Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	aaron_n	moses_n	speak_v	10,234	5	5.6402	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91314	A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Supper, from some misprisions and unjust exceptions lately taken against them; both in the pulpit, by a reverend brother of Scotland, in a sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster, before the Honourable House of Commons, at a publike fast there held for Scotland, on the 5th of September last: and in the presse, by three new-printed pamphlets, by way of answer to, and censure of them. Wherein some scripture texts, (commonly reproduced for excommunication, and bare suspention from the Lords Supper onely,) are cleared from false glosses, inferences, conclusions wrested from them; ... / By William Prynne of Lincolns Inne, Esquire.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1645 (1645)	Wing P4124; Thomason E265_5; ESTC R212424	79,558	71

that the remembrance of them is grievous unto them the burthen of them intolerable desiring God to have mercy upon them for his Sonne Christ Jesus sake and to for●er all that is past and grant that they may ever after serve and please him in newnesse of life offering up themselves soules and bodyes to be a holy and li●ing Sacrifice acceptable unto God through Jesus Christ Yea I dare presume there is no Receiver so desperate that dares professe when he comes to receive he is not heartily sorow for his sinnes past but resolvs to persevere impenitently in them for the future though afterward he relapse into them as the be● Saints do to their old infirmities because his heart nature are not truly regenerated by Gods Spirit All this being granted no Minister ought to refuse the Sacrament to such an external penitent sinner the sincerity of whose heart and repentance God onely knows nor may or ought any Christian to abstaine from communicating with him at it in case he be not actually excommunicated or not re-admitted to the Church for his prophane scandalous life since they have no warrant from this or any other Scripture else to doe it All which if seriously pondered by Separatists and Independents misled by the objected inference would speedily reduce them to the bosome of our Church and quite allay the heat of the present controversies about suspension from the Sacrament in which many now place The very Kingdome of Christ who never claimed nor exercised such a soveraignty as they under his name and title would usurp unto themselves The fifth thing in difference is Whether the Priests under the Law had divine authority to keepe backe any circumcised person from the Passeover who desired to eat it for any reall or pretended ignorance heresie or scandalous sinne My opposites affirme they had for proofe whereof they produce Num. 9. 1. to 12. Where the Israelites being commanded to eat the Pasover on the fourteenth day of the first moneth at evening there were certaine men defiled by the dead body of man that they could not keep the Passeover on that day and they came before Moses and Aaron on that day and said unto Moses we are de●iled by the dead body of man wherefore are we kept backe that we may not offer an Offering to the Lord in his appointed season among the children of Israel And Moses said unto them stand still and I will heare what the Lord will command concerning you And the Lord spake unto Moses saying speak unto the children of Israel saying If any man of you or your posterity shall be uncleane by reason of a dead body or in a journey a farre off he shall keep the Passeover unto the Lord the fourteeenth day of the second Moneth they shall keep it and eat it By which it is cleere that legall uncleannesse did dis-able them to eat the Passover at the appointed time therefore much more scandalous sinnes and spirituall uncleannesse did dis-able and keep them from it and by consequence they doe likewise debar men from the Lords Supper now of which the Passeover was a type yea our reverend Scottish brother in his controversall Fast-Sermon added that no man might bring a Trespasse offering to the Lord to expiate any particular sin he was guilty of unlesse he did first confesse he had sined in that thing Levit. 5. 5 6. Therefore said he a fortiori he could not be admitted unto the Pasover nor any now unto the Lords Table unlesse he first particularly and publikely confessed the sinnes he stood guilty of To this I answer first that all circumcised persons whatsoever had a right to eat the Passeover and participate of all the Ordinances under the law from which the Priests had no power to exclude them for ignorance or any scandalous offence for ought appeares by any Scripture-precept or president ALL of them under pain of being cut off from their people being bound to eat the Passeover in its season except in cases of necessity disability by reason of a journey or of legall uncleannesse onely not spirituall as is cleere by Exod. 12. 3. 43. to 50. Num. 9. 1. to 15. Deut. 16. 16 17. Ezra 6. 19 20 21. 2 Kings 23. 21 22. 2 Chron. 35. 6 7 13 17 18. where we read that ALL THE PEOPLE and ALL the Males THAT WERE PRESENT received the Pasover not one of them being excluded from eating it This is most evident by that noted place of 2 Chro. 30. 