Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	damnation_n	drink_v	eat_v	10,899	5	8.2264	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86500	The mischeife of mixt communions, fully discussed. All maine arguments on both sides, are largely canvased. Many difficulties demonstratively cleared, as that Judas was not at the Lords Supper, &c. When, and how was the originall of parishes in England. Severall cases of conscience resolved. As in case unworthy ones thrust into the Lords Supper; what single Christians should doe, and what the congregation should doe. A discovery what is the originall, and rise of all these disputes, and how a faire end may be put to all. / By Doctor Nathanael Homes.	Homes, Nathanael, 1599-1678.	1650 (1650)	Wing H2569A; Thomason E607_8; ESTC R205868	24,915	24

no not in the 1 Cor. 5. For we argue thus if they are blamed for not casting out unworthy persons but let them abide as members with them in 1 Cor. 5. they must needs be blamed there for comming to the Communion with them and if they are told in 1 Cor. 5. that they must not eate with any Brother that was a lesse sinner then any named in the Objection namely a railer or a covetous person then sure the blame of the breach of this command in 1 Cor. 5. is upon them if after this they did eate with them at the Lords Table 3. We answer that in 1 Cor. 11. first Paul blames them for comming together to their Church-meetings to their hurt v. 17. where the Apostle plainly tels them they were the worse for those meetings and his figurative speech in an Hyperbolicall Meiosis namely I praise you not is a vehement reproofe of them as the witty Objectors well understand and this sharp reproofe is the Preface to all the Apostle would Declare to them both the first and second part of his Declaration against them which two parts should seem by the Apostles therefore in v. 20. did unhappily depend Their disorderly communicating sprang from their divisions Againe in that 1 Cor. 11. the Apostle bids them examine themselves whether this were right receiving And brings them to the institution just as Christ reproved sins against marriage And in the Lords institution of his last SUPPER there is not onely rule but example that after Judas tooke the Sop and thereby was discovered which Sop must of necessity be before the Supper Christ in cleer effect bids him be gone and punctually t is said upon the receiving of the Sop he immediatly went out John 13. Fourthly We answer as full to all the great offenders mentioned in the whole Epistle afore and objected here in the present Objection Paul concludes his Epistle with this direction to the Church of Corinth If ANY MAN love not the Lord Jesus LET HIM BE he doth not say I pronounce him so but let him be ANATHEMA MARANATHA which is the forme of the great excommunication Ob. 3 3. They object for mixt communions That he that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation or judgment to HIMSELFE not to others An ¦ swer We answer first It should seem that men for mixt Communions will grant gratis that unworthy communicants may drink damnation or judgement to themselves rather then they will by the rule Matth. 18.15 keep them from so drinking For if they were kept from the Communion they could not be sayd to drink their own damnation or c. 2. Behold what a sophisme and fallacy here is in this Argument The poore ignorant prophane unworthy wretches in comming to the Communion drink damnation to themselves therefore the able gifted Brethren and Ministers and such are the objectors doe not drink pollution to themselves in comming and drinking with them at the Communion But t is plaine by that which hath been argued against mixt Communions that the unworthy receivers drink pollution to the other and they in communicating with them doe pledge them 3. The Lord in Ezek. 3.18 teacheth us better Logick and pertinent to the thing in hand When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousnesse c. he shall dye because thou hast not given him warning he shall dye in his sins but his blood will I require at THY hands You see here that there is danger to the sinner and to him also that did not endeavour to reclaime him Con ∣ clusion The rest of the Objections are not worthy the considering therefore let me conclude with bewailing these times which succeed and exceed former times of false Prophets false Teachers and Pharisaicall Rabbies and Professors who spend their wits and parts to keep holinesse low in Doctrine and Practice Saying Every man that can say the Creed the Lords prayer and the ten Commandements is a Christian yea if he doth but confesse Christ is come in the flesh and come to Church as they call it he is a Christian that all Infants whatsoever although both the Parents be apparently unbeleevers ought to be Baptized That all the Parishoners offering themselvs ought to be admitted to the Lords Supper To Preach spirituality and of the inward power of the spirit of Christ in a soule are but strange phantasies of mans wit and that an ordinary man a faith and troth Professor hath the spirit of God as well as another whom you cal a Saint With many the like holinesse-depressing doctrines and suitably as needs must the people practice Thus as in Jer. 5. v. ult The Prophets prophesie falsely and the Priests bear rule by their means and my people love to have it so and what will yee doe in the end thereof Thus in 2 Pet. 2.1 There were false Prophets among the people as there shall be false Teachers among you c. How shall we know them By their laying holinesse low despising or bringing into contempt Christ making the way of truth evil spoken of through covetousnes making merchandise of mens soules or salvation leading or leaving