Selected quad for the lemma: grace_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
grace_n	covenant_n	promise_n	seal_v	2,532	5	9.8875	5	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

so judged by them that have authority he must administer the Sacramentall signes unto him not as unto one worthy or unworthy but as unto one yet undivided from them If you take giving of the Lords Supper for the Ministerial distribution of the Elements why then again I grant the Lords Supper is not to be given unto dogs and swine provided that they be such juridically by Church censure and so this precept binds not absolutely but conditionally upon a condition that dependeth upon the Eldership and not upon the Minister solely And thus again the reverend Bowles answereth the place Qui omnium pessim● usque dum Ecclesia eos suâ sententiâ decretoriâ pro cambus porcis habendos declaraverit non mihi cum illis ut canibus porcis agendum Latronem qui mortem commeruit nullus jure de vita tollat usque dum judex reum declaraverit sententiam tulerit I am not to deal with the worst of men as dogs and swine until the Church hath sentenced them to be such Suppose a felon hath deserved death yet the Sheriffe himself cannot lawfully execute him untill he be tryed and the judge hath condemned him If any should argue from this place for a Ministers not giving of the Lords Supper unto such dogs and swine as are not so by Church censure I hope they desire to be understood not absolutely but limitedly so farre forth as it lyeth in a Minister And this I readily yeeld unto as no way impugning my opinion I do confesse that a Minister is to keep dogges and swine from the Sacrament so farre as in him lyeth that is he is to do all that God hath required at his hands for prevention thereof But I am very confident that this grant of mine will no wayes prejudice my cause or advantage that of my opposites because God for prevention of wicked mens Sacramentall approaches nowhere requireth a Minister to usurp a power which is none of his a sole power of jurisdiction in foro Ecclesiastico externo But the Schoolmen endeavour to prove not only from the but now mentioned place of Scripture but also from reason That it is a sinne to give the Lords Supper unto such as a man knowes to be unworthy receivers Great is the dignity and holinesse of this blessed Sacrament Obligatio exhibendi reverentiam huic Sacramento digne illud tractandi naturalis est ex intrinsecâ ipsius Sacramenti dignitate orta ad hanc vero pertinet obligatio non dandi Sacramentum hoc indignis Sicut non projicere illud in locum immundum similia Suarez in tertiam part Thom. disp 67. sect 1. Is dicitur sacrilegium committere qui violat rem Sacram per aliquam irreverentiam D. Thom. 2.2 Q. 99. a. 2.3 Atqui Minister conferens Sacramentum homini indigno violat rem Sacram per quandam irreverentiam ergo sacrilegium committit Becanus su mma Theol. par 3. tract 2. cap. 5. Sect. 8. and therefore it should be handled in a meet decent reverent and devout manner Now it were a very undecent and unreverent part to take the Elements assoone as consecrated and wittingly to throw them into a noysome sinke but it is a point of greater irreverence nay it is a kind of Sacriledge to take them and give them unto known unworthy receivers for no sink is so foule dirty and stinking as a sinful earthy and uncleansed soul For answer I deny that there is any sacriledge or irreverence in a Ministers giving the Sacrament unto unworthy persons who are not such juridically provided still that he use all lawfull likely means to keep them off And the Schoolmen themselves confesse as much concerning hidden and secret sinners as also when a Minister cannot avoid the giving of it unto them without scandall or some other great inconvenience Indeed the dignity and holinesse of the Sacrament is sacrilegiously violated by the irreverence of unworthy receivers But God hath not left his Church infallible means to keep his Name and Ordinances from irreverence And the Minister is not guilty of this irreverence in unworthy receiving though he give them the Sacramental Elements if he do what lyeth in him to keep them off and when he cannot hinder them he give them the Elements with regret with a mourning and bleeding heart I shall conclude my answer unto this Objejection with that of Suarez praedictâ disputatione Section 4. Ipsemet Christus vult ut aliqua ejus injuria potius permittatur quàm indebito modo ac ordine caveatur It is Christs will rather that there should be a permission of wrongs and injuries unto his Name Ordinances and Sacraments then that they should be prevented by unlawfull means in an undue either order or manner A second generall Attribution of the Lords Supper from whence it is endeavoured to conclude to the sinfulnesse of giving it in any case unto such as are known by the Minister to be unworthy receivers is its being a seal of the Covenant of Grace the righteousnesse of Faith For hence think some it followeth that administration of the Lords Supper unto known scandalous and wicked persons is a practicall and visible lye a confirmation of an untruth because it seals the Covenant and Promises to those who have visibly no share in them For answer The Lords Supper may be said to be a seal of the Covenant or Promise of Grace either absolutely or conditionally The truth of the Covenant and Promises in themselves our obligation to gratitude and obedience are sealed absolutely by the Lords Supper but interest in the Covenant and Promises of Grace the Lords Supper sealeth unto those that partake thereof but conditionally so they beleeve Unto wicked men the Promises are as propounded so sealed but conditionally Sacramenta saith Amesius non sunt Testimonia completa absoluta nisicredentibus They are saith Rutherford seals unto the wicked not in actu secundo but only in actu primo See Mr. Marshall in his defence of Infant Baptisme against Tombs pag. 117.118 The last sort of Objections proving that it is a sin to give the Lords Supper unto known scandalous sinners is drawn from the consequents that will follow upon distribution of the Sacramentall Elements unto them First transgression of the Rule of Christ Secondly pollution of the Sacrament Thirdly a participation of the sinne of unworthy receivers Fourthly a Communion with wicked men in worship c. First then upon a Ministers giving the Sacramental elements unto them there will follow a transgression of the Rule of Christ which by my owne confession excludeth scandalous sinners c. For answer Upon a Ministers giving the Sacramental elements unto known scandalous sinners that are not such by Church censure for of such only we speak there will follow a transgression of the Rule of Christ but by whom by the known scandalous sin in unworthy receiving by the Church-guides in case the Church be Presbyterated if

