PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)

JUDAS EXCOMMVNICATED, OR A VINDICATION OF THE Communion of Saints: BEING A brief Examination and clear Re­futation of Mr Peter Lightfoots Arguments for proof of JUDAS his re­ceiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, (which, could he prove, makes no­thing at all for a mixt Communion.)

By JOSEPH HEMING, a Servant to all men in the Goſpel of Jeſus Chriſt.

〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉


〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉


LONDON, Printed for Giles Calvert at the black Spread-Eagle neer the Weſt end of Pauls, 1649.


To all the SAINTS OF THE Moſt High God In and about ƲTTOXITER: Salvation by JESUS.

Precious Hearts,

I Confeſs I am engaged in low and fruitleſs Contreverſies, a­gainſt which I find a reluctancy in my ſpirit, becauſe they tend not ſo much to edification as could be Wiſhed: but as I am bound to vindicate the loweſs truth from the find aſperſions. and falſe calumniations of Satan and his inſtruments; ſo I daily, God that low things are moſt beneficial for beleevers of loweſt attain­ments: And what I have done in this, is for their ſakes, who came out of Aegypt, out of Babylon but the other day; I am unwilling they ſhould be carried captives back again, or that thoſe who dearly ſee the doors opened to them, ſhould be any longer kept in bondage. Many weak ones have ſtumbled at what Mr Lightfoot hath ſpo­ken and written, though there be neither Divinity nor Reaſon••it.


I never intended this Anſwer of mine ſhould have come to a p••­lick cenſure, had not Mr Lightfoot and his unholy Communic•••dealt deceifully (that I ſay not, diſhoneſtly) with me, in breaking ſome ſentences, and taking up ſuch pieces of them, as they conc••••might bring the truth and my perſon into contempt and diſgrace, poſſeſſing people at home and abroad, that I wrong and abuſe him, whilſt be ſhame fully conceals my whole Anſwer, together with the true intent and meaning of thoſe innocent expreſſions he and they ſo much cry out upon. Wrong be ſhall have none, if ſhame, he may thank himſelf.

Moſt of you ſufficiently know how patiently I have born wish him hither to, and my own conſcience tells me, the truth hath ſuffer­ed too much through my forbearance and long-ſuffering. He hath had his time to inſult over, caluminiate, reproach, and belye it, re­porting whatſoever be pleaſed touching my Anſwer to his Paper, inſomuch that no any ungodly onesell immediately to blaſpheming, curng, railing, and trampling upon the Truth, as though it had been quite conquered. And although Rabſhekeh's railings make no breaches in Jeuſalms Walls, yet many weak Chriſtains (ſee­ing only a few unchriſtianly wreſted-expreſſions in ſmal bits of Pa­per, and not knowning how little Judas his receiving or not receiving doth either advantage or diſadvartage a Communion of Saints) Were abundantly diſcouraged, and bunded downs their necks, that the Whore which ſits on many warers might go over. And now I hope it is high time for me to ſpeak in vindication of the truth, and for ſatisfaction of ſuch as are ſo eaſily ſerupled by falſe reports, and rea­dy upon every ſummons from Satan ro deliver up their ſtrong holds, not knowing they have, on every ſide, Salvation for Walls and Bul­warks; and to publiſh my Anſwer, moſt unfaithfully dealt withal by Mr Lightfoot, that ye may ſee it, and then judg righteouſly be­tween me (or rather the truth) and him. And I would intreat thoſe into whoſe hands this may come, to turn unto the Scriptures quoted (Which I hope will not be wiſ-printed) and ſtrictly to examine them, and then to judg impartially: I crave no ſavour at the hands of any man; hough this piece Was never cut out for the publique vion•••; let me ſee my Errata's, and I ſhall endeavor to correct and amind them.

My Antagoniſt takes great exceptions at a plain-dealing Epi­ſtle,5 intended only for himſelf and ſome few Friends, for I had no thoughts of printing then, and is conceited that I have exceedingly wronged him in it; all the right I can do him, is, not to inſert it here, and (though I am able to make good every jot and tittle of it) for the future to bury it in the abiſs of Oblivion, if ſo be I am not enforced by his unjuſt clamours, and exotick conſtructions put upon it, to ſend it, With a large Comment upon it, after this.

