Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	action_n	good_a	sin_n	1,408	5	4.8951	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87512	The want of church-government no warrant for a totall omission of the Lords Supper. Or, A brief and scholastical debate of that question, which hath so wonderfully perplexed many, both ministers and people. Whether or no, the sacrament of the Lords Supper may (according to presbyterial principles) be lawfully administred in an un-presbyterated church, that is, a church destitute of ruling elders. Wherein the affirmative is confirmed by many arguments, and cleared from objections, especially such as are drawn from the unavoidablenesse of mixt communions without ecclesiastical discipline. / By Henry Jeanes, minister of Gods Word at Chedzoy in Sommerset-shire.	Jeanes, Henry, 1611-1662.	1650 (1650)	Wing J511; Thomason E618_6; ESTC R202652	58,879	80

some sort glorified by the outward performance of the duties of wicked men Now he that cooperates with an action that is good in it self materially or objectively and only sinful by accident may be farre from cooperating with the sinfulnesse of that action For he may no ways be a cause thereof Lastly it is objected that upon giving the Lords Supper unto known scandalous sinners a religious Communion with them in worship will ensue therefore to give it to them is a sinne for what were this but to turn the Communion of Saints into a Communion of sinners For answer first this objection is taken from an Independent forge and will not be owned by Presbyterians that understand their own Principles The old non-Conformists writing against the separation resolve generally that the Lords Supper may be partaken of in a Church where scandals are tolerated For we are not say they to omit a Worship for the sins of our fellow-worshippers You may say as much in the Vindication of the Presbyterial Government and Ministers by the Ministers and Elders met together in the Provincial Assembly at London November 9. 1649. 134.135 136. Suppose say they there were some sinful mixtures at our Sacraments yet we conceive this is not a sufficient ground of a negative separation Secondly a full and sufficient answer you have to this objection in Mr. Ball pag. 200 201. In coming to Gods ordinance we have Communion with Christ principally who hath called us thither is there present by his grace and spirit to blesse his ordinance and with the faithful who are there met together at Gods Commandement in the name and by the authority of Jesus Christ with the wicked we have no Communion unlesse it be external and by accident because they are not or cannot be cast out Internall and essential Communion we have with Christ and the faithful only external with the wicked Our Communion with Christ and his faithful People is not free and voluntary but necessary enjoyned by God not left to our will or pleasure Our Communion with the wicked in the ordinances is unwilling on our part suffered not affected if we know how to hinder it lawfully God requireth attendance on him in his holy ordinances and to joyne with his Voluntaries assembled where he is present in the midst among them If we cannot appear before him as duty bindeth but we must have outward Communion with the wicked which should be expelled but cannot be kept back by us In this case our Communion with God is free and voluntary but our Communion with the wicked is suffered only or held in respect of the Will and Commandement of God who requireth that service at our hands A Postscript Christian Reader I Thought good to acquaint thee that I have received from one Mr. Fulwood a pretended examination of my Arguments for the lawfulnesse of administring the Lords Supper in an Un-Presbyterated Church and unto it I have pen'd a very large Reply for which I am exceedingly blamed by my best and most knowing friends who unanimously tell me that it is very unfit so worthlesse a Paper should have the honour of a Refutation If the Author therof think that he hath any wrong by this censure he may right himselfe by making it as publike as he please Most of what he saith is either answered in this my book or else the absurdity of it is so grosse and apparent as that it carrieth a refutation in its own forehead Indeed there be but two things considerable in this pretended examination An Answer and an Objection The Answer is unto my Argument à Praecepto The sum of it is That the Command to celebrate the Lords Supper is not immediate but mediate and conditional not binding but upon pre-supposal of a preparative work of the Presbytery c For reply unto this first all the proofe that he brings for its being a mediate Command is in 1 Cor 14. ult unto which I shall presently give answer Secondly An immediate Command doth not exclude the Command of all Antecedent duties but only of such upon which the Duty commanded hath an essentiall dependency and answerably a mediate Command is that which obligeth not proximè immediatè unto the performance of that which it commandeth unlesse there be performance of Antecedent duties upon which it hath an essentiall dependency or an existence of any other Antecedents that are before the duty enjoynd in regard of that order which is of essential dependency To give an instance of this The Command to be assured of our Justification Vocation c. is only mediate and doth not bind immediately before there be a performance of an Antecedent duty upon which it hath an essentiall dependence to wit the faith of adherence before there be an existence of the Objects Vocation Justification c. which are Antecedents unto this assurance in regard of the order of essential dependency It is not therefore the absence of of every Antecedent that doth suspend much lesse evacuate annul the Obligation of a Command but only the wants of Antecedents necessary by Physicall Obligation A due serious and diligent preparation is enjoyned as an Antecedent unto hearing of the word and unto publike and solemn Prayers and yet I hope Mr Fullwood dare not say that upon want of preparation there is a suspension of the Obligation of these Commands of God to heare and pray And that in such a case not to heare not to pray are at the most but mediate sins It is generally resolved by all the Casuists that ever I saw that when we come unto a duty and do not find our hearts prepared according unto that we do desire that we are not yet for that time to let go the duty and forbeare the performance of it If any one saith Mr. Burrows in his Gospel-Worship in answer unto the Question performe a duty in Worship in that sincerity and strength that he is able to do though he be not prepared as he ought yet he is better to do it then to neglect it And he applieth this his answer unto receiving of the Sacrament as well as the Word and Prayer as may be seen by his proposall of the Question Againe There are divers things required in the call and Ordination of a Minister that are by Gods command to be Antecedent unto his preaching unto his flock Some of which are wanting in such Ministers as were ordained by Bishops But because they are not Antecedents essentially necessary unto the preaching of the Word by the want of them the Obligation unto the preaching of the word is not suspended much lesse annulled And yet it is not denied but that the want of them is sinful for which such Ministers ought to be humbled Scotus lib. 4 Distinct 12 Quest 3. num 32. thus limits this Proposition Destructo priori destruitur posterius Vera est saith he de simpliciter priori à quo scilicet dependet posterius non

