Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sin_n	law_n	transgress_v	transgression_n	5,886	5	10.8651	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62668	To receive the Lords Supper, the actual right and duty of all church-members of years not excommunicate made good against Mr. Collins his exceptions against The bar removed, written by the author : and what right the ignorant and scandalous tolerated in the church have to the Lords Supper declared : many thing belonging to that controversie more fully discussed, tending much to the peace and settlement of the church : and also a ful answer to what Mr. Collins hath written in defence of juridical suspension, wherein his pretended arguments from Scripture are examined and confuted : to which is also annexed A brief answer to the Antidiatribe written by Mr. Saunders / by John Timson ...	Timson, John.; Timson, John. Brief answer to the antidiatribe written by Mr. Saunders.	1655 (1655)	Wing T1296; ESTC R1970	185,323	400

unto it being of no other religion then what the Gospel teacheth they may be said to be worthy whatever they are for sincerity and truth so again Matth. 22. concerning the invited guests to the marriage Supper which set forth the fat things of the Gospel administrations and the grace thereof the messengers were sent to call in the guests that were bidden but they made light of it and would not come and some went to their farms and others to their merchandize and others abused the servants that invited them c. Then the King was wroth and destroyed those murderers and said to his servants The wedding is ready but they that were invited were not worthy vers 8. This was meant of the unbelieving Jews that totally rejected Christ and would never come under his external administrations set up in his Church in order to salvation they are said you may see not to be worthy or unworthy but the Gentiles that came in though so●● came absurdly and perished too at last y●● there is no such thing said of them no the were worthy though they consisted of goo● and bad The invitation priviledged all● come there is no pleading I am unworth to come but refusal was that which the unworthinesse consisted in only From the hints of Scriptures we may conceive there no such thing as personal unworthinesse ● order to observance and duty of perso● in Covenant relation which all are the have entred Covenant though but in the parents untill they renounce the Covenan● or for their hating to be reformed by th● Churches just censures they be discovenante● conditionally that if they never repent 〈◊〉 return to their obedience in a right way the are gone forever Now then I say if t● Scriptures charge not any with unworthynesse of person but such as I have instanced in who can imagin that the Chur●● of Corinth was punished for that I would gladly know of Mr. Collings of any other learned man where the Scripture● threaten punishment against personal unworthinesse simply Or where can they give an instance that ever any wese punished for habitual unworthinesse at all in the Old or New Testament If you cannot finde such a thing in all the whole Bible what reason can you have to judge that the Corinths were punished for personal unworthinesse It 's true the sin of our natures derived from the first man is punished with death for we al dye in Adam but this natural death is a common lot appointed for all good and bad It 's appointed for all men once to dye Heb. 9.27 And we see death reigns over Infants that have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression Rom. 5. but in this both original sin and death that follows thereupon is of unavoidable necessity by the decree of God So likewise as actual sin is the transgression of the law he that so transgresseth is lyable to the punishment of that law 1 Tim. 1.9 10. And the whole Law it self is made for the lawlesse and disobedient for the ungodly and for sinners for murderers for whoremongers for lyars and for perjured persons c. that is for the punishment of all wilful disobedience of men And so it is said of the Church If you will walk contrary to me I will walk contrary to you You have I known of all the families of the earth yet the Lord will punish them for their sins And wherefore doth living man complain for the punishment of his sin Lam. 3.39 all the punishments threatned in the Word and inflicted either by God or man were for actual offendings but we never read of any coming to the Ordinances that were punished for a meer want of regeneration circumcision of the heart an interest in Christ c. This is a case the Lord hath alwayes pity● and promised the cure of unto his Church forasmuch as no man can convert and rene● his own soul of himself nay of thos● that have the means and use the ordinar● means of their salvation as the Jews di● It 's said not of him that willeth nor of b● that runneth but it is God that sheweth mercy R● 9. Habitual unworthinesse in that respe● is unavoidable and is the common state● all by nature as well them that are born the Church as those that are born out of i● Ephes 2. but the Covenants of promise a● made to the Church for the cure of this d● praved