All the exceptions he makes (ſo far forth as I can learn either from himſelf or others) againſt the particulars of my Anſwer, are ſo frivolous and groundleſs, that he durſt not give them under his own hand, much leſs publiſh them to the World, and therefore I may very well paſs them by; but yet I muſt needs vindicate the laſt particular (in the cloſe of all,) againſt which he hath draws up a Charge of high Crimis and Miſdemeanors: Good Friends and Readers turn to it; is begins thus, That I ſhould ſuper-abun­dantly wrong him, if I ſhould not rank him amongſt the vileſt in the Kingdom, for with them, &c. for this I muſt pay dearly, ſaith he, and his prophane fellow Members: But were not I a mad man, and might I not deſervedly incur the name or title of a Schiſma­tick, ſhould I make a breach in his Church, in his Communion? and for this he calls me twenty Fools, and mad man, &c. But work, a while, and you ſhall ſee the Food, the mad man, as well as the Whet­ſtone, Will fall to his ſhare. He would perſwade people (or ſome o­thers for him) that there in that place I make him a Drunkard, a Thief, a Murderer, &c. and why may be not as well perſwade them I make him a Whore? The buſineſs is in deed and in truth thus; All that are in Church-fellowſhip or Communion With him, are, in a Scripture ſence, his Brethren and Siſters. And this I dare ſay, I can prove againſt all the devils in hell by almoſt (if not all out or above) an hundred Scriptures: No man that hath not a fore­head of Braſs or Iron can deny it. I have beſide the Scripture Rea­ſon, and the conſent of moſt Divines, whether Epiſcopal, Presbyte­rial Independent, or by what nick-names ſoever they are called or diſtinguiſhed, on my ſide; if any ſhall deny it, they muſt diſclaim their own principles or tenets. The very Book of Common-Prayer called all the men in all Pariſhes throughout England and Wales, Dearly beloved Brethren, &c. I know all men of diſ-enga­ged judgments all the Kingdom over Will vote it in the Affirma­tive,6 but I am content the matter ſhould be tryed at the tri•••••of his own conſcience, if yet is be not ſeared with a hot iron.

So then as long as be will walk in fellowſhip or Communion with prophane, wicked, looſe men and women, as Members of the ſaw external viſible body of Chirſt (the Church) with himſelf, they muſt and ſhall be his brethren and ſiſters: for to ſay, I will walin Church fellowſhip or Communion with ſuch and ſuch men and women, &c. and yet they ſhall not be my brethren and ſiſters, is an abſierd, idle, vain, focliſh, irrational, contradictory aſſertion 'tis to ſay and unſay, and in plain Engliſh, to ſay juſt nothing at all.

And for thoſe that have been hanged at Tyburn, &c. unleſs bcan prove that they were not by Raptiſm admitted into his Church, nor be into theirs; or that they were firſt excommunicated, (which be ſhall never do: and beſides, let him but once mention Exce••­munication with Approbation and his cauſe is utterly loſt,) or〈◊〉leſs he will eat his own words, deny a National Church in ſo groſs a ſence aseols one, or joyn with us in order to a Reformation, let him fret and fu••e huff and puſſrage and ſtorm, call and miſs••••whilee will, they muſt and ſhall be his brethren, &c 'tis he〈◊〉made them ſo, not, therefore let none he offended with me: W••heislams that Communion he pleadfor, the bonds of this bro­ther-hood will be looſed, and not before. I confeſs, I was once of this brother-hood my ſelf, but now I abhor and loath it; And yet I look upon all men whatſoever as my brethren in this ſence, viz. as we are the off spring of, and have dependency upon the ſame eternal Being, Acts 17.28, 29.

He is willing ſuch at Judas was ſhould be his Brethren-Co〈7 letters〉nicants; and do Drunkards, Theves, Murderers, Lyars, &c. ex••ed Judas in Wickedneſs? He is called a Devil, John 6.70. and we ſuch worſe then Devils? Behold then a Communion of wſe then Devils. What are the ends of the mans arguings? I wiſh be would declare them to us. But to haſten to a period, the vileſmen in England (profeſſing Faith in Chriſt) ſhall be his brethren, but it vexeth him to the heart they ſhould be called ſo.

Whereas he blaoneth abroad, That I grant Judas received, &c. as though he had obtained his end: As I doubt not but all••an­tions men will ſmile at his folly, ſo for ſatisfaction of the loweſt ca­pacities7 amongſt u, I am willing to ſay again, 'tis not〈…〉ath proved it, or ever will whilſt he liveth, bubecauſe he ſhall not ſay, what I contend for (viz a Communion of Saints) 〈◊〉up­on Judas his receiving or not receiving, Admit he did, ſh••oſine granted, I ſay, yet that doth not in the leaſt meaſure advantege his, or prejudice my cauſe: Lt him draw his inferences.

When he gives ou, be could quickly be re••••led to unto, he ac­knowledgeth the difference in affection is only on his part, and be ſpeaks moſt truly, for I am willing to have the love of all man, and to live peaceably with them, ſo far as poſſibly I may;a••I〈…〉compliancy with any man to the prejudice and diſ-advantage of the truth. My very adverſarious muſt needs confeſs I have b••n ſoar from preaching Contention, Strife and Diviſion amongſt godly man of diſſenting judgments in matters of Worſhip, that I havend••­vored to make up all branche, and touſt all names and〈◊〉of diſtinction behind my back.

Now, good Friends and Readers, do not ſay I have ſpoken any thing in paſſion or bitterneſs of ſpirit, for (if I may uſo Po••ls Aſter­veration, 3 Cor. 1.23.) I call God to record upon my ſoul, I have not. I find my very bowels are moved for him; and obth•••e would ſmite upon his thigh, and ſay, What have I done? I am ſo far from hating his perſon, or ſeeking revenge for any injury done to me, that I profeſs I will lay my very hands under his fies to do him good.

