A42757:954
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.
Quidam dicun• (but who they were appears not saith Mr Prynne, in any extant work of theirs) Judam non fuisse participem Sacramentorum, sed egressum esse priusquam dominus Sacramenta traderet. Shall we take this upon Mr Prynnes credit, that it doth not appear in any extant work of theirs? Nay, let him take better heed what he saith, and whereof he affirmeth. In the next page he himself excepteth one, which is Hilary; but except him only, he saith that all the Ancients unanimously accord herein, without one dissenting voice. But see now whether all is to be believed that Mr Prynne gives great words for. Tis well that he confesseth we have Hilary for us. First therefore let bthe words of Hilary be observed. Next I will prove what he denieth, namely that others of the Ancients were of the same opinion.
Quidam dicun• (but who they were appeares not saith Mr Prynne, in any extant worke of theirs) Iudam non fuisse participem Sacramentorum, sed egressum esse priusquam dominus Sacramenta traderet. Shall we take this upon Mr Prynnes credit, that it doth not appeare in any extant worke of theirs? Nay, let him take better heed what he saith, and whereof he affirmeth. In the next page he himselfe excepteth one, which is Hilary; but except him onely, he saith that all the Ancients unanimously accord herein, without one dissenting voyce. But see now whether all is to be believed that Mr Prynne gives great words for. Tis well that he confesseth we have Hilary for us. First therfore let bthe words of Hilary be observed. Next I will prove what he denieth, namely that others of the Ancients were of the same opinion.
- bHilarius Can. 30. in Matth: Post quae Judas proditor indicatur, sine quo pascha accepto calais & fracto pane conficitur: dignus enim aeternerum sacramentorum communione non f•erat &c. Neque sanè bibere cum eo poterat, qui non erat bibeturus in regno.Hilarius Can. 30. in Matth: Post quae Judas proditor indicatur, sine quo pascha accepto calice & fracto pane conficitur: dignus enim aeternerum sacramentorum communione non ferat &c. Neque sanè bibere cum eo poterat, qui non erat bibeturus in regno.