Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	drink_v	fruit_n	vine_n	2,742	5	10.7149	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42771	A treatise of miscellany questions wherein many usefull questions and cases of conscience are discussed and resolved ... / by Mr. George Gillespie ... ; published by Mr. Patrik Gillespie ...	Gillespie, George, 1613-1648.; Gillespie, Patrick, 1617-1675.	1649 (1649)	Wing G761; ESTC R8829	216,733	306

not for the use of a table at least not to all the Communicants Fourthly I offer also this argument The comming to and receiving at the Table serveth to set foorth the communion of Saints with Christ and among themselves which is a principall thing intended in this Sacrament and without such a symbole as I now plead for is not plainly and clearly set foorth in this Ordinance To eat in the same house and of the same meat is nothing near such a signe of fellowship or communion as to eat at the same Table This difference is noted between Martha and Lazarus Ioh. 12. 2. when they made a supper to Jesus in Bethany Martha served but Lazarus was one of them who sate at the Table with him Lazarus therefore had more fellowship with Christ at that time Peter Martyr on 1 Cor 10. noteth out of Chrysostome that communicare doth imply sodalitium and is more then participare to communicat is more then to partake for one may partake of the same bread who doth not communicat in the same bread Hee ha eateth of the same thing but not at the same Table cannot be altogether or properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you shame them that have not or them that are poore saith the Apostle What shall I say to you shall I praise you in this I praise you not 1 Cor 11 22. So say I those that receive the Sacrament in their Pewes shame the poor that have no Pewes wherein they are not to be praised Sure it were more cōmunion like to sit receive at one Table It is the most suteable significant setting foorth of the communion of Saints when the children of God are like Olive plants round about his Table Psal 128. 3. Therefore the Apostle having mentioned our partaking of one bread 1 Cor. 10. 17. addeth verse 21. our partaking of one Table which is the Lords Table When Communicants come not to the Table but abide in their Pewes some here some there this is indeed a dividing of the congregation in varias partes partiumque particulas Neither can they be said to divide the cup amongst themselves which by the institution they ought to doe in testimony of their communion when they are not within reach yea oftentimes not within sight of one another There is nothing like a dividing it amongst themselves where they come not to the Table and there give the cup each to other I know some have scrupled whether our Saviours words Luke 22. 17. Take this and divide it amongst your selves be meant of the Eucharisticall cup or of the Paschall But they goe upon surer reasons who put it out of question that it is meant of the Eucharisticall cup which is there mentioned by Luke by way of Anticipation I shall for the present give but this reason which I know hath satisfied some who were of another opinion although much more might be said that which Luke recordeth to have been spoken by Christ concerning that cup which he bade them divide amongst themselves the very same doe Matthew and Mark record to have been spoken by him concerning the Eucharisticall cup which was drunk last of all and after the Paschall supper viz. That thencefoorth he would not drink of the fruit of the Vine untill he should drink it in the Kingdome of God which doth not hold true if understood of the Paschall cup therefore those other Evangelists plainly apply it to the Eucharisticall cup and there withall they close the historie of the Sacrament adding only that a hymne was sung Math 26. 27 28 29. Mark 14. 23 24 25. with Luke 22. 17 18. And if notwithstanding some will not be perswaded that the words divide it amongst your selves were meant of the Eucharisticall cup as I am confident they are in a mistake so I hope they will at last yeeld this argument a fortiori If there was such a symbole of communion in the Pascall cup that the receivers were to divide it amongst themselves sure this ought to have place much more in the Eucharisticall cup for the Lords supper doth more clearly and fully set forth the communion of Saints then the Passeover did The fifth Argument I shall draw from the words which Christ used in the distribution Take ye eat ye this is my body which is broken for you and of the cup Drink ye all of it The institution is our rule and patterne and t is high presumption for any man to be wiser than the Sonne of God or to speak to the communicants individually in the distribution Take thou eat thou This is the Lords body broken for thee c. When Christ thought fit in the distribution to speak in the plurall Take yee eat ye c. 'T is no answer to say that the words Take ye eat yee c. are used in the consecration for then they are but related Historically Here is the strength of the Argument Christ spoke so in the act of distribution and by way of application to the Communicants in a demonstrative enunciation therefore so should we But now this cannot be where the communicants do not receave at the Table but in their severall Pewes This very thing hath occasioned the change of the words of the institution from the plurall to the singular Sixthly we have some light from antiquity also in this particular for which purpose there are some notable passages in Chrysostome tom 5. de Divers Nov. Test. locis Ser 21. where opening these abuses in the matter of love-feasts reproved in the Corinthians who joyned together with these the Sacrament 1 Cor 11. this he much insists upon as a principall abuse that they did eat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by themselves or severally and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the table is not made Common for the rich did eat by themselves not together with the poore Christ did not so with his Disciples in his last Supper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For in that Supper both the Master and all the servants sate together Chrysostome sheweth further from the Churches custome and forme observed in the administration of the Lords Supper how justly the Apostle challengeth that abuse in the love feasts For in the Lords-Supper all approach unto and receave at the same table For saith he that spirituall and holy Table is common to all both rich and poore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is the same honour the same accesse and approach for all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And untill all doe partake of this spirituall and holy Table the things which are set upon the Table are not taken away but all the Priests or Ministers stand expecting even him who is the poorest or smallest of all So that according to this form and custome which he holdeth forth unto us the Ministers did not goe about with the Elements unto the severall pewes of the Communicants but they stood still at the table and

glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle If so then remember that whole Text is copulative and none that belong to the Church and bodie of Christ may be secluded from any part of the Text. We may al●… well hold that the Children of beleivers not yet grown up to knowledge and the use of reason are incapable of the love of Christ or of justification sanctification and glorisication by Christ as to hold that they are uncapable of the washing of water by the word i.e. of Baptisme which cannot be made void but is efficacious to all the members of Christ young and old by vertue of the word of promise and Covenant of grace sealed in that Sacrament according to that of Augustine Accedit verbum ad elementum fit Sacramentum The washing of water by the word can no more be restricted to the Church of aged or actuall beleevers then Christs love and death with the ends and effects thereof can be restricted to such The complication of these benefites is clearer in the Originall the the nearest rendering whereof is thus That cleansing it with the laver of water by the word he might sanctifie it The Tigurine version thus ut illam sanctificaret mundatam lavacro aquae c. CHAP. XVIII Of the use of a Table in the Lords Supper And of the communicants their coming to and receaving at the Table THat a Table ought to be so farre used as that the Elements of bread and wine ought to be set upon it is not I think controverted but whether therebe so much light from Scripture as that all the communicants ought to come to and receave at the Table This I conceave to be the question For resolution whereof I humbly offer these following considerations First of all it may easily appeare that the first guests whom our Saviour intertained at this Sacrament of his body and bloud receaved at the Table Chrisostome de proditione Iudae Serm. 30. Comparing the Eucharisticall supper with the passeover saith that both of them was celebrated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at or on the very same Table The common Supper the Paschall and the Eucharisticall were all at the Table Luke 22. 21. But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with mee on the table John 13. 28. Now no man at the Table knew c. Which Texts I do not understand of the Lords Supper as some do but of the common Supper But I suppose no man did ever imagine that the Apostles being before set at the Table did remove from it when they were to receave the Lords Table Peradventure it will be replyed for so it hath been replyed by some that the first Communicants their sitting and receaving at the Table was occasionall in respect that they had been sitting before at the common and at the Paschal supper so that in this particular we are no more bound to follow Christs example then in the other occasionall cicumstances the upper chamber unleavened bread after supper c. Beside Christ had but twelve communicants unto whom he was to give the Sacrament and so might conveniently make them all sit at the table which now in many Churches cannot conveniently be done Finally that it is as great a deviation from Christs example to have divers successive tables without which innumerous Congregations all the communicants cannot receave at the table I answer 1. 'T is gratis dictum that sitting at the Table was occasionall or such as hath not a standing but a temporary reason for it and there is this reason to the contrary occasionall circumstances in that action which are not to be imitated by us were such as Christ was limited unto by the law or by the providence of God so that therein he was not left at a liberty or latitude to choose to doe otherwise For instance it was not allowed by the Law to have any other bread in Ierusalem during the feast of passeover but unleavened bread onely The upper room was the place assigned by the Master of the house God so ordering After supper it must be because it must succeed to the passeover being also the Testament or latter will of Jesus Christ. There was also a providentiall limitation to such and so many communicants that is not exceeding the number which was allowed to eat the passeover together Let some such reason be brought to prove that sitting at table was occasionall else let it not be called so Sure if Christ had not thought it fittest and choosed it as the best way that his Disciples should receave his last Supper at the table it was free to him to have changed their posture without encroachment upon any law of Moses or upon any providentiall limitation Secondly I am herein the more confirmed because Christ himself as it were on purpose to shew that the sitting and receaving at Table was not occasionall but such a thing as he meant to commend unto us for our imitation he gives this standing and permanent reason for it that it is a peice of honour that he will have put upon those whom he inviteth calleth and alloweth to eat and drink with him Luke 22. 27. for whether is greater he that sitteth at meat or he that serveth Is not he that sitteth at meat This at meat is not in the Originall where wee finde onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that sitteth wee may aswell and better supply at table from vers 21. adde vers 30. That yee may here I supply from vers 27. and Matth. 8. 11. Sit downe and eat and drinke at my table in my Kingdome and sit on thrones judging the twelve Tribes of Israel Here is an honour of Communion and an honour of Iurisdiction The honour of Communion is to eat and drink at his Table in his Kingdome and this honour signified by their sitting eating and drinking at his table in his last Supper he puts upon them as beleeving communicants so that it belongs to all such There is another honour joyned with a speciall judiciall prerogative to sit on Thrones and judge the twelve Tribes of Israel and herein there is somewhat meant peculiarly of the Apostles which is notwithstanding mentioned else were in a different phrase as a Prerogative of all the Saints 1 Cor 6. 2. Thirdly it cannot be denyed but that the first communicants who receaved from Christ might with more ease and conveniency be placed at the table then can bee now in many Churches which have been accustomed to another way But we must not bring down our rule to our conveniences rather bring up our conveniencies to our rule It is no hard matter to alter pewes and such like things in Churches where the present posture is inconsistent with following the patterne and a lesse alteration will serve then is apprehended Fourthly the flux and reflux so to speak of severall successive tables where there is a great number to communicat and the repeating or pronouncing and applying to those severall tables