Here is one thing that I would have you, and all men, to take special notice of, namely, That Mr LightooCommunion D••­metrically oppoſeth,

1. The Scriptures, the plain Letter, 1 Cor. 5.9, 10, 11. 2 Cor. 6.14.15, 16, 17, 18.

2. His Creed, or at least this Article of it, viz. The Commu­nion of Saints; for I ſuppoſe he believes in God, &c. and in Jeſus Chriſt, &c, and in the Holy Ghoſt, &c. the holy Catholick Church, but his Communion muſt be of ungodly, ſondal••and no••rious ſinners, and not of Saints.

3. The Covenant, by which we are bound to endeavor a Refor­mation according to the Word of God, and the beſt Reformed Churches, who abbor ſuch Communions.

4. The Directory, which ſaith, The ignorant and the ſcandalous8 are not fit to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, pag. ••. Yea, the Common-Prayer-Book it ſelf, which ſhuts the doors a­gainſt and keeps out open and notorious evil livers, till they have manifeſted repentance for the ſatisfaction of the Congregation, &c. It ſeems his Reformation it to bring us into a far worſe condition then ever we were in, under Prelacy and Common-Prayer-Book.

5. And laſtly. The Principles, Hopes, Expectations, and joy••Endeavors of all godly Miniſters, both of the Independent (ſo called) and more purely Preſbyterial way; who, that it not wilfully blind, will be of a Communion that thus ſets it ſelf in oppoſition to all that is called God, or holy in every dispentſation and form of WorſhipI ſhall trouble you with no more at preſent, but carneſtly entreat you ſeriouſly to conſider of theſe things, and the Lord give you un­derſtanding in every thing, and lead you forth into the ways of Righ­teouſneſs, that you may walk blameleſs before him in Love.

Yours as ye are Chriſts; Joſ. Heming.

JƲDAS Excommunicated; OR A VINDICATION Of the Communion of Saints, &c.

TO prove that Judas received the Sacrament, Mr Light-foot deals with two Suppers; the one at Bthany in the houſe of Simon the Leper, Math. 26.6. Mark 14.3. The other at Jeruſalem the Paſſeover night. The Sup­per at Bethany (ſaith he) was before the feaſt of the Paſſeover, Luke 22.1. namely two days before, &c. Mat. 26.2. Mark 14.1.


1. I wonder a wiſe man ſhould bring Luke 22.1. to prove the Supper at Bethany was before the Paſſeover, (though I confeſs it was ſo,) in which there is not the leaſt mention of that Supper. Juſt as if I ſhould quote Math. 2.1. to prove, that when Chriſt was born, his mother laid him in a manger, becauſe there was no room for them in the Inn.

2. The following Scriptures, viz. Math. 26.2. Mark 14.1 do not at all prove the Supper at Bethany to have been juſt two days before the Paſſeover; but that two days before the Paſſeo­ver, the chief Prieſts and Scribes fought how they might take Ghiſt by craft and ſubtilty, &c. and at laſt concluded it muſt not be on the Feaſt day (viz. the feaſt of the Paſſeover) leſt there ſhould be an uproat, &c. Mark 14 1, 2.

3. The Supper at Bethany is as likely to have been ſix days be­fore the Paſſeover, as two. Then Jeſus, ſix days before the Paſſe­over, came to Bethany, &c. There they made him a Supper, Joh. 12.1, 2.

Now here ariſeth a great queſtion between Mr Lightfoot and my ſelf: namely,

Which was the Supper at Bethany, That mentioned Joh. 2.1,10 2, 3, &c. Or That John 13.1, 2, 3?

He ſaith That in Joh. 13. and upon that miſtaken place hath built his wood, hay and ſtubble. Boys and Girls, if ye can but tead Engliſh, come forth and ſhame this great maſter in Iſraels Read both the Chapters, and then tell him which ſpeaks of the Supper at Bethany. But I anſwer,

That in Iohn 12. was the Supper at 'Bethany, and not that in Iohn 13. For,

1. In Iohn 13. Bethany is not ſo much as once named, but in in Chap. 12. it is, as alſo in Math. 26. Mark 14.

2. In Iohn 13. there is no mention made of the womans pour­ing oyl upon Chriſt, for which very act the Supper is remark­able, and ever ſhall be, Math. 26.13. Mark 14.9. not yet of Indas his indignation; not of Chriſts reproving him: all which we finde in Iohn 1. as alſo in the places before quoted.

3. In Iohn 13.1. Now before the Feaſt &c. is not meant two days before, as he would have it; the words are,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, meaning immediately before, &c, as Luk. 1.38. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Phariſee wondered he waſhed not before dinner, that is, immediately before dinner.

