The defence of the nonconformists plea for peace, or, An account of the matter…

II. If he know a man to be a Papist, if he be a Church-Papist, or have a dispensation, he cannot on that account deny him the Sacrament. Yea, Dr. Heylin in the Life of Arch-Bishop Laud, maketh it his commendable design to have drawn the Papists into our Churches, (as they were, say some others, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign; and this, say they, is to be a Queen Elizabeth Protestant, to be one that will communicate with the Papists in our Liturgy.) But many good Ministers dare not give the Sacrament to a Papist, till he repent and renounce the Papal Universal Government, and their grossest corruptions.

III. If the Minister know any man to be an Adulterer, Fornicator, Drunkard, or Heretic, or Infidel, by private conference, confession, or other notice, and cannot prove it, he must give him the Sacrament.

III. If the Minister know any man to be an Adulterer, Fornicator, Drunkard, or Heretick, or Infidel, by private conference, confession, or other notice, and cannot prove it, he must give him the Sacrament.

IV. If he (that converseth not with one of an hundred himself; and can know them but by hear-say) shall hear a neighbour or two, or ten, report that such a one is taken by those that converse with him to be an Heretic, Atheist, Infidel, Scorner at Christ and Scripture, a Fornicator, Drunkard, &c. he cannot deny him the Sacrament unless the reporters will stand to it as witnesses. And it's known, 1. That few that can prove it will tell it the Minister. 2. Good people that hear it, cannot prove it. 3. Those that can prove it, and privately tell it, will not trouble themselves, and offend their neighbours, by witnessing it openly. What need we more than experience? Do not your Books and Complaints tell us, that not only Coffee-houses and Taverns, but other places are witnesses of abounding Atheism, Infidelity, or Sadduceism; and that our Parishes have great numbers of them? And how many such have you known in London excommunicated, or openly suspended? And are not the London Ministers able good men, that would do it if they could? Ask them why it's never done. If you say, that such come not, but excommunicate themselves: I answer, 1. Are they not still members of the Parish-Church? 2. How doth the Minister know that they come not, who knoweth very few of his Parishioners? 3. It's known by their acquaintance, that such ordinarily communicate so far as to satisfy the Law. For what should hinder them when it is their interest?