommunicate
,
as
well
as
suspend
from
the
Sacrament
;
but
I
humbly
desire
such
to
be
sure
that
they
are
intrusted
with
the
exercise
of
Church
Discipline
of
binding
and
loosing
,
before
they
put
it
into
execution
.
Now
I
shall
examine
what
he
hath
drawn
from
1
Cor.
10.21
.
to
prove
suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
;
his
argument
is
this
:
It
is
unlawful
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
those
that
cannot
eat
or
drink
it
,
but
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
(
not
excommunicated
)
who
cannot
drink
of
the
Lords
Cup.
—
Ergo.
In
his
explaining
the
tearms
,
he
understands
cannot
eat
,
in
a
moral
sense
,
and
then
the
sense
is
,
you
cannot
lawfully
and
warrantably
eat
and
drink
the
Cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
the
cup
of
Devils
:
the
sum
of
all
is
,
1.
Such
as
God
hath
forbidden
to
come
to
that
Ordinance
.
Or
,
2.
Such
as
if
they
rush
upon
the
Ordinance
,
yet
can
have
no
Communion
with
Christ
,
no
benefit
by
it
:
this
he
makes
to
be
the
sense
,
and
then
doubts
not
but
he
shall
make
good
his
argument
,
pag.
27
,
28
,
29.
Give
me
leave
to
search
into
the
Apostles
sense
,
and
then
examine
how
Mr.
Answ.
1
Collins
and
the
holy
Apostle
doe
agree
in
the
sense
of
this
Text
,
1
Cor.
10.21
.
I
have
said
something
unto
this
already
upon
another
account
;
I
will
be
as
brief
as
I
can
.
This
is
the
fourth
publick
fault
the
Apostle
deals
with
the
Corinthians
about
.
First
,
he
chides
them
for
their
factious
respect
had
about
their
Ministers
,
upon
which
they
ran
into
divisions
,
and
making
of
parties
,
chap.
1.3
.
Secondly
,
he
chides
them
for
indulging
and
tolerating
a
known
member
amongst
them
in
an
incestuous
marriage
,
which
hath
been
largely
handled
,
chap.
5.
Thirdly
,
he
chides
them
for
their
unnecessary
suits
of
Law
,
Brother
with
Brother
in
Infidel
Courts
before
Heathen
Judges
.
Fourthly
,
he
blames
them
for
eating
of
things
offered
in
Sacrifice
unto
Idols
,
at
their
Idolatrous
Festivals
in
the
Idol
Temple
,
chap.
8.
And
to
that
end
he
might
reform
them
,
and
take
them
off
that
were
guilty
;
as
in
the
other
different
faults
,
he
applyed
himself
unto
them
with
different
remedies
,
and
means
of
reforming
,
(
which
would
be
too
tedious
to
speak
unto
)
so
here
in
this
as
it
is
a
different
fault
he
deals
with
the
offenders
in
a
different
way
to
the
former
.
His
concession
with
them
,
that
the
thing
it self
(
to
them
that
had
knowledge
)
was
not
simply
a
sin
:
for
an
Idol
was
nothing
,
and
unto
them
there
was
but
one
God
,
and
meat
commends
not
unto
God
,
though
they
had
this
knowledge
,
and
stood
upon
their
liberty
,
he
tels
them
,
If
you
doe
eat
,
you
are
not
the
better
,
if
you
doe
not
eat
,
you
are
never
the
better
,
vers.
4.8
.
But
then
he
tels
them
that
this
practice
was
dangerous
and
of
evill
consequence
in
respect
of
some
circumstances
.
1.
In
respect
of
the
Heathen
that
out
of
conscience
eat
it
,
as
a
thing
offered
unto
the
Idol
,
the
presence
of
Christians
emboldened
them
in
their
Idolatry
.
2.
In
respect
of
weak
Brethren
,
that
have
not
that
clear
knowledge
in
the
nature
of
the
thing
it self
,
as
some
had
;
which
upon
such
Precedents
was
ready
to
venture
upon
the
same
practice
,
and
not
having
knowledge
of
himself
,
his
conscience
were
defiled
by
the
liberty
and
practice
of
the
other
,
v.
10.
and
so
by
consequence
it
became
a
sin
unto
the
strong
,
vers.
12.
&c.
3.
Then
he
comes
to
perswade
with
them
to
forbear
that
practice
upon
several
considerations
and
reasons
.
1.
He
urges
Christian
Charity
in
order
unto
the
edification
of
others
,
before
knowledge
in
their
liberty
,
so
as
to
use
it
to
the
prejudice
of
the
weak
.
2.
Tels
them
his
own
tendernesse
in
such
a
case
,
rather
then
he
by
meat
should
make
his
brother
to
offend
,
he
would
eat
no
flesh
while
the
world
stands
.
3.
Then
commends
unto
them
himself
and
Barnabas
,
for
an
ensample
in
another
case
,
ch.
9.
That
although
they
had
power
as
well
as
other
Apostles
,
to
marry
,
&
require
maintenance
from
them
,
which
was
no
more
then
Christ
had
ordained
and
appointed
for
the
Preachers
of
the
Gospel
,
yet
they
used
not
this
power
,
nor
required
any
such
maintenance
from
them
:
and
though
he
was
free
from
all
,
yet
he
became
servant
unto
all
,
to
the
Jew
he
became
a
Jew
,
to
the
weak
he
became
as
weak
,
that
he
might
save
some
;
and
this
he
did
for
the
Gospel
sake
,
&c.
and
then
applyes
it
,
Know
ye
not
that
they
which
run
in
a
race
run
all
,
even
so
run
that
you
may
obtain
;
even
as
himself
denyed
himself
in
many
things
(
which
he
might
have
lookt
after
)
for
their
sakes
and
the
Gospels
;
looking
for
a
better
prize
or
reward
hereafter
,
so
he
would
have
them
to
deny
themselves
in
some
things
,
that
they
might
doe
,
rather
then
to
cause
their
Brother
to
offend
so
uncharitably
,
But
in
the
10.
chapter
he
comes
more
close
,
and
addes
several
arguments
taken
from
their
relation
they
had
to
God
,
as
they
were
of
his
Church
and
people
,
and
invested
with
such
priviledges
of
gifts
and
graces
,
and
of
Church
Ordinances
,
in
which
they
had
Communion
with
Christ
,
and
one
with
another
,
as
he
instances
in
Sacramental
Communion
,
&c.
Well
this
he
yeelds
unto
them
,
and
then
draws
his
argument
,
1.
From
the
Church
of
the
Jews
;
they
were
related
unto
God
as
near
as
we
can
be
,
and
they
had
the
same
Sacraments
and
other
peculiar
Ordinances
of
Gods
own
prescribing
;
yet
notwithstanding
the
Lord
often
punished
them
for
their
sins
,
I
and
for
as
small
sins
as
some
of
them
were
guilty
of
;
and
therefore
he
would
have
the
Corinthians
(
and
all
others
)
be
warned
and
admonished
by
such
precedents
of
Gods
severity
towards
his
own
;
the
particular
instances
thereof
are
written
for
our
admonition
.
Wherefore
let
him
that
think
he
stands
,
take
caution
,
lest
he
fals
.
It
's
a
dangerous
thing
to
goe
to
the
outside
of
your
liberty
,
and
to
put
your selves
upon
such
dangerous
temptations
,
as
to
go
into
the
Idol
Temple
to
feast
with
Idolaters
.
Gods
people
before
time
have
been
drawn
into
Idolatry
by
such
temptations
;
and
so
might
they
.
And
yet
see
the
tendernesse
and
the
good
opinion
the
Apostle
had
of
them
,
he
mingles
his
sharp
with
some
sweet
,
telling
them
,
that
although
some
of
them
had
miscarryed
,
in
this
very
thing
,
yet
there
hath
no
temptation
taken
you
but
what
is
common
unto
frail
imperfect
man
:
but
God
is
faithfull
,
who
will
not
suffer
you
to
be
tempted
above
that
ye
are
able
,
&c.
And
hence
exhorts
to
decline
the
temptation
,
v.
14.
Wherefore
my
beloved
Brethren
flee
from
Idolatry
:
Two
things
to
be
noted
,
1.
He
doth
not
call
them
Idolaters
,
but
his
beloved
Brethren
that
were
guilty
of
this
fault
.
2.
He
doth
not
charge
them
with
flat
Idolatry
,
but
is
earnest
to
perswade
them
to
flee
the
temptations
,
appearances
,
occasions
of
Idolatry
.
He
spake
unto
wise
men
,
that
as
they
gave
offence
this
way
,
so
they
were
able
to
judge
of
his
arguments
and
manner
of
dealing
with
them
;
still
yeelding
unto
them
their
deserts
,
that
his
arguments
might
the
better
take
with
them
to
reform
them
:
but
still
goes
on
with
further
considerations
,
that
might
further
convince
them
,
and
be
prevailing
to
reform
the
evil
,
by
commending
unto
them
the
consideration
of
their
Sacramental
Communion
,
vers.
16
,
17.
comprehending
all
,
The
cup
of
blessing
which
we
blesse
,
is
it
not
the
Communion
of
the
bloud
of
Christ
?
Doubtlesse
it
was
unto
the
whole
Church
in
a
Sacramental
sense
,
as
follows
,
For
we
being
many
are
one
bread
,
and
one
body
,
for
we
are
all
partakers
of
that
one
bread
,
even
those
that
were
in
fault
were
a
part
of
that
(
many
)
and
(
all
)
we
are
all
partakers
of
that
one
Sacramental
bread
,
and
consequently
of
Christ
Sacramentally
;
as
he
gives
a
proof
thereof
,
vers.
18.
Behold
Israel
after
the
flesh
,
are
not
they
which
eat
of
the
Sacrifices
partakers
of
the
Altar
?
this
they
could
not
deny
,
but
must
yeeld
it
,
What
say
I
then
?
that
the
Idoll
is
any
thing
?
or
that
which
is
offered
in
Sacrifice
to
Idols
is
any
thing
?
He
grants
them
that
still
which
they
so
much
stood
upon
,
but
yet
he
saith
,
This
is
something
that
the
things
which
the
Gentiles
sacrifice
they
sacrifice
unto
Devils
,
and
not
to
God
;
and
I
would
not
that
you
should
have
fellowship
with
Devils
;
That
's
the
consequence
;
and
here
lyes
the
argument
,
If
,
as
you
are
Christians
by
eating
the
instituted
bread
,
you
have
Communion
together
,
and
partake
of
Christ
the
end
of
that
bread
,
then
as
you
eat
and
partake
with
the
Gentiles
in
those
things
that
are
consecrated
and
sacrificed
to
the
Devill
,
you
have
communion
with
Devils
;
or
as
Israel
which
eat
of
the
Sacrifices
of
the
Altar
were
partakers
of
the
Altar
;
even
so
Christians
with
Heathens
that
eat
of
the
things
sacrificed
unto
Devils
,
were
partakers
of
Devils
.
This
by
consequence
was
a
greater
evil
then
they
were
aware
of
;
and
therefore
he
tels
them
,
I
would
not
that
you
should
have
fellowship
with
Devils
;
which
had
they
been
aware
of
,
doubtlesse
they
would
have
declined
it
.