4. At that Supper, Iohn 13. Chriſts hour was come. Ver•••••ſo that he was betrayed the very fame night, as 'tis evident, com­paring, Ioh. 13.37 38, with Ioh. 18. 1, 2, 3. and Math. 26.34. Mark 14 30. This diſcourſe paſſed betwixt Chriſt and Pe••••the very night in which he was betrayed. Now,

5. (And laſtly; though much more ſhall be added if there be oc­caſion,) If any man of common capacity will but compare Iohn 12. from Verſ. 1. to 8. with Math. 26.6. to Verſt 13. and Mark 14. 3-9. he ſhall finde they all three ſpeak of the ſame Supper at Bethany. And for what Iohn differs from the other two Evangeliſts in naming Martha and La••artes, and in ſaying ſhe anointed his feet, whereas the others ſay, ſhe poured it on his head, That ſhall be eaſily reconciled whenſover Mr Light-foot pleaſe; yea, and as great (that I ſay not greater) differences clearly manifested between Marthew and Mark in their relati­ons of other paſſages, perhaps of the ſame Supper; but at pre­ſent I refer him to Calvin, Diodat, (or almoſt any, other Expo­ſitor upon the place.

I conclude, againſt all he hath ſaid, or can ſay, yet, againſt11 whatſoever all the friends he ſhall make in this controverſie can ſay for him.

1. That there was no ſop given in the Supper at Bethany let him finde it me in Mat. 26. Mark 14. or Iohn 12.

2. That the diſcourſe between Chriſt and his Disciples con­cerning the traitor paſſed that very night he eat the Pſſeover at Ieruſalem, Mat. 26.19, 20, 21, 22-26. Mark 14. 16-22. and not at Bethany two days before. For had Ind••been diſco­vered at Bethany, how could the Diſciples (John as well as the reſt) begin to be ſorrowful (wondering to hear Chriſt ſay, One of you ſhall betray me, Joh. 13.21, 22.) and enquire who it was, ſaying, Is it I? Is it I? two days after? Mat. 26.22. Mark 14.19. Luke 22.23.

3. That Chriſt waſhed not his Diſciplea feet at Bethany, but at the Supper at feruſalem, the ſame night he was betrayed, Ioh. 13.

4. That the ſop was given at an ordinary or common Supper, (which Chriſt had the ſame night before he eat the Paſſeover, as Calvin, Beza, Parem, Fulk, Carwright, Pelargus, Toff•••, Tolet, Maldonat, and divers others do affir••in their Expoſitionof ſe­veral Scriptures and which the Corinhiant imitated 1 Cor. 〈…〉and immediately after the ſop, Satan enered into him. Joh. 13.17. and immediately after that he (Judas) went forth, Joh. 13.30. And that he came in again, is no where to be found neither can it be proved; therefore he eat not ſo much as of the Paſſeover, but only the common Supper, much leſs received the Sacrament.

The reaſon why Mr Lightfeor hath gone againſt ſo manifeſt Light of Truth, the whole current or ſtream of orthodox, godly and learned Expoſitors, common ſence, &c. is to me as clear as the Sun at noon days; and 'tis thus: He thought, if ever he proved Indas received the Sacrament, he muſt firſt prove the ſop was given two days before at Bethany, (which could he prove, would help his cauſe little or nothing,) and becauſe thoſe Scriptures that do indeed mention the Supper, viz. Matth. 26. Mark 14. John 12. would not ſerve ſuch a malignant deſign he wickedly, and ('tis to be feared) contra-conſcientiouſly wreſts and wrings in John 13. a place, ſo far from proof of his pur­poſe, that who ſo hath but half an eye, may eaſily ſee it never toucheth it. The man hath not yet perfectly learned12 the trade of wreſting and abuſing Scriptures (ſubtilly) for the the advancement of his Maſters Kingdom.

Thus the very foundation on which he builds, being found no­totiouſly falſe, and rotten, and utterly raſed, I might very well break off here; but I ſhall beſtow a little pains in viewing his reaſons alledged for father confirmation of his proundleſs aſſer­tions.

I. It is probable (ſaith he) nor can be conceived that In­das ſhould receive the ſop, and ſo the Dvil with it, and go to the high P••eds, and bargain with them, receive a band of men Joh. 18.3. and betray his maſter, and all upon one night: for beſide the unlikelineſs of it, the text is plain, that from the t•••e of the receiving the ſop he ſought oportinity to betray him Mat 26.16. or how he might conveniently, &c. Mark 14.11. Luke 22.6. And how improper it is to ſay, a man ſeeks conve­nency or opportunity, when he runs upon a thing, and doth it on a ſudden, I refer to any one of common capacity.


1. 'Tis probable all this might be done in one night; for In­das was not ſo far from the high Prieſt, the band of men not ſo far to ſeek, (ſee Diodat on Iohn 18.3. ) the Devil, Indas, and the Jews not ſo backward in driving on this damnable deſign, as be would inſinuate, I my ſelf have known in this betraying age five times more than this amounts unto brought about in〈◊〉ſhort a night. But by the way take notice, that by Satan in Scripture is to be underſtood the Devil by Mr Lightfoots own confeſſion) and not a diſeaſe, as he idlely and falſely affirmed formerly in my hearing: The bare naming of this is a ſufficient refutation of it, and as clear a demonſtration of a Phyſitians folly.