state And the Lord hath set up 〈◊〉 Ordinances of Word Sacraments and Pray● in the Church as the ordinary means fo● men to use in their conversion and salvation revealed in the promises of the Covenant the neglect whereof is usually punishe with blindenesse and profanenesse not diligent frequenting of them But what i● God doth punish habitual or natural u●● worthinesse it being an effect of Adams defection What is that to the Church that i● bounded by a rule May they contrary t● all rule judge of it and punish it therefore with suspension from the Sacrament Our blessed Saviour rebukes this rash humour in men saying Judge not lest you be judged It 's clear enough that we may judge of mens actions and finding them transgresfors we may punish their persons but we have nothing to doe to judge of mens persons let them be good or bad as to their persons that is nothing to us we must leave them to stand or fall to their own Master for what have we to doe to judge another mans servant But if either be found transgressors so far as their offendings come within the Churches cognisance to punish let them impartially doe it without respect of persons in the Church We read that those that are appointed to judge amongst their brethren Deut. 1 16 17. are to judge righteously between every man and his brother without respect of persons in judgement to hear the small as well as the great not fearing the face of any man for the judgement is the Lords and the cause that is too hard for man to judge of was to be brought before the Lord and he would hear it there is a rule given to judge of causes and actions between brother and brother And yet in point of causes and things external that brethren might differ in these might be too hard for men to judge of How much more hard is it to judge of the spirits of men within them whether they have an interest in Christ or no surely if in the other much more in this we are to refer it to the Lord besides you may see in judging about things which concerns the Church Matth. 18. 1. It must be of evill actions only 2. Upon sufficient proof 3. And in case of obstinacy refusing 〈◊〉 hear the Church c. before any judgement can issue out against them Tell me ho● you can apply this rule to personal unwor● thinesse Can this be attested upon Oath o● is the Church able to convince any in particular of it Or is it

the Apostle spake of habitual unworthinesse o● actual when all he drives at is nothing else unto his admitting to the Sacrament If I can but undermine him in that one prop his whole building will fall and the controversie come to some good issue for what Mr. Collings can doe in it let him doe the best can In the next place he saith he dares not deny but the disorderly eating in the Church of Corinth was an unworthy eating and might be a cause of their punishment vers 30. We know God is very tender of his own order and brings that instance of Uzziahs case c. This I take to be a good concession to my anwer of the 3. 4. query pag. 16 17 18. Answ The Bar removed But I see he is very unwilling to come off clearly in it mark he doth but say their unworthy eating might be a cause of their punishment The holy Apostle saith plainly for this cause many are weak and sick some dead That is the cause is plain vers 29. Their not discerning was more out of carelesnesse and profanenesse then simply out of ignorance their eating and drinking unworthily which he further explains to be their not discerning the Lords body but used the bare elements as common bread not discerning the body and bloud of the Lord they were consecrated to represent with other particular miscarriages in the time of administration for this cause saith our Apostle they were punished this were a cause saith our Author but not all the cause for which they were punished with death Who shall carry the sense now of these two competitors our Apostle or Mr. Collings I need not again urge what have formerly spoke to this Scripture 〈◊〉 Mr. Collings or any other first answer 〈◊〉 what I have done in clearing the set of the place and let them prove that were for personal unworthinesse if th● can or for any other sins that they w● guilty of before they met together for t● time of administration c. Let them g●● us some clear demonstrations of it if they c●● if they cannot let them be so ingenu● as to give us their consent and trouble se●ful consciences no longer with such kind trifling uncertainties that here follow 〈◊〉 our Author Mr. Collings hath given us three argume● to shew us why ●e cannot digest the se● that I have given of the 1 Cor. 11.20 to● end He saith because the Apostle chap. 5. had them of Corinth that they could not keep 〈◊〉 feast with the old leaven of malice and wickedne● And bidden them purge out the old leaven vers 7. And not eat with one called a brother who sh● be a fornicator or idolater c. And agai● chap. 10.21 had told them they could 〈◊〉 drink of the cup of the Lord and of the cup divels What then why did he not mal● his conclusion that we might have clear● understood to what end he quotes tho● Scriptures as a reason But let us a little follow him in thes● Scriptures and examine what they will