people in their riotings and wantonnesse c. throughout the Chapter The Apostle teacheth us better 1 Cor. 12. v. ult covet earnestly the best gifts and I will shew you a more excellent way and chargeth us Phil. 1.10 as we wil shew our selves to be syncere to approve the things that are excellent and to be without offence So that if it were lawful to have som unworthy at the communion but it were best or more excellent to have none we should choose the best way and that which is most excellent You see notwithstanding all objections that this truth stands firm that persons known to walk unworthily and unbeseeming an ordinary true Christian should not be admitted to the Lords Supper nor should true Christians communicate with such unworthy ones in case others will admit them And the trut● is to speak my conscience therefore ordinary partakers of mixt Communions are so little reformed because the Church-rules Mat. 18.15 2 Thes 3.6 1 Cor. 5. are so neglected and in stead thereof gracelesse men are nuzled up in a self-flattery because admitted to the priviledges of the best Saints and the best that partake of such mixt communions are not so quickned and comforted because polluted Ordinances are not so blest to men that by neglect of rule pollute them Study that place Ezek. 22.26.28.31 and that in Mat. 15.3 6. Qu. How should a Congregation know what a Communicant is Ans By conference by enquiry by conversation In other things men would be inquisitive by those means to know exactly as in matters of Marriage servants Partnership c. Qu. But may not Congregations for all those wayes by them used be deceived in admission of some Ans 1. Not ten for one 2. In observing the rule to their power they keep themselves from sinning against knowledge and through negligence 3. If any such break out and appeare worse then they were they are to be cast out if not reformed according to rule * But those assemblies that take in among them those that are apparently bad at first they cannot with any shew of Justice according to their principles cast out such whiles such because they are as good at last as at first Viz. naught all along 4. In carelesse Congregations receiving all to the Communion men come in openly bad because no stop is made and so continue because no orderly admonition is exercised but in Congregations that are exact to look well to the Gates of the Church and yet some make the Church beleeve they are right because they pronounce Shibboleth right I meane they make a laudable confession and are unblamable in their conversation and so creep in and at last appear to be naught it is the sin of the received not of the receivers and they lye open to the Law of Churches to be thrown out because growne worse And usually unsound hearted Professors doe grow worse for this reason because Pharisaically they trusted in their relation and membership c. Lay all together and consider whether the way we have propounded or the way of mixt Communions doe most tend to purity and reformation which we professe and pretend in opposition to former corrupt times The Lord give the Reader understanding in all things Amen FINIS

among the Lutherans partly in Doctrine namely that of Consubstantiation and partly in ceremonies many Christians gathered themselves into purer Churches at Geneva c. And here in England of late the Presbyterian Churches were a little refined in some things out from the Episcopal congregations So then to tell me there must not be separation upon separation and that if another discerne not the Lords body yet I doe and if another hath no right to it yet I have c. these are all contrary as well to former practice as well as rule and are impertinent to our point in hand Churches that will be called and counted Churches must be constituted as Churches and act as Churches they must be godly persons joyning together and setling their officers among them with one unanimous consent to keep out unworthy persons and upon due complaint and proceeding as aforesaid to cast out unworthy persons So the dispute is at an end Consciences shal not be troubled No danger of separation Good mens consciences shall be cherished and bad men shall be shamed till they repent the dogs shall not have opportunity to snatch the childrens bread nor the children afrayd to goe to their meals lest if they let not the dogs take share with them they bite and teare them Is he a wise governour of a Family that will say Children Servants goe to dinner let the Dogs alone to share with you though they take of your meat doe you take your meale When he may far easier by help of his Family shut the Dogs out if they be so unruly And t is at least as unwise an exhortation to stir up godly men to goe to mixt Communions as to incite them to goe thither when t is known that there are many there that have Plague-sores upon them Sure spirituall infection is worse then corporal and the soule more precious then the body But in your second Reply to our Objections you say ●…ir se●…d Re●… that that 1 Cor. 5. about Leven and that 1 Cor. 10. of one bread doth not signifie any spriritual pollution by reason of society at the Lords Supper But that in 1 Cor. 5. only signifies that the Church of Corinth might be corrupted by the incestuous persons evill example if he were not cast out And that in 1 Cor. 10. cannot signifie that either the wicked man can become a true member with me ●…r Du●… or I a false member with him by reason of fellowship at the communion To which we duply and answer thus to both places distinctly 1. To that of 1 Cor. 5. t is evident that the Apostle speaks in the past time of things past not of what in future that evill example might effect but of an evill past that 't was their sin all the