A42757:926
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
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.
2. Especially considering that Luke doth not relate the business of the last supper according to that order wherein things were acted or spoken, as is manifest by Luke 22. 17. 18. And he took the cup and gave thanks and said, Take this and divide it among your selves. This though related before the taking and breaking of the bread, yet it is but by an anticipation or preoccupation, occasioned by that which had preceded vers. 16. so to join the protestation of not drinking again, with that of not eating again the Passover with his Disciples: therefore Beza, Salmeron, Maldonat, and others following Augustine and Euthymius do resolve it is an anticipation, even as Paul mentioneth the cup before the bread, 1 Cor. 10. 16. I know some understand the cup mentioned Luke 22. 17. to be the Paschal cup; others, to be the cup in the ordinary supper; but to me its plain that it was the Eucharistical cup; yea Mr Prynne takes it so pag. 25. because that which Luke saith of that cup, that Christ took it, and gave thanks, and gave it to the Disciples, that they might all drink of it, and told them he would not drink with them any more of the fruit of the Vine till the Kingdom of God should come; all this is the very same which Matthew and Mark record of the Eucharistical cup. Therefore our Non-conformists were wont to argue from that place, that the Minister ought not to give the Sacramental elements to each communicant out of his own hand, but that the communicant• ⟨p. 438⟩ought to divide the elements among themselves, because Christ saith in that place, of the cup, Divide it among your selves.
2. Especially considering that Luke doth not relate the businesse of the last supper according to that order wherein things were acted or spoken, as is manifest by Luke 22. 17. 18. And he tooke the cup and gave thanks and said, Take this and divide it among your selves. This though related before the taking and breaking of the bread, yet it is but by an anticipation or preoccupation, occasioned by that which had preceded vers. 16. so to joyne the protestation of not drinking againe, with that of not eating againe the Passeover with his Disciples: therefore Beza, Salmeron, Maldonat, and others following Augustine and Euthymius doe resolve it is an anticipation, even as Paul mentioneth the cup before the bread,