make to prove these two things 1. That the Lord punished the Corinthians for personal unworthinesse 2. That they were punished for some other sins then what they were guilty of in the time of administration which is the main thing in hand As for 1 Cor. 5. he tels us not the Apostle that they could not keep the feast with malice c. the Apostle exhorts them to purge out the old leaven meaning that of the incestuous person speaking by way of an allusion to the law of the Passeover which were to purge their houses of all leaven against that feast which continued seven days resemblably he would have them purge themselves of that wicked person whom they had indulged amongst them and made the name of God to be evill spoken of by tolerating such sins amongst them as is not so much as named amongst the Gentiles that one should have his fathers wife c. therefore deliver him to Satan purge your selves of your former connivence and indulging such and then saith he let us keep the feast but not with malice and wickednesse c. but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth meaning that he would have them spend their whole lives so the Apostle tels them what he would have them doe and how they should keep the feast Mr. Collins tels us he told them they could not keep the feast c. but he that hath but half an eye may easily discern what this place is for his purpose This proves that scandalous persons should be cast out of all Christian Communion for the conclusion of the whole is in the last verse cast out from amongst your selves that wicked person which is the thing that I all along contend for the just censures of the Church but I would have none debarred their right till then But Mr. Collings might have given us some probable grounds to prove that the feast mentioned was the holy Supper and not to leave us to such uncertainties for if it be not meant of the holy Supper what is this to his purpose Let him shew us where the Supper of the Lord is called a feast and that this feast must needs be that but this is but a shift to hold up the old interest So hard a thing it is to come off from the authority of men especially when themselves are ingaged in such wayes that men have framed But then he goes on vers Answ 11. And not eat with one called a Brother This Scripture is more fully opened hereafter as also the 1 Cor. 10.21 who should be a fornicator an Idolater c. Mr. Collings should have cleared unto us what is meant by not eat whether not eat in a civil friendly necessary sense or not eat at the holy Supper with such during their actual abode in the Church If he mean the latter in reference to the Sacrament I shall demand of him where that word eat alone is to be taken for the holy Supper and if it be not meant of the holy Supper what is this to the thing in hand The 9 10. verses doe give us some light of the Apostles meaning He had wrote an Epistle to them not to keep company with the fornicators of the world But in this Epistle he mollifies the former with some liberty else they must goe out of the world his meaning is not to keep company in a civil friendly sense unnecessarily but if a brother be such a one keep no civil friendly company with him at all no not to eat upon unnecessary occasion And so for that 10. chap. 21. They could not drink of the cup of the Lord and of the cup Divels too The main sin the Apostle aims at in this chapter is Idolatry vers 14. These Corinthians being grafted into the Christian Church did bear up themselves upon their Church priviledges too high And hence grew fearlesse of Gods judgements notwithstanding

will give you an acquittance or a release from Excommunication keep but from the Sacrament you need not fear any examination adomonition or excommunication if you can but dispense with your conscience carelessely to neglect this Ordinance you may freely enjoy all the rest as well as a Heathen or an Excommunicate person Nay it may be if you will but keep from the Sacrament he will allow you the title of Brethren as well as an Excommunicate person but if you will not be satisfied unlesse you may receive the Sacrament in remembrance of Christ for remission of sins then you must look to be called Hogs and Dogs unbelievers murderers of Christ the profane world that are without hope and God in the world This argument of his doth better become a Brownist then one that pretends to a friendly owning of our Church but the poor Church may say these slanders divisions Separations and confusions are the wounds that she hath received by the hands of such friends All that he saith in proof of his Minor hath been sufficiently answered already both by my learned friend Mr. Humfrey and my self I intend brevity for there is nothing left in his following arguments much considerable His seventh Argument Either it 's lawful for the Officers to deny the Sacrament to such as they finde ignorant scandalous and impenitent or they are bound to give into such But they are not bound to give it to such Ergo. His proof of the Minor is The Officers are not bound to administer the Ordinance to those who they know are not bound to receive it but the ignorant and scandalous are