Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	church_n	member_n	visible_a	3,184	5	9.3025	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86891	A second vindication of a disciplinary, anti-Erastian, orthodox free-admission to the Lords-Supper; or, The state of this controversie revised and proposed: for the fuller understanding of the most, as to the grounds whereon it stands; and more especially for the ease, and clearer proceeding of those, that shall write about it, whether for it, or against it. / By John Humfrey, min: of Froome.	Humfrey, John, 1621-1719.	1656 (1656)	Wing H3710; Thomason E1641_2; ESTC R209066	63,290	161

and they shall be my people And as that is extended to the whole Jews Lev. 26.12 13. So are the whole Gentiles Is 55.4 5. Is 11.10 Is 60.1 2. All Nations Isa 2.1 2. All flesh Is 66.23 Is 40.5 Psal 65.2 All the kinreds of the earth Ps 22.26 27. The Kingdoms of the world Rev. 11.15 From the rising of the Sun to the going down thereof Mal. 1.11 to wit even as many of them as the Lord our God shall call Act. 2.39 said to become the people of God under the New Testament SECT 2. I Know indeed for all these many and arge expressions every where in Scripture some eminent Divines do conceive the Church and Covenant ought to be restrained to the regenerate only and that none else are really but nominally aequivocally Church-members And so I remember Arminius expresses it for them Disp pub Thes 18. Sec. 15. Vocati et non electi ad ecclesiam visibilem pertinere judicantur quanquam Aequivocè quum ad invisibilem non pertine an t This doctrine enforces them to distinguish between what gives right as to a mans own part unto Church-membership and the Ordinances and that which gives right to be admitted whereas the truth is these are Relata quorum posito sublato uno ponitur tollitur alterum Besides there is this grievous inconvenience it runs do●nright into that the Minister shall be bound to administer the Ordinances particularly the Sacrament unto people when they are bound upon pain of damnation not to take them Upon this arises inextricable difficulties which as they encline men to separations so they leave the doubtfull Christian in such a case that he can hardly ever act in faith upon such foundations It is my opinion therefore that the Covenant may be considered in the special grace thereof and in ernal administration and thus it belongs only to the elect and regenerate Or in the general grace and external administration of the Ordinances and thus it belongs to the whole Church as visible and to the several members alike whether regenerate or not My reasons for this latitude are these 1. It is manifest that the whole Nation of the Jewes Deut. 29. were Gods peculiar people in covenant with him by the texts fore-quoted and this is amply proved by Mr. Blake Treat Cov. p. 189 190. but that most of them were only aequivocally so is by others assumed gratis 2. It is plain that the Gentiles are ingrafted into the Olive of the Jews Rom. 11.24 that is into their external covenant which covenant must be the covenant of grace for else it could be no prejudice for any of them to be broken off nor priviledge for any of us to be ingrafted in And it must be as to the external administratiò for else neither could any of them be broken off not any of us ingrafted in 3. It appears that the Promise or covenant of Grace in the external administration belongs to all that the Lord our God shall call Acts 2.39 To those that are afarr off that is the Gentiles and their children when the Lord should call any of their parents as it did for the present to the Jews and theirs 4. The called no doubt are many more than the elect many are called but few chosen The called are such as Mr. Blake phrases it as are brought in covenant The chosen such as are brought up to the terms of it Now it is to be considered The called contain the chosen As there is an outward vocation and an effectual vocation yet that outward is real as well as the other So there is an outward being in covenant and effectual as we speak for distinctions sake Yet that outward is real not aequivocally only 5. The Scripture puts a real difference between the Nation of the Jews as being in covenant Rom. 3.1 and 9.4 and others that were alienated from the Commonwealth of Israel without hope without God in the world Eph. 2.12 but if none but the regenerate are in covenant there is no such difference externally between a Jew and Gentile Christian and Heathen but aequivocally onely in which manner methinks the Scripture should not be made to speak so abundantly 6. For this latitude as to Obligation and priviledge of Ordinances it is evident Gen. 17.10 This is my covenant ye shall keep between me and you every man-child among you shall be circumcised Here I note that the waiting on Gods ordinance is the keeping the covenant it self in the external administration And surely there is so much plain strength in the instance of circumcision Gen. 17. Jud. 5. from this large right of Ordinances from covenant-relation that it alone will hold against all can be said against it 7. Excellent Mr. Baxter in his Inf Bap p. 224. mihi Ed. 3. highly commending Mr. Blakes opening of the conditional covenant and affirming that he hath fully proved that the reprobate meaning of professors is within the verge of it he adds And doubtlesse this imerest