The
Apostle
having
thus
brought
the
sin
home
,
by
such
an
argument
that
could
not
be
evaded
,
then
he
concludes
from
hence
,
that
you
cannot
drink
of
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
of
the
cup
of
Devils
.
Ye
cannot
be
partakers
of
the
Table
of
the
Lord
,
and
of
the
table
of
Devils
.
Doe
you
provoke
the
Lord
to
jealousie
,
are
you
stronger
then
he
,
&c.
vers.
21
,
22.
Well
,
now
we
are
come
to
the
place
that
Mr.
Collins
makes
the
very
bottome
of
his
argument
,
You
cannot
drink
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
the
cup
of
Devils
,
&c.
That
I
conceive
is
to
be
understood
thus
;
so
long
as
they
profest
themselves
for
Christ
,
and
continued
in
his
visible
body
the
Church
,
and
were
partakers
of
the
Sacramental
Communion
with
Christ
,
they
could
not
without
sin
drink
the
cup
of
Devils
,
and
be
partakers
of
the
table
of
Devils
:
there
was
such
a
direct
opposition
in
these
two
Tables
,
that
it
was
a
thing
inconsistent
,
or
a
contradiction
for
one
to
partake
of
both
:
as
a
Heathen
might
not
drink
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
so
a
Christian
might
not
drink
the
cup
of
Devils
,
there
was
a
diametrical
opposition
in
these
two
,
even
as
much
as
Christ
and
Belial
.
Accordingly
our
blessed
Saviour
in
another
case
,
No
man
can
serve
two
Masters
,
that
is
,
two
Masters
directly
contrary
:
ye
cannot
serve
God
and
Mammom
.
And
so
Elijah
,
If
the
Lord
be
God
,
follow
him
;
if
Baal
be
God
,
follow
him
;
they
could
not
follow
both
:
who
will
or
can
imagine
that
our
Saviour
spoke
this
to
forbid
such
to
serve
God
?
Or
that
Elijah
forbid
the
Israelites
to
follow
God
,
because
he
said
they
could
not
follow
both
?
And
yet
Mr.
Collins
strength
of
phancy
hath
wryed
his
reason
,
that
he
will
have
the
Corinths
forbid
the
Sacrament
,
and
their
serving
of
God
therein
,
because
they
could
not
doe
both
.
The
Apostle's
end
in
writing
is
to
reform
the
evil
,
by
forbidding
them
the
cup
of
Devils
;
but
Mr.
Collins
end
in
writing
is
to
forbid
them
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
and
that
's
all
the
reformation
that
he
drives
at
.
But
the
Apostle
goes
on
and
grants
as
much
at
the
last
as
he
did
at
the
first
,
All
things
are
lawfull
for
me
,
but
all
things
are
not
expedient
,
all
things
are
lawfull
,
but
all
things
edifie
not
,
vers.
23
,
24.
meaning
the
things
that
were
sacrificed
unto
Idols
,
upon
the
same
account
as
at
first
,
that
an
Idol
is
nothing
in
the
world
,
chap.
8.
But
the
thing
was
inexpedient
,
and
uncharitable
,
did
rather
destroy
then
edifie
my self
or
brother
,
and
therefore
adviseth
not
to
seek
our
own
,
but
every
man
anothers
wealth
,
&c.
And
so
he
hath
done
with
that
,
only
he
hints
at
another
case
,
upon
their
civil
and
necessary
occasions
,
if
they
bought
any
such
meat
at
the
shambles
,
they
might
lawfully
eat
it
without
scruple
of
conscience
;
nay
further
,
if
an
unbeliever
should
bid
a
Christian
to
a
civil
feast
,
he
leaves
them
to
their
own
liberty
to
goe
and
eat
whatsoever
was
set
before
them
.
But
I
have
been
too
long
already
,
yet
I
was
willing
to
search
after
the
true
sense
of
the
place
,
which
is
not
easily
discerned
,
unlesse
we
minde
heedfully
the
scope
,
especially
when
a
thing
is
in
an
intricate
case
,
and
so
much
reasoning
largely
held
out
,
proving
that
to
be
evill
by
consequence
,
as
cloathed
with
some
circumstances
,
which
in
it's
self
,
in
its
own
nature
is
lawful
and
good
,
as
here
;
Now
I
shall
examine
Mr.
Coll.
argument
what
bottome
it
stands
on
,
his
argument
is
,
It
's
unlawful
to
give
the
Sacrament
unto
those
that
cannot
eat
it
,
But
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
(
not
Excommunicate
)
who
cannot
drink
of
the
Lords
cup
—
Ergo
,
&c.
His
Major
he
saith
,
is
proved
,
vers.
21.
I
will
confess
that
in
this
place
we
have
the
Sacrament
spoken
of
,
and
that
those
that
the
Apostle
blames
for
drinking
the
cup
of
Devils
,
were
not
Excommunicate
:
but
yet
I
deny
that
it
was
unlawful
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
such
;
For
1.
it
's
a
great
question
,
and
will
require
some
time
for
Mr.
Collins
to
prove
,
That
eating
of
things
offered
unto
Idols
,
was
a
sin
that
came
within
the
verge
of
the
Church
to
punish
with
putting
such
out
of
Sacramental
Communion
.
In
the
5.
chapter
as
I
take
it
,
those
that
the
Apostle
deals
with
in
the
10.
Chapter
,
are
not
in
that
particular
list
,
vers.
11.
which
the
Church
was
to
judge
:
doubtlesse
if
they
had
been
such
Idolaters
,
that
in
the
5.
chap.
11.
he
speaks
of
,
he
would
have
threatned
the
rod
,
and
given
order
unto
the
Elders
of
the
Church
to
put
out
of
their
Communion
such
Idolaters
:
for
their
connivence
at
Idolaters
would
leaven
the
lump
,
as
well
as
an
incestuous
person
;
but
herein
not
a
word
of
any
such
thing
.
But
he
will
be
ready
to
say
,
The
Apostle
spoke
of
putting
out
of
Com●union
before
in
the
5.
chap.
therefore
it
was
not
necessary
to
repeat
it
again
in
the
10.
I
,
but
how
will
these
things
hang
together
?
1.
To
give
a
charge
to
the
Church
to
cast
out
Idolaters
,
and
then
himself
using
such
mildnesse
of
speech
,
and
variety
of
argumentation
,
as
I
have
shewed
,
to
convince
them
that
it
was
a
sin
,
granting
the
thing
in
it self
lawfull
,
but
evill
in
respect
of
some
circumstances
.
2.
The
main
argument
to
prove
their
eating
and
drinking
in
the
Idol
Temple
to
be
a
sin
,
was
drawn
from
the
nature
of
the
Sacrament
,
in
which
themselves
,
as
Christians
,
are
said
to
have
Communion
with
Christ
,
by
being
partakers
of
the
cup
and
bread
consicrated
for
to
represent
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
;
in
like
manner
they
were
said
to
have
Communion
with
Devils
,
by
being
partakers
of
the
cup
and
meat
in
the
Idol
Temple
,
that
was
consecrated
and
offered
unto
Idols
:
and
hence
the
Apostle
would
not
have
them
to
have
Communion
with
Devils
;
as
all
his
other
reasons
,
so
this
tends
solely
to
reform
them
in
that
particular
of
eating
in
the
Idol
Temple
,
and
not
a
word
of
forbidding
any
such
the
Sacrament
,
as
Mr.
Collins
would
have
it
,
when
he
saith
,
The
sum
is
,
they
who
cannot
drink
the
cup
of
the
Lord
,
are
either
1.
Such
as
God
hath
forbidden
coming
thither
.
2.
Or
those
that
can
have
no
Communion
with
Christ
,
nor
benefit
by
this
Ordinance
.
Those
that
give
credit
to
that
sense
,
Answ.
must
be
such
as
adhere
more
to
Mr.
Collins
fancy
,
then
the
sense
of
holy
Scriptures
;
what
are
any
of
those
two
,
to
the
text
in
hand
?
was
any
forbid
the
Sacrament
that
eat
of
things
offered
unto
Idols
?
2.
Doth
not
the
Apostle
affirm
,
that
they
all
had
Communion
with
Christ
in
partaking
of
the
cup
of
blessings
?
Is
not
that
the
very
medium
of
his
argument
?
the
Apostle
argues
from
their
Sacramental
Communion
as
Christians
,
to
decline
Communion
with
Idolaters
.
Mr.
Collins
argues
from
their
Communion
with
Idols
,
to
a
none
Communion
as
Christians
.
And
thus
the
Judicious
Reader
may
easily
judge
of
the
soundation
of
his
argument
,
who
out
of
an
inconsiderate
rashnesse
most
grossely
runs
upon
mistake
,
and
thence
forms
a
silly
syllogism
,
pag.
29.
I
grant
it
a
sin
to
deliver
the
Sacrament
to
those
whom
we
know
God
hath
forbid
it
.
But
I
deny
that
these
of
Corinth
spoken
of
are
in
the
least
,
so
much
as
blamed
,
or
in
the
least
tittle
forbid
the
Sacrament
,
the
Apostle
proves
they
all
took
it
,
and
had
Communion
in
Christ
in
it
.
I
wonder
that
ever
a
man
pretending
unto
sober
principles
,
should
be
so
fond
as
to
think
,
(
that
those
that
the
Apostles
writes
to
as
Saints
,
sanctified
in
Christ
Jesus
,
his
dearly
beloved
Brethren
,
and
writing
unto
them
as
wise
men
,
and
such
that
had
great
gifts
,
and
largenesse
of
knowledge
in
their
liberties
by
Jesus
Christ
,
that
knew
an
Idol
was
nothing
in
the
world
,
and
that
which
was
offered
was
never
the
worse
,
every
creature
of
God
was
good
,
and
not
to
be
resused
,
&c.
as
the
Apostle
yeelds
)
I
say
,
how
he
comes
to
think
that
these
should
be
forbidden
the
Sacrament
,
and
to
be
such
as
could
not
have
Communion
with
Christ
,
makes
me
wonder
:
if
Saints
,
and
the
Apostles
dearly
beloved
Brethren
,
whom
he
argues
so
friendly
with
,
were
not
under
Christs
command
of
this
necessary
observance
in
the
Church
,
then
here
is
not
any
that
are
,
but
I
have
said
enough
to
this
already
,
and
all
that
he
saith
to
this
text
is
most
irrational
and
impertinent
,
to
prove
that
some
in
the
Church
not
excommunicated
,
ought
to
be
denyed
the
Sacrament
;
this
place
proves
that
they
did
all
partake
of
that
one
Sacramental
bread
,
1
Cor.
10.17
.
and
puts
the
thing
past
questioning
.
He
hath
more
things
in
making
good
his
argument
,
but
having
pluckt
up
his
ground
work
,
it
's
too
tedious
both
for
me
to
write
,
and
you
to
read
the
confutation
of
the
rest
;
for
it
will
fall
of
it self
,
you
must
grant
him
what
he
sayes
to
be
true
,
because
he
sayes
it
,
for
he
is
not
able
in
the
least
to
bring
any
one
argument
from
Scripture
to
prove
suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
as
himself
states
it
.
