Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	cup_n	drink_v	eat_v	8,062	5	7.8137	4	true

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

that have no foundation in Scripture are indeed saucy presumptions a taking upon us to tutour the Almighty Unto this expresse Command for the administration of the Lords Supper the Scholemen adde a virtual and implicite precept from the necessity Suarez or at least profitablenesse of it unto salvation The people are bound to make use of all meanes that are in any degree necessary to salvation and a Minister being to watch for the soules of his People is to make what provision he can not only of things simply and absolutely necessary but all things profitable convenient for salvation Before I meddle with the Answer which may be to this Argument I will give it a little more strength We have a Command not only for the celebration but also for the frequent celebration of the Lords Supper Mr Marshal in his Sermon of the Baptizing of Infants argues for a repetition of the Lords Supper by way of Analogy and proportion from the Passeover Pag. 35 36. All Gods Commands and Institutions saith he about the Sacraments of the Jews bind us as much as they did them in all things which belong to the substance of the Covenant and were not accidental to them The Jewish Passeover being to be yearly repeated binds us to have a repetition of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper which came in roome of it because this belongs to the substance of the Covenant both of them being Sacraments for spiritual nourishment growth and continuance in the Covenant But we have no need to stand upon a virtual or analogical command for the frequent use of this Sacrament seeing we have an expresse command of it 1 Cor. 11.24 25 26. * Addit declarationem istius clausulae hoc facite Annunciate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sic m●l● quam Annunciatis quasi dicat annunciare debetis nam exponit illa verba Hoc facite ad meirecordationem Quod si reddas Annunciatis erit rationatio cujus vis nulla apparet Nempe vis Corinthii celebrantes Coenam Domini Annunciatis mortem Domini ergo Christus praecepit ut hoc faceretis Quin determinatie illa temporis videtur imperativ●em postulare Annun●iate donec venerit id est non solum vos sed etiam vos secuturi credentes usque ad finem mundi deb●nt in celebranda sacra caena mortem Domini annunciare This do in remembrance of me This do as oft as ye drink it in remembrance of me for as often as ye eate this bread and drink this cup shew ye the Lords death untill he come For to choose rather to read the words as they are in the Margent then as they are in the Translation ye do shew you may see in Piscator two reasons for thus rendring the words The meaning of them in briefe is Ye ought to shew declare represent and make known the death of the Lord by this sacred Supper This is a duty lying not only upon you but upon all Beleevers following you unto the end of the world The Lords Supper is then to be celebrated even untill the coming of Christ to judgement and therefore there ought to be no interruption of the celebration of it at fit and convenient seasons which is that which I meane by the frequent celebration thereof That the frequent celebration of this Sacrament is a duty is inferred from this Text by Tilemannus Heshusius Fridericus Baldwinus Peter Martyr Calvin Musculus Aretius Hiperius Tossanus Pareus Piscator Dickson and our own Pemble And for this their inference I find these following reasons alledged The first is pressed by Pareus upon the words Cur saepius faciendum quia mors domini perpetuis laudibus celebranda c. Christ death is so great so important so beneficial a mercy as that it cals for a frequent commemoration Now this Sacrament of the Lords Supper was appointed purposely to quicken our memory therein Do this in remembrance of me therefore ought frequently to be administred A second reason is of Mr David Dickson upon the place Because Christ shall not bodily be present in the Church before the last judgment he therefore commands that by this Sacrament the memory of the Redemption of the Church by his death should ever and anon be repeated and celebrated untill he come from the Heavens in the last day A third reason is also in Pareus upon the place How long ought this Sacrament to be administred untill the Lord come till he come to judge the quick and the dead For even as the Sacraments of the Old Testament continued untill the first coming of Christ in the flesh so shall the Sacraments of the New Testament continue till the second coming of him in glory From these Arguments thus premised we may infer in the words of the learned godly Pemble that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here implyeth a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as often as ye do it therefore do it often not once in an age as Baptisme never to be repeated nor once a year and no more as the Passeover but many times in our Age many times in a yeare according as the Saints in the Primitive Church understood the meaning of these words and not as some in these times when Sophistry hath wrangled out Divinity would seeme to cavill that because the words run Do it as oft as you eate this bread and drink this cup therefore it is at their discretion to do it as seldome as they please who these Cavillers are that he speaks of I know not but Bellarmine hath some such evasion in his plea against the Cup in the Lords Supper and Bullinger also upon the place hath something sounding that way By this word As often Christ saith he leaves a liberty unto the Churches when and how often they will celebrate the Lords Supper For this he quotes a saying out of Augustine Epist 118. ad Ianuarium In which after repetition of some variety or difference in the Churches of God about the time of administring this Sacrament some administring it every day and some only upon certaine set daies he concludes that the best course for a prudent Christian herein is to conforme himself unto the usage of that Church unto which he shall come Unto Bullinger I might joyne Hiperius who quotes Epiphanius affirming as much But I beleeve that the liberty left to the Church which Bullinger and Hiperius speak of is meant only concerning a prudent choice of fit and convenient seasons for administration of the Lords Supper alwaies provided that she keep within the Latitude of frequency in the administration thereof If so be by it they understand an absolute unbounded liberty of administring it as seldome as she please the collection is groundlesse and unreasonable and confuted by Volkellius a Socinian and therefore an undervalluer of this Sacrament We must mark faith he that the Apostle doth not at all say that it is free for us to use or not to use the Lords Supper