in the covenant is afruit of Christs death Now if it be so how can it be aequivocal only that is an interect or priviledge which will become a lie and dissimulation for those that have it to assume and can that be a fruit of Christs death 8. If no unregenerate Christian be in covenant but aequivocally then must not such a one bring his child to baptism nor partake himself of Christian communion but it is a meer mockery of Christ as some seem to me here to speak harshly to avoid which he must tenounce his profession and never come to the Supper and to the other Ordinances but only as an Heathen and Infidel 9. Then those that are disciples of Christ for so was Judas must not be caught to doe all things Christ hath commanded Mat. 28.20 10. The Scripture as Mr. Blake urges speaks of dealing falsly in covenant breaking and not being stedfast in it but if the regenerate only be in covenant there can be no such thing really but nominally only 11. Christ said expresly to the twelve Doe this Drink you all of it that was a command and yet one of them was unregenerate From whence it follows that receiving the Sacrament is a duty of a disciple though unregenerate and so the covenant as to priviledge of ordinances belonging to such For my part I cannot but think those titles of Disciples Beleevers Christians Saints by calling and the like given to all within the Church are titles of right and not nominal only We must distinguish saies Timson of beleeving in a large sense and of beleeving in a strict sense both to be accounted true beleeving in Scripture sense The denomination of a beleever and so Saint Christian is as well derived from a right object beleeved on as from the holiness of the subject beleeving Answ to Mr. Col p. 153. It is in my apprehension appositely spoken 12. The covenant is founded upon grace Gratia saies Bullinger Decad. 5. Ser 6.

Word that accompanies the Sacrament especially in things of the Sacrament as well as by that which goes before or after it And by the way as for the younger sort come out of their childhood my judgement is with Aquinas Quando pueri incipiunt aliqualem usum rationis habere ut possint devotionem hujus Sacramenti concipere tunc potest eis hoc Sacramentum conferri Part 3. Quaest 80. Art 4. For the Scandalous in the next place I would have some to know or consider that the Sacrament is an ordinance wherein the curse and wrath of God against sin is held forth in the sufferings of Christ as well as pardon upon repentance Herein is the joynt strength of the Law and Gospel applyed in power to the understanding and a most high-aggravating of sin upon the conscience saies Mr. Blake in his late Book called The Covenant sealed in reference to his former The Covenant opened ch 7. Sect. 13. Arg. 3. 4. A sin-aggravating heart-breaking soul-humbling ordinance as he calls it is a means to reclaim even a scandalous sinner Reader I speak not these things on the one hand to hinder Catechism Examination and any means of private conference for the bringing our people unto knowledge Nay I am not against a prudential making use of this season to this end but only in regard that few Ministers doe or can go to all their people and their people will not come to them I doe conceive it may be satisfactory to their spirits in doing their office that though some persons be ignorant yet coming to the Supper and hearing the nature and use of the Sacrament laid open there is hope through Gods grace that they may receive at the very time competent information to be edified and wrought on by it I will speak plainly they may receive instruction for the knowing according to their modell the wretchednesse of sin that Christ is the Son of God through whose name alone we can be saved and that he is held forth as crucified in the elements and tender'd to beleevers which is as much as Mr. Blake saies he dares require to admittance Cov. Seal p. 233. Again on the other hand I speak not neither to favour the scandalous my doctrine is rather too harsh in the casting them out yet am I not so far gone as to think that it is not possible for such a person not yet under censure to be wrought on or edified by this ordinance No let but a right application of what is held forth herein be made by every receiver according to the state of his soul and what can be more effectual through the word to break his heart Let the man which is most keen against sin consider what I have proposed in my Rejoynder p. 37 39 40 75 76. 112 113.235 236 237 238 239 255. and he will see this is no loose doctrine I have taught Neither may they say this is no means to work grace or repentance but confirm it this is not an ordinance for conversion but for edification For I say otherwise It is a means of edification and salvation and therefore unto some likewise of conversion The whole exercise of Christs officers in dispensing the word seales and all other ordinances of Christ say the London Divines in their Jus Divin Reg. Ec. p. 36. is for the edifying the Church of Christ or the visible body Eph 4.11 12. with v. 4 5 6. 