Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	day_n	jewish_a	sabbath_n	2,758	5	9.9661	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A80157	Provocator provocatus. Or, An answer made to an open challenge made by one M. Boatman in Peters Parish in Norwich, the 13th of December, 1654. in a sermon preached there at a fast, in which answer these questions are spoke to. 1. Whether juridicall suspension of some persons from the Lords Supper be deducible from Scripture; the affirmative is proved. : 2. Whether ministeriall or privative suspension be justifiable; the affirmative also is maintained. : 3. Whether the suspension of the ignorant and scandalous be a pharisaicall invention; a thing which wiser ages never thought of, as Mr Boatman falsly affirmed. In opposition to which is proved, that it hath been the judgment and practice of the eminent saints and servants of Christ, in all ages, of all other reformed churches in all times ... / By John Collings ...	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.; Boatman, Mr.	1654 (1654)	Wing C5329A; ESTC R232871	174,209	280

it would plainly prove that the sop was eaten by Judas two dayes before the Passeover was celebrated or the Lords Supper instituted and that Judas two dayes before was discovered scandalons to all the Disciples and that two dayes before he deserted Christ and the other Disciples onely if Mr Humfly could prove this it would stand him in hand to prove his coming back well to eat the the Passeover or the Supper 2. But we will yield him nothing he bids us look the margent of our Bibles the place we insist upon is Io. 13.30 where our ordinary Bibles have nothing in the margent so that in obedience to him we must tell him we have enquired but non est inventum in Bibltis nostris Indeed to the first verse of that chap. is affixed in marg Mat. 26.2 But thirdly he dreames that the Supper spoken of where Iudas had the sop was a Feast two dayes before the Passeover Indeed we read Mat. 26.1 2. Mar. 14.1 of some consultation of the Chiefe Priests two daies before the Passeover to take Christ But that there was any supper besides this at the Passeover will pose Mr Humfry to prove CHAP. VI. Containining a digression in which there is an attempt to prove that Christ did eat the Passeover two daies before the Jewes did eat it that yeare and that he was not crucified till the second day after he was apprehended and that at the Passover there was but one supper as is plaine by the comparing the Jewish order of celebration with the story of the foure Evangelists concerning this and that Iudas was not present at the Passeover nor the Supper IT seems to me very conducible towards the clearing of this matter of fact whether Iudas received the Supper or no to find out 1. What day Christ celebrated the passeover and instituted his supper 2. To examine the Iewish order of celebrating the Passeover and to compare it with what the Evangelists have concerning Christs actions in it Towards the first I shall offer these following considerations 1. It is cleer from Scripture that the time God set for the celebration of the Passeover was the 14 day of the first month at even Ex. 12.18 19. Lev. 23. v. 6. Num. 28.16 17. 2. It is as cleer that it was to be 7 dayes in all which time they were to eat no unleavened bread 3. Dr Lightfoots Temple service cap. 12.4 The Lambe at least for the first Passover was taken up the tenth day whether this held or no is doubted and by many denyed it was at first Ex. 12.7 4. It is cleare that the Jewes reckoned the beginning of their day from the setting of the Sunne the night before 5. When the daies of unleavened bread should have begun it is cleer Lev. 23 6. on the fifteenth day they were to eat unleavened bread that is from the evening succeeding Sun-set the fourteenth day Therefore Ex. 12.18 19. it is said on the fourteenth at evening you shall eat unleavened bread which fourteenth at evening was the beginning of the fifteenth and that is clear for they were to end the 21 at even and to hold but seven daies Grotius in Mar. 6. Dr Willet in Ex. 12.9 7. Grotius saies there were eight daies of unleavened bread So Iosephus tels him But Dr Willet tels us Iosephus must not be credited in it it being expresly against Scripture Rupertus is in the same error but we must not yield it 6. Yet because on the fourteenth day they kill'd the Passeover and at even began the first of unleavened bread it is plaine they called the fourteenth day the first of unleavened bread and so saith Dr Lightfoot it is called in Scripture Dr Light Tem. service cap. 12. in the New Testament and so it is called both by Mark and Luke The first day of unleavened bread when the passover was killed Saint Luke when the Passover ought to