I
will
trouble
you
but
with
two
things
more
of
his
in
this
argument
;
for
now
I
intend
brevity
in
all
he
has
further
to
say
in
defence
of
Suspension
;
for
I
know
not
any
one
thing
more
much
material
,
that
I
have
not
fully
answered
in
the
former
discourse
,
in
order
to
his
several
exceptions
against
the
Bar
removed
.
He
sayes
,
He
hopes
we
have
all
too
reverend
thoughts
of
the
wisdome
of
God
,
to
think
that
he
should
lay
an
obligation
upon
his
Ministers
to
give
this
Ordinance
unto
them
,
whom
he
hath
warned
upon
pain
of
damnation
not
to
take
it
.
What
is
this
but
to
beg
the
question
,
Answ.
and
thence
insinuate
upon
us
an
absurdity
?
let
him
first
prove
that
a
scandalous
member
not
cast
out
,
is
warned
not
to
take
it
upon
pain
of
damnation
,
I
know
no
such
text
,
and
it
remains
still
to
prove
that
the
Corinths
were
threatned
or
punished
for
any
scandalous
sins
committed
before
they
came
,
or
for
admitting
any
scandalous
brethren
at
all
;
but
only
for
their
actual
miscarriage
in
the
very
act
of
administration
.
I
have
said
more
for
the
negative
,
then
Mr.
Collins
will
be
able
to
answer
this
two
dayes
.
He
saith
,
None
can
without
sin
knowingly
expose
the
Ordinance
of
God
to
necessary
abuse
and
profanation
:
but
to
administer
it
to
one
that
cannot
have
Communion
with
Christ
profanes
it
.
—
Ergo.
Let
him
prove
the
consequence
if
he
can
.
Answ.
1.
The
Apostle
proves
that
all
the
Corinthians
that
drank
of
the
Lords
cup
,
and
eat
of
that
bread
,
had
Communion
with
Christ
,
and
he
sayes
,
We
that
are
many
are
one
bread
,
ch.
10.16
,
17.
And
doubtlesse
those
that
made
divisions
,
and
lived
in
incest
,
and
eat
of
things
offered
unto
Idols
,
and
that
opprest
one
another
by
needlesse
and
scandalous
suits
at
law
in
the
Heathen
Courts
;
and
those
that
were
guilty
of
such
great
schisms
and
disorders
in
the
Church
,
were
a
part
of
that
many
.
The
very
outward
actions
of
eating
and
drinking
according
to
the
institution
is
a
Sacramental
Communion
,
which
is
a
holy
Communion
in
the
relation
the
signes
have
to
the
thing
signified
thereby
:
And
in
the
relation
the
receiver
hath
to
the
benefit
and
profit
thereof
,
Sacraments
being
instituted
to
that
end
for
the
Church
;
as
hath
been
proved
.
But
he
tels
us
how
a
thing
is
abused
.
1.
When
it
is
not
turned
to
a
right
use
.
2.
When
no
difference
is
put
between
the
holy
and
profane
,
Ezek.
22.26
.
The
first
is
answered
,
Answ.
his
latter
I
shall
speak
to
,
his
quotation
is
meant
of
the
legal
clean
and
unclean
,
that
her
Priests
through
carelesnesse
made
no
difference
,
and
so
profaned
the
holy
things
by
admitting
such
to
bring
their
sacrifices
,
that
during
their
uncleannesse
made
every
thing
they
touched
unclean
;
but
there
is
no
such
difference
to
be
made
in
the
Gospel
Church
now
;
that
difference
is
taken
away
,
Heathen
uncleannesse
remains
still
,
but
we
doe
not
plead
their
admittance
into
Church
Communion
.
He
sayes
further
,
That
he
cannot
see
but
every
scandalous
sinner
,
Drunkard
,
Swearer
,
Adulterer
,
&c.
hath
as
great
a
fellowship
with
Devils
,
as
the
Corinthians
had
.
He
must
see
a
great
deal
more
fellowship
with
devils
in
such
,
Answ.
then
in
the
Corinthians
,
or
else
he
can
conclude
nothing
for
his
purpose
;
for
it
's
certain
the
Corinthians
were
not
kept
from
the
Sacrament
,
nor
forbid
it
upon
that
account
.
His
first
argument
for
Suspension
is
,
That
nothing
is
lawful
in
the
worship
of
God
,
but
what
we
have
precept
or
president
for
:
but
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
such
as
are
visibly
scandalous
,
not
Excommunicate
,
is
to
doe
that
in
the
worship
of
God
which
neither
precept
nor
example
doth
justifie
.
—
Ergo
,
Sacraments
are
parts
of
institute
worship
,
and
in
the
administrations
we
are
to
be
guided
according
to
the
precepts
given
,
upon
the
institution
of
them
;
and
according
to
the
example
of
the
Lord
Jesus
,
who
at
the
first
institution
of
the
Supper
gave
us
an
example
for
the
perpetual
celebration
of
it
,
&c.
p.
51
,
52.
His
Major
is
good
,
Answ.
but
his
Minor
is
false
,
and
to
be
denyed
;
matter
of
scandal
doth
not
disoblige
any
that
are
within
,
and
of
Christs
family
and
Kingdome
from
precepts
of
institute
worship
,
as
the
Sacrament
is
confessed
to
be
;
but
rather
it
is
thus
,
that
this
precept
of
institute
Worship
doth
oblige
all
Church-members
that
are
within
,
to
reform
their
other
scandalous
actions
.
'T
is
true
Christ
gave
to
none
but
his
Disciples
.
And
the
Apostles
directed
this
observance
only
unto
the
visible
Churches
which
consisted
of
visible
Saints
,
by
their
profession
and
external
calling
at
least
.
And
who
will
plead
for
any
but
visible
Saints
,
professing
the
true
Religion
externally
at
least
?
while
they
are
Church-members
and
within
,
we
plead
the
priviledges
of
that
estate
as
all
Scripture
Churches
alwayes
practised
,
and
yeelded
unto
their
members
.
And
so
long
as
our
Antagonists
own
our
Church
for
the
Church
of
Christ
,
and
our
members
true
members
of
the
Church
,
they
doe
but
discover
their
own
nakednesse
in
all
they
say
against
us
,
and
what
's
this
argument
in
hand
but
the
same
with
the
Anabaptists
,
if
not
a
great
deal
lesse
rational
,
then
they
use
it
for
?
Had
we
but
that
clear
precept
,
or
precedent
for
Insant
baptism
,
that
we
have
for
baptized
members
of
the
visible
Church
,
to
receive
the
Sacrament
in
remembrance
of
Christ
;
I
doubt
not
but
there
is
hundreds
of
those
that
would
quit
the
argument
,
and
reform
their
practise
.
Christ
sayes
to
his
Disciples
when
it
was
first
instituted
,
drink
ye
all
of
it
.
The
Apostle
Paul
understands
this
precept
,
as
respecting
the
whole
Church
of
Corinth
,
for
he
directs
that
Church
in
general
to
act
according
to
the
institution
of
Christ
;
for
he
delivered
what
he
received
from
the
Evangelists
that
did
hear
and
see
the
institution
.
That
question
about
Judas
is
not
very
material
to
the
Controversie
,
whether
he
did
receive
the
Sacrament
or
not
:
't
is
certain
he
eat
the
Passeover
,
and
what
was
the
Paschal
Lambe
,
but
a
sign
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
?
and
the
Bread
and
the
Wine
is
no
more
.
Besides
he
might
have
taken
the
Sacrament
if
he
had
had
a
minde
to
have
continued
with
them
during
that
service
,
who
hindered
him
or
forbad
him
?
if
he
did
not
,
he
had
done
better
to
have
adhered
unto
Christ
in
the
observance
of
his
holy
Ordinances
,
(
though
but
a
hypocrite
,
)
then
by
giving
way
to
the
Devils
temptation
to
turn
his
back
upon
Gods
Ordinance
,
and
seek
for
opportunity
how
to
betray
his
Lord
and
Master
into
the
hands
of
his
bloudy
enemies
;
but
for
my
own
part
I
incline
to
believe
that
Judas
did
receive
the
Sacrament
,
but
I
need
not
trouble
my self
with
that
dispute
.
I
have
said
enough
as
from
that
of
Matth.
28.19
,
20.
compared
with
1
Cor.
11.24
.
to
satisfie
any
that
are
impartial
.
I
need
adde
no
more
in
proof
of
this
,
that
it
is
a
duty
incumbent
upon
all
Church-members
to
observe
the
Sacrament
,
as
any
other
publique
duties
of
Worship
.
This
we
shall
with
more
case
and
lesse
time
make
good
against
all
opposition
of
men
,
then
our
adversaries
who
oppose
us
,
will
free
themselves
from
what
the
Pharises
were
charged
withall
,
namely
,
in
making
void
the
commands
of
God
,
by
their
own
Traditions
.
As
for
Precedents
,
the
Analogy
of
the
Passeover
,
the
practice
of
the
Apostolical
Churches
,
which
have
been
urged
sufficiently
to
satisfie
any
that
are
sober
of
the
Presbyterians
judgement
,
that
have
not
such
clearnesse
of
reason
from
the
Analogy
of
circumcision
,
nor
new
Testament
Precedents
for
Infant
baptism
,
as
we
for
free
admission
of
Church-members
baptized
,
and
not
excommunicated
,
unto
the
Supper
,
and
hence
were
they
but
as
rational
in
the
one
as
the
other
,
the
controversie
would
cease
amongst
us
that
are
for
a
National
Church
.
I
proceed
unto
his
sixt
Argument
,
If
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
yet
cast
out
,
with
whom
the
Communion
of
the
Church
cannot
be
pure
;
then
there
may
be
some
in
the
Church
not
Excommunicate
whom
the
Officers
may
not
without
sin
admit
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
But
there
may
be
some
such
in
the
Church
.
—
Ergo
,
His
proof
of
the
proposition
is
,
1.
That
it
is
the
duty
of
the
Officers
of
the
Church
to
keep
the
fellowship
of
the
Church
pure
.
This
,
he
saith
,
none
will
deny
:
but
if
any
be
inclined
to
deny
it
,
he
should
doe
well
,
First
,
To
think
to
what
end
the
rod
of
discipline
is
put
into
their
hands
.
Secondly
,
How
to
expound
1
Cor.
5.7
.
and
those
many
other
Texts
that
look
this
way
,
pag.
86
,
87.
2.
That
it
is
their
special
duty
to
keep
the
fellowship
of
the
Church
pure
,
as
to
this
Ordinance
,
as
this
was
proved
before
from
1
Cor.
5.8
.
so
it
's
c●ar
from
reason
;
it
's
apparent
,
that
of
all
other
Ordinances
,
this
Ordinance
alone
is
appointed
for
such
as
have
something
of
grace
in
them
.
Answ.
1
I
grant
that
it
is
the
duty
of
the
Rulers
of
the
Church
to
use
all
necessary
and
lawful
means
to
preserve
the
purity
of
Church
Communion
in
all
acts
of
publike
Worship
.