1 Cor. 12.11 12. From hence then I argue If the Lord hath appointed all his ordinances within the Church for the edification of the whole and there be some unregenerate within the Church then is the Sacrament appointed for some unregenerate mens edification and consequently their conversion for otherwise such cannot at all be edified unto salvation But the former is true therefore the latter Again The solemn application of the covenant to a mans self according to his estate to wit of salvation through Christ if he will beleeve and repent and of judgement from Christ if he continues in his sinnes and does not turn effectually to him is the very onely way whereby the Spirit usually worketh conviction and sincere conversion But actual receiving of the Sacrament is a solemn means of such an application Ergo. I pray see what I have written in the fore-quoted places for the clearing of this and compare it with the substance of what Mr. Blake hath put in since and it may be more cautiously exprest in the said place of his Cov Seal p. 204. 240. which hath much confirm'd me and I am perswaded when this matter is a litle more laid to heart that many will not only be ready to confesse with him ibid. p. 240. that there is more weight herein than personally hath been acknowledged but also that though it be objected against my doctrine that it strengthens the hands of the wicked Ez. 13.22 yet shall the godly find here a sword put in their hands for the smiting the wicked the secure and hypocrite up to the heart with this Sacrament it self while they are but taught to apply what is held forth to them according to their condition Indeed I conceive a forbearance sometimes for all this may be piously advised upon the account of prudence and the solemnitie of the ordinance to doe more good by it which I shall speak something of in the end to yield what may be to the satisfying the pious but this will not come up to a necessity All the disciples of Christ were ignorant in the fundamentals of Christs death and resurrection and Judas was scandalous See my Rejoynd page 15. yet Christ excluded neither of them at his Supper SECT 6. WEll now let thus much be considered that the Lord hath his Church in such a latitude to take into it whole Nations regenerate and unregenerate That the priviledge of ordinances belongs to this Church by way of distinction of it from the world That every member thereof therefore hath a right unto the ordinances devolved on him from this Church-covenant-relation While yet it is confessed that there are some which through their incapacity of reason cannot use the same The result of all will come to this that there is no person of discretion within the Church can be debarred any publick ordinance particularly the Sacrament before he be turn'd out of the Church with which this priviledge of ordinances is convertible and from it inseparable The Sacrament is the communion or token of our communion in Jesus Christ But every Church-member in statu quo is in Christ Jo. 15.2 and in some sense partaker of his blood so as to sanctifie him Heb. 10 29. and redeem him 2 Pet. 2.1 and therefore his right is good to that which is in the same sense the token hereof So long as he is in communion how can he be debarr'd the communion while he is in the body he may partake of the body The Church is the body of Christ and so

admitters in regard Christ acting say they as a Minister was not to take notice of what he knew of Judas as he was God yet it is apparent that it reaches not the matter at all as to the receivers themselves who neverthless for all this as for their own parts will be bound to receiving though they be such as Judas was that is at least unregenerate if not scandalous also It may be replyed as to the part of the admitters that Christ knew of Judas compact which no doubt was a high scandal in its self being inductive of sin and ruine to the Jews with whom he dealt not only as God but as man likewise because as man he was a Prophet Deut. 18 15. and that Godhead that dwelt in him bodily revealed this to him Now I argue if it was Christs duty to have excluded Judas from the Passeover if a man had revealed this to him how much more must be have done it when the God-head revealed it to him whose testimony is above all mens in the world But I shall chuse to lay my strength here as I say as to the part of the receivers that from Christs acting not as a mere man but as Mediator As the Lord Jesus does institute the Sacrament and give the precept he must do it unquestionably as mediator It is God only can give laws to bind the conscience Now in the institution and giving the precept he directs the same to all present and so to Judas amongst the rest from whence arises an obligation from the Lord irrefragably upon Judas as well as on the others to actual receiving what Christ bids him expresly do among them must be his duty and consequently while a man is a disciple though unregenerate as Judas was that does not unduty him to use the Supper And then let us hear what Dr. Diake himself who herein throughly looks to the foundation will tell us Let but Mr. H. says be p. 116. prove that actual receiving is a debt on the part of a natural man and he will yield the cause to us 2. Whereas it is denied notwithstanding this text and others by us alleadged that there is no precept nor president in Scripture for the administring the Sacrament to all Mr. Coll. ch 5. I desire these two Trules may be laid 1. that Giving and receiving being Relata all those texts that prove it the duty of any to receive the Sacrament does eo nomine oblige the Minister to deliver it to them or admit them because Posito uno relatorum ponitur alterum 2. That we are to look upon all the Ordinances of God unto his Church as universal obliging every member in particular to wait upon them unless where the Scripture it self layes some restriction or limitation the reason is because it is presumption in any to limit that which Gad hath not restrained And then I do assert hereupon that there is as many Scripture-precepts and presidents to deliver the Sacrament to all as to any supposing them within the Church and neither unintelligent or excommunicate as we entend the question for such as are Heathen Exod. 12.43 48. or have not reason and discernment 1 Cor. 11. 