2. He (following the old trade) moſt ſhamefully abuſeth Mat 26.16. Mark 14 11. when he ſaith 'tis plain from thoſe Texts, That from the tune of the receiving the ſop Judas ſought opportunity to betray Chriſt: Read the Verſes before and after and then tell me it you can ſee but the print or footſters of any ſuch thing. Is it not plain in thoſe places, that from that time Chriſt reproved Indas for his coverous indignation at the ſpend­ing of the ointment, he ſought opportunity, and from that re­proof took occaſion to betray him? 'Tis evident he ſought how13 he might conveniently betray Chriſt before he received the ſop. But,

3. A man may properly be ſaid to ſeek opportunity or con­veniency to do that which he yet doth the ſame night. Now let any one of common capacity (even Mr Lightfoot himſelf) judg in this caſe.

II. Is is plain (ſaith he) that Indas began his treaſon at Bo­thany, Mat. 26.14. Mark 14.10.


Be it ſo; but did he receive the ſop there? Nothing elſe paſſ­ed at the Supper at Bothany, concerning Indas, but Chriſts re­buking him for his indignation at the ſpending of the alabaſter box of precious ointment, for which he took occaſion to begin his treaſon.

III. The Devil (ſaith he) entred into Indas at Bethany, Luk 22.3. and Verſ. 7. then came the Feaſt: and all the Evangeliſts ſet the treaſon conſpiracy before the feaſt of the Paſſeover.


1. Luke 22.3. ſpeaks nothing at all of the Supper at Bethony, nor of any thing done there.

2. Though all the Evangeliſts place the Conſpiracy before the Paſſeover, yet they place not the giving of the ſop at Bothany; Read Mat. 26. Mark 14. Iohn 12, and ſee if you can finde any ſuch thing there. The Conſpiracy is as clearly placed before the Sop, as before the Paſſeover.

3. The Original (which Mr Lightfoot bids me obſerve) in Iohn 13.2. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉(others〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) however tranſ­lated, whether a great part of the Supper being done, or when they were at Supper, or Supper being begun, or Supper being pre­pared and ready, and ſet on table, helps not his cauſe one Jot. I will give him treb leave (ſo he offer no violence to the Text) to tranſlate it for his beſt advantage when he writes next.

IV. It is plain (ſaith he) be received the ſop before the Feaſt. John 13.27, 28, 29.


1. Perhaps Christ did not eat the Paſchal Limb upon the ſame day the Jews did according to the judgment of Sealign, Cauſa­bon, and others, as I have found them quored. Moreover ſee Dio­dat on Mat. 26 17. and then the Feaſt the Diſciples dream'd of might very well be the Jews Paſſover kept a day after I could14 ſpeak more for proof of this from Iohn 18.28. & 19. 〈…〉ever Mr Lightfoot will be able to anſwer; but at preſent I refer him and the Reader to the places themſelves.

2. Obſerve how he would dawb over his own miſtake with the untempered morter of the Diſciples ignorance, what ſo••of them thought proceeded from their ignorance, John 13.28. ••If from this Scripture he will conclude, that there was another thing to the poor? The Diciples knew not (as probably they might have conjectured from the diſcovery of Judas two days before, and his abrupt departure then immediately upon receipt of the ſop) that he was to be betrayed that night as it fell out, and will manifeſtly appear to any indifferent man that will but•…­gently read, and ſeriouſly conſider the whole ſtory, and then judg impartially: For all the Diſciples ignorance, and Mr Lightfoot grounded upon theirs, Chriſt had no more Feaſts.

3. Whereas he ſaith, that we know the Lords Supper was gi­ven the Paſſeover day at night, viz. the firſt Sabbath of the Feaſt, whereon the Jews eat the Paſchal Lamb. I am afraid he under­ſtandeth neither what he ſaith, nor whereof he affirmeth,〈◊〉be it ſo, and then,

1. How was Chriſt upon the Croſs on the preparation day, the day before the Sabbath, according to theſe Scriptures, Mat. ••. 62 Mark 15.43. Luke 23.54. Iohn 18.28 & 19.14.31, and 4•…Verſes?

2. How could he ariſe the day after the Sabbath, namely the firſt day of the week, Mark 16.2. Mat. 28. . ſince he lay three days in the grave? Doth the man believe (think you) that Chriſt eat the Paſſeover a day or two after he was dead! Or that he did riſe the next day after he had eaten it? Spectatum ad•…riſum teneatis amici? What day thinks he Chriſt was betray­ed and taken on? Or how long was it between his taking and crucifying? I wiſh the man be not found tardy here.

Thus Mr Lightfoots premiſes being weighed in the ballance of Verity, and found lighter then Vanity, what ſhall become of his concluſion? But to trace my Gentleman a little further?

And it is plain, ſaith he, the premiſes conſidered, at the Supper at Ieruſalem he ſate down with the twelve, of which Iudas was one, Mat. 26 20. Mark 14.17. Luke 22.14. He taxeth Judas for15 Treaſ•…, Mark 24.18. Luke 22.2.

Anſwer. I. 'Tis true, he ſate down at Jeruſalem with that twelve, of whom Judas was one, in the common or ordinary Supper: And.