I
grant
that
they
are
in
a
special
manner
to
take
care
to
keep
the
Communion
of
the
Church
pure
,
as
to
this
Ordinance
of
the
Sacrament
;
but
still
I
deny
that
this
is
to
be
done
by
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
,
and
allow
them
the
priviledges
of
all
other
publique
Communion
in
the
Worship
of
God
as
members
.
That
1
Cor.
5.7
,
8
,
13.
hath
been
examined
already
,
and
proves
no
such
thing
:
let
it
be
proved
that
the
Communion
of
that
Church
was
leavened
for
admitting
one
that
was
scandalous
to
the
Sacrament
,
or
that
their
Communion
is
that
Ordinance
was
polluted
,
by
their
connivence
towards
him
:
or
that
to
deny
him
the
Sacrament
was
a
sufficient
remedy
both
to
reform
the
offender
,
and
to
purge
out
the
old
leaven
wherewith
they
were
leavened
:
if
the
Text
will
bear
none
of
these
things
,
what
is
it
quoted
for
?
The
Rod
of
Discipline
it
's
expressed
clearly
from
the
text
,
was
to
reform
the
sinner
,
with
the
salvation
of
his
soul
,
and
the
Church
by
doing
her
duty
is
correcting
,
with
this
merciful
end
,
did
clear
and
purge
her self
from
that
sinful
connivence
and
toleration
of
such
a
one
.
And
if
this
purging
was
not
by
excommunication
,
then
I
am
out
,
if
it
was
,
then
Mr.
Collins
is
quite
out
in
quoting
it
,
and
he
hath
said
nothing
in
laying
the
foundation
of
his
argument
,
as
to
the
keeping
of
the
Sacramental
Communion
pure
by
Suspension
.
I
beseech
you
mark
,
for
in
this
very
argument
many
are
very
much
perplexed
,
as
if
the
only
end
of
discipline
were
to
preserve
the
Communion
of
the
Church
pure
only
at
the
Sacrament
,
and
as
if
the
greatest
impurity
of
Communion
in
the
Church
lay
in
the
admitting
of
ignorant
unregenerate
scandalous
brethren
unto
the
Sacrament
:
whereas
I
dare
be
bold
to
affirm
,
that
to
receive
the
Sacrament
is
as
much
the
duth
of
any
such
,
as
they
are
Church-members
and
within
,
as
any
other
duty
of
publike
worship
whatever
;
and
their
obedience
in
that
observance
is
as
well
pleasing
and
acceptable
unto
the
Lord
(
they
coming
as
prepared
as
they
can
)
as
any
observance
in
the
Church
.
And
if
it
was
not
for
the
correcting
of
such
things
that
are
in
their
own
nature
sinful
,
such
as
are
nominated
,
1
Cor.
5.11
.
there
would
be
no
need
of
Church
discipline
.
The
main
end
of
discipline
is
to
reform
that
which
is
evill
in
Church-members
,
and
to
encourage
unto
well
doing
,
that
every
member
may
be
obedient
in
all
things
.
And
for
Mr.
Collins
to
say
,
that
the
Sacrament
alone
is
appointed
for
such
as
have
something
of
grace
in
them
,
is
only
his
bare
saying
,
and
doth
clash
with
the
command
of
Christ
,
as
also
with
the
peace
,
edification
,
charity
,
and
unity
of
the
Church
.
But
he
sayes
further
,
The
Word
is
called
the
bread
of
life
,
and
it
is
to
be
offered
to
dead
souls
.
Heathens
were
ever
admitted
to
hear
,
and
profane
persons
are
the
objects
of
discipline
.
The
Excommunicate
may
hear
,
and
ought
to
be
admonished
as
brethren
.
That
he
knows
not
wherein
the
Officers
can
have
any
work
to
keep
the
Communion
of
a
Church
pure
,
if
not
in
this
Ordinance
,
a●
to
this
,
the
Scripture
saith
it
cannot
be
pertaked
of
worthily
,
without
examining
our selves
and
discerning
the
Lords
Body
.
It
's
true
,
Answ.
1
the
Word
is
the
Bread
of
Life
,
and
doth
quicken
dead
souls
where
God
gives
the
blessing
,
doth
it
follow
,
that
the
Sacrament
the
visible
Word
of
Life
,
is
not
appointed
unto
that
end
,
where
God
gives
the
same
blessing
?
Heathens
may
hear
;
true
,
What
then
?
therefore
Church-members
may
not
receive
.
Or
,
2.
Therefore
Church-members
may
hear
;
but
the
question
is
,
whether
he
will
allow
a
Christian
to
hear
as
a
member
,
or
as
a
Heathen
.
The
profane
are
the
objects
of
discipline
:
What
them
?
Must
they
not
pray
,
hear
,
receive
,
untill
they
be
cast
out
by
it
?
Are
they
objects
of
nothing
else
?
How
are
they
objects
of
discipline
that
were
never
admitted
unto
the
Sacrament
?
Can
you
suspend
them
from
that
they
never
had
?
wherein
are
such
more
objects
of
discipline
then
those
that
are
without
;
who
may
hear
,
and
pray
,
and
be
present
at
every
Ordinance
as
well
as
the
other
that
are
within
?
Then
he
saith
,
The
Excommunicate
may
hear
,
and
ought
to
be
admonished
as
brethren
.
Very
good
;
it
's
well
the
Excommunicate
may
have
the
title
of
Brethren
;
but
as
ill
that
those
in
the
Church
whom
we
cannot
charge
with
obstinacy
,
untill
it
be
Juridically
tryed
,
shall
have
the
odious
tearms
of
Hogs
,
and
Dogs
,
profane
,
&c.
He
knows
not
wherein
the
Officers
of
a
Church
,
can
have
any
work
to
keep
the
Communion
of
the
Church
pure
,
if
not
in
the
Sacrament
.
What
,
doth
all
their
work
lye
,
in
that
?
Answ.
1.
Is
no
care
to
be
had
how
men
profane
all
the
other
Ordinances
by
their
sleeping
,
talking
,
laughing
,
and
disturbing
the
Minister
and
others
,
in
holy
Worship
?
2.
Is
not
care
to
be
had
that
the
doctrine
be
holy
,
and
sound
,
even
the
Word
of
the
Lord
,
that
is
taught
?
That
the
Worship
of
Prayer
be
performed
with
soundnesse
of
words
sutable
to
the
necessities
of
the
people
,
and
with
such
devotion
and
affection
becoming
Worship
?
3.
Is
not
care
to
be
had
that
the
Sacraments
be
rightly
administred
according
unto
the
institution
,
without
superstitious
addings
unto
,
or
detracting
from
them
?
4.
Is
not
care
to
be
had
to
admonish
,
rebuke
the
unruly
,
and
to
excommunicate
the
obstinate
,
to
reform
and
amend
them
in
order
to
their
spiritual
good
?
And
is
this
and
the
former
no
work
,
if
the
Officers
may
not
suspend
from
the
Sacrament
only
?
The
truth
is
,
he
puts
so
much
in
this
,
that
he
makes
nothing
of
all
other
work
that
the
Scriptures
clearly
teach
;
allow
him
but
suspension
,
which
he
hath
unnecessarily
ingaged
himself
to
prove
,
and
he
will
give
you
an
acquittance
,
or
a
release
from
Excommunication
;
keep
but
from
the
Sacrament
,
you
need
not
fear
any
examination
,
adomonition
,
or
excommunication
;
if
you
can
but
dispense
with
your
conscience
carelessely
to
neglect
this
Ordinance
,
you
may
freely
enjoy
all
the
rest
as
well
as
a
Heathen
,
or
an
Excommunicate
person
.
Nay
,
it
may
be
,
if
you
will
but
keep
from
the
Sacrament
,
he
will
allow
you
the
title
of
Brethren
,
as
well
as
an
Excommunicate
person
:
but
if
you
will
not
be
satisfied
unlesse
you
may
receive
the
Sacrament
in
remembrance
of
Christ
for
remission
of
sins
,
then
you
must
look
to
be
called
Hogs
,
and
Dogs
,
unbelievers
,
murderers
of
Christ
,
the
profane
world
,
that
are
without
hope
and
God
in
the
world
.
This
argument
of
his
doth
better
become
a
Brownist
,
then
one
that
pretends
to
a
friendly
owning
of
our
Church
;
but
the
poor
Church
may
say
;
these
slanders
,
divisions
,
Separations
,
and
confusions
,
are
the
wounds
that
she
hath
received
by
the
hands
of
such
friends
.
All
that
he
saith
in
proof
of
his
Minor
hath
been
sufficiently
answered
already
,
both
by
my
learned
friend
Mr.
Humfrey
,
and
my self
;
I
intend
brevity
,
for
there
is
nothing
left
in
his
following
arguments
much
considerable
.
His
seventh
Argument
,
Either
it
's
lawful
for
the
Officers
to
deny
the
Sacrament
to
such
as
they
finde
ignorant
,
scandalous
and
impenitent
,
or
they
are
bound
to
give
into
such
.
But
they
are
not
bound
to
give
it
to
such
,
—
Ergo.
His
proof
of
the
Minor
is
,
The
Officers
are
not
bound
to
administer
the
Ordinance
to
those
who
they
know
are
not
bound
to
receive
it
,
but
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
are
visibly
such
as
are
not
bound
to
receive
it
.
—
Ergo.
His
main
proof
of
this
Minor
is
this
,
If
such
be
bound
to
receive
,
then
they
are
bound
to
make
themselves
guilty
of
the
body
and
bloud
of
Christ
,
and
to
eat
and
drink
their
own
damnation
,
which
are
strange
things
for
a
man
to
be
bound
in
conscience
unto
.
This
argument
is
wholly
founded
upon
that
grosse
mistake
of
personal
unworthinesse
,
Answ.
which
I
have
so
clearly
confuted
at
large
in
it's
place
,
where
I
shall
refer
the
Reader
for
full
satisfaction
.
His
eight
Argument
,
If
none
may
be
suspended
but
those
who
are
excommunicated
,
then
none
must
be
kept
away
but
those
that
are
contumacious
.
But
some
may
be
kept
away
who
are
not
contumacious
.
—
Ergo.
The
major
is
plain
,
Mat.
18.
The
minor
only
needs
proof
(
saith
he
)
1.
Surely
those
that
are
under
admonition
are
to
be
kept
away
.
2.
Suppose
one
should
come
to
the
Minister
the
morning
he
were
to
receive
,
and
blaspheme
Christ
;
and
tell
him
he
came
for
nothing
,
but
to
abuse
the
Church
;
or
suppose
a
Minister
should
know
one
of
his
people
had
committed
murder
,
theft
,
incest
,
whoredome
the
night
before
,
&c.
shall
such
be
admitted
,
they
not
being
excommunicate
?
if
not
,
then
there
is
suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
pag.
98.
The
Major
admits
of
some
question
,
Answ.
1
for
Matth.
18.15
.
speaks
not
very
clearly
unto
all
cases
;
that
instance
is
of
particular
trespasses
between
private
brethren
,
which
are
things
of
a
lesser
nature
,
yet
these
persisted
in
unto
contumacy
after
the
Churches
admonition
makes
one
lyable
unto
Excommunication
;
but
I
question
whether
all
publike
notorious
open
scandalous
sinners
in
the
Church
,
be
thus
to
be
proceeded
against
,
especially
when
their
scandalous
sinning
is
of
long
continuance
,
and
doth
offend
the
Congregation
:
the
whole
Congregation
in
such
a
case
is
to
be
satisfied
,
which
cannot
be
by
a
private
repentance
(
should
it
be
supposed
)
upon
the
admonitionof
the
Church
.
