A42757:100
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present…
Aaron's rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversy concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiastical government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlessness of the chief objections made against the Presbyterial government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...Aarons rod blossoming, or, The divine ordinance of church-government vindicated so as the present Erastian controversie concerning the distinction of civill and ecclesiasticall government, excommunication, and suspension, is fully debated and discussed, from the holy scripture, from the Jewish and Christian antiquities, from the consent of latter writers, from the true nature and rights of magistracy, and from the groundlesnesse of the chief objections made against the Presbyteriall government in point of a domineering arbitrary unlimited power / by George Gillespie ...
London: printed by E.G. for Richard Whitaker, 1646
THE CONTENTS. › Book 3 › Chapter 8: Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
CHAP. VIII. Whether Judas received the Sacrament of the Lords Supper.
The Question between M. Prynne & me concerning Judas, much like unto that between Papists and Protestants concerning Peter. Two things premised. 1. That Matthew and Mark mentioning Christs discourse at Table, concerning the Traitor, before the Institution and distribution of the Lords Supper, place it in its proper order, and that Luke placeth it after the Sacrament by an [Greek or Hebrew] or recapitulation: which is proved by •ive reasons. 2. That the story John. 13. concerning Judas and the sop, was neither acted in Bethany two days before the Passover, nor yet after the Institution of the Lords Supper. The first Argument to prove that Judas received not the Lords Supper from Joh. 13. 30. he went out immediately after the sop. Mr Prynnes four answers confuted. His opinion that Christ gave the Sacrament before the common supper, is against both Scripture and Antiquity. Of the word immediately. The second Argument from Christs words at the Sacrament. That which M. Prynne holds, viz. that at that time (when Christ infallibly knew Judas to be lost) he meant conditionally that his body was broken and his blood shed for Judas; confuted by three reasons. The third Argument from the different expressions of Love to the Apostles, with an exception, while Judas was present; without an exception at the Sacrament. M. Prynnes Arguments from Scripture to prove that Judas did receive the Sacrament, ⟨image 26⟩answered. That Judas received the Sacrament, is no indubitable verity as Mr. Prynne calls it, but hath been much controverted both among Fathers, Papists and Protestants. That the Lutherans who are much of M. Prynnes opinion in the point of Judas his receiving of the Lords Supper, that they may the better uphold their Doctrine of the wicked their eating of the true body of Christ, yet are much against his opinion in the point of admitting scandalous persons not Excommunicated to the Sacrament. M. Prynnes bold assertion that all the Ancients except Hilary only, do unanimously accord that Judas received the Lords Supper, without one dissenting voice; disproved as most false, and confuted by the testimonies of Clemens, Dionysius Areopagita, Maximus, Pachymeres, Ammonius Alexandrinus, Tacianus, Innocentius 3. Rupertus Tuitiensis, yea by those very passages of Theophylact, and Victor Antiochenus, cited by himself.