3. to 21. where King Hezekiah proclaiming a solemn● Pasover summoned ALL Israel and ALL THE PEOPLE from Dan to Beersheba to repaire to it whereupon there assembled MUCH PEOPLE to Jerusalem to keep it Now there were many in the Congregation that were not clean nor sanctified for a multitude of the people had not cleansed themselves from their legall pollutions YET DID THEY EAT THE PASSOVER neither Hezekiah nor the Priests prohibiting them to eat it otherwise then it was written But Hezekiah prayed for them saying The good God pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seeke God the Lord God of his Fathers though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the Sanctuary And the Lord hearkned t● Hezekiah and healed the people Here legall uncleannesse did not actually suspend them from the Passover when their hearts were upright and they desirous to eat it the Lord at Hezekiah's prayer passing by their unpreparations and accepting their devotions in this act Nor yet did spirituall pollution by reason of grosse and scandalous sinnes debar them that were circumcized from the Passeover as Paul expresly determines 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 10. an unanswerable Text to this purpose Moreover brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant that ALL our Fathers were under the cloud and ALL passed through the sea and were ALL baptiz●d unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea and DID ALL EAT THE SAME SPIRITUALL MEAT to wit the Passeover and Manna and did ALL DRINK OF THE SAME SPIRITUALL DRINK for they drank of the Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ But perchance ALL these Communicants were visible Saints free from any legall pollution at least not tainted with any scandalous sinne The Apostle to take off this evasion subjoynes in the very next words But with MANY OF THEM God was not well pleased for they were overthrowne in the Wildernesse No● these things were our examples to the intent we should not lust after evill things 〈◊〉 they also lusted neither be ye Idolaters as were some of them c. neither let us commit fornication as some of them committed c. neither let us tempt Christ 〈◊〉 some of them also tempted neither murmure ye as also some of them murmurd and were destroyed of the destroyer So that the Israelites being once circumcized were all admitted to eat the Passeover though some of them were Idolaters others lusters after evill things others Fornicators others tempters of Christ

Jewes Church though they were execrable to the Jewes by reason of the●r Tax-gathering and Oppressions yet we never read in Scripture that they w●re excommunicated or cast out of their Sinagogues but contrarily that they went up into the Temple to pray as well as the Pharises and were more acceptable to Christ himselfe who never excommunicated but received and conversed with them then the proud Pharises were Luke 18. 11. to 15. ch. 3. 12. chap. 7. 29. chap. 5. 27. 28 29. chap. 15. 1 2. chap. 19. 2 c. Mark 9. 11 12. Matth. 10. 3. Marke 2. 15 16. Therefore these expressions can no wayes warrant or imply any excommnnication or suspension from the Sacrament Fifthly the words runne onely let him be TO THEE as a heathe● man and a Publican not to the whole Church and all others professing Religion which might have intimated something in behalfe of the Opposites and therefore ●o ground excommunication from the Church or suspension from the Sacrament on this Text which the Papists and others have very much abused is to extract water out of a flint and palpably to wrest the Scripture from its genuine sense Object And whereas some object that the n●xt ensuing words verse 18. Verily I say unto you what soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven c. doe necessarily infer the preceding words to relate to Ecclesiasticall censures and the power of the Keyes as they phrase it Answ. I answer first that these words have no coherence with or dependence on the former but are a distinct sentence of themselves because spoken onely to and of Christs Disciples as is evident by the Parall●l Text of John 20. 23. not of the Jewish Church much lesse of their Councell or Sanhedrim meant onely by the Church in the former verse as is already cleared Secondly the this binding and loosing is not meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament as some would fancy it but onely of binding and loosing mens finnes by preaching the Gospell and denouncing pardon or remission of sinnes and salvation to penitent and beleeving sinners but judgement and damnation to obstinate impenitent sinners as is evident by comparing it with Matth. 16. 19. Marke 16. 16. John 3. 16 17 18 36. chap. 12. 48. Luke 13. 3. 5. Rom. 2. 16. Acts 2. 38. chap. 3. 19. Therefore some clearer Text then this must be produced to found excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament and Ecclesiasticall Discipline upon by those who contend for it Jure divin● Thirdly whether 1 Cor. 5. 5. To deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus and 1 Tim. 1. 