A42757:1076
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
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.
Thirdly, That which gives us the new food, supposeth that we have the new birth and spiritual life, and that we are not still dead in sins and trespasses. But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us the new food. Ergo it supposeth we have the new birth. The proposition I prove thus. sA man must first be born by the new birth, before he can be fed with the new food: and how can a man eat the flesh, and drink the blood of Christ, and yet be supposed not to have a spiritual life before that act, but to get a spiritual life in that very act? Doth a man get life because he eats and drinks, or doth he not rather eat and drink because he lives? The Assumption is a received and uncontroverted truth. And hence do Divines give this reason why we are but once baptized, but do many times receive the Lord• Supper; because it is enough to be once born, but not enough to be once nourished or strengthened. See the Belgic confession. Art. 34. and D. Parei Miscellanea Catechetica pag. 79. I shall strengthen my Argument by the Confession of Bohemia Cap. 11. The Sacraments cannot give to any such (which before was not inwardly quickened by the holy Ghost) either grace or justifying and quickening faith, and therefore they cannot justify any man, ⟨p. 507⟩nor inwardly quicken or regenerate any mans Spirit: for faith must go before. And after. For if a dead man or one that is unworthy do come to the Sacraments, certainly they do not give him life and worthiness. &c. See the Harmony of Confessions printed at London 1643. pag. 280. 281. To what end then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper instituted? For that, see the Confession of Belgia Ibid. pag. 320. We believe and confess that Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour hath instituted the holy Sacrament of his Supper, that in it he might nourish and sustain those whom he hath regenerated and ingrafted into his Family, which is the Church. Both these Chapters did Mr. Prynn cite in the Question of Judas (which yet prove not what he affirmeth in that point, as I have noted before) but it seems he did not observe these passages, which make directly against him in this Question of conversion or conferring of grace by the Sacrament. I add also Mr. Pemble in his Christian dissections for receiving the Sacrament. The Sacrament saith he is appointed for our nourishment in grace;
Thirdly, That which gives us the new food, supposeth that we have the new birth and spiritual life, and that we are not still dead in sins and trespasses. But the Sacrament of the Lords Supper gives us the new food. Ergo it supposeth we have the new birth. The proposition I prove thus.