2. 'Tis as true, that there (as Mr Lightfoot doth moſt righteouſ­ly affirm for the truth, to the deeper wounding of his cuaſe) lie t••ed Judas for Treaſon, gave him the ſop, and diſcovered〈◊〉and not at Bethany two days before.

Mr Lightfoot. He delivered the Sormont to all; Mat. 26. 26. Mark 14.23. Luk. 22 19. and they all drank of it, Mark 14.23.

Anſwer, II. The〈◊〉doth nor ſay, he delivered it to th••worse, but to all, namely, to all preſent, for Indas had gotten the ſ••p, and was goes forth.

2. It is had been ſaid, he gave it to the twelve, yet that would prove nothing; for in 1 Cor. 15.5. 'tis ſaid, He [Chriſt] was ſeen of Cophus, and them of the twelve, though he was••on only of thee­laven, Mat. 28.16, 17. Mark 16.14.

II Mr Lightfoot ſhall be ſo vain as to ſay (behind my bick,••­cording to his uſund cuſtom) Matthes was then〈◊〉in the room of Indas, and therefore there were twelve.

I anſwer That is notoriously ſalts, for Chriſts app••ting was before his aſcetion, and not after: but Matthias; was no〈◊〉till after his aſeention, Acts 1.9, 10, 21, & 25, Verſes, to the end of the Chapter, how then could he be choſen when Chriſt up­peared?

3. Whereas he affirmeth, that Chriſt gave the Sacrament to Judas, I fear he doth him more injury then ever he will be able to account for at his tribunal. Did not he uſually except Judas? Have I not choſen twelve, and one of you it a Devil? (Joh. 6.70) Ye are clean, but not all, Joh. 1.10, 11. And again Verſ. 1. I ſpeak not of you all, I know whom I have choſen, &c. But to thoſe he gave the Sacrament, he ſaith without exception,

1. This is my body which is given for You. This is the••ly of the New Testument in my blood which is ſend for You? Luk. 12.19.20. Surely Chriſt could not ſafely ſay ſo to Judas whom he〈◊〉to be a Devil, eternaly loſt.

2. I will not drink hence forth of this fruit of the vine, nu••l that day I drink is new with you in my Fathers Kingdom, Mat. 16.19. Had Chriſt means Indas as well as the reſt (as be〈◊〉has16 been preſent, ſince he excepts him not) he had been•…ly•…­ken, for he was never like to come there, underſtand the Fa­thers Kingdom how you will.

3. Luk. 22.28, 29 30. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations: And I appoint to You a Kingdom, as my Father hath appointed to me: That ye may eat and drink at•…y table in my Kingdom, and ſit on twelve Thrones judging the twelve tribes of Iſrael. But,

1. Iudas had not continued with him in his temptation. Neither,

2. Could Chriſt appoint to him any other Kingdom, but that of wrath and darkneſs. Nor,

3. Was he ever like to ſit at Chriſts table in his Kingdom; much leſs ſit on a throne in the judgment of the twelve tribes, who is himſelf to be judged as a devil.

4. Math. 26.31. All ye ſhall be offended becauſe of me this night. This is the ſame All to whom the Sacrament was deli­vered. Let Mr Lightfoot take heed how he traduce Chriſt him­ſelf, by affirming Iudas was one of that All he adminiſtred the ſeal and ſpake theſe words to. And let him not think to evade any of theſe Scriptures by ſaying Iudas has received the Sacra­ment and was gone forth, unleſs he be able to prove it.

Mr Lightfoot. I cannot conceive how any ſhadow can be to gainſay his receiving.

Anſ. He doth well to blame the dulneſs of his own concepti­on. The cauſe he ſeeth not, is that darkneſs which dwells in him.

Mr Lightfoot. onely to vapor out another buſineſs

Anſ. The buſineſs he meaneth depends not upon Judas his re­ceiving or not receiving; and that he, and others, may beleeve it doth not, I will here grant that Judas did receive the Sacrament, now let Mr Lightfoot do his worſt.

Mr Lightfoot. which will be as ſoon blown over as this.

Anſ. I beleeve him; for this buſineſs is not yet blown over. He that doth it, muſt have a ſtronger breath then Mr Po•…r Lightfoot.

Mr Lightfoot.

For the fancy is to make a noiſe of only the Saints receiving


Hear O Heavens, and give ear O Earth, how reproachfully the man calls that a fancy all the Scriptures bear witneſs to the17 moſt precious truth. Come, let us reaſon together a little, Mr Lightfoot: Do you beleeve there is a Communion of Saints? If ſo, how dare you call it a fancy? If you know no ſuch Com­munion, (but Oh that you knew it, or rather were known of God in it) may I not juſtly number you amongſt thoſe Iu••10. who ſpeak evil of things they know not? What? Is your Com­munion of Chriſt and Belial, light and darkneſs, precious and vile, Saints and Devils? Can two walk, together, except they be agreed? (Amos 3.3.) And do you think there will ever be any concord or agreement between theſe? Why would you have the dirt and filth of the Nation bound up in the ſame bundle with the precious Sons of Sion? Why will you not allow Ieſus Chriſt the moſt precious materials living ſtones, to build him a houſe, a temple withall? Come, deal faithfully with your own ſoul, and tell me whether the Communion of Saints be a fancy or not and give me leave to open my heart as freely to you, and in ſo doing tell you, that I am afraid your Fellowſhip is in and with Darkneſs; but aſſure your ſelf the light will finde you out at length, if not to your converſion (but oh that it might be to that) yet to your utter ſhame and confuſion of face, in the preſence of thoſe Saints you dayly reproach and wound, yea, and Chriſt through their ſides. Oh that I could hear you ſay, this expreſſion dropt from your pen before you were aware of it, and that in truth not in hypocriſie; or that you would ſmite upon your thigh, and ſay, What have I done?