28 29. or are under censure 1 Cor. 5. 13. are debarr'd we all grant by the Scriptures quoted There are two instances only besides the precept and president in the former text I will here mention The one is the instance of the Passeover where all the congregation of Israel every man Ex. 12.3 47 50. from Dan to Bersheba 2 Chr. 30.5 all their males every year Exod. 34.23 Deut. 16. 16. All the children of the captivity to name that text Ezra 6.21 because by some it is alleaged against us that is all the Jews that returned without exception and all such as had seperated themselves unto them from the filthinesse of the heathen that is all their proselytes also the filthinesse of the heathen was their idols did eat and were so commanded There is nothing which I would chiefty have observed that made any Israelite uncapable of partaking thereof but that which made a godly man uncapable and such no more uncapable of this than of other the holy things And this was Levitical uncleanness whereof while the question is proposed to Moses Num. 9. whether such should eat of it or no it is plain in the chapter that for the rest to eat thereof was out of question The other instance is that of 1 Cor. 10.1 2 3 4. as I have prest it in my first book They all eat of the Manna and drank of the rock which was Christ The main answer given by Beza Gillespy Philip Goodwin Rutherford Dr. Drake and which all have is that all the Israclites were admitted here because this water and manna was their corporal food without which they could not live But herein lyes the force of what we urge to wit Why should the Lord make that ordinary food of theirs without which they could not live to be Sacramental if to eat and drink of Christ sacramentally was not a priviledge in common to the Church The main thing alleaged against Free-admission is the holiness of that whereunto Sacramental sigus do relate and the indisposition of the visibly unworthy to partake thereof Now sayes the Apostle the Israelites all of them yet many of them unworthy in our adversaries sense did drink of the rock which was Christ and it was the Lords will they should do so for therefore he made that food I say which all were to live by Sacramental Besides if it were such a grievous sin as murdering the Lord of glory or being guilty of his bloud to drink of Christ symholically without such and such qualifications as some do still speak then should these Israelites as I have said in my Rejoynd have rather samished their bodies than have eat and drank the damnation of their souls whereas we find that the sons of Aaron Lev. 22.23 were not to eat of the holy things during their Levitical uncleanness though it was their appointed food which Gillespy himself notes p. 97. Exemplo Israëlitarum saies Musculus in Ps 105. v. 39. Apostolus admonet usum externorum Sacramentorum talem esse ut neminem justificet possing ab omnibus promiscuè exerceri 3. Whereas it is laid down by my adversaries as their main hold that visible worthiness is the rule of admission as visible unworthiness or unfitness the rule of Suspension I shall think sit to propose or oppose these three things 1. Take all the visible worthiness in the world it can amount to no more than an external covenant-relation denominating the subjects quoad homines Saints Believers Christians Now who shall define us these covenant-relatives either this judgement of men or the open plain determination of the Scriptures 2. If we go on this ground of covenant-relation we go on a certain judgement every one knows who are externally in covenant or Church-members but if we go on

indulgence to bring the sinner to repentance It is manifest that the Primitive Christian Church was wont to permit an Heathen or those that were without to be present in their assemblies at the Word if not at Prayer and some other Ordinances for their conviction as appears 1 Cor. 14. According to this president it is my opinion then in short that a person excommunicate may be admitted to an Ordinance or Ordinances as an Heathen into which condition he is expresly cast Mat. 18. when yet he is cut off from all his priviledge and interest in them as a member And this I suppose will even serve the turn of my very adversaries and yet be no dishight or prejudice to that latitude of Excommunication which the truth dictates and must be maintained according to my opinion In fine two things are objected against me by my Opposers which methinks do even quite take off one another In the former question it is objected that my doctrine is loose in that it admits of every intelligent Church-member to the Sacrament before censure To which I answer That doctrine about admission that maintaines Excommunication in point of offending cannot be