be killed So that in strict account the dayes of unleavened bread began not till the Sun-set of the fourteenth day yet in vulgar reckoning they began before and the whole fourteenth day was so called 7. And I conceive for another reason which both Buxtorf and Dr Lightfoot hint us ibid. Buxt synag Iud. cap. 12. and that was a custome the Jewes had to send an Officer assoon as ever Sunne was set on the thirteenth day to search for leaven in all houses which he did narrowly with Candles and this search continued till the next day at noon at which time they threw what they found this way and that way Hence I conceive the whole space of time from the thirteenth at Sun-set till the fourteenth at Sun-set was called the first of unleavened bread not that it was strictly so but that it was called so from this fashion And in this Grotius in Mat. 26.17 Grotius agrees with me though not upon this reason It is plain both by Mark and Luke that the fourteenth day is called the first of unleavened bread which fourteenth began at Sunset the thirteenth day 8. For the time in which Christ celebrated the Passover and instituted his Supper it is plaine from the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.23 it was the same night in which he was betrayed For the day wherein he was crucified Beda de ratione temporum Dr Wil. in 12. Ex. qu. 11. Beda tels us that no Christian must doubt but it was the fifteenth day of the month Dr Willet saith it is the received opinion But Learned Scaliger with others conclude the contrary It is certaine that the day whereon he was Crucified was the day or day before the preparation to the Jewish Passover and Sabbath Mat. 15.42 Luke 23.54 Iohn 19.14 42. 9. Scali de emend temp l. 6. p. 566 That he was Crucified before the noon of the day is cleare from Mar. 15.25 it was about the third houre And Mat 26.45 46. after he had been some time on the Cross was the sixth houre when the darkness began Now the Jewes reckoning their houres from our six to six the third houre was nine of the clock at which time saith Mark he was Crucified and the sixth houre was twelve of the clock at which time the darkness began and lasted till three 10. For the better finding out therefore of the night wherein he was betrayed in which he instituted the Supper saith St Paul Let us consider what the Gospell saies was done from the time of the institution of the Supper till his death Some think that excellent Sermon Iohn 14.15 16. was preach'd in the chamber where he administred the Supper Some think it was as he was going to the Mount of Olives and Gethsemane Certaine it is it was after the Supper On the mount of Olives he sings an hymne after this he goeth to Gethsemane and is in an agony prayeth thrice besides that prayer John 17. After this Mat. 27.1 2. Mar. 15.1 2. Judas comes and apprehends him he is carried before

repentance so Cyprian after which as the Magdeburgenses prove out of Cyprian they were examined and judged by their particular Churches after which upon their confession of their sins there also they were admitted It is more than probable that Novatus his heresie which was broached about this time gave occasion to the Church to mitigate their Censure of Excommunication and denying the Communion till death to some s●andalous sinners For Cyprian tells us that his Predecessors had resused to recon●ile Adulterers at all to the Church and if I mistake not the same was determined concerning Apostates I thinke Albaspinaeus proves it Novatus say some Albaspin Obs l. 2. Obs 21. denied that any falling after baptisme could be restored by repentance Albaspinaeus saith it is a mistake for his Errour was That he denied that Christ had given power to the Church to absolve or restore any In opposition to whom the Church remitted something of her former severity and instead of Excommunicating or denying the Sacrament till death which before were very frequent ●ensures they determined that scandalous persons should being admonished and approving themselves to the Church by these steps be restored to a plenary Communion And now I have given my Reader as good an account as I can find of this Primitive Discipline from whence he may observe 1. That we who desire the Presbyterian reformamation in the exercise of our Discip●ine require no more than the recovery of this ancient Custome of the Churches of Christ It is as cleare as the light 1. That they admitted none to the Sacrament but such as before had approved themselves to the Church to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enlightened with the knowledge of the Principles of Christian Religion 2. Such as were free from all grosse and scandalous sins and if they did fall into any they required not only a verball profession of