Leviathan

he did forbid them to eat with a man Excommunicate.

As for keeping them out of their Synagogues, or places of Assembly,
they had no Power to do it, but that of the owner of the place,
whether he were Christian, or Heathen.  And because all places are
by right, in the Dominion of the Common-wealth; as well hee that
was Excommunicated, as hee that never was Baptized, might enter
into them by Commission from the Civill Magistrate; as Paul before
his conversion entred into their Synagogues at Damascus, (Acts 9.2.)
to apprehend Christians, men and women, and to carry them bound
to Jerusalem, by Commission from the High Priest.

Of No Effect Upon An Apostate
By which it appears, that upon a Christian, that should become
an Apostate, in a place where the Civill Power did persecute,
or not assist the Church, the effect of Excommunication had nothing
in it, neither of dammage in this world, nor of terrour: Not of terrour,
because of their unbeleef; nor of dammage, because they returned
thereby into the favour of the world; and in the world to come,
were to be in no worse estate, then they which never had beleeved.
The dammage redounded rather to the Church, by provocation of them
they cast out, to a freer execution of their malice.

But Upon The Faithfull Only
Excommunication therefore had its effect onely upon those,
that beleeved that Jesus Christ was to come again in Glory,
to reign over, and to judge both the quick, and the dead,
and should therefore refuse entrance into his Kingdom, to those
whose Sins were Retained; that is, to those that were Excommunicated
by the Church.  And thence it is that St. Paul calleth Excommunication,
a delivery of the Excommunicate person to Satan.  For without
the Kingdom of Christ, all other Kingdomes after Judgment,
are comprehended in the Kingdome of Satan.  This is it that
the faithfull stood in fear of, as long as they stood Excommunicate,
that is to say, in an estate wherein their sins were not Forgiven.
Whereby wee may understand, that Excommunication in the time
that Christian Religion was not authorized by the Civill Power,
was used onely for a correction of manners, not of errours in opinion:
for it is a punishment, whereof none could be sensible but such
as beleeved, and expected the coming again of our Saviour to
judge the world; and they who so beleeved, needed no other opinion,
but onely uprightnesse of life, to be saved.

For What Fault Lyeth Excommunication
There Lyeth Excommunication for Injustice; as (Mat. 18.) If thy Brother
offend thee, tell it him privately; then with Witnesses; lastly,
tell the Church; and then if he obey not, "Let him be to thee
as an Heathen man, and a Publican."  And there lyeth Excommunication
for a Scandalous Life, as (1 Cor. 5. 11.) "If any man that is called
a Brother, be a Fornicator, or Covetous, or an Idolater, or a Drunkard,
or an Extortioner, with such a one yee are not to eat."
But to Excommunicate a man that held this foundation, that Jesus
Was The Christ, for difference of opinion in other points,
by which that Foundation was not destroyed, there appeareth
no authority in the Scripture, nor example in the Apostles.
There is indeed in St. Paul (Titus 3.10.) a text that seemeth
to be to the contrary.  "A man that is an Haeretique, after the first
and second admonition, reject."  For an Haeretique, is he, that being
a member of the Church, teacheth neverthelesse some private opinion,
which the Church has forbidden: and such a one, S. Paul adviseth Titus,
after the first, and second admonition, to Reject.  But to Reject
(in this place) is not to Excommunicate the Man; But to Give Over
Admonishing Him, To Let Him Alone, To Set By Disputing With Him,
as one that is to be convinced onely by himselfe.  The same Apostle
saith (2 Tim. 2.23.) "Foolish and unlearned questions avoid;"
The word Avoid in this place, and Reject in the former, is the same
in the Originall, paraitou: but Foolish questions may bee set by
without Excommunication.  And again, (Tit. 3.93) "Avoid Foolish
questions," where the Originall, periistaso, (set them by)
is equivalent to the former word Reject.  There is no other place
that can so much as colourably be drawn, to countenance the Casting
out of the Church faithfull men, such as beleeved the foundation,
onely for a singular superstructure of their own, proceeding perhaps
from a good & pious conscience.  But on the contrary, all such places
as command avoiding such disputes, are written for a Lesson to Pastors,
(such as Timothy and Titus were) not to make new Articles of Faith,
by determining every small controversie, which oblige men to
a needlesse burthen of Conscience, or provoke them to break the
union of the Church.  Which Lesson the Apostles themselves observed well.
S. Peter and S. Paul, though their controversie were great,
(as we may read in Gal. 2.11.) yet they did not cast one another out
of the Church.  Neverthelesse, during the Apostles time, there were
other Pastors that observed it not; As Diotrephes (3 John 9. &c.)
who cast out of the Church, such as S. John himself thought fit
to be received into it, out of a pride he took in Praeeminence;
so early it was, that Vainglory, and Ambition had found entrance
into the Church of Christ.

Of Persons Liable To Excommunication
That a man be liable to Excommunication, there be many conditions
requisite; as First, that he be a member of some Commonalty,
that is to say, of some lawfull Assembly, that is to say,
of some Christian Church, that hath power to judge of the cause
for which hee is to bee Excommunicated.  For where there is
no community, there can bee no Excommunication; nor where there
is no power to Judge, can there bee any power to give Sentence.
From hence it followeth, that one Church cannot be Excommunicated
by another: For either they have equall power to Excommunicate
each other, in which case Excommunication is not Discipline,
nor an act of Authority, but Schisme, and Dissolution of charity;