churches sin that they had not been humbled for letting such a one abide a member amongst them v. 2. Secondly That he speaks in the Present tence of their present condition that the whol lump of them was now at present levened by that person being one of them though they were unlevened in their persons in regard of regeneration or else they could not be sayd to be levened but rather to be very leven yet levened in their actions in regard of polluting mixture and polluted worship 3. For future 1. The Apostle cold not imagin that by example all the church of Corinth could become incestuous persons but Paul speaks of the danger of the levening the whole lump 2. He speaks of keeping the feast purely and of not eating with a Brother walking disorderly Therefore from all its plain the Apostle drives at more then evill example namely at evil of Church-communion with unworthy persons so likewise to the 2d. place Viz. 1 Cor. 10. we say that as there is a Anti-federall unholinesse or uncleannesse in children whose Parents neither of them are beleevers though these children may be elect and in time may beleive 1 Cor. 7.14 And a matrimonial-like or a tanquam conjugal union between an Harlot and a Christian whiles that Christian by temptation c. fals into that ditch as Solomon speaks of which union see 1 Cor. 6.15.16 18. So there is a confederate onenesse unto spirituall pollution or purity according to the matter and manner of worship men joyne in If in the due partaking of the Lords Supper t is the Communion of the body and blood of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 If in eating and drinking at the Idolatrous feasts they that did so though Christians are said to partake of the cup of Devils v. 20. And by the same proportion a compound of good and evil doth make the partners in the same to share in that evill mixture as we have heard much afore 2. Let us speak something to their arguments for mixt Communions a little will serve because former things have anticipated Ob. 1 1. They say it is certaine that there were great offenders at this time in the Church of Corinth some that made themselves drunk at their love feasts at the Sacrament chap. 11. some that even denyed the resurrection chap. 15. and sundry other greivous offenders 2 Cor. 12.20 21. yet are they still a Church though these uncast out and he no where blames for comming to the Lords Table because of them no not in that 1 Cor. 5. An ¦ swer To this our answer is ● That the Church of Corinth might farr better be called and accounted a Church then the ordinary Parochiall Churches here among us 1. Because Corinth for the generality were in matter a Church of such as were called to be Saints and sanctified in Christ Jesus chap. 1. v. 2. And they were altogether a Church in forme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 orderly gathered and united of such according to the Apostles direction 1 Cor. 11.34 and 1 Cor. 14.40 But Parochiall Churches in the matter for the generality consist of prophane and ignorant and their forme and union is onely by the Gutters and Stones and Posts of the Precincts of the Parish making them to belong to that congregation of that Parish But when they move house but over the Gutter into another Parish they are no more of that Parish Church Here is no spirituall bond relation or mutuall owning or reciprocall watching between Minister and People or between People and People So that this Objection doth nothing helpe the now Churches that are for mixt Communion least of all these defending mixt Communions which the Church of Corinth did not If they brake the commandement of God yet they did not teach men so So that in many respects it was safer to call Corinth a Church and more tolerable to communicate with it then with the Parish Churches now extant The Church of Corinth however at a time negligent yet the rule was known and own'd among them to keep out and cast out the unworthy 2. We answer That it is not true that the Corinthians are not blamed for comming because of them uncast out

Election of evill company is the great detection of the evill heart of him that chooseth that company * And to know that others are spiritually infected and that we have the distemper of originall corruption very apt to take infection and yet voluntarily to thrust into society with them is to bring upon our selves the guilt of our owne danger and infection 5. Obs That the Apostle distinguisheth between godly mens going out of the world and godly mens keeping an evil walker out of their company and out of the Church You cannot avoid it saith the Apostle unlesse you wil goe out of the World but necessitatedly upon some unavoydable occasions you must have civil businesse with men that are covetous extortioners fornicators c. But there is no necessity you should have a fellowship with such in eating or at your feast or among you in your Church For you must cast them out from among you or you must withdraw from such 2 Thes 3.6 and not eate with them 6. Obs That the Apostle allows expresly that there may be a necessity for temporal things of having civill fellowship with evil men out of the Church such as never were Brethren but he doth not expresse so much of men in the Church or of such as were once called Brethren now walking disorderly As if the Apostle would have us conclude that if we are necessitated to have businesse and for that time fellowship with men of evil conversation it would be safer for us to supply that our necessity in or among the company of them that alwayes were of the World and never of the Church then by any necessity that can be supplyed any where else to have to doe with men once called Brethren but now walking disorderly Obs 7. That the Apostle