their sorrow and a promise of their amendment but that according to the nature of their offence they should be kept from the Sa●rament till by an humble contrary walking for some time they had manifested their hearty sorrow and repentance To which purpose they set 1 2 5 10 15 20 yeares for them we plead not for such a time but for a convenient time for them to stand ashamed and to evidence their true repentance And though as to every particular circumstance we do not justifie our Fathers yet in these two maine things we agree with them and insist on no more And for the point of examination so much bogled at it is only in order to the setling of our Churches and the correcting the abuses of corrupt Ministers formerly who should have look'd to that to have admitted no blind ignorant persons to the Lords Table which I have sufficiently evidenced was the Discipline of the ancient Church of Christ Secondly From what hath been said the Reader may judge how simply or maliciously Mr Boatman spake when he told his people that it never entred into the heads of wiser ages to determine for what sins any should be suspended from the Lords Table It is a signe he never read the Councils nor any part of them nor yet Basils Canonicall Epistles ad Amphilochium he would have seen there that for Manslaughter Adultery Fornication Perjury Apostacy and many sins more Suspension was determined I shall conclude this Chapter with that exclamation of Albaspinaeus with which he concludes the two and twentieth Observation of his second book O mirabilem sacrosanctae antiquitatis pietatem religionem O veteris disciplinae sanctitatem mirabilem c. O the admirable piety and Religion of former times O the wonderfull holinesse of the Church and strictnesse of her Discipline then In those daies if a Christian in the heat of persecution to save his life had but bowed to an Idoll or offered in their Temple though sorely against their will the Church did not only suspend him from the Sacrament but he could not be restored againe till his dying day or till after seven or ten yeares standing as a penitent Now if Christians give up themselves to their lusts and not to save their lives but to satisfie their beastly lusts only be drunke uncleane sweare lye c. yet if they will but wipe their mouths and say they will do so no more they must presently be admitted to the holy Table yea and they usurpe Christs authority that will keep them away if we may beleeve all that is told us Basil ep Canon ad Amphil. Then the Adulterer might not be admitted till by fifteene yeares holy conversation he had evidenced his repentance now we think fifteen months yea fifteene daies too much Ib. Can. 58. Ib. Can. 59. A Fornicatour must abstaine in those daies eight yeares two he must only beg prayers other two he must only heare other two he must mourne a seventh he must stand and merely look on in the eighth he might be admitted If one had stolne and confessed it himselfe Ib. Can. 61. he must have been kept away a yeare if he had not confessed it two yeares Now it is no more but Let him that hath stolne steale no more and come Ib. Can. 64. If a man had sworne falsly and forsworne himselfe then he must have been kept away eleven yeares now if he sweares profanely it is but a Veniall sin if he saies he is sorry our charity must shut her eyes and beleeve him a visible Saint Nay and we must be made beleeve that all former ages were as mad and as loose as we are No no Reader the feare of God was more upon our fore-fathers hearts they durst do no such things they rather offended by too much severity yet sinners in those daies had ten times more temptations to sin and those of the highest nature from the danger of their lives and spoyling their goods c. we may be as strict as we will and are not tempted but when we are drawn away by our own lusts and enticed O how inexcusable shall the Ministers and Elders of Congregations appeare before the Lord Jesus Christ for the exposing his body and bloud to profanation Shall not the Lord say Behold here my Servants Tertullian and Cyprian how strict they were in furious times Behold my Servant Chrysostome who would rather have suffered his own bloud to have been shed than my Sons to be profaned Behold my Servant Ambrose he was not afraid of the face of an Emperour Theodosius but in a just cause he denied him the Sacrament you were afraid of the face of a rich man afraid of losing ten shillings a yeare afraid of losing the love of those who hate me what shall we say How shall we appeare before the Lord Shall not blushing cover our faces that day The Lord grant it be laid to none of our charge FINIS An Appendix to the former Discourse containing a Discourse of Mr Boatmans in a publike Lecture at Peters in Norwich