Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	apostle_n	sin_n	sin_v	1,996	5	9.1338	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38575	A treatise of excommunication wherein 'tis fully, learnedly, and modestly demonstrated that there is no warrant ... for excommunicating any persons ... whilst they make an outward profession of the true Christian faith / written originally in Latine by ... Thomas Erastus ... about the year 1568.; Explicatio gravissimae quaestionis utrum excommunicatio. English	Erastus, Thomas, 1524-1583.	1682 (1682)	Wing E3218; ESTC R20859	61,430	96

that this poor Soul remain'd for some months under great Terrors and Agonies of mind till he had receiv'd the joyful intelligence of Paul's remitting the Punishment That the matter was manag'd much after this rate may be plainly collected out of that second Epistle to the Corinthians LXI From what has been already alleadg'd as well as from what might yet be urg'd 't is so clearly and solidly demonstrated that this delivering up to Satan was quite another thing from that which we now-a-days call Excommunication or Suspension from the Sacrament that sure none but those who are as defective in understanding as in love to the Truth can have the face to deny it I said just now that some ancient Writers expounded this place as we do Augustine whose Testimony I cited before is one of them there is another passage of his in his first Book upon Christ's Sermon in the Mount concurring with us as doth also Athanasius and after him Chrysostom and his Compiler Theophylact. LXII Let us now take a short survey of those other places which our Opponents flie unto for their own defence Some lay a stress upon that passage of St. Paul to Timothy 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine for hereby they fancy themselves able to squeeze out a proof that there were some Elders who did not labour in the Word and on these they bestow another Office to wit that of inspecting and censuring our Manners and Behaviour of being Observators of our sins and failings of admonishing the Stubborn and Refractory of certifying their fellow-Elders that is say they the Church and lastly in conjunction with these of excommunicating such as hear not or obey not the Church LXIII But we think it evident from the Writings of the Apostles Peter and Paul that Ministers Bishops and Presbyters or Elders if Office Function and Ministry be meant by those two last and not their Age were all the same in the Apostles time and so that there was no Presbyter who was not a Teacher or Preacher as we now call them that is who did not labour in the Doctrine unless any are desirous to stretch this word to those Judges and Arbitrators of Suits and Controversies mentioned 1 Cor. 6. 4. But we talk not of them at present since their Duty was of a quite different nature This Opinion of ours which we think grounded upon apparent truth hath both Hierom and Ambrose to vouch for it onely this latter says that Bishops were first nominated out of the Order of Presbyters This therefore is the manner of Paul's Discoursing as if I should say I love all Ministers and Pastors but especially those who with unwearied Industry and a constant waking Care and Sedulity feed the Sheep committed to their charge I love all studious persons but especially those who sit to it night and day I do not now by saying thus say that there are some Pastors who never feed their Sheep or some Students who never study but I suppose thereby some more diligent than others though I do not say that any do more than they ought to do or than their Function requires of them That this is the genuine and true Exposition of the Apostles meaning and words the subsequent words v. 18. concerning the reward proves it for 't is in no sort probable that the same reward was at any time allotted in the Church to them that did and to them that did not teach for the first should be charg'd with a double Duty and the other with but a single one yet the Apostle stiles them both worthy of double honour Besides the Apostle quotes that passage of the Ox treading out the Corn to prove that Sustenance is due to the Ministry and the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confirms our Exposition which signifies not barely labouring but wearying our selves with labour or using an extraordinary diligence therein And thus is it always taken in the New Testament where it often occurs And the Greeks call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latins call Lassitudo Weariness And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differ so do their Verbs LXIV They say withal that Christ did forbid to cast Pearls before Swine and to give things that are holy unto Dogs I answer Christ speaks of them that despise those Pearls and tread them under their feet and turn again and rend the Donors of them that is he speaks of the Enemies of the Gospel with whom we have nothing to do in this dispute for we meddle not with any here but Christians who are rightly principl'd in that Doctrine and approve the same and are desirous to be Partakers of the Sacraments with their fellow-Christians though they live not up to that Integrity that others do Besides Christ speaks not there of Sacraments but of the Doctrine of the Gospel which ought not to be offer'd to Dogs and Swine that is to such as refuse and trample it under feet of which nature is that Parable of the Pearl Mat. 13. 45. where Christ likens the Kingdom of Heaven to a Merchant-man who bought a Pearl of great price and therefore it makes nothing to our purpose LXV Whereas again they remember us that St. Paul gave it in charge to Timothy 1 Tim. 5. 29. That them that sin he should rebuke before all We deny not the thing but deny that it relates to our purpose I will not muster up multitudes of Arguments to prove it this onely shall I say That 't is beyond the wit of man to make it out that to reprove or rebuke any man before or in the presence of the Church is the same thing with forbidding him the Sacrament Nay they that object this object it to no purpose unless they can shew it to be the same Who can prove that the Apostle so much as thought here of interdicting the Sacrament Again the Apostle treats not here of sins that are committed openly and in the face of the world but those that sin says he that is that persevere continue in sin rebuke before all that thereby both he that hath sinned and others that saw it may fear with him and do no more wickedly He puts no distinction here between little and great venial and moral sins much less between publick and private sins To speak once for all 't is a leaden Objection and will melt away like wax at the Fire of Truth and vanish like the smoak Besides St. Paul's words stand in perfect opposition to this Excommengent for he commands him that sins to be rebuk'd not to be excommunicated before all subjoyning it as a reason that all may fear as if he should say If he will not repent and mend himself at least others shall thereby learn to be and do better Where by him that sins is not meant him that has left

