Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	church_n	divine_a	tradition_n	5,425	5	9.4683	5	true

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

right I shall conclude this Argument with that of the Bramble Berry As it were better in our almes to relieve ten Counterfeits then let Christ go naked and hungry in any one member So it were better to admit ten Hypocrites to the Table of the Lord then deprive one Godly man of this soul nourishment To this Argument we may adde weight by considering that in an Un-Presbyterated Church Beleevers have not only a right to the Lords Supper but also need of it Their own necessities saith Mr. Pemble may perswade them to frequent celebration of this Sacrament if they can be sensible of their spiritual weaknesse and wants Let them look inward and see how great need they have of many and often confirmations of their faith renovations of their repentance of stirring up the graces of God in the soul to adde an edge and eagernesse to all spiritual affections after holinesse to get unto themselves the most powerful provocations unto obedience Every one that hath grace knows how frequently the power thereof is impared by temptations weakned by worldly distractions even of our lawful employments and overmastered by the force of sinful lusts so that they must needs discover a great deal of ignorance in their spiritual estate that feel not in their soules a pronenesse to a famishment as well as in their bodies at least they bewray intolerable carlesnesse that finding the emptinesse and leannesse of their souls yet neglect to repaire often unto this holy Table whereon is set forth the bread of life whereof when they have eaten their spirit may come again their hearts may be strengthned their souls may be replenished as with marrow and fatnesse The Ministers and Elders met together in the late Provinciall Assembly at London in their Vindication of the Presbyteriall Government consider the Sacrament under a four fold Notion First As it is a spirituall medicine to cure the remainders of our corruption Secondly As it is spirituall food to strengthen our weak graces Thirdly As it is a spirituall cordiall to comfort our distressed consciences Fourthly As it is a strong obligation and forcible engagement to all acts of thankfulnesse and obedience unto Jesus Christ Now Beleevers in an Un-Presbyterated Church have need of the Lords Supper under all these considerations First Their souls are perpetually diseased and therefore they stand in need of the frequent use of this Sacrament as a soveraigne medicine to heal them Secondly Their souls are naturally empty of all spirituall goodnesse their graces feeble and defective their faith weak and often staggering their hope fainting their love cold their zeal languishing And therefore the Lords Supper is frequently needful as spiritual food for the nourishing and strengthening of all their graces for the confirming of their faith quickning of their hope rowzing of their love and kindling of their zeal c. Thirdly The faith of the strongest Beleevers may be shaken their assurance ecclipsed with doubts their spirituall joy darkned with fears discomforts and afflictions They may walk in darknesse and see no light And in such a case the Lords Supper is necessary as a precious Cordiall to revive and chear up their sinking spirits to confirme their doubting and to comfort their distressed consciences Fourthly The hearts of the best of men are false and unsteadfast loose and deceitfull apt to start from God and his just commands They therefore want the Lords Supper for renuall of their Covenant with God that so thereby they may bind fasten and engage themselves a fresh unto God in the strength of Christ The seventh Argument is from comparison of the Lords Supper with Baptisme The seventh Argument A Comparatis It is a generally received Maxime amongst Divines that Baptisme ought to be administred but once for it is the seal of our new birth and we are borne but once The Lords Supper ought to be administred often for we stand in need continually of food nourishment confirmation c. Now by this Divinity that the Lords Supper is not to be administred in an Un-Presbyterated Church it will follow That if the Church wherein we live be not all our lives long Presbyterated that then in such a condition of the Church Baptisme is to be administred once the Lords Supper never The eight Argument is drawn from the consideration of the opposite of the administration of the Lords Supper The eight Argument Ab Opposito the non-administration thereof Non-administration of the Lords Supper in an Un-Presbyterated Church is unlawful Therefore administration in an Un-Presbyterated Church is lawful That non-administration of the Lords Supper I mean thereby at otal forbearance of the administration therefore is unlawful in an Un-Presbyterated Church I prove by these three following Arguments All unwritten Traditions in matters of Worship and Religion are unlawful But a totall forbearance of the administration of the Lords Supper in an Un Presbyterated Church is an unwritten Tradition having no precept or exmaple in Scripture to countenance it Ergo c. There is expresse Scripture for administration of the Lords Supper unto the Churches of God As for the restriction of it unto Presbyterated Churches it cannot be made good from Scripture And Commentaries Expositions of Scripture that are not by good consequence deducible therefrom are unwritten Traditions and humane Presumptions However we cannot argue negatively from humane testimonies we may yet from divine the Scriptures For they are able to make a man wise unto salvation and throughly to furnish the man of God a Minister to all good works able to give him sufficient direction when to performe when to omit duties And therefore seeing there is such a deep silence in the Scriptures concerning the totall forbearance of administring the Lords Supper in an Un-Presbyterated Church I cannot but conclude it to be unnecessary The Lord may say unto us who hath required this at your hand These two things differ wide First Scandalous persons ought to be excluded the Lords Supper Secondly If for want of an Eldership they cannot be excluded therefore we must wholly forbear administration of the Lords Supper The former is obvious in Scripture the latter an unwritten Tradition But you will say there is warrant for Omission of the Lords Supper c. The Passe over was omitted by the Children of Israel in the Wildernesse as also circumcision whence we may argue by way of Analogy and Proportion for Omission of the Lords Supper when the Church is in a Wildernesse and if ever she were in a Wildernesse then now First Arguments from meer and naked Analogy and Proportion without some other ground are not concludent otherwise we might argue for a Pope from the Jews High-Priest But as to the instances I wonder why omission of the Passeoves in the Wildernesse is alledged For after the first celebration thereof all future celebrations were by expresse plain command to be only in the land of Canaan Exod. 13.4 5. c. Deut. 16.