I
think
the
incestuous
Corinth
was
not
dealt
withall
according
to
that
rule
,
Matth.
18.15
.
Publike
sins
should
have
publike
shame
,
that
others
may
fear
,
and
the
offender
be
brought
to
a
serious
and
notorious
repentance
,
before
the
Church
declare
themselves
satisfied
,
and
receive
them
into
holy
Communion
;
so
that
I
think
for
the
Church
to
proceed
gradually
in
some
cases
,
as
such
as
Mr.
Collins
doth
instance
in
,
is
not
alwayes
necessary
,
nor
to
wait
untill
the
offender
appears
to
be
obstinate
,
but
ipso
facto
to
be
forthwith
censured
.
But
these
cases
are
not
to
be
left
to
the
discretion
of
every
particular
Pastor
to
judge
of
,
but
to
the
discretion
and
grave
judgement
of
the
ruling
part
of
the
whole
Church
.
Besides
,
I
question
whether
one
that
hath
been
often
reproved
in
the
publike
Ministery
,
and
yet
lives
in
scandalous
sins
of
whoredome
,
drunkennesse
,
cursing
and
swearing
,
variance
and
contention
,
&c.
is
not
to
be
judged
contumacious
,
and
upon
that
account
,
the
Church
being
in
a
capacity
,
and
informed
,
should
upon
sufficient
proof
without
delay
Excommunicate
him
.
I
leave
these
things
to
better
Judgements
,
but
yet
I
am
inclinable
to
conceive
,
that
Matth.
18.
most
properly
respects
private
trespasses
which
are
not
openly
known
,
and
how
that
rule
should
hold
to
be
applyed
in
the
same
manner
to
open
scandals
,
that
cause
the
name
of
God
,
and
the
true
profession
of
Religion
to
be
blasphemed
and
reproached
,
I
am
not
very
clear
.
But
now
we
shall
examine
his
Minor
,
But
some
may
be
kept
away
from
the
Sacrament
that
are
not
contumacious
.
So
may
some
be
Excommunicate
that
are
not
contumacious
,
as
I
have
hinted
at
,
Answ.
which
if
that
be
true
,
then
the
argument
fals
to
nothing
of
it self
.
But
he
saith
surely
,
Those
that
are
under
admonition
are
to
be
kept
away
.
This
he
begs
;
how
will
he
prove
it
?
For
where
the
offence
will
admit
of
hearing
the
Churches
admonition
,
and
upon
that
give
hope
or
satisfaction
of
amendment
,
why
should
they
be
kept
from
the
Sacrament
more
then
the
other
Ordinances
?
they
not
being
authoritatively
put
out
of
Church
Communion
,
is
it
rational
for
to
execute
,
before
sentence
be
given
?
Unto
his
suppositions
,
I
shall
answer
him
,
first
they
are
no
proof
.
If
such
may
be
Juridically
suspended
,
then
they
may
be
Juridically
excommunicated
,
for
it
is
Juridical
Suspension
that
is
now
in
question
.
And
as
it
is
stated
the
Church
may
as
well
doe
the
one
as
the
other
:
And
the
Church
need
not
be
long
in
giving
sentence
in
such
cases
,
if
there
be
clear
proof
;
besides
the
Sacrament
may
rather
be
rejourned
for
a
short
time
,
then
that
any
should
justly
be
offended
,
or
that
a
single
Minister
should
doe
that
which
is
not
regular
.
Murder
,
thest
,
incest
,
whoredome
is
Felony
by
the
civil
Law
of
the
Nation
,
and
if
any
can
discover
any
such
,
they
should
attach
and
put
them
into
the
custody
of
the
Civil
Officers
;
these
are
gaol
sins
,
and
to
be
punished
by
the
Judges
.
And
I
know
no
rule
that
doth
warrant
the
Church
to
censure
those
that
are
under
the
penalty
of
the
course
of
civil
Courts
of
Justice
.
If
one
should
grant
that
in
an
extraordinary
case
,
some
extraordinary
course
at
the
present
might
be
taken
;
as
suppose
some
profane
abuse
at
the
Sacrament
,
as
to
disturb
the
administration
by
some
disorder
,
I
doubt
not
but
the
Churchwardens
might
thrust
them
out
of
the
Church
,
&
do
the
like
to
any
that
should
come
drunk
or
mad
;
but
what
is
this
to
Juridical
Suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
as
it
's
usually
practised
in
some
Churches
?
Indeed
Mr.
Collins
need
not
have
been
so
hasty
in
aspersing
Mr.
Boteman
,
pag.
98.
unlesse
he
could
in
some
ordinary
case
prove
Juridical
Suspension
from
the
Sacrament
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
the
which
he
hath
not
yet
done
,
and
it
's
a
great
question
whether
he
ever
will
or
can
.
It
's
true
,
that
our
Church
in
prudence
left
the
denying
of
the
Sacrament
to
some
,
to
the
discretion
of
particular
Ministers
,
as
he
alleadges
;
but
then
let
me
tell
you
,
this
doth
not
reach
the
argument
.
For
1.
this
was
only
in
case
of
obstinacy
,
being
dealt
with
all
by
the
Minister
,
who
was
by
the
Canons
and
Rubrick
of
the
Church
authorised
thus
to
doe
.
2.
Such
acts
of
discipline
were
subject
to
the
Churches
judgement
and
censure
afterwards
;
the
persons
conceiving
themselves
wronged
might
complain
,
and
those
Ministers
were
lyable
to
be
censured
for
going
beyond
the
rule
,
as
some
have
been
suspended
from
officiating
themselves
,
for
putting
persons
by
,
upon
slender
proof
,
even
such
as
their
Ordinary
upon
hearing
did
not
judge
competent
.
3.
The
Church
urged
the
act
of
receiving
as
a
necessary
duty
incumbent
upon
all
of
years
,
and
upon
that
ground
both
earnestly
exhorted
all
to
come
,
and
punished
those
that
carelesly
neglected
it
.
4.
The
Churches
Jurisdiction
consisted
of
Excommunication
only
in
case
of
obstinacy
,
but
in
case
of
penitency
,
admonition
,
and
publike
penance
,
the
offenders
confession
of
his
sins
(
humbly
in
the
body
of
the
Church
)
craving
the
forgivenesse
of
their
sin
in
particular
,
both
of
God
and
the
Church
,
did
free
from
Excommunication
:
The
obstinate
was
denyed
all
the
Ordinances
,
except
to
hear
the
Sermon
at
the
Church
doores
,
or
behinde
the
Font
,
the
penitent
not
denyed
any
one
Ordinance
:
lay
these
things
together
,
and
then
let
wise
men
judge
how
our
Church
heretofore
doth
precedent
the
Suspension
which
Mr.
Collins
contends
for
;
namely
,
that
a
Minister
by
vertue
of
his
Office
,
with
his
Elders
may
,
and
ought
upon
Scripture
ground
to
deny
some
the
Sicrament
(
not
obstinate
)
and
allow
them
the
priviledge
of
all
other
Church
Communion
as
Members
.
And
this
he
would
have
Juridical
,
although
the
Church
be
in
no
capacity
to
impower
them
with
any
acts
of
discipline
at
all
,
nor
have
the
help
of
appeals
to
restrain
the
rash
proceedings
of
inconsiderate
uncharitable
zealous
Ministers
,
whose
principles
tend
too
much
to
division
,
Separation
,
and
confusion
in
the
Church
,
who
would
be
more
careful
to
further
the
edification
,
peace
,
and
unity
of
the
Church
,
were
themselves
under
the
rod
of
holy
discipline
Juridically
exercised
by
grave
,
learned
,
experienced
presidents
,
which
particular
Presbyters
in
reason
will
not
be
very
zealous
for
,
so
long
as
themselves
are
left
to
themselves
to
exercise
an
absolute
power
,
to
rule
as
they
please
in
their
own
Congregation
without
controll
.
I
wish
these
petty
irregular
reformings
prove
not
the
greatest
remora's
that
hinder
the
reformation
,
peace
,
and
edification
of
the
whole
,
especially
where
particular
Pastors
and
Elders
are
of
Mr.
Collins
opinion
.
1.
That
makes
a
meer
nothing
of
Church-membership
without
grace
.
2.
That
will
allow
them
no
other
Covenant
relation
then
to
Heathens
.
3.
That
will
not
so
much
as
allow
them
the
external
titles
of
Brethren
,
Saints
,
Believers
,
within
,
but
reproach
them
with
the
odious
names
of
Hogs
and
Dogs
,
unbelievers
,
and
of
the
Devil
,
&c.
though
they
he
such
as
never
had
the
benefit
and
help
of
holy
discipline
to
amend
them
,
or
try
whether
they
sin
out
of
weaknesse
or
wilfulnesse
.
4.
That
will
take
upon
him
in
his
own
name
to
dissolve
them
from
Christs
commands
,
and
threaten
them
not
to
doe
it
upon
pain
of
damnation
.
5.
That
will
make
the
Sacrament
strong
meat
,
that
cannot
be
digested
by
weak
doubting
Christians
.
6.
That
knows
not
wherein
the
Officers
can
have
any
work
to
keep
the
Communion
of
the
Church
pure
,
if
not
in
the
Sacrament
.
7.
That
will
allow
no
more
priviledge
in
duties
of
worship
to
the
ignorant
and
scandalous
,
then
to
Heathens
out
of
the
Church
.
8.
That
doth
insolently
affirm
that
a
single
Pastor
alone
,
may
lawfully
suspend
from
the
Sacrament
,
he
being
the
ruling
part
of
that
particular
Church
.
9.
That
upon
the
matter
puts
the
whole
of
discipline
in
Suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
,
either
making
it
the
same
with
Excommunication
,
or
else
renders
Excommunication
needlesse
in
the
Church
.
Are
men
thus
leavened
with
Brownism
,
fit
to
be
rulers
in
the
Church
of
God
?
Or
like
to
preserve
the
peace
,
unity
,
edification
,
and
seek
reformation
of
the
whole
,
according
to
the
general
rules
and
ends
prescribed
in
the
Scriptures
?
I
appeal
to
the
standing
rule
of
Sciptures
to
judge
,
whether
such
as
himself
,
or
the
friends
of
my
judgement
and
opinions
,
as
to
the
weal
of
the
Church
,
(
it
being
judged
true
by
both
)
be
consonant
unto
it
,
and
whether
he
or
we
be
guilty
of
the
most
folly
and
filth
,
and
defend
such
things
as
is
a
shame
to
be
named
amongst
Christians
,
as
himself
expresses
against
our
opinion
in
opposing
his
,
pag.
98.
I
come
to
his
ninth
argument
;
the
sum
is
,
If
scandalous
persons
not
excommunicate
nor
unclean
were
debarred
the
Passeover
,
then
such
may
be
suspended
from
the
Lords
Supper
:
but
the
first
is
true
,
therefore
the
latter
.