of the thing must be determined by the scandall they go upon a very slippery ground As slippery and uncertain is another restriction which they joyne unto the former viz. That it is lawful for a Minister to give the Sacrament to the unworthy when they cannot keep them back without great inconveniency or inexpediency Suarez in 3am part Thom. disp 67. sect 1. Saith that the precept of not giving this Sacrament unto the unworthy is not simply negative but is to be reduced unto an affirmative precept of prudently and faithfully dispensing this Sacrament Quod praeceptum quidem formaliter sumptum ut sic dicam semper servandum est quotiescunque hoc Sacramentum dispensatur hinc fit ut si commodè possit debeat indigno denegari non tamen quod semper denegari debeat cum cocunque in commodo sine ulla exceptione These last words of Suarez together with those of Gillespy will serve to answer all the Arguments of the Schoolmen so farre as they are urged against us For in an Un-Presbyterated Church the Lords Supper cannot be denyed unto unworthy persons without scandall great inconveniences nay I beleeve sinne And this for a general answer unto all the Arguments I shall next examine each argument a part The first Argument is taken from that fidelity and prudence required in Ministers as stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor. 4.1 2. and it is urged by Suarez in 3am partem Thom. disp 18. sect 2. disp 67. sect 1. As also by Becanus summ Theolog. parte 3 ia tract 2. cap. 5. Quaest 8. * Praeceptum naturale est ut dispensator qui bona Domini sui dispensat sit fidelis prudens in dispensando ergo praeceptum naturale est ut non dispenset homini indigno contra voluntatem insiitutionem sui domini quia hoc esset contra fidelitatem prudentiam quam indispensando debet servare cum ergo non velit Sacramenta sua dispensari indignis non potest Minister si fidelis esse vult contra hanc voluntatem facere Stewards say they ought to be faithful and prudent in distribution of the goods of their Lord and Master and therefore they should not dispense them against his will and appointment Now for Ministers to give the Lords Supper unto known unworthy receivers is to distribute it against the will and appoyntment of their Lord and Master Christ Jesus And therefore a violation of that prudence and fidelity which is required at their hands For answer First I shall desire you to apply unto this Argument the generall Answers and then the Argument may be retorted upon our Antagonists Prudence and fidelity obligeth stewards all such as have committed unto them the dispensation of the goods food c. of their Master unto the houshold not to go beyond their commission not to usurp the exercise of a power which their Master hath forbidden them by themselves only to meddle with as being given in commission joyntly with them unto their fellow Stewards Now they should go beyond their commission and assume a power for which they can shew no warrant from their Lord and Master if they should singly and solely by themselves debarre any from the Lords Supper Secondly There would be little colour in the Argument if it were not for the ambiguity that is in the terme Gods will Here if the Objection conclude any thing against us The Will of God must be taken Metonimycally for that which they call Voluntas signi in particular the Command of God and then the Argument is nothing but a pitifull and miserable begging of the Question For that there is a command unto the Minister not to give the Lords Supper unto unworthy persons who are not such juridically is not so much as attempted to be proved A second Objection is taken from the generall nature of the Lords Supper It is a holy thing a Pearle of the Gospel a Seal of the Covenant of grace First It is a holy thing a Pearle of the Gospel and our Saviours command is Matth. 7.6 Give not that which is holy unto dogges neither cast ye your Pearle before swine Sufficient satisfaction is given unto this place by the general Answers yet because it is much stood upon I shall say something unto it apart First this place as appears both by the Coherence as also by the reason annexed is principally intended concerning admonitions and reproofe For if you look upon the words foregoing you shall finde a direction for the reprover that he be not spotted with greater faults then those which he reproveth in others Then in this Verse there is directions concerning the persons to be reproved that they be not dogges and swine But the reason annexed lest they turne again and rent you makes the matter quite out of Question For the giving of the Lords Supper unto the prophanest wretches almost that are is not likely to occasion any such carriage But yet I will not deny that the place may be extended and applyed unto the giving of the Lords Supper unto unworthy receivers but then it must bee cum grano salis Giving of the Lords Supper may be taken either for the authoritative and juridicall admission unto or else for the Ministeriall distribution of the Lords Supper First then if you take it for the juridicall and authoritative admission unto the Lords Supper then indeed it is true that the Lords Supper ought not to be given unto swine or dogges they ought not authoritatively or juridically to be admitted thereunto but then we say that the Commandment is not given unto the Minister solely but unto the whole Eldership and thus Mr. Bowles answereth the place Praeceptum de non dando quod sanctum canibus eos duntaxat obligat quibus Deus a sacris arcendi canes potestatem demandavit haec non uni alicui sed pluribus à Christo tradita With reference unto this is it that Mr. Ball tels us pag. 204.205 that the Minister if he have done the office of a private Christian and a publique Minister and afterward he reach the Sacrament unto an unworthy Communicant he doth not so much give it him as suffer his Communion because he hath not power or authority to put him back He reacheth him the signes as that which he cannot with-hold because he is held in by the most prevailing power without which he cannot be debarred In this case the Minister is neither actor nor consenter in his admission because he doth it not in his own name but according to the Order established by God who will not have any member of the Congregation publiquely denyed his interest and right to the holy things of God by the knowledge will and pleasure of one singular Minister If a Minister know a man to be unworthy he may yet receive him because he cannot yet manifest it to the Church And for the same reason if his unworthynesse be notorious if it be not