the Pattern for we are to live up to the Laws and not to Presidents and not walk after any one in his deviations from the Laws of God unless we will confound all the Rules and Measures of Right and Wrong Let us indeed have an eye to the good Examples of the good and strive to come after them but not after the bad of the bad I have been so particular though with all the brevity I could on this Argument because some do mightily hug and applaud themselves in it though to the deceiving of themselves as well as others XXIII 'T is therefore a most certain unshaken and indisputable truth that under the old Testament no man was shut out from Sacraments for Immoralities but on the contrary all the holy Priests Prophets Judges Kings and at last John the Baptist that most eminent and most holy Forerunner of Christ rather sent Invitations to all good and bad to come in and keep them according to the Law than shut the doors upon them XXIV But now our Sacraments and those of our Forefathers under the Old Testament are as to the things signified see the spiritual sence of them altogether the same as Paul 1 Cor. 10. plainly intimates And therefore unless it can appear that the Law of Moses either is abolished or changed in this point none has authority to set up a contrary practice XXV For as against the Anabaptists we do well urge as a most effectual Argument that since Baptism came in the place of Circumcision and that Christ did nowhere forbid the baptizing of Infants it cannot be less lawful for us to baptize our Children than 't was for the Jews to circumcise theirs so may we here argue with equal force that the Lords Supper succeeded to the eating the Passover but Vice and Immoralities were not punished by prohibiting them to eat the Passover nor were the Jews on any such account drove from it but the Law did rather invite all of what age or condition soever especially every Male to keep it Which being not found to be either antiquated nor abolished but holding still as to the reason of it Crimes are no more now to be punished by denying us the Lords Supper neither ought any one on this account to be rejected But enough has been said with reference to the Old Testament 't is time we should now come to Christ and his Apostles that is to the New Testament XXVI Now we read not any where that our Lord and Saviour Christ did in any wise interdict any person access unto or use of the Sacraments or that he so much as commanded the Apostles that they should do any thing like it for Christ came not into the world to destroy the Law but to fulfil and perfect it therefore when the Law commanded all but the unclean to celebrate the Passover Christ would not surely forbid any one XXVII For 't is very clear that Christ checkt no body for using Sacraments or frequenting the Temple and Sacrifices but onely caution'd them to use them aright and agreeably to the Will and Law of God He went into the same Temple with Pharisees Sadduces Publicans and who not be they bad be they good he was with them at the same Sacrifices used all Sacraments promiscuously with the rest of the people was baptized of John with the same Baptism as those wicked ones were XXVIII Upon this account was it that Jesus hindred not Judas his Betrayer from eating the last Paschal Lamb with him but he sate down to it with all his twelve Disciples not but that there are some who endeavour to prove that Judas was not present at this new instituted Supper of our Lord which is an hard if not an impossible matter to evince from Sacred Writ but that he withdrew before the Institution yet sure none can have the hardiness to deny that Judas was according to the Law admitted to the eating the Passover on which Concession our Argument holds firm and unanswerable for whether he went or went not out before the Institution of another Supper though the latter carries most of probability in it and always hath been believed by most men this still is plain that he was present and partaker of the first and was not openly or expresly forbidden the latter Neither read we any where that Christ commanded him to go out to the end that he might not be a Communicant in his new instituted Supper if therefore he did go out he did it voluntarily and of his own head neither went he out for any such purpose But ●he Question with us is what Christ not what Judas did 'T is enough for our purpose that Christ never commanded him to withdraw from his Supper XXIX But the common Put-off and Salvo for this matter is very light and frivolous That Judas his Crime was not of a publick nature and that on that consideration he was not to be put out for first he had struck the bargain and agreed the price with the Pharisees before and Christ acquainted his Disciples with it at that Supper-time this was an ample Publication by Christ himself and should therefore have been the rather made a President and Example in this matter But secondly whatever this may be he was at least known to be a Thief before and though such an one he were yet did our Lord commit a Ministry and office to him and bestowed on him the power of casting out Devils of healing the Sick and of doing other such-like Miracles Lastly Christ admitted him as well as the rest of his Disciples to the Celebration of the Passover all the whiles he was with him Is not this proof enough that Christ had no mind no intent or desire that flagitious persons should be punisht by debarring them the Sacraments Sure 't is matter of greater moment to take a wicked man into the Ministry than to admit such an one to the Supper yet we see that Christ did both to Judas XXX 'T is farther observable that at his first Supper the Disciples began to contend about Greatness and Superiority yet was none of them shut out thence on that score nay Christ would and commanded that all should drink of the Cup Mat. 26. v. 27. which Mark 14. v. 23. is said to be actually done And as to this business the reason holds in the Bread as well as Wine Now what can it be believed was the mind and intent of Christ but to ratifie what God had before commanded by Moses to wit ●●t none who were initiated by Baptism should be debarr'd from that publick and solemn act of Thanksgiving who had a mind to be at it Whence it appears that no person is to be thrust from the Lords Table who embraces the Doctrine of Christ and submits to be instructed by him XXXI Christ doth not desire that his Kingdom I speak of his visible and external one in this world should be of a narrower extent among Christians than were