I
grant
the
consequence
is
good
,
Answ.
but
let
him
prove
the
antecedent
,
that
scandalous
sinners
not
cut
off
,
nor
unclean
were
debarred
some
Ordinances
,
and
the
Passeover
;
I
dare
give
him
seven
years
time
to
prove
that
by
Scriptures
,
either
by
direct
text
or
sound
consequence
,
that
cannot
rationally
be
denyed
:
all
that
hath
been
said
to
that
thing
is
,
to
give
us
a
glosse
of
moral
uncleannesse
,
and
thence
argue
,
that
if
the
legal
unclean
might
not
eat
the
Passeover
,
much
lesse
the
moral
unclean
,
if
the
legal
unclean
defiled
holy
things
,
much
more
moral
uncleannesse
,
the
consequence
is
naught
.
Because
1.
The
Church
of
the
Jews
were
in
Covenant
relation
,
and
holy
in
a
Covenant
sense
,
and
no
where
blamed
or
debarred
the
Ordinances
of
the
Church
upon
any
such
account
.
2.
Because
it
was
either
punished
by
their
Judicials
,
or
taken
away
by
a
continual
course
of
Sacrifices
;
and
therefore
could
not
rest
upon
them
,
much
lesse
bar
them
from
the
Sacrament
of
the
Passeover
.
3.
Because
nothing
could
excuse
from
the
not
observing
of
that
service
in
its
appointed
season
,
but
legal
uncleannesse
,
and
a
necessary
journey
,
upon
their
lives
;
if
nothing
else
would
excuse
,
then
all
others
were
to
keep
it
.
4.
It
's
clear
that
some
did
keep
the
Passeover
that
were
guilty
of
that
which
you
will
say
was
moral
uncleannesse
.
Ezra
9.1
.
after
they
had
kept
the
Passeover
,
complaint
was
brought
unto
Ezra
,
saying
,
The
people
of
Israel
,
Priests
and
Levites
have
not
separated
themselves
from
the
people
of
the
lands
,
doing
according
to
their
abominations
,
of
the
Canaanites
,
&c.
for
they
have
taken
of
the
daughters
for
themselves
,
and
for
their
sons
,
and
the
Princes
have
been
chief
in
this
trespasse
.
5.
I
say
further
that
in
some
cases
the
people
of
Israel
were
accepted
of
,
in
their
keeping
the
Passeover
,
although
many
of
them
did
eat
the
Passeover
otherwise
then
was
written
,
for
some
that
were
unclean
did
eat
thereof
,
2
Chron.
30.18
,
19
,
20.
6.
It
was
the
will
of
God
that
declared
that
such
things
upon
a
man
should
be
unclean
,
and
all
things
he
touched
should
be
so
by
his
institution
only
;
but
there
is
no
such
thing
declared
by
the
will
of
God
touching
moral
uncleannesse
in
the
Church
,
as
to
debar
them
the
Passeover
or
any
other
Ordinance●
all
his
,
and
other
mens
quotations
have
been
sufficiently
examined
as
to
this
,
and
fully
answered
,
unlesse
it
be
one
of
Mr.
Collins
,
Deut.
23.18
.
Thou
shall
not
bring
the
price
of
a
whore
,
or
the
price
of
a
Dogge
into
the
House
of
the
Lord
for
any
vow
,
for
these
are
abomination
to
the
Lord
,
if
not
the
price
,
then
not
the
Whore
or
Dogge
.
He
argues
from
the
lesser
to
the
greater
.
Answ.
Doth
it
follow
,
that
because
they
might
not
offer
any
of
those
two
for
any
vow
,
that
therefore
they
might
not
bring
their
Lambe
in
its
season
to
the
House
of
the
Lord
,
and
offer
it
before
him
according
to
Gods
command
?
It
was
an
abomination
to
doe
those
things
that
God
forbad
;
therefore
it
is
abomination
to
doe
that
which
God
commands
;
that
's
all
the
text
will
prove
,
as
to
debarring
of
the
moral
unclean
from
the
Passeover
.
Away
with
such
trifling
and
impertinent
applications
of
holy
Scriptures
.
The
truth
is
,
men
of
his
judgement
must
do
more
then
they
have
yet
done
;
I
had
almost
said
more
then
they
can
doe
,
or
else
had
better
never
to
have
said
any
thing
about
this
argument
drawn
from
the
Analogy
of
the
Passeover
:
all
that
man
can
say
against
us
from
that
,
doth
but
discover
their
own
weaknesse
in
fighting
against
the
Truth
.
His
tenth
Argument
,
It
's
a
sin
in
a
Minister
to
declare
those
one
visible
Body
,
who
are
not
one
body
with
visible
Saints
;
but
scandalous
sinners
are
not
one
body
with
visible
Saints
.
And
be
that
gives
the
Lords
Supper
,
declares
those
to
whom
he
gives
it
unto
,
to
be
one
visible
Body
.
—
Ergo.
1.
Answ.
Is
it
a
sin
to
say
the
visible
Church
is
the
visible
body
of
Christ
,
and
this
visible
body
consists
of
good
and
bad
,
Wheat
and
Tares
,
&c.
Is
it
a
sin
to
declare
this
?
2.
Are
not
all
that
are
baptized
into
one
Body
,
of
that
Body
,
and
are
not
the
scandalous
in
the
Church
baptized
,
and
is
it
a
sin
for
one
to
declare
that
the
baptized
are
one
visible
body
with
visible
Saints
?
What
is
a
visible
Saint
,
but
a
baptized
visible
professing
Christian
,
that
is
a
member
of
the
true
visible
Church
?
Is
not
an
offending
brother
a
brother
,
and
within
while
he
is
within
?
If
the
Sacrament
of
baptism
doe
initiate
into
that
one
body
,
and
the
Sacrament
of
the
Supper
bespeaks
them
so
too
that
are
baptized
:
Is
it
a
sin
for
a
Minister
to
give
the
Sacrament
to
such
,
by
declaring
that
which
is
true
,
and
which
no
man
can
deny
that
holds
our
Church
a
true
visible
Church
?
Who
can
you
say
is
not
a
real
member
of
Christ
in
particular
?
And
one
that
he
dyed
not
for
?
The
Apostle
affirmed
it
of
all
in
the
Church
of
Corinth
,
that
they
were
one
body
.
What
if
Gillespy
will
not
be
perswaded
the
Apostle
would
say
it
of
all
,
we
finde
it
so
written
,
and
I
think
it
safe
to
be
perswaded
of
the
truth
of
what
is
written
:
the
authority
of
Scripture
shall
perswade
with
me
before
the
authority
of
men
.
His
eleventh
Argument
,
The
Sacrament
is
not
to
be
given
to
any
who
are
not
Christs
Disciples
,
but
scandalous
sinners
are
none
of
his
disciples
—
Ergo.
The
Major
is
true
,
Answ.
but
the
Minor
is
to
be
distinguished
into
scandalous
sinners
out
of
the
Church
,
and
such
like
sinners
in
the
Church
;
to
the
former
it
's
granted
,
but
to
the
latter
it
's
denyed
,
What
are
Church-members
but
Disciples
?
What
are
all
that
professe
the
true
Christian
Religion
,
and
only
call
upon
the
name
of
the
Lord
Jesus
in
hope
of
eternal
life
by
him
,
but
Disciples
?
if
they
be
not
Disciples
and
within
,
then
they
are
Heathens
and
without
,
whom
the
Church
have
nothing
to
doe
to
judge
in
order
to
their
amendment
;
and
if
they
be
without
,
and
strangers
from
the
Covenant
of
promises
,
why
doe
you
baptize
their
children
or
presse
them
to
any
duties
of
Gospel
worship
,
as
incumbent
upon
them
as
Christians
?
If
they
be
Christians
,
and
within
,
why
should
they
not
have
their
proper
titles
,
and
priviledges
of
that
estate
?
If
you
can
make
them
neither
within
the
Church
,
nor
without
,
then
it
's
possible
you
may
doe
something
in
this
argument
;
and
when
you
have
done
that
,
I
doubt
not
but
you
will
be
answered
.
His
12.13
.
arguments
,
I
have
answered
in
my
answer
to
what
he
hath
excepted
against
The
Bar
removed
;
His
fourteenth
Argument
.
It
is
unlawful
to
partake
of
other
mens
sins
,
Ephes.
5.7
.
But
he
that
gives
the
Sacrament
wittingly
to
an
ignorant
scandalous
person
partakes
with
him
in
his
sin
.
—
Ergo.
I
grant
his
Major
,
Answ.
but
deny
his
Minor
,
because
giving
and
receiving
the
Sacrament
is
a
most
necessary
duty
of
worship
,
which
both
Minister
and
people
stand
mutually
ingaged
to
observe
and
perform
as
any
other
duty
of
worship
in
the
Church
,
and
the
Sacrament
being
given
and
received
with
that
reverence
and
order
according
to
the
form
of
holy
institution
,
there
is
no
sin
,
as
to
the
matter
it self
;
and
as
for
the
manner
,
as
in
every
thing
we
fail
all
,
so
in
this
,
and
if
this
were
sufficient
to
forbear
the
Sacrament
,
then
we
must
give
over
all
worship
.
In
all
duties
better
to
doe
as
well
as
we
can
,
then
not
at
all
;
so
that
it
follows
,
that
those
that
deny
the
Sacrament
to
those
that
are
bound
to
receive
it
are
partakers
of
their
sin
,
in
not
allowing
them
to
doe
their
duty
;
for
ignorance
and
other
offendings
,
doe
not
excuse
from
precepts
of
institute
Worship
,
and
the
holy
Supper
,
more
then
all
other
Gospel
Worship
,
while
persons
are
within
.
Shall
mans
impotency
and
iniquity
pull
down
Gods
authority
?
If
in
all
other
duties
of
Gospel
Worship
such
had
better
obey
as
wel
as
they
can
,
then
neglect
Gods
worship
altogether
,
it
's
but
a
begging
the
question
to
deny
it
,
in
the
observance
of
the
Sacrament
.
It
's
true
,
a
Minister
may
be
guilty
of
his
peoples
ignorance
,
and
may
fear
and
tremble
at
that
guilt
,
if
he
neglect
all
or
any
due
and
probable
principles
of
the
true
Religion
,
that
may
in
some
measure
prepare
them
to
profit
by
every
Ordinance
in
the
Church
:
But
having
done
his
duty
,
he
need
not
fear
to
give
them
the
Sacrament
,
but
tremble
at
the
neglect
of
that
administration
,
and
discouraging
weak
and
ignorant
Christians
from
it
.
True
it
is
also
,
that
a
Minister
and
the
Church
may
make
themselves
accessory
to
the
sins
of
offending
brethren
in
the
Church
,
by
their
carelesse
indulging
of
them
in
their
evill
wayes
,
by
not
reproving
,
admonishing
,
censuring
,
&c.
by
which
sinners
should
be
reformed
from
their
evils
;
otherwayes
the
Minister
and
Church
may
partake
of
those
sins
,
though
they
never
come
to
the
Sacrament
;
but
this
is
a
conceit
of
some
men
,
that
unlesse
a
man
doe
what
he
can
to
keep
such
away
from
the
Sacrament
,
he
is
a
partaker
of
their
sins
,
whereas
the
Sacrament
is
his
duty
as
well
as
any
other
Worship
,
who
is
not
to
be
blamed
for
that
,
but
for
his
sins
,
such
works
of
darknesse
that
the
Apostle
doth
instance
in
,
Ephes.
