A42757:1165
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.
Seventhly, If the Temple was polluted and profaned by the coming of profane and abominable persons into it, then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper also profaned by such persons their participation of it. But the Temple was polluted and profaned &c. The reason of the consequence in the Proposition is, because as the Temple had a Sacramental signification of Christ, and a certain Ceremonial holiness, as well as the Lords Table, so it will be dur•s sermo (and I presume none of our Opposites will adventure to say it) that such profaneness as did of old ⟨p. 547⟩keep back men from the Temple, cannot now exclude them from the Sacrament.
Seventhly, If the Temple was polluted and prophaned by the comming of prophane and abominable persons into it, then is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper also profaned by such persons their participation of it. But the Temple was polluted and prophaned &c. The reason of the consequence in the Proposition is, because as the Temple had a Sacramental signification of Christ, and a certain Ceremonial holinesse, as well as the Lords Table, so it will be dur•s sermo (and I presume none of our Opposites will adventure to say it) that such prophanesse as did of old ⟨p. 547⟩keep back men from the Temple, cannot now exclude them from the Sacrament.
The Assumption is largely proved in the first Book, both from Scripture and from Jewish writers. That one place Ezek. 23. 38. 39. (beside divers others) cleareth it. Moreover this they have done unto me: they have defiled my Sanctuary in the same day, and have profaned my Sabbaths▪ For when they had slain their children to their Idols, then they came the same day into my Sanctuary to profane it. You see the Temple was profaned and polluted, not only by those that were ceremonially unclean, but by Idolaters and Murderers when any such presumed to come into the Temple.