20. whom I have delivered unto Satan that they may learn not to blaspheame be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament Some of our Opposites peremptorily affirme it but produce no shadow of proofe for it others speak dubiously of these Texts as needing a large debate and therefore prudently wave them with a rhetoricall preterition as the late Reverend Preacher did I for my part humbly conceive that to deliver to Satan is a thing somewhat different from excommunication and suspension from the Lords Table My reasons are these First if to deliver a man to Satan be the self-same thing with excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament as some affirme then every excommunicated or suspended person should during his excommunication or suspension either in a literall or sprituall sense at least be in their judgement in the actual power of Satan though a true child of God whom e Christ himself hath rescued out of the jawes and pawes of Satan since such a one may be actually excommunicated suspended from the Lords Table for a season not onely injuriously but upon just grounds and yet not inthe Devils actuall power or possession but in Christs John 10. 28 29. Secondly if to deliver unto satan were the same with excommunication then it would have some proportion and coincidency with other Scripture phrases produced for proofe of excommunication as put away from among you that wicked person and the like forecited with which it hath no 〈◊〉 Thirdly our Opposites generally grant f that Excommunication belongs onely to the Presbytery or whole Congregation not to any one particular person be he Bishop Minister or other whereas Paul himselfe deliv●●ed Hymeneus and Phyletus unto Satan as the words whom I have delivered c. import without the concurrence of any other Fourthly many members of the visible Church are spiritually under the g ●ower of satan and taken captives of him at his will though still within the Church and not actually excommunicated therefore to deliver men over thus to satan and no more cannot be properly tearmed excommunication Fifthly nor can it be meant meerly of suspending people from the Sacrament for then children and others debarred from the Sacrament by reason of their nonage or any other naturall dis-abilities should be as much delivered over to Satan as any scandalous persons What this delivering of men over to satan is hath been much controverted among Divines Many who take it to be meant of excommunication and an act of discipline established then in the Church for all future ages interpret it to be not onely a casting of a man out of the Church h wherein Christ reigns into the world of ungodly men among whom satan rules but likewise to give a man over to be guided in his spirit by the word spirit of satan as the Church and those within it are led guided by the word and spirit of God explaining it by Ephes. 2. 2 3. 2 Tim. 2. 26. John 14. 30. John 8. 44 1 John 3. 8. But this exposition seems to me both false and improper First because these scandalous sinners even whiles they were in the Church were i led and acted by the spiret of satan in committing those scandalous sinnes for which they were excommunicated and therefore their excommunication cannot thus deliver them over unto satan who tooke them captive at his will but leaves them in his hands in the same condition as before Secondly such a delivery unto satan as this to be guided acted in their spirits by him and no more tends nothing at all to the destruction of the flesh but rather to the pampering of it much lesse to the reforming of the life or the saving of the spirit in the day of the Lord Jesus but rather to aggravate and encrease mens sinnes Thirdly it 's confessed that a godly man may for some notorious sinnes or scandals be actually excommunicated as well as other wicked persons now such a one God never k gives over to be led and ruled by the unclean spirit of satan but he always leads them by his own holy spirit which ever dwels and rules within their soules and is never dis-possessed by the Devill Fourthly all accord that the end

and use of excommunication is onely to reforme or amend mens lives and turn them from the power of satan unto God And is not this diametrally contrary to that end to deliver them over to the very conduct and guidance of satan who l rules only in the children of disobedience precipitates them into all sinful courses with a ful c●●●re and is so farre from learning men not to blaspheme that he fils their hearts and mouthes with naught but lyes and blasphemies This interpretation therefore I cannot approve Neither doe I read or beleeve that any Presbytery or Church hath or doth claime any authority in these dayes to deliver any man to Satan Wherefore to deliver a man unto satan I rather cōceive to be meant in two other senses more agreeable both to the letter and scope of these Texts and the interpretation of the Fathers on them The first is either to deliver up a man corporally by way of punishment into the actuall possession of the Devill onely in respect of his body not soule so as the Devill thereby might actually possesse macerate torment and afflict his flesh as he m used to vex those whom he did corporally possesse which the Scripture plentifully manifests till he were sufficiently punished and then be dispossessed of the Devill againe by those who delivered him into his power and restored to the bosome of the Church the Apostles and others n in their age