down right doth declare that as we should avoyd what may be all fellowship with worldly men that are covetous fornicators c. so much more we ought to avoyd all fellowship with covetous fornicators c. once called Brethren 8. Obs That the Apostle in reckoning up the sins that must divide fellowship he doth not onely name greater and grosser sins as fornication drunkennesse extortion but such as in common account are lesser and in their nature more mental or aiery As 1. Idolatry but to sit in the Idoll Temple and eate or drink with the company chap. 8. and chap. 10. And there is the same reason proportionably in all unwar-ranted worship in matter or manner 2. Covetousnesse which is an heart sin a spiritual mental sin in the maine extortion is the manifestation of it and by the same proportion great pride may be included c. 3. Railing which is a verbal sin and by the same proportion all swearing and lying as 't was mentioned afore is of the same nature 9. Obs That the Apostle saith that godly men must not with such as walke in such sins as these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so much as EATE TOGETHER with them Now if those that are for mixt Communions wil say that this is meant of spirituall eating the Lords supper with such afore named then they yeeld the question of avoyding mixt Communions that godly men must not receive the Lords supper with covetous railers c. If they say it signifies civill eating of our common meales in our houses then they grant by necessary consequence that we may not eate at the Communion with such inordinate persons for if it be a sin to eate our common meat with evil livers once called Brethren then much more unlawful to eate at the Lords Table with them Surely surely the Apostle could not mean to be more careful to keep Saints more pure at their owne Tables then at the Lords Table Of which I leave the consciences of them that are for mixt Communions to judge These few of many things more that might be spoken against mixt Communions wil be sufficient to them that are willing to understand But the unwilling wil dispute though they bring but their owne phantasies to oppose the plaine Word of God And therefore I am not very willing to take the paines to follow them with answers But least they should persist and be hardned the rather because we give no answer at al I shal reply briefly and the rather because our cause against mixt Communions wil gaine by it upon the minds of considerate men There are I finde abroad two sorts of opposers some more ignorant others more cunning To the first in the first place more briefly Obj. 1. Objection The Wheat and the Tares must grow together till the harvest Answer Such tares and so long as are so like the wheat that there may be danger in plucking up them to pluck up the wheat also Matth. 13.29 But tares when they grow ranck and appeare they must be weeded from among the wheat as we have heard afore Obj. 2. Obj. Thou must forgive thy Brother to seventy times seven Answ True of private personall offences against our selves Them we must forgive often if our Brother repents but we cannot forgive his sins against God These two Objections as they are levelled strike at all Magisterial and Ministerial discipline evident in the Word of God even in judgement of all judgements Papisticall Episcopall Presbyteriall and Congregationall And therefore these Objections are not rightly mounted Obj. 3. Obj. 'T is said 1 Cor. 11. Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate Answ This indeed is that thousands of times repeated argument by the vulgar to no purpose For Observe 1. That one Verse doth not containe all Gods minde we must compare Scripture with Scripture and so Mat. 18.15 1 Cor. 5. c. of ●asting off out from the fellowship of one that persists in evil ways especially after admonition 2. Self is a comprehensive word there is a mans selfe as he is a man a mans selfe as he is an Husband a mans selfe as he is a Father a Master a Magistrate a Minister a fellow-member and fellow-Communicant of such a Congregation all these are a mans selfe and a man must examine himselfe touching all his sins in all these relations and so whether he hath done his duty to admonish his neighbor that comes to the Communion with him of his evil life according to Christs rule Mat. 18.15 c. And according to that rule if in case he doth not so hear thee or others with thee as to reforme so the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is though he heard thy words yet he neglects thy counsel whether or no hast thou told the Church til they cast him off as an Heathen or Publican Our Saviour saith a mans selfe is concerned so in his Brothers spirituall welfare that a man must when he is to goe to worship minde and consider how t is with his Brother afore he worship Study the fifth of Matthew 23. If thou bring thy gift to the Altar and there remembrest that thy brother hath ought AGAINST