visibly such as are not bound to receive it Ergo. His main proof of this Minor is this If such be bound to receive then they are bound to make themselves guilty of the body and bloud of Christ and to eat and drink their own damnation which are strange things for a man to be bound in conscience unto This argument is wholly founded upon that grosse mistake of personal unworthinesse Answ which I have so clearly confuted at large in it's place where I shall refer the Reader for full satisfaction His eight Argument If none may be suspended but those who are excommunicated then none must be kept away but those that are contumacious But some may be kept away who are not contumacious Ergo. The major is plain Mat. 18. The minor only needs proof saith he 1. Surely those that are under admonition are to be kept away 2. Suppose one should come to the Minister the morning he were to receive and blaspheme Christ and tell him he came for nothing but to abuse the Church or suppose a Minister should know one of his people had committed murder theft incest whoredome the night before c. shall such be admitted they not being excommunicate if not then there is suspension distinct from Excommunication pag. 98. The Major admits of some question Answ 1 for Matth. 18.15 speaks not very clearly unto all cases that instance is of particular trespasses between private brethren which are things of a lesser nature yet these persisted in unto contumacy after the Churches admonition makes one lyable unto Excommunication but I question whether all publike notorious open scandalous sinners in the Church be thus to be proceeded against especially when their scandalous sinning is of long continuance and doth offend the Congregation the whole Congregation in such a case is to be satisfied which cannot be by a private repentance should it be supposed upon the admonitionof the Church I think the incestuous Corinth was not dealt withall according to that rule Matth. 18.15 Publike sins should have publike shame that others may fear and the offender be brought to a serious and notorious repentance before the Church declare themselves satisfied and receive them into holy Communion so that I think for the Church to proceed gradually in some cases as such as Mr. Collins doth instance in is not alwayes necessary nor to wait untill the offender appears to be obstinate but ipso facto to be forthwith censured But these cases are not to be left to the discretion of every particular Pastor to judge of but to the discretion and grave judgement of the ruling part of the whole Church Besides I question whether one that hath been often reproved in the publike Ministery and yet lives in scandalous sins of whoredome drunkennesse cursing and swearing variance and contention c. is not to be judged contumacious and upon that account the Church being in a capacity and informed should upon sufficient proof without delay Excommunicate him I leave these things to better Judgements but yet I am inclinable to conceive that Matth. 18. most properly respects private trespasses which are not openly known and how that rule should hold to be applyed in the same manner to open scandals that cause the name of God and the true profession of Religion to be blasphemed and reproached I am not very clear But now we shall examine his Minor But some may be kept away from the Sacrament that are not contumacious So may some be Excommunicate that are not contumacious as I have hinted at Answ which if that be true then the argument fals to nothing of it self But he saith surely Those that are under admonition are to be kept away This he begs how will he prove it For where the offence will admit of hearing the Churches admonition and upon that give hope or satisfaction of amendment why should they be kept from the Sacrament more then the other Ordinances they not being authoritatively put out of Church Communion is it rational for to execute before sentence be given Unto his suppositions I shall answer him first they are no proof If such may be Juridically suspended then they may be Juridically excommunicated for it is Juridical Suspension that is now in question And as it is stated the Church may as well doe the one as the other And the Church need not be long in giving sentence in such cases if there be clear proof besides the Sacrament may rather be rejourned for a short time then that any should justly be offended or that a single Minister should doe that which is not regular Murder thest incest whoredome is Felony by the civil Law of the Nation and if any can discover any such they should attach and put them into the custody of the Civil Officers these are gaol sins and to be punished by the Judges And I know no rule that doth warrant the Church to censure those that are under the penalty of the course of civil Courts of Justice If one should grant that in an extraordinary case some extraordinary course at the present might be taken as suppose some profane abuse at the Sacrament as to disturb the administration by some disorder I doubt not but the Churchwardens might thrust them out of the Church do the like to any that should come drunk or mad but what is