A85312:195
Of schism. Parochial congregations in England, and ordination
Of schism. Parochial congregations in England, and ordination by imposition of hands. Wherein Dr. Owen's discovery of the true nature of schism is briefly and friendly examined, together with Mr. Noyes of New England his arguments against imposition of hands in ordination. / By Giles Firmin, sometime of new England, now pastor of the Church at Shalford in Essex.
London: printed by T.C. for Nathanael Webb, 1658
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Most Divines that I read agree, that by breaking of bread, Acts 2.42. is meant the Lords Supper: I do not see that Beza hath many followers. Why then by breaking of bread, v. 46. should not be meant the Lords Supper also, and their eating meat with gladness their Lovefeasts which attended the Supper, I see no reason, though I know many Divines do not understand it as in 42.
Most Divines that I read agree, that by breaking of bread, Acts 2.42. is meant the Lords Supper: I doe not see that Beza hath many followers. Why then by breaking of bread, v. 46. should not be meant the Lords Supper also, and their eating meat with gladness their Lovefeasts which attended the Supper, I see no reason, though I know many Divines doe not understand it as in 42.
That it is the phrase whereby the Lords Supper is set forth in the New Testament, is yielded, Acts 20.7. 1 Cor. 10.16. & Cap. 11. and so in the 42. v. of this Chap. Once in Luke 24.30, 35. we find it meant of an ordinary supper, the text doth clear it, though some Papists would draw it to the Sacrament under one element, yet other Papists deny it here.
It's true, we find this phrase once in the Old Testament, Isa. 58.7. to be understood of the ⟨p. 62⟩