instance in scandals tending unto sin occasioned by the forbearance of the Lords Supper First There is the scandal of the godly viz. their wants and weaknesse both of faith and grace from want of an Ordinance appointed and sanctified for the confirmation of faith and increase of grace by the donour of all faith grace Secondly Seperatists are hereby encouraged in their seperation from our Churches because we want a principal Ordinance of God which also is laid aside amongst us upon a principle of their own which was never granted them by the old Non-Conformists to wit that a worship is to be omitted for the sin of the worshippers an Ordinance for the sins of the partakers of the Ordinance Thirdly It staggers many weak ones amongst us and if not timely prevented will occasion their totall defection and seperation from us For though they approve not of their Tenents yet this will much sway with them That amongst them they may have an Ordinance which amongst us is withheld from them and of enjoying which they have not any the least hopes as long as they stay with us A fourth scandal is in that others take occasion by this forbearance of the Lords Supper to contemne the Lords Supper it self as being by this carriage induced to beleeve that Ministers despise it and do not so much for a while forbear as utterly disclaime the administration thereof Secondly Let us compare these scandals with the scandal which the wicked take by the administration of the Lords Supper and consider with which of them the Minister may most justly be charged A Minister can never wash his hands from these scandals which follow upon a totall forbearance of the Lords Supper whereas having done his duty for prevention of that scandal which the wicked take by administration of the Lords Supper he stands free from the guilt thereof My reason for this is because these scandals which follow upon a totall forbearance of the Lords Supper are active as well as passive given by the Minister as well as taken be the People whereas the scandal of the unworthy receiver consequent to administration of the Lords Supper is only Passive not Active taken by the unworthy receiver not given by the Minister The former scandals those which follow upon a totall forbearance of the Lords Supper flow per se naturally and kindly from the Ministers neglect or sinful omission of a necessary Ordinance of God The latter scandal the scandal of the wicked their being guilty of the body and blood of the Lord by occasion hereor is only by accident by reason either of their ignorance or sinfull corruption and evil disposition There is a young smatterer in both Divinity and Philosophy who hath taken great exceptions against this passage But he objected nothing worthy of the least digression I shall therefore take no notice of what he sayeth but only clear and explaine mine own meaning When I say the scandals consequent unto a totall forbearance of the Lords Supper flow naturally there from I mean congruenter nature that is sutably and agreeably unto the nature of such an omission The total omission of the Lords Supper is of itself apt and likely to occasion these above mentioned scandals following thereupon All sinful words deeds and all sinful omissions if discernable by others are in their own nature scandalous they are of themselves naturally apt to scandalize to occasion sin in others Now I have proved that a total forbearance of the administration of the Lords Supper is a sinful omission and therefore I think that it is no Paradox to affirme that it naturally occasioneth sin in others Again whereas I said that the scandal of the wicked or unworthy receiver was only by accident I meant in genere causae moralis For in genere causae Physicae the scandals consequent unto a total forbearance of the Lords Supper are by accident also To manifest this we must distinguish of a twofold cause of the scandal or fall of another into sin Physical and moral The Physical efficacious and neerest cause is only the ill-disposition and sinful corruption of the Party scandalized for all other mens words actions omissions are but occasions not causes of sin in genere Physico they work but objectively and that is no Physical and real influence And in this sense I readily grant that all passive scandals whatsoever are accidental in respect of the words deeds or omissions of others the most enticing practices of others that are even Satans temptations have no real and Physical influence upon our sins but this acception of accidental is utterly impertinent unto our present purpose In a second place then our sinful words actions omissions may be moral causes of other mens scandal or falling into sin they may scandalize to use the words of Rutherford morally by contributing a moral influence culpably to the scandalizing of others to speak plainly all words deeds and omissions of either that do sinfully and culpably occasion the scandal or fall of others into sin are moral causes of their scandal or fall into sin Moralis causa est quae verequidem non efficit sed tamen talis est ut ei imputetur effectus But now if a word or action do not sinfully culpably occasion the scandal the fall of another into sin but he only be scandalized thereby by his own default that scandal is only termed then per accidens accidental a passive scandal without an active a scandal taken not culpably given such was the scandal in the Capernaites at Christs preaching of eating his flesh and drinking his blood John 6.60 61. So also Christ crucified was to the Iews a stumbling block 1 Cor. 1.23 In like manner the Pharisees were scandalized at Christs doctrine concerning the cause of defilement Matth. 15.12 All these scandals were only ex accidente they were only accidental scandals Now to make application of all this to the matter in hand The scandals in the godly consequent upon forbearance of the administration of the Lords Supper however they come Physically from the sinful corruption and ill-disposition of the godly vet they proceed also morally from this total forbearance of the Lords Supper as a culpable and sinful occasion of them whereas now on the other side of the scandals in the wicked following upon administration of the Lords Supper the administration of the Lords Supper is not a culpable and sinful occasion not occasio data sed arrepta not an occasion sinfully given but sinfully taken even as sin is occasioned by the Commandement Rom. 7.11.13 So that they come therefrom only per accidens and therefore may fitly be termed only accidentall scandals I am willing to say all that I can in behalfe of them whom I oppose And therefore I shall desire you to consider the ground why such affirmative precepts as command duties relating to others do not bind to alwaies The duties that they command are principally to this end That they