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

The want of CHURCH-GOVERNMENT No warrant for a totall omission Of the LORDS SVPPER 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 London Printed for SAMUEL GELLIBRAND at the Ball in Pauls Church-yard 1650. An Approbation of the following Tractate by that learned Divine Mr. ROBERT CROSSE late of Lincolne College in Oxford unto whose censure it was submitted Worthy friend I Have somewhat heedfully perused your determination touching administring the Lords Supper in an Vn-Presbyterated Church It seems to me both judicious and accurate I was of your judgment as to the main before But am now much more enlarged and confirmed in it If humble sober-minded men be not yet of the same mind with you it is possibly because they are unacquainted with your reasons You shall therefore to my apprehension do both a grateful and seasonable work To make that of publike use which may be and I am confident will be of publike benefit Luckam Novembr 16. 1650. Your friend and neighbour ROBERT CROSSE To his honoured friend Col. John Pyne A Member of the Parliament and one of the Commissioners for the Militia of the County of SOMMERSET A Principall end of prefixing your name unto the following piece is to give a publike testimony of that deep obligation which lieth upon me for those favours which you have vouchsafed unto me not in my selfe only but in others for my sake These have beene so many and so great as that they may make just challenge for you unto any thing of my performance But indeed this Treatise is yours by a stricter tye of justice then that of gratitude For it is principally by your care and assistance that it is brought unto the Press and therfore to alienate it by any other inscription would be not only an ungrateful but an injurious part I shall deteine you no longer from your more weighty affairs But with my most hearty prayers commending you and yours to the great Preserver of men and beseeching him to make you a worthy instrument of the peace and justice of this County I shall rest Yours in all humble observance HENRY JEANES To the Reverend our very much honoured Brother Mr. HENRY JEANES Preacher of the Word at Chedzoy These present Reverend Sir WE have met this day to debate whether there be any course warranted by the Word wherein Ministers may proceed to the administration of the Sacrament as our case now stands and what that is We earnestly desire that you would be pleased to take the Question into your serious consideration and to give your thoughts on it or rather the state of it the fourth of July next ensuing when we intend to meet again to consult farther about that thing And we are the rather inclined to desire your particular resolution therein Because we understand that you have administred that Sacrament and therefore doubt not but you have some way satisfied your self therein which we earnestly desire that you would be pleased to impart unto Your affectionate Brethren Tho. Gatchel Rich. Newton Tho. Court Tho. Musgrove Will. Mills John Gardner George Newton Barthol Safford John Norman George Bindon Taunton June 13. 1649. ERRATA PAge 2. line 21. for all read also for p. 3 l. 5. for to r. so I. p. 5. l. 2. for by r. even by p. 6 l. 35 for they r. they whom we oppose p. 12 l. 14 for Are r. Is p. 13 l. 6 for in-ductivum r. inductivū p. 15 l. 24 for nature r. naturae p. 17 l. 18 for is r. in idem l. 32 for slock r. flock p. 18 l. 11 for presuptuous r. presumptuous p. 27 l. 78 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 32 l. last for a duty r. be a duty p. 38. for example r. example p. 41 l. 11. for codclude r. conclude p. 43 l. 12 for ut r. ad p. 45. l. 16. for more r. most p. 50. l 20 for proceeded r. preceded p. 52 marg l. 21 for peccatur r. peccator p. 54 l. 11. for possible r. possibly p. 55 l. 18. for cocunque r. quocunque p. 57 l. 1. for directions r. direction p. 60. l. 5. blot out the second to p. 61 l. 7 for sin r. sinners p. 63 marg for te net-u r. tenetur p. 64 marg l. ult for hi r. hic p 65. l. 6. for stances r. instances p. 66 l. 20 for say r. see p. 67 l. 14 for know r. knew p. 69. l. 35 for re-eive rerecoive p. 70 l. 29 blot out not p. 72 l. 29 for committed r. committed by our selves These are the grossest faults others of an inferiour nature being easily discernable by the Reader are omitted 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 TO go over the Topical places belonging to the Termes of the Question will afford the greatest light and upon a full and thorow survey of them I resolve upon holding the Question affirmatively There be two Termes in the Question considerable viz. Administration of the Lords Supper and a Non-Presbyterated Church or a Church destitute of ruling Elders and I shall argue for the affirmative from both First then Arguments evidencing the Affirmative may be drawn from the Lords Supper and the Administration thereof From the Command of and Examples for the administration thereof From the general Nature of the Lords Supper From the Instrumental Cause End and Object of the administration thereof From a Comparison of the Lords Supper with Baptisme From the consideration of the opposite of administration of the Lords Supper the non-administration thereof Primum â Praecepto The first Argument shall be taken from Christs Command Luk. 22.19 1 Cor. 11.24.25 This do in remembrance of me All Christs Commands are to be observed even in an un-Presbyterated Church unlesse there be some dispensation from Christ himselfe to the contrary The Charge that Christ gave to his Apostles at his ascension Mat. 28.19 20. was to teach those Nations they should baptize to observe all things whatsoever he had commanded them Now to administer the Lords Supper we have an expresse Commandement and no dispensation that I know of to lay it aside in an un-Presbyterated Church Ergo c. It is an old and a good rule Non distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit We must not distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish Limitations and restrictions of divine praecepts

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