A continuation of the exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the…

That this passage in our Apostles discourse hath been looked upon as accompanied with great difficulties, is known to all. And many have the Differences been about its Interpretation. For both Doctrinally and Practically, sundry have here stumbled and miscarried. It is almost generally agreed upon, that from these words, and the colourable but indeed perverse Interpretation and Application made of them by some in the Primitive times, occasioned by the then present circumstances of things, to be mentioned ⟨p. 39⟩afterwards, the Latin Church was so backward in receiving the Epistle it self, that it had not absolutely prevailed therein in the days of Hierome, as we have elsewhere declared. Wherefore it is necessary, that we should a little enquire into the occasion of the great contests which have been in the Church almost in all Ages, about the sense of this place.

It is known that the Primitive Church according to its Duty, was carefully watchful about the Holiness and upright walking of all that were admitted into the Society and Fellowship of it. Hence upon every known and visible failing, they required an open Repentance from the Offenders, before they would admit them into a participation of the sacred mysteries. But upon flagitious and scandalous crimes, such as Murder, Adultery, or Idolatry, in many Churches they would never admit those who had been guilty of them into their Communion any more. Their greatest and most signal trial, was with respect unto them, who through fear of death complied with the Gentiles in their Idolatrous Worship, in the time of Persecution. For they had fixed no certain general Rules whereby they should unanimously proceed, but every Church exercised severity or lenity, according as they saw cause, upon the circumstances of particular instances. Hence Cyprian in his banishment would not positively determine concerning those of the Church in Carthage, who had so sinned and fallen, but deferred his thoughts until his return; when he resolved to advise with the whole Church, and settle all things according to the counsel that should be agreed on amongst them. Yea many of his Epistles are on this subject peculiarly; and in them all, if compared together, it is evident, that there was no Rule agreed upon herein, nor was he himself resolved in his own mind, though strictly on all occasions opposing Novatianus, wherein it had been well if his Arguments had answered his Zeal. Before this the Church of Rome was esteemed in particular more remiss in their Discipline, and more than other Churches in their re-admission unto Communion, of notorious Offenders. Hence Tertullian in his Book de Poenitentia, reflects on Zepherinus the Bishop of Rome, that he had admitted Adulterers unto Repentance, and thereby unto the Communion of the Church. But that Church proceeding in her Lenity, and every day enlarging her Charity, Novatus and Novatianus taking offence thereat, advanced an Opinion on the contrary extreme.