they themselves had none at all When at Auspurge I asked a Ring-leader of this sect when he had partaken with the Church of Christ of the Bread and Cup of the Lord He expressy answered he had then abstained about twelve years from this Communion Being demanded why he had done so he replied that he had not as yet found any Church which was inwardly and outwardly adorned with the gifts and vertues of the true spouse of Christ and that therefore he did put off and deferre his Communion until he could find such a Church rightly setled or ordered Here I shall once for all clearly prove that a Ministers universal and total abstinence from administration of the Lords Supper unto that flock or Church over which God hath made him an overseer is unlawful though for the eschewing of scandal No sinful omission of that which is commanded by an affirmative Precept is lawful for the eschewing of scandal But a Ministers total and universal abstinence from the administration of the Lords Supper unto that flock over which God hath made him overseer is a sinful omission of that which is commanded by an affirmative Precept therefore it is not lawful for the eschewing of scandal The major is confirmed from that of the Apostle Rom 3.8 Their damnation is just that say Let us do evill that good may come as also that of Aquinas secunda secundae Quaest 43. Art 7. Secundum ordinem charitatis plus debet homo suam salutem spiritualem diligere quàm alterius A well-ordered charity beginneth ever at home making a man chiefly to desire and endeavour the salvation of his own soul and consequently to be more solicitous how to avoid sin in himself then to prevent it in others See Rutherford more largely touching scandal pag. 84. The Minor is proved because it is necessary for my salvation to obey affirmative Precepts though not in all differences of time See Rutherford pag. 13.14 Praecepta affirmativa obligant though not ad semper yet ad aliquando Affirmative Precepts tie us to do the things they require though not at all times yet at some time or other And therefore universally and totally to abstaine from what they command is sinfully to omit what is commanded by them I cannot but here call to mind a Reply of the renowned Chamier to a shift of Cajetan which he brings to elude our Arguments against their Communion under one kind that are drawn from the command of the Cup. The Command saith Cajetan is but affirmative and affirmativa Praecepta utsi obligent semper non tamen ad semper Unto which Chamier replyeth very solidly and sharply Esto saith he sed quid tu appellas pro semper nullumne apud te discrimen est inter non semper nunquam The like Reply will serve unto those who go about to evade the Command of the Lords Supper by telling us that it is an affirmative Command and doth oblige semper but not adsemper It doth always bind but not to always for there is a wide difference between not always and never Now the upshot of these mens tenents is that if the Church be not Presbyterated the Command of the Lords Supper doth never bind during such its condition Suarez in Tertiam Part. Thom. Tom. 30. Disput 80. Sect. 1. as also Becanus in his Summae Theol. Scholastic Part. tertiae Tract secundo cap. 25. Part. secundae Quaest prima alledge divers reasons why all Priests whatsoever are bound to say Masse if you please to make such a change in them as to put Ministers for Priests and the Lords Supper for Masse you may make them Orthodox and so they will serve our turn First it seems to be a kind of spiritual Prodigality very dangerous to the soul for a minister to deprive himself of the use of the power of order and of the fruit of the Sacrament Unto this we may adde out of Dunand that it is a virtuall contempt of the great benefit that is offered in the Sacrament Secondly Seeing the power is for the Act it is an inordinate thing to receive the power of administring this Sacrament and not to use this power but to let it lye idle Thirdly It is against charity to deprive the Church of that great fruit and benefit which they might partake of by this Sacrament Lastly Because the Minister by vertue of his office takes upon his shoulders the burden of praying for his people of Preaching and administring the Sacraments unto them and therefore he sins if he never or seldome dischargeth these offices and duties of his calling A calling and office is for the work Ministry and service proper thereunto and therefore it is a great fault to neglect that work service or Ministry which is proper to a mans calling Secondly Not only a Ministers totall and universall abstinence from administration of the Lords Supper but also seldomnesse and unfrequency of administring it is unlawfull And the reason of this is because as I have proved and cleared There is a command for a frequent administration of the Lords Supper And a command of frequency in dispensation of an Ordinance is violated and transgressed not only when the Ordinance is wholly and altogether omitted but also when it is seldome or rarely dispensed when it is omitted for the date of many years Thirdly This objection of scandall holds as well against administration of the Lords Supper in a Presbyterated as in an Un-Presbyterated Church For a Minister may ordinarily foresee that scandall will follow in a Presbyterated Church in case there be a Mal-administration of discipline or else in case scandalous persons known to be such only unto the Minister himself or else unto some one godly person cannot be convicted or proved to be such either by their own confession or else by the testimony of two or three witnesses Fourthly It is a very unreasonable position that the administration of the Lords Supper ought to be suspended and deferred upon the likelyhood of the following of scandall for then a Minister shall be almost perpetually uncertaine whether he may administer the Lords Supper or no because likelyhood of scandall to follow will occurre if not alwayes yet very often When our Saviour tels us Mat. 13.41 that in the consummation or end of the world the Son of man shall send his Angels and they shall gather out of his Kingdom all scandals or all things that offend he doth clearly imply that till then there will be scandals even in his Kingdom in his Church And this holds not only of scandals in generall but also of such scandals as are likely to follow upon dispensation of Gods Ordinances unto the end of the world Some will be scandalized at the Ordinances of God The Word will be a savour of death unto death in them that perish Unworthy receivers will eat and drink their own judgment will be guilty of the body and blood of Christ Christ himself will be for a