Mr Lightfoot. Which if we could prove, then we might ga­ther particular Churches.


So then by his own confeſſion, if we can but prove none but Saints (i.e. ſuch as have upon them viſible or external ſanctity) ſhould receive the Sacrament, we may lawfully gather together into a particular (he means Independent) Congregation. Will the man ſtand to this think you? I fear, not. If he will, I dare ſay that ſhall hereafter be proved an abundanti, both from the Scriptures, the conſtitution and practice of the primitive Chur­ches, the Confeſſions of Faith of the moſt Churches in Chriſten­dom, and the univerſal conſent of ſuch godly Divines both an­cient and modern, as he himſelf durſt not but judg ſound and orthodox. And the lawfulneſs of gathering particular Congre­gations (though I am not gathering any) I ſhall defend againſt18 all Mr Lightfoot hath to ſay on the contrary: I wiſh be may〈◊〉in the mean time forget what he hath ſpoken; but if be he ſhould I ſhall relieve his memory.

Mr Lightfoot. And ſo make a gain of that godlineſs

Anſ. Who gains moſt, man? thoſe that gather ſuch Chur­ches, or ſuch as get ſat parſonages of two or 300 l. per annu••, and leave them when they can get better, as having a clearer call, or a better ayr, &c. Take heed how you go about to ſtamp an odi­um upon the ways of God, you may pay dearly for it one day.

Mr Lightfoot. Which by ſteps would ſet us in ſuch an op­poſition to the wicked

Anſ. Whom MLightfoot never intends to oppoſe, but coun­tenance, aſſociate, and have communion with, as appears by what he hath written, and dayly ſpeaks on their behalf.

Mr Lightfoot. As that we would leave them neither wealth, life, not liberty. Look of the actions, beginning and ending of Muncer and his holy crew, ſet down by Sleidan.

Anſ. 1. This is but the mans old trade of calumniating, lying, and belying, I wiſh he would leave it; But in the mean time I dare pawn my life, that generation of men he intends ſhall not, touch ſo much as one hair of his head, much leſs his wealth, life or liberty. I am afraid ſome of his unholy crew (for why ſhould I ſeparate him from thoſe with whom he will have communion? he muſt and ſhall go with them; ' is for fellowſhip with un­holy ones he contends, let him deny it if he can,) would touch theirs, if ever it lay within their reach. But by the way take no­tice, Mr Lightfoot is an Independent, and knows not of it; be but now condemned Lberty of conſcience in matters of wor­ſhip, and yet here he pleads for Liberty, even for the Wicked, Liberty in the groſſeſt fence, Liberty with the Miſchief: But what a miſerable condition are thoſe poor men (commonly known by the nick-name of Independents) in? one while they are cryed out upon us the onely men that would have Liberty, yea Toleration of Wickedneſs, Blaſphemy, Herſie, Sects, Schiſms, &c. another while they are ſet in ſuch an oppoſition to the wicked, as that they would leave them neither wealth, life nor liberty. I am unwilling to put a ſtrange interpretation upon Mr Lightfoot's Liberty, I would therefore have him to unriddle him­ſelf, and then happily he and I may agree. In the mean time I19 propound this quer••to his conſideration; viz. Whether there be not a world (as I may ſay) in England as well as a Church? and whether ſuch (viz. Independents, Anabaptiſts, Seekers. Preſbyterians; for by ſuch names he knows may godly men:) may not be tolerated in that world to enjoy their conſciences in relation to the Ordinances of Christ (ſecurity being given in point of civil ſubjection) who may not be tolerated in the Church? and whether we have not better grounds in the Word of God to walk in Church-fellowſhip with godly men and wo­men, though of different judgments, than with thoſe wicked ones he ſo hotly contends for?