loose towards the offender and if a man have not offended I mean so far as to deserve censure the Minister can but admonish and advise he can go no further and here how much I allow upon the score of pastoral discretion is declared And why should any more be desired In the second question it is objected my doctrine is too severe bloody and cruel in that those persons which it cuts off from the Sacrament it cuts off from all other parts of Church-communion also To this I answer It is true it does do thus indeed according to the Scripture but let this be understood aright and candidly of this Relative exclusion here declared likewise and then I hope all will be reconciled and satisfied And thus I have now finished my purpose endeavouring to keep in a way of moderation that I might avoid the extremities of others I have not in any thing I suppose departed from the Scripture as my Guide and yet in every thing come up as near as I can to those that are against me to content them I do not know how it may be taken but it shall suffice me that I have in the sincerity of my intention so far as I can judg of my own heart proposed my thoughts leaving others to their own The Churches peace is the thing I have aimed at without hindring but happily furthering her reformation If I have done well and as is fitting to the matter it is that I desired if I have done but slenderly and meanly it is what I could attain unto Deo gloria J. H. FINIS A POST SCRIPT Courteous Reader THere are yet some things I shal make bold to trouble thee to read in this place because I would not have the Discourse it self to swel any bigger thā it has don If thou thinkst thē long thou mayest let them alone if thou wilt I know well that this controversie is not about any fundamental but that as brethren we may bear well enough with one another that differ in it nevertheless in regard of practice it is even necessary at least for most that are of the Ministry to be establisht concerning the same or else perhaps it might have been long enough before some should have thought it fit to meddle any more with it What I have done here in this last book I offer to them chiefly and thee that hast studied the point what I have done in my first book to the many 1. Whereas in my undertaking this Subject I chose those words Doe this Drink ye all of it And they all drank of it in that text Mar. 14. 23. for my ground which many think might have been more soundly chosen I desire the strength thereof may be laid in those two things which have been touched Sect. 10. but I am not satisfied without speaking a little farther thereof with thy leave to have it noted by such The first is that we have here as in the other Evangelists the institution of the Sacrament wherein there is a direct precept to the Church Doe this with the extent thereof expressed Drink ye all of ir The words are directed in general to the disciples as disciples and consequently all that are disciples suppose them in a capacity of reason to use it come under a right of Obligation to use the same It is objected By all is meant no more than All present But this is too overly the precept I hope does so concern the disciples present as that St. Paul makes these very words of the institution obtigatory to the Church of Corinth and to us all as a standing Ordinance till Christ come 1 Cor. 11. 26. It is manifest then that these words as the precept of Christ are delivered to the disciples in bebalf of the Church whereof themselves were a representative part Now then I ask whether as Representatives of the Church invisible or visible if you will say of the Church invisible to make the command only to the regenerate and elect it is unreasonable for all the Ordinances are delivered to the Church as visible Heb. 9.19 Rom. 3.2 and we suppose Judas was amongst them But if they were here Representatives of the Church as visible it must follow that all those who are of the visible Church and in capacity of the obligation are berchy obliged to this Ordinance It is not argumentative to say here none of these disciples were ignorant or scandalous which yet I think is untrue because they were representatives of the Church not as men unspotted with ignorance or scandal any more than as Apostles but as they were members thereof visible members disciples Christians Id veiò concedimus saies Bezs De Presb. Ex. p. 27. with 23. quòd Christus inter suos discipulos coenam instituens manifestè oftendìt coenae celebrationem illis convenire which is inciuded in solis illis qui Christi se discipulos profiteantur and Mr. Perkins Case cons B. 2. c. 10 laies this down for his first rule Every man of years living in the Church and being baptized is bound in conscience by the commandement to use the Supper Now whiles my adversaries are forced to fly off here and confine the precept to the regenerate only we may easily see both where our bottom lies and also how firm it is The second thing I build on in this text is That together with the precept we have the example of Iudas who is sat down with the twelve Mat. 26.20 and his hand at the table Luke 22.21 It is objected that Judas was a close hypocrite his villany secret and unknown and so this president will make nothing to our purpose But under favour such as say so are mistaken for though this answer should suffice which I think it does not as to the part of the