Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	day_n	prove_v	sabbath_n	10,739	5	10.5479	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

no more then we can infer that it is only to be administred to men or Ministers But look as because Christ gave the Lords Supper only unto men therefore it followeth that it is lawfull to administer the Lords Supper unto a Congregation made up only of men which is a thing usuall in ships at Sea and amongst Merchants trading in remote parts even so because Christ gave the Lords Supper unto a Church destitute of Ruling Elders therefore the administration of it unto a Church that now is destitute of Ruling Elders is lawfull as being agreeable unto the practice of Christ in the first administration thereof A second Example is in Acts 2.42 They continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and in breaking of bread and in Prayers The breaking of bread here mentioned is not say Interpreters a common but a Sacred or Sacramentall breaking of bread And Mr Shepheard in his Doctrine of the Sabbath Part. 2. pag. 23. gives a reason for it The bread was no more common then the continuance in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship was common Now that the Church was then Presbyterated is spoken gratis without any colour from the Text. But you will say the Apostles were clothed with a fulnesse of Jurisdiction What if First It is not said That the breaking of bread was by the Apostles only or by their direction And secondly if it were Did they act under the Notion of Apostles extraordinary Ministers or else as ordinary Ministers For the former no Argument appeares in the Text and for the latter we have at least a probable Argument A Connexis The Doctrine or Preaching and the Prayers there mentioned belong to the Apostles as Ministers why not so also the breaking of bread A third Example is Acts 20.7 And upon the first day of the week when the Disciples came together to break bread From this Example thus I argue The Lords day and all duties belonging thereunto are to be observed even in Un-Presbyterated Churches But the administration of the Lords Supper is a principall duty belonging to the Lords day For Saint Luke describes therefrom as its end the Assembly of the Disciples upon that day the first day of the week when the Disciples came together to break bread And it were absurd to describe a thing as from its end by that which is unnecessary and lesse principall It were absurd to describe a constant meeting upon such a day as from its end by that which is unusuall upon the day The evidence of this Argument is acknowledged by the London Divines in their Divine Right of Church Government Pag. 20 21. Whatsoever actions were done by Saints recorded in Scripture upon such grounds as are of a morall perpetual and common concernment to one person as well as another to one Church as well as another These actions are obligatory to all a rule to after generations and for an instance they bring the Text now under debate Thus say they the Churches practice of Preaching the Word and breaking Bread on the first day of the week Acts 20.7 c. is our rule for sanctifying the Lords day by celebrating the Word Sacraments and other holy Ordinances at these times Unto whom we may adde Mr Shepheard in his Doctrine of the Sabbath Part. 2. pag. 22 23. Here the breaking of bread is made mention of as the opus diei or the especiall businesse of the day and the day is mentioned as the especiall time for such a purpose And therefore it is called in effect the day of meeting to break bread Holy duties are here called breaking of bread by a Synecdoche of a part for the whole and therefore comprehends all other Sabbath duties For there is no more reason to exclude Prayer Preaching singing of Psalmes c. Because these are not mentioned then to exclude drinking of wine in the Sacrament as the blind Papists do because this neither is here made mention of Thus Mr Shepheard But now we could not well take breaking of bread Synecdochycally for all Sabbath duties unlesse it were a principall part of them If we consult Ecclesiasticall Stories they informe us that the Lords Supper was administred every Lords day Paraeus proves as much out of Justin Martyr and Tertullian Indeed there be many who affirme that the Lords Supper was celebrated by the Primitive Christians every day But this strengthneth my Argument as is well collected by Nathaniel Eaton in his disputation at Franeker under the Moderation of Doctor Ames de Sabbato die Dominico If the Lords Supper were daily administred in the Primitive Church why then is there particular mention made of the celebration of it on the first day of the week unlesse it be for the singular eminency of this day above others and because Christians were bound by necessity of Command unto performance of this duty of celebrating the Lords Supper upon that day whereas in other daies they were left unto their liberty The fourth and last Example is in the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 11. And how strongly conclusive this Example is for the administration of the Lords Supper in an Un-Presbyterated Church you shall heare when we come to a Comparison of an Un-Presbyterated Church with a Presbyterated Church in which there is a Mal-administration of Discipline Unto which head we shall refer the consideration of this Example The third principal Argument is taken from the general nature of the Lords Supper It is an Ordinance of Christ The third Argument a genere one of those mysteries of God which we read of 1 Cor. 4.1 2. A principall branch of Gods positive and instituted Worship a part of that Profession of faith which is required at our hands And therefore to be administred even in an Un-Presbyterated Church First the Ordinances of Christ may nay must be dispensed even in an Un-Presbyterated Church unlesse there be some dispensation to the contrary For they are under a Command have promises annexed are appointed for Gods honour and our good In the use of them we draw nigh unto God and therefore omission of them must needs be transgression if we may dispense them without sin for it is a detracting the shoulder from Gods burden a neglecting an opportunity to glorifie God and so a sin against God and our selves But now the Lords Supper is an ordinance of Christ and Ministers have no dispensation in Scripture to omit the administration thereof Ergo c. Secondly Ministers are to dispense the mysteries of God without any exception that we read of as well in an Un-Presbyterated as a Presbyterated Church 1 Cor. 4.1 2. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God Moreover it is required in Stewards that a man be found faithfull but the Lords Supper is a part of these mysteries Ergo c. Thirdly no principal part of Gods positive and instituted Worship is to be omitted in an

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