If the Major be true , the legally unclean could not lawfully be kept from the Passeover , yet God threatens the Priests for not doing it . Besides , Excommunication is a separation in the Church ; for the excommunicate person is not out of all relation to the Church , but to be admonished as a brother ; yet we are to separate from him ( as a diseased member ) both in respect of Sacramental communion , and intimacy of civil communion .

The unworthiness of some must not debar others of their right . Argum. 13

But ( admitting suspension ) this is done .

Ergo.

1. As to the Major if he means by debarring others of their right , devesting them of their right , it is true . 2. if he means hindring them for a time from enjoying their right , It is a question whither such a case may not be , suppose the peace of the Church must be broken , or suppose there be one or two have a right who cannot make a communion .

But to the Minor .

2. I see not how the admission of suspension enforceth the debarring of any their right . Let the worthy be received , and the unworthy suspended . The good mother will feed her children , but if the doggs be so many that she cannot at present , she will watch her time till they be shut out of doors .

To whom the tender of the Covenant belongs , Argum. 14 to those all the seals of it belong .

But to the ignorant and scandalous the tender of the Covenant belong .

Ergo.

The Major is false ; though the tender of the Covenant belongs to all , yet the seal belongs to none but those who have evidenced their acceptance of the covenant ; God hath commanded the offer of the Covenant to all , but not the setting of the Seal .

I find no more in that book looking thwart upon me ; for I durst not defend Mr. Helms his Arguments . If Mr. Barksdales friends have truly represented the dispute . I could either have wished Mr. B. stronger Opponents that day , or at least his Opponents stronger Arguments .

But I must not let pass a passage or two I find there in a letter from Mr. Barksdale to Collonel A. dated June 1653.

1. He tells the Collonel , and now the world that Judas was an hypocrite disclosed , when Christ admitted him ; whether Christ admitted him or no , I have shewed we have just reason to doubt , if not to conclude the contrary . But suppose he did , how it appears he was an hypocrite disclosed , I cannot tell ; that Christ ( who as God knew hearts ) knew his heart is plain indeed , but is an hypocrite known only to an all seeing God disclosed think we ?

2. He tells the Collonell , Christ did not eate the Lamb. This is indeed Grotius his notion ; to which more afterwards . But neither Grotius , nor Mr. Barksdale sure shall ever make sober Christians believe that Christ supped that night with a humane invention instead of a divine institution ; the eating of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , was no fulfilling the Law , which we think Christ did in that last act .

In the same letter he tells us , That the sop Christ gave to Judas was the Sacramental bread ; upon this very ground was founded the mistake of diverse of the Antients , from whence they concluded Judas was at the institution , and a communicant there , because they conceived this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the sacramental bit . To this opinion , Cyrill , Euthymus , and ( as I remember ) Austin ( somewhere ) doth encline ; I confess it startled me at first , because he hints me that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify a bit of bread ; and so doth Dr. D. Hammonds Annotations on John 13. Hammond in his late Annotations on the Gospel , who also puts in Hesychius for a witness should say ( I know not where ) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; From whence he confidently concludes ( as well he might ) that Judas was at the Sacrament .

I must confess at first blush I had almost began to quit our notion of the sop being the bitter herbs dipt in the Charosheth , allowing the Dr. and other learned Expositors ( in the same mistake ) a great deal more Critical learning then I dare pretend to . But post 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( which they say are best ) remembring that they did not use to dip bread in the Char●sheth ; and that if this were the Sacramental bread , it would enjoin us all to dip it before we give it ( for I cannot allow the Doctors notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , though I have not time now to enter my exceptions , I resolved to look a little before I subscribed . And first I find ,

Hesychius saith no such thing ; he saies indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so signifies , but saies nothing of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and it is a pittyful shift that the Doctor hath , saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a false print ; for which

1. Suid. in verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Scapulain Lex . Budeus in Lex . You have onely the Doctors word .

2. Suidas then is false printed too ; for he saies the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .

3. If there had been no such word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Doctor might have been believed ; but there is such a word in the Greek tongue which so signifies . Scapula expounds it Frustulum ; Budeus , inferior pars pains , mica aut crustulum panis nimium assati .

4. If indeed ( in Hesychius ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had stood in the place of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , we might have been so charitable as to have believed the Doctor , but Hesychius hath not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at all , but onely its Primitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and there are nine or ten words which in their Alphabetical order intervene ( I may mistake the number , but I believe not much if at all ) now considering this , why we should believe the Printer rather than the Doctor mistaken , I cannot tell ; especially considering what others no less Criticks in the Greek tongue say .

5. Steph. Thesauru . Gr. Lin. Bnd. Comment. Gr. Lin. Bud. Lex . Gr. Suidasin verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Phav . in Lex● Diog. Laertius in v. Diog. Eustathius in ●om Od. l. 2. Stephen saies it signifies a crust of bread put into a mans mouth , a mouthful of bread , or any other edible thing . Budeus in his Commentataries tells us it signifies any mouthful , in his Lexicon he translates it by Buccella a mouthfull .

Suidas sayes it signifies Bread , and not only so , but Reiesculente frustulum , quantum os capere potest , quod ideo Buccea vocatur sive Buccella , a morsel or mouthfull of any edible thing .

Phavorinus expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith he , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( parts , little bits of things , thence it is joined with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which it needed not if it signified as much alone ) and indeed for this there is a place plain enough in Diogenes Laertius in the life of Diogenes where we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for which ( saith Stephen ) debuit dicere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; what Phavorinus saith of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath borrowed verbatim from Eustathius , who saies the same thing in his comment on the ninth book of the Odysses ; where we find Homers authority sufficient to spoil the Doctors and Mr. Barksdales notion , where it is said of the Cyclops being asleep , — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . — Homer . Odyss. l. 9.

From whence it is plain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth onely signify a mouthful , a bit , and doth not designare materiam ; and conformably to this Hesychius expounds it only by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( now surely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a pig of his own Sow ) and being a diminutive derived from it , Hesyc . in Lex . doth not add to the signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . can be no more than a little 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , being daughter to it ; conformably to this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , another sprig from the same root , used Rom. 12.20 . If thine enemy hunger , Rom. 12.20 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which surely need not be construed Give him a bit of bread to eat , and 1 Cor. 13.3 . 1 Cor. 13.3 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it cannot be construed of bits of Bread , except we will say Pauls estate was made up of nothing but loaves of bread . By all this the vanity of the Doctors and and Mr. Barksdales Criticism appears ; as also how dangerous a thing it is to build divinity conclusions upon vain criticisms . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies onely a little mouthful ; be it of what it will ; for that must be understood by what is joined with it . Christ took 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a little mouthfull and gave it to Judas ; but it still remains to prove that this was bread ; we say it was the herbs , which he dipt in the Charcsheth and gave it to Judas .