Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n according_a church_n word_n 2,966 5 4.1215 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A86500 The mischeife of mixt communions, fully discussed. All maine arguments on both sides, are largely canvased. Many difficulties demonstratively cleared, as that Judas was not at the Lords Supper, &c. When, and how was the originall of parishes in England. Severall cases of conscience resolved. As in case unworthy ones thrust into the Lords Supper; what single Christians should doe, and what the congregation should doe. A discovery what is the originall, and rise of all these disputes, and how a faire end may be put to all. / By Doctor Nathanael Homes. Homes, Nathanael, 1599-1678. 1650 (1650) Wing H2569A; Thomason E607_8; ESTC R205868 24,915 24

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Communion and keeping of the spiritual feast 1 Cor. 5.2 2. Though to come to the Lords Table if it may be had according to Christs institution is an undoubted duty yet it is not an undoubted duty that any should come to take a sin upon them that they should come to known mixt Communions where other mens sins some how as we have shewed become theirs 3. The company of unworthy persons at the Communion is more then a circumstance for the contrary namely Saints meeting in faith and charity to partake of the Communion is of the essence i. e. of the matter and forme of the Churches right receiving But where there is a mixture of evil persons there is no ground of Scripture to beleeve I do doe wel nor any vertuous object in such unworthy persons for me to love them as fellow Communicants 4. To except against unworthy persons and because they are admitted for me to forbear the Communion is not a mistake that cause is just as we have shewed afore and shal after There is a mistake at least or more by your own intimation in them that having authority doe not keep unworthy ones away and in those unworthy ones that they keep not themselves away And if the former will bring a defilement on themselves and the latter wil bring judgement on themselves I cannot be excused if I may keep my selfe free from both and will not Distinction of Parishes in England were made by Pope Honorious about 1200. years since and so of no divine institution nor inforce any divine obligation for me to receive only in mine own Parish The Scriptures send me to a true Church not to a Parish If one Church be polluted and there is another not farr off that is free from that known pollution in ordinary prudence one would choose pure things afore polluted It s a stated case in Casuists as in Doctor Ames cases of conscience c. that a man may goe from a polluted Church to a pure Church and yet here is no danger in such a particular person of separation upon separation as you after object if Churches will doe their duty If a Church wil separate from the rule of the Word what would your conscience troubled at it doe in such a case Would you against conscience offend and transgresse with the rest For fifthly If a matter about religious things be against my conscience though by mistaking the godly Casuists resolve that till I be informed I shal sin against conscience to doe it So Doctor Ames and study Rom. 14.22 Yea so Saint Paul Rom. 14.23 whatsoever is not of faith is sin For the Apostle speaks of things indifferent and so of matters that I might have done and 't was my ignorance that I was not perswaded I might have done them and therefore Paul exhorts Brethren not to eate any thing to the offence of a weak Brother Rom. 14.20 21. although t is his weaknes to take offence about kinds of meats And therefore sixthly we say why doe not Churches that use mixt Communions more tender the consciences of them that cannot bear these mixtures They keeping out the unworthy would prevent all this adoe Save your words and Paper and Ink in writing in behalfe of mixt Communions what need we plead for rubbish We cannot be too pure in our practise according to the Scriptures If the Church and Officers be they whom you meane have authority to keep out unworthy ones from the Communion so had the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. And I know none else but the particular Church by joynt consent have the immediate proper power why do not they doe their duty Why must there such load be layd upon a particular tender conscience that out of conscience doth abstaine from a mixt Communion whiles the whole congregation goe on in their sin of admitting sinful mixtures and suppose against conscience and against admonition For sure no Minister and People more or less in any congregation but could wish that unworthy persons were kept out And the case here as before touched is not onely of one private person as private For we put the case as men according to rule ought to act in case they were so imprudent as to incorporate to a congregation that shunned not such mixtures a godly man sees a neighbour that came to the Communion transgresse he admonisheth him of it c. according to Matth. 18.15 The matter at last by these two or three Brethren is brought afore the Church Here is more then one And in the Church they act as publick persons fellow members As three Justices on the Bench are publike persons though there be twenty more there If these three brethren with some other that no doubt will adhere to the rule cannot prevaile against the Officers or major vote to cast out the unworthy a withdrawing from such a congregation is not upon so private a consideration Yea the matter is of so publike a concernment that other Churches must blame that Church if they reforme not and countenance such as withdraw according to rule in 2 Thes 3.6 14. because they cannot attaine the end of that rule Matth. 18.15 Sure if we must withdraw from any one Brother walking disorderly contrary to rule as t is in that 2 Thes 3.6 14. then much more from a whole Congregation of Brethren walking contrary to rule and so offending Christ and the consciences of his Lambs The design then is not separation upon separation but to keep Churches to the rule But to speak al in a word Parish congregations for the most part as in relation to the communion have so il a constitution that they cannot tel where to begin to reform and then they must defend it seeing they cannot amend it and so break Christs Commandements and teach men so But if it be separation upon separation or a taking Churches out of Churches t is a thing I think not contrary to all rule 2 Cor. 6.14 to end Revel 18.14 explained afore and the best Saints generally in all ages have practised and they also I mean the Presbyterians that cry out against it There was a true Jewish Church and particular Jewish Synagogue-congregations among which Christ Preached for three yeares and an half yet Acts 2. and thence forward out of them was a separation and a gathering of Christian Churches Therefore simply and absolutely to go from Church to Church or gather Churches out of Churches is not unlawfull Again the Romish Church was a true Church as famous Polanus proves though a most polluted one it was essentially a true Church till in the Councill of Trent they pronounced an Anathema against all the maine truths of Christ and so gave him a bill of divorce yet justly when Luther Preached more light and holinesse many Nations and among them anon England did also separate from them and their congregations departed from them in Doctrine in part and in forme of worship Many corruptions remaining