2. To that of Muncer, and his holy crew, I anſwer, as I may not take upon me to juſtifie the actions, beginnings and endings of all men of this or that form of worſhip; ſo it becomes not Mr Lightfoot (did he rightly underſtand himſelf) to judg of this or that form or way, by the carriage of, or Gods dealing with the corrupter ſort that profeſs it: For at that rate of judging what would become of Chriſtian Religion, ſet on foot by Chriſt and the twelve, amongſt whom there was one Devil? (for Commu­nion with which he pleads.) Muſt the Goſpel it ſelf be con­demned, becauſe many men of corrupt minds have diſhonored it? Or the old legal Adminiſtration, becauſe of the rebellion of Korah, Dathan and Abiram? Or will Mr Lightfoot undertake for all of his own way, be it Epiſcopacy or Presbytery? If ſo, I preſume I ſhall find him work enough. This may ſatisfie any ſo­ber ſpirited man; yet I add moreover, That I have as little ground to beleeve Sleidan in all he reports of thoſe men (he him­ſelf being an Adverſary to them and their way) as I have to be­leeve wh; Mr Edwards wrote in his book of Lyes (commonly called Gangrana) againſt ſuch as were not of the ſame judgment with himſelf: or what the Papiſts write of us who live not in their abominations. But,

3. Whilſt he is condemning one wicked and unholy crew, he is pleading for Communion with another; let ſpecial notice be taken of this. It ſeems that way wherein (to the great grief of the Saints) there have been, are, and will be found many ungodly ones, muſt be utterly condemned, whilſt that wherein all the un­clean beaſts in a Nation live, is vindicated. But for Mucr, and his holy crew (is Mr Lightfoot ironiclly calls them) they might very well have been of his own Church.


Mr Light••otBut more of this ſhortly.

Anſwer. As much as you will, and as ſhortly as you e•••〈◊〉ever it come to my hands, you ſhall not ſtoy long for an An­ſwer, though I need ſay no more; but that as faſt〈◊〉any of〈◊〉Churches of Ieſus Chriſt purge our the old leaven out off and eaſt out corrupt Members, as Adulterers, Fornicators, Drunkards, co­vetous, &c. you may take them into your fruternity, there's none will be offended with you, I think; for my part, I will not.

Now before Mr Lightfoot and I part, let me tell him,

1. That he ſhall never whilſt he live be able to prove Indas••­ceived the Sacrament, ſcarcely the Paſſeover; and yet I can and do, grant him both, without the leaſt prejudice to that righteous cauſe I maintain,〈◊〉ſhall be more full manifelled hereafter, if the Lord give me time and ſtrength.

2. That I ſhould ſuper-abundantly wrong him, If I ſhould not rank him amongſt the vileſt in the Kingdom, for with them no will have Communion, us a Member of the ſame external viſible body, by vertue of which relation they are all his brethren and ſiſters, ſo that he hath his brother Dru••ard, brother Thief, bro­ther Murderer, brother Lyar, &c. ſiſter Whore, ſiſter Witch, &c. yea, all that have been hanged at Tyburn, and all oher Bllowin England ever ſince he was born and baptized into that fellow­ſhip he pleads for, have been his brethren and ſiſters, lot him, or any man elſe, upon good grounds, deny it if he can. Precious Hearts, ye that live godly in Chriſt Ieſus, being in him dead to ſin, and begotten unto good works, if ye will be of this fraternity, Mr Lightfoot, and his unholy crew, will be friends with you: but the Lord keep you from ſuch an unſanctified fellowſhip, and gather you up into that Union and Communion with himſelf and his Chriſt, that can make you one ſpiritual Body, even the Body of Chriſt, Rom. 12, 4, 5.1 Cor. 12.12. Then ſhall ye be called trees of Righteouſneſs, the planting of the Lord, and he ſhall be glori­fied in you, by you, and amongſt you,


Mr Lightfoot gave out, that he would print this Anſwer of mine as though that had been an invincible Reply; I confeſs, if he had done to, he might have put himſelf to ſome coſt, and I might have ſuſtained much wrong; but now I have grevented both, and I know no cauſe he hath to be offended with me.

〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉
〈1 page duplicate〉

About this transcription

TextJudas excommunicated, or A vindication of the communion of saints: being a brief examination and clear refutation of Mr Peter Lightfoots arguments for proof of Judas his receiving the sacrament of the Lords Supper, (which, could he prove, makes nothing at all for a mixt Communion.) / By Joseph Heming, a servant to all men in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
AuthorHeming, Joseph..
Extent Approx. 44 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 14 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
SeriesEarly English books online.
Additional notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A86188)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 117533)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 87:E565[5])

About the source text

Bibliographic informationJudas excommunicated, or A vindication of the communion of saints: being a brief examination and clear refutation of Mr Peter Lightfoots arguments for proof of Judas his receiving the sacrament of the Lords Supper, (which, could he prove, makes nothing at all for a mixt Communion.) / By Joseph Heming, a servant to all men in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Heming, Joseph.. 24 [i.e. 20] p. Printed for Giles Calvert at the black Spread-Eagle neer the West end of Pauls,London :1649.. (Pp. 17-20 repeated in text.) (Annotation on Thomason copy: "July. 16".) (Reproduction of the original in the British Library.)
  • Spiritual life -- Early works to 1800.

Editorial statement

About the encoding

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial principles

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database ( The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

Publication information

  • Text Creation Partnership,
ImprintAnn Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2012-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2).
  • DLPS A86188
  • STC Wing H1420
  • STC Thomason E565_5
  • STC ESTC R206114
  • EEBO-CITATION 99865294
  • PROQUEST 99865294
  • VID 117533

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.