having a power not onely to cast out and dispossesse men of Devils but likewise to deliver men up by way of punishment to o be corporally possessed by the Devill which as I conceive was the ground of that common imprecation too frequent in lewd mens mouthes when they are injured or provoked by any man the devill take you or Tradatur Satan● This kind of delivering men over to satan was peculiar onely to the Apostles and some others in that age but ceased since and so cannot be drawne into practice among us A godly Christian by way of punishment may be for a season thus delivered unto satan for the mortifying or destruction of his flesh and carnall corruptions and yet still continue a true child of God in respect of his soule and spirit p which the holy Ghost doth alwayes possesse though the Devill possesse his body as he had possession of Christs body though not of his soule and spirit when he led him into the Wildernesse to be tempted and carried him from place to place And this I take to be one genuine sense and scope of these two Texts Secondly there is another sort of delivering men up to satan somewhat different from the former which suits very well with the words and sense of these Scriptures and that is when a man by Gods immediate permission is delivered unto satan to be tortured afflicted and vexed by him either in his body by sicknesses botches diseases or in his mind by cares feares perplexplexities and discontents or in his estate and family by losses and crosses of all sorts as q Job was of purpose to mortifie his flesh and carnall members to humble his soule and bodie before God that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord his sinfull life reformed and he hereby lessoned no more to blaspheme or dishonour God In this sense God many times delivers over his children as he did Job into their Adversary satans hands to scowre away all their drosse and crucifie their old man the flesh with the affections and lusts thereof without giving their hearts and spirits into his power which he still reserves intirely to himselfe as he did lob's and theirs whom the Devill cast into prison and into tribulation for ten dayes that they might be purifid and have their robes of corruption washed quite away and made white in the blood of the Lamb Revel. 2. 10. chap. 7. 14. And in this sense no doubt the Apostles by Gods permission had power to deliver men over to satan one of whose r Messengers Paul had sent to buffet and humble him least he should be exalted above his due measure for the destruction of the flesh But how farre the Church or Ministers of God have any authority at this day actually to deliver any scandalous persons thus to satan unlesse it be by way of prayer or option I submit to others who now claime this power to determine However in these two last senses which I conceive most genuine these Texts are no solid proofes at all either of excommunication from the Church or suspension from the Sacrament since a Christian may be delivered over to satan in both these senses and yet not actually excommnicated or suspended from the Sacrament The fourth difference is this Whether 1 Cor. 5. 11. If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator or cov●tous or an Idolater or a railer or a drunkard or an extortioner with such a one no not to eat be properly meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrament or not to eat with such at the Lords Table upon any tearmes Some Opposites confidently averre others with my selfe deny it and that upon these grounds First because there is not one sillable of receiving the Lords Supper or eating at the Lords Table spoken of in this chapter and in the 10. and 11. chapters where the Apostle professedly treats of the Lords Supper and receiving that Sacrament he speakes not one word of secluding any members of the Church or Christians from it but onely exhorts men carefully to examine themselves before they come to receive it least they eat and drink their owne damnation become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord and draw downe sicknesses and diseases upon themselves affirming expresly ch. 10. ver. 16 17. The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ for we being many are one bread and one body for WE ARE ALL PARTAKERS OF THAT ONE BREAD If ALL were then partakers of this bread certainly none were excluded from it in the Church of Corinth but as the Israelites under the Law did ALL eat the same spirituall meat and ALL drink the same spirti●all drinke though God were displeased with many of them who were idolaters tempters of God fornicators murmurers and were destroyed in the Wildernesse 1 Cor. 10. 1. to 12. so all under the Gospell who were visible Members of the Church of Corinth did eat and drink the Lords Supper to which some drunkards whiles drunken did then resort as is cleere by the 1 Cor. 11. 20 21. which Paul indeed reprehends verse 22. Therefore this with such a one no not to eat cannot be meant of excommunication or suspension from the Sacrameut Secondly if we look upon the catalogue of those with whom the Corinthians were forbidden so much as to eat we shall find railers covetous persons and extortioners therein mentioned as well as idolaters fornicators drunkards and if all such must be