5.2
,
3
,
4.
the
place
that
this
argument
stands
upon
.
We
are
not
to
reform
such
offenders
in
those
lawful
things
,
they
are
but
to
reform
them
from
the
wicked
and
ungodly
courses
that
they
offend
in
.
I
grant
that
if
any
in
the
Church
should
pollute
the
holy
signs
of
Bread
and
Wine
to
profane
ends
,
in
a
meer
carnal
eating
and
drinking
unto
excesse
,
as
the
Corinthians
did
,
and
were
punished
for
,
or
if
by
any
rude
profane
carriage
or
misdemeanour
,
shall
be
disorderly
in
the
time
of
administration
,
the
Officers
of
the
Church
not
doing
what
in
them
lyes
to
restrain
and
prevent
it
,
might
be
partakers
of
their
sins
:
but
this
is
a
case
which
was
hardly
ever
known
in
our
Congregations
.
But
as
for
Church-members
that
come
with
reverence
,
and
demean
themselves
orderly
,
and
conform
to
the
external
actions
,
according
to
the
rules
of
institution
,
there
can
nothing
be
proved
against
any
for
being
partakers
with
other
mens
sins
,
as
to
this
particular
,
so
far
as
I
am
able
to
judge
.
I
have
now
given
you
an
account
of
Mr.
Collins
14.
arguments
,
to
prove
Suspension
from
the
Sacrament
,
only
distinct
from
Excommunication
.
And
if
I
mistake
not
very
much
,
I
have
sully
answered
them
by
removing
all
his
foundations
from
Scripture
and
reason
he
pretends
to
deduct
them
from
.
What
others
can
doe
I
doe
not
know
,
I
will
prejudge
none
of
his
perswasion
;
but
yet
I
am
somewhat
confident
,
that
the
more
wise
men
search
into
this
Controversie
,
the
more
they
will
finde
it
a
work
of
that
difficulty
to
make
good
Suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
only
from
Scriptures
,
and
allow
the
liberty
of
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
as
members
,
that
they
had
need
follow
no
other
studies
but
this
that
undertake
it
.
Touching
that
authority
brought
in
proof
of
Suspension
,
so
largely
insisted
upon
,
I
cannot
examine
.
And
therefore
must
leave
it
to
those
that
are
in
a
capacity
to
search
and
judge
;
whether
Mr.
Collins
hath
dealt
any
more
impartially
with
his
Authors
then
with
the
holy
Scriptures
.
I
question
,
whether
any
of
his
quotations
,
Ancient
,
or
Modern
,
doth
reach
Suspension
,
as
,
himself
hath
stated
it
,
and
as
many
practise
it
:
for
it
was
alwayes
to
be
put
in
execution
by
the
authority
of
the
whole
Church
,
and
not
left
to
the
liberty
of
a
Pastor
and
his
Elders
to
deny
the
Sacrament
to
whom
they
please
,
without
any
remedy
of
appeals
.
Whether
they
suspended
from
the
Sacrament
of
the
holy
Supper
only
,
and
allowed
the
suspended
the
liberty
of
all
the
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
as
Church-members
.
Whether
their
Suspension
was
gradual
and
made
use
of
only
in
order
to
their
proceedings
unto
Excommunication
,
and
so
of
no
longer
continuance
then
to
try
the
offenders
obstinacy
,
or
repentance
.
Whether
they
grounded
Suspension
on
the
Word
of
God
,
or
on
the
policy
and
prudence
of
the
Church
:
if
he
say
the
former
,
he
may
doe
well
to
shew
us
their
grounds
;
if
the
latter
,
then
that
doth
much
alter
the
case
:
for
Mr.
Collins
doth
not
urge
it
upon
any
such
account
,
nor
may
the
Churches
prudence
be
pleaded
,
where
Christ
commands
,
and
the
Word
doth
determine
.
Whether
non-admittance
of
Penitents
,
Aliens
born
,
Catechumens
,
unbaptized
,
were
any
thing
at
all
unto
suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
.
I
question
whether
any
one
instance
can
be
given
of
any
Church
or
persons
that
were
judged
Orthodox
,
that
ever
maintained
that
a
Church-member
in
possession
of
the
Sacrament
,
was
denyed
the
Sacrament
by
his
Minister
and
Elders
,
meerly
for
ignorance
and
for
the
omitting
of
some
private
duties
;
and
allowed
the
benefit
of
all
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
as
members
,
which
is
the
practice
of
the
Presbyterian
party
that
Mr.
Collins
defends
,
or
that
ever
any
scandalous
members
were
only
kept
from
the
Sacrament
,
without
any
further
Juridical
proceedings
unto
Excommunication
;
or
whether
any
Church
ever
would
suffer
their
members
of
years
to
neglect
the
Ordinance
of
the
holy
Supper
year
after
year
through
carelesnesse
,
or
meerly
leave
them
out
as
Heathens
,
though
born
in
the
Church
and
baptized
.
Now
I
say
,
if
that
authority
which
is
quoted
by
Mr.
Collins
will
not
reach
these
cases
,
they
are
but
little
for
his
purpose
,
they
will
not
speak
to
the
clearing
of
the
Controversie
in
hand
.
Besides
humane
authority
only
will
not
satisfie
the
conscience
of
the
doubtful
;
it
is
only
the
authority
of
the
holy
Scriptures
that
must
satisfie
conscience
,
and
be
binding
unto
all
.
And
as
it
is
apparent
the
ancient
Church
did
erre
in
their
extremity
of
rigour
in
their
censures
in
respect
of
length
of
time
,
so
it
's
possible
enough
they
might
erre
in
their
several
degrees
of
censures
.
Not
so
much
their
practice
as
the
ground
thereof
from
Scripture
rule
will
give
satisfaction
to
those
that
doubt
.
Besides
these
,
let
Mr.
Collins
give
us
authority
of
any
Church
before
these
last
ages
,
that
ever
made
a
Pastoral
examination
of
Church-members
of
years
,
of
that
necessity
unto
the
holy
Supper
,
without
which
they
would
debar
them
the
Sacrament
.
By
these
and
the
like
queries
,
I
hope
we
shall
hear
by
some
of
the
Presbyterian
judgement
,
or
others
,
by
what
authority
they
practise
so
many
things
,
not
to
be
found
in
the
holy
Scriptures
.
But
I
finde
Mr.
Collins
in
his
Booke
pag.
(
157.
)
making
some
Apology
for
themselves
.
He
confesses
their
present
practise
doth
differ
from
other
reformed
setled
Churches
:
as
to
the
suspension
of
any
they
admit
,
they
agree
with
others
,
and
wil
suspend
none
but
after
admonition
for
some
scandalous
sin
.
And
indeed
saith
he
this
only
is
properly
Suspension
.
We
deny
the
Sacrament
indeed
to
others
,
viz.
such
as
will
not
give
account
of
their
faith
and
submit
to
the
order
of
the
Church
,
&c.
What
did
Mr.
Collins
mean
in
his
stating
the
question
to
put
in
ignorant
persons
,
Answ.
1
if
none
are
to
be
suspended
,
but
after
admonition
for
some
scandalous
sin
?
if
this
indeed
be
properly
suspension
,
what
will
he
make
denying
the
Sacrament
to
the
ignorant
not
resusing
to
learn
?
and
denying
it
those
that
are
not
convinced
of
submitting
to
Church
examination
,
and
an
explicite
profession
of
faith
as
their
duty
?
What
will
he
call
that
?
If
it
be
not
suspension
properly
,
what
is
it
then
?
the
punishment
is
the
same
with
those
that
are
excommunicate
for
scandalous
sins
,
or
suspended
properly
:
all
they
doe
,
amounts
but
to
this
,
to
deny
them
the
Sacrament
.
And
yet
they
would
be
judged
to
agree
with
other
reformed
Churches
,
but
it
was
never
heard
of
before
these
present
times
,
that
a
Heathen
,
an
excommunicate
person
,
the
suspended
,
or
left
out
,
had
al
equal
priviledge
to
all
other
Ordinances
but
Sacraments
.
They
agree
with
other
reformed
Churches
as
to
suspension
properly
;
as
the
Brownists
and
Anabaptists
doe
,
all
agree
in
this
to
suspend
scandalous
members
that
will
not
be
resormed
by
admonition
:
but
what
's
this
to
the
case
in
controversie
,
unlesse
they
judge
,
that
not
any
are
members
untill
they
be
admitted
upon
profession
of
faith
,
&c.
as
others
of
the
separations
judge
:
if
so
,
what
is
the
Church
priviledge
of
one
born
a
Christian
and
baptized
,
and
of
years
of
discretion
to
the
holy
Supper
,
more
then
a
Pagan
,
who
upon
his
profession
of
faith
,
hath
right
to
Sacraments
?
What
doth
admission
upon
profession
of
faith
imply
,
but
that
all
in
the
Church
not
so
admitted
,
are
Heathens
and
without
,
making
the
Lords
Supper
the
initiating
Ordinance
into
Church
Communion
,
and
subjection
to
censures
?
If
of
those
that
are
admitted
none
may
be
suspended
but
after
admonition
for
some
scandalous
sin
,
and
this
only
is
properly
suspension
;
Then
let
me
demand
of
Mr.
Col.
what
he
will
make
the
cause
of
excommunication
.
If
he
say
that
scandalous
sinning
is
the
cause
of
both
,
then
one
of
those
censures
are
superfluous
;
if
he
say
,
we
must
distinguish
of
scandalous
sining
in
regard
of
degrees
some
deserving
the
lesser
censure
,
the
other
the
greater
Excommunication
.
Let
him
make
that
good
from
the
Scriptures
;
which
concerns
him
to
doe
before
he
can
prove
suspension
from
the
Sacrament
distinct
from
Excommunication
:
in
the
mean
time
what
he
affirms
of
proper
Suspension
,
is
all
one
with
Excommunication
,
and
upon
the
same
ground
,
the
Church
may
as
well
proceed
unto
Excommunication
as
Suspension
:
so
that
this
very
concession
of
his
,
doth
(
upon
the
matter
)
undermine
his
chiefest
strength
,
and
render
all
he
hath
said
in
proof
of
Suspension
as
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
frivolous
.
But
in
the
next
place
his
pleading
,
That
they
must
be
lookt
upon
as
now
reforming
a
disordered
Church
:
had
former
Ministers
done
their
duties
they
might
have
saved
us
this
labour
of
putting
our
people
upon
making
a
profession
of
faith
in
order
to
admittance
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
Answ.
1
1.
Me
thinks
the
sad
effects
of
our
late
reformings
might
have
put
a
stop
to
Mr.
Col.
thus
late
pleadings
;
the
issue
being
little
else
but
either
neglect
of
Gods
Ordinance
,
or
running
Pastors
and
people
into
a
deluge
of
division
,
and
confusion
.
2.