might well goe forth according to Saint John chap. 13. afore the Communion And therefore Luke did not intend to set down those things according to the accurate order of the doing of things Your most ancient mark in your Bibles ¶ at v. 21. of that 22. of Luke is used by the learned afore we had any Verses to signifie a new matter and that a distinct discourse begins there Namely that when Christ did discover Iudas he was at the Table with him mark it At the Table t is not sayd at the Communion and with this begins the new distinct story of Iudas his betraying Christ But is not a joynt story in order of doing knit on to the end or conclusion of the Lords Supper though our English BUT at 21. Verse may seem to some to look that way But in the Greek it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which infallibly had signified BUT but it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Truly or moreover c. which may well fit to begin a new distinct story And there is this further in that 22. of Luke to prove that Luke in that Chapter did not intend to set down things according to the order of doing because there is another distinct story annext to that of the institution of the Lords Supper namely of the Disciples contention about Supremacy v. 24. set down with that ¶ afore it which Matthew in chap. 18. 1. and Mark in chap. 9. 34. set down long before Christs betraying by Iudas Yea further the Evangelists doe not regard acuratenesse of order sometimes in speaking the same matter in one and the same Verse For whereas many cry all men must be first taught before they are baptized building on that order of words Mat. 28. Goe teach and baptize in Mark 1.4 there is a contrary order Iohn did baptize in the Wildernesse and Preach So that bare order of story cannot yeeld any infallible argument that such a thing was done then 2. We affirme that for certaine as farr as we can possibly see Iudas was not at the Lords Supper upon this argument out of Iohn 13. Christ and his Disciples ate two Suppers afore the institution of the Lords Supper 1. The Passover Supper 2. Their owne civill supper 3. Followed the Lords Supper For in this we all agree I think that the Lords Supper was the last of all according to all the Evangelists that relate the institution thereof The first Supper namely the Passover we have it beginning and ending Iohn 13.1 2. turne to the place else you will see nothing This supper being ended Christ riseth from the Table v. 4. layes aside his Garments takes a Towel and water and washeth the Disciples feet v. 5. to the end of v. 11. In v. 12. he takes his Garments againe and sits downe In v. 18. he saith He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me In v. 21. he saith One of you shall betray me In v. 26. the Disciples having by Iohn asked him whom he meant Christ plainely saith He it is to whom I shall give a Sopp when I have dipped it and when he had dipped the Sopp he gave it to Iudas Iscariot Here you see they were eating againe This the second Supper their civil Supper because of their Sopps In v. 27. Satan enters after the Sopp into Iudas And then sayd Jesus to him doe that thou dost QUICKLY Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Comparitive degree more speedily wherein in effect now Judas was discovered Christ bids him be gone from amongst them the Devill was in him and he might be gone Christ bids him speedily to end his treason which he would doe Then saith the 30. Vers he having received the Sopp went out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a keen acute and punctuall word Immediately which can signifie not an Iota lesse then that nothing of action intervened between Iudas his taking the Sopp and with it the Devil and Judas his going out And v. 31. upon his going out Christ in a laudative manner saith Now the Son of man is glorified and God in him and presently fals to Preaching and last to Praying in that high sublime and transcendent spiritual manner Chap. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. as never before while Judas was with them The Evangelist John doth not mention the Lords Supper which was the third and last for reasons best known to the holy Ghost But doth most punctually tell us Judas went out immediately after the Sop which clearly was at their second Supper Viz. their common civil Supper And therefore stayed not at the Lords Supper which was last of all according to the other Evangelists For if Judas had stayd at the Lords Supper after his receiving the Sop he had not according to the text gone out immediately But the text must be true therefore Judas was not at the Lords Supper If this argument be too long I will give it you another way in a shorter manner At the Lords Supper which was the last Supper there was neither Sop nor Sauce Christ mingled no such thing or Sippets in Wine or c. that we read of But Judas went out immediately when he had received the Sop for being then discovered and filled with Satan Christ in effect bid him be gone Therefore Judas was not at the Lords Supper I wil yet if it may please give it you a third way John expresly mentions that Judas was at the Passover and the common Supper but doth not say he was at the Lords Supper not mentioning the Lords Supper at all and the other Evangelists or Scriptures doe not affirme Judas was at the Lords Supper therefore wee have no ground to beleeve Judas was there Thus of the plainer sort of Objectors we come in the second place to deale with the more cunning disputants who wil undertake to answer our arguments and to urge their unanswerable arguments as their confident manner of disputing imports against us in the behalf of mixt communions To speak briefly to both First to their answers to our Objections The●… Rep●… 1. They reply that though out arguments prove that wicked persons ought not to come and that they ought not to be admitted by them that have power to keep them away in case they doe come yet they doe not prove that wicked mens undue comming should keep a good Christian away An undoubted duty omitted is not excused by my mistake concerning some circumstances And if the impediment be real I must know it to be so my thinking it in my conscience to be an impediment wil not excuse my omission of that duty c Our duply to take off this is 1. Plain sin must keep one away Ou●…●…ply But to communicate with unworthy persons is a sin a levening and souring 1 Cor. 5.6 To disobey that command 2 Thes 3.6.14 a sin and 1 Cor. 5.11 a sin if we be secure and not humbled for such mixt