It
's
granted
by
all
,
that
our
Church
in
respect
of
some
evil
circumstances
in
doctrine
,
worship
,
and
discipline
,
had
need
of
a
holy
,
yet
a
wary
and
a
wholesome
reformation
,
that
might
best
stand
with
the
health
,
peace
,
union
,
&
edification
of
the
whole
.
3.
That
the
most
godly
and
knowing
part
of
the
Nation
,
have
had
the
advantage
of
power
and
opportunity
to
reform
what
ever
was
amiss
,
I
think
cannot
be
denyed
.
But
whether
they
have
sincerely
endeavoured
it
,
in
that
way
that
might
best
stand
with
the
health
,
peace
,
union
,
and
edification
of
the
whole
,
doth
admit
of
questioning
.
4.
'T
is
certain
our
late
reformers
found
an
establishment
of
the
main
substantials
of
Doctrine
,
Worship
,
and
discipline
in
the
Church
.
And
do
they
think
to
advance
reformain
the
removal
of
the
foundations
of
the
Churches
well
being
?
5.
Reformation
stands
in
the
reducing
all
Christians
to
a
universal
observance
of
al
the
known
Laws
&
Ordinances
of
Jesus
Christ
uniformly
;
and
not
in
setting
up
of
humane
inventions
,
that
the
Church
must
bow
unto
,
in
order
to
holy
worship
:
and
hence
Mr.
Col.
must
first
make
good
,
that
it
is
the
duty
of
all
in
the
Church
to
make
a
publick
profession
of
faith
,
or
submit
to
the
examination
of
his
Eldership
,
in
order
to
the
holy
Supper
,
before
he
tels
others
what
they
require
now
,
&
suspend
for
,
is
to
be
excused
,
by
their
being
upon
reformation
now
:
A
strange
reformation
that
's
begun
in
making
void
the
commands
of
Jesus
Christ
,
&
carryed
on
with
prejudices
and
division
,
and
if
persisted
in
,
may
end
in
confusion
.
Was
it
ever
known
before
now
that
Reformation
began
in
admitting
to
the
Passeover
or
Lords
Supper
?
it's
an
absurd
reforming
that
wil
allow
those
to
be
Church-members
,
and
yet
deny
them
to
do
the
duty
of
a
Member
and
Christian
.
It
was
more
rational
and
agreeing
with
Scripture
rule
,
to
correct
that
general
carelesse
neglect
in
Ministers
and
people
in
order
to
reforming
,
then
to
devise
a
novel
way
in
a
setled
reformed
Church
to
hinder
the
most
of
Church-memb
.
from
doing
their
duty
.
The
care
&
zeal
of
our
first
reformers
,
was
both
to
exhort
and
to
presse
all
of
years
to
actual
receiving
,
not
thinking
it
sufficient
to
be
present
gazing
on
,
or
carelesse
in
not
preparing
;
and
likewise
corrected
those
that
neglected
this
holy
observance
:
how
unlike
are
these
mens
spirits
to
our
first
reformers
?
It
's
true
,
many
Ministers
then
were
too
carelesse
of
their
duties
in
catechising
and
instructing
the
younger
sort
,
and
so
it
will
be
still
;
but
what
then
?
Doth
that
disoblige
Christians
from
that
necessary
part
of
institute
Worship
?
Ministers
neglect
their
duties
to
their
people
,
therefore
the
people
must
not
doe
their
duty
to
their
Lord
;
but
must
be
left
out
and
levelled
with
the
Pagan
world
!
Had
our
Church
been
abolished
,
when
they
abolished
Episcopacy
,
then
in
order
unto
constituting
and
gathering
a
new
Church
,
a
verbal
profession
of
saith
in
order
unto
lawful
baptism
,
had
been
proper
;
but
to
plead
it
unto
reforming
but
of
the
same
Church
already
imbodyed
and
planted
together
by
baptism
,
is
to
be
wise
beyond
what
is
written
.
If
Mr.
Collins
plea
be
good
for
the
Presbyterian
perswasion
,
it
holds
as
good
to
the
Independent
practice
,
for
they
admit
into
Communion
upon
the
same
principle
,
But
he
would
not
have
this
lookt
upon
as
a
standing
principle
.
Answ.
(
Why
,
)
because
it
wants
a
standing
rule
,
that
's
his
reason
I
judge
.
But
then
he
tels
us
,
Our
former
Ministers
would
admit
any
one
for
his
two
pence
.
This
is
somewhat
an
ignorant
slander
,
Answ.
as
if
it
was
left
to
the
liberty
of
a
private
Minister
to
admit
and
refuse
at
his
pleasure
,
when
he
might
know
both
the
Minister
and
people
were
under
the
precept
and
penalty
of
the
Church
.
But
what
means
all
this
pleading
to
excuse
their
rigid
practices
,
but
that
either
they
question
their
warrant
,
or
would
have
us
think
the
case
is
extraordinary
,
and
so
will
warrant
their
irregular
improper
proceedings
in
order
to
admitting
Church-members
to
the
Lords
Supper
;
an
argument
indeed
of
late
,
that
doth
set
the
whole
land
at
a
stand
to
answer
,
but
not
so
much
for
strength
of
reason
that
is
in
it
,
but
for
a
power
out
of
it
,
that
will
make
any
thing
hold
that
's
said
.
158.
pag.
Mr.
Collins
pleads
further
,
and
tels
his
Reader
,
That
there
was
no
way
but
this
to
begin
any
Reformation
amongst
us
,
who
by
our
former
way
of
administration
of
the
holy
Supper
had
made
our
Churches
a
reproach
to
Papists
,
and
a
grief
to
all
Protestants
,
and
opened
a
way
for
Brownists
and
Anabaptists
to
fill
their
Congregation
with
our
strictest
Professors
,
&c.
The
substance
of
this
is
much
to
be
doubted
of
,
Answ.
unlesse
our
common
people
were
more
ignorant
then
the
common
people
in
Rome
or
Italy
,
who
are
taught
that
Ignorance
is
the
Mother
of
Devotion
,
and
I
think
the
most
of
Orthodox
Protestants
were
more
grieved
about
the
gesture
determined
by
the
Church
,
and
those
superstitious
rails
,
and
turning
the
Table
Altarwise
,
and
the
insufficient
administrators
;
then
at
our
free
admission
of
Church-members
.
Suppose
all
he
saith
were
true
,
is
there
no
way
to
reform
,
but
to
remove
the
foundations
of
the
Churches
established
doctrine
,
worship
,
and
discipline
,
and
innovate
wayes
of
our
own
politick
choosing
,
different
to
all
other
setled
reformed
Churches
(
as
himself
confesses
)
Say
our
malady
in
a
great
part
was
ignorance
,
could
not
they
begun
reformation
with
a
more
then
ordinary
diligence
in
teaching
and
instruction
,
and
friendly
admonition
,
in
the
carrying
on
all
Gods
ordinances
in
love
,
reverence
,
and
unity
,
taking
all
advantages
to
promote
knowledg
,
in
which
in
time
we
might
have
hoped
to
see
some
good
proficiency
,
in
the
growing
up
of
the
whole
together
by
the
goodnesse
and
blessing
of
the
Lord
.
For
it
's
certain
,
that
the
Scriptures
teach
not
any
thing
about
the
censuring
of
Church-members
for
ignorance
simply
,
and
to
deprive
Church-members
of
the
benefit
of
Gods
Ordinances
,
for
causes
lesse
then
the
Scriptures
do
warrant
,
is
no
reformation
,
but
rather
an
usurpation
upon
the
priviledge
and
right
of
a
Church-member
.
Say
again
,
that
loose
and
scandalous
members
was
another
part
of
our
malady
,
is
the
denying
the
Sacrament
to
a
multitude
of
such
sinners
,
the
only
way
to
reform
them
?
What
care
such
for
the
Sacrament
,
so
long
as
it
's
the
ordinary
case
of
most
,
and
they
may
have
the
liberty
of
all
the
other
Ordinances
in
the
Church
as
members
?
How
is
this
like
to
reform
their
persons
,
when
they
may
be
let
alone
to
be
loose
and
profane
,
if
they
doe
but
keep
away
from
the
Sacraments
?
Such
a
kinde
of
reforming
that
was
never
read
of
in
holy
writ
,
nor
in
any
Orthodox
Authors
.
Had
it
not
been
better
to
reform
according
to
Scripture
rules
and
precedents
,
(
we
judging
all
in
the
Church
adhering
to
the
Protestant
Religion
Church-members
)
to
have
prest
them
unto
all
Christian
observance
,
and
to
have
dealt
with
them
as
those
that
are
within
?
and
to
have
proceeded
against
some
unto
the
like
admonitions
and
excommucation
Juridically
?
Gods
way
is
alwayes
best
,
and
we
may
groundedly
hope
to
have
his
way
attended
with
a
blessing
of
successe
in
the
amendment
of
the
worst
sinners
amongst
us
.
It
's
a
pitiful
shift
to
prevent
our
strictest
professors
from
running
into
the
Brownists
Congregations
,
to
practise
their
principles
,
and
so
become
like
them
in
making
admission
to
the
Lords
Supper
upon
a
publike
profession
of
faith
,
the
only
ground
to
unite
and
imbody
the
visible
Church
into
Ecclesiastical
Communion
,
and
so
in
gratifying
some
few
in
their
error
,
require
such
terms
unto
actual
receiving
of
necessity
,
that
the
baptized
in
the
Church
of
years
are
no
where
bound
to
submit
unto
,
nor
in
a
capacity
to
come
unto
:
And
yet
are
under
the
obligation
of
actual
receiving
,
unlesse
in
plain
tearms
you
will
unchurch
them
,
and
so
unduty
them
,
and
speak
out
as
the
Brownists
do
.
But
I
think
enough
hath
been
said
already
as
to
this
,
and
therefore
I
shall
now
take
my
leave
of
my
Reader
,
having
done
with
the
main
things
in
Mr.
Collins
late
Book
as
it
opposes
free
admission
to
the
Lords
Supper
.
And
I
hope
Mr.
Collins
may
seriously
conceive
himself
soberly
and
rationally
answered
,
as
to
Juridical
Suspension
distinct
from
Excommunication
,
as
himself
hath
stated
it
.
He
hath
taken
some
pains
to
prove
it
in
the
power
of
a
single
Minister
to
suspend
from
the
Supper
,
but
I
think
it
needlesse
to
examine
him
,
or
answer
him
in
that
;
for
I
know
that
Mr.
Collins
will
have
work
enough
to
maintain
that
Suspension
from
the
Lords
Supper
which
he
cals
Juridical
;
he
might
first
have
tryed
how
he
could
have
come
off
with
this
,
before
he
had
shewed
himself
so
forward
to
goe
about
to
prove
that
which
is
so
denyed
by
all
that
are
Orthodox
and
sober
.
And
I
know
were
there
any
thing
in
what
he
hath
said
of
private
Suspension
considerable
,
and
worthy
of
a
consutation
;
that
learned
Reverend
Gentleman
Mr.
Joanes
,
whom
he
attempts
to
answer
,
would
call
him
to
an
acount
of
his
forwardnesse
of
Spirit
,
to
Lord
it
over
Gods
heritage
,
and
to
be
a
Pope
in
his
own
Congregation
.
FINIS
.