Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	child_n	husband_n	parent_n	3,987	5	7.8229	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91314	A vindication of foure serious questions of grand importance, concerning excommunication and suspention from the sacrament of the Lords Supper, from some misprisions and unjust exceptions lately taken against them; both in the pulpit, by a reverend brother of Scotland, in a sermon at Margarets Church in Westminster, before the Honourable House of Commons, at a publike fast there held for Scotland, on the 5th of September last: and in the presse, by three new-printed pamphlets, by way of answer to, and censure of them. Wherein some scripture texts, (commonly reproduced for excommunication, and bare suspention from the Lords Supper onely,) are cleared from false glosses, inferences, conclusions wrested from them; ... / By William Prynne of Lincolns Inne, Esquire.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1645 (1645)	Wing P4124; Thomason E265_5; ESTC R212424	79,558	71

eat with them at the Lords Table Therefore this Argument in point of Logicke and Divinity is as infirme and absurd as any of the former Yet how many thousands as well Schollers as Ignorants have been over-reached with it so far as to make them separate not onely from our Sacraments but Congregations too Now because thi● grosse fallacious Inconsequence in my apprehension is one principle cause and prop of Independency yea of Separation from our Churches Sacraments and hath misled so many especally of later yeers I shall a little further examine it with relation to the Text on which it is grounded and further lay open both the falsenesse and absurdity thereof to all mens jndgements and consciences First it is cleere that this Text is ment onely of civill conversation eating and drinking not of spiritual as I have already proved I would then demand these two Questions of the Objectors First whether this Text prohibits all kind of civill communion and eating at Table with any Christians who are raylers fornicators idolaters covetous persons extortioners or drunkards under paine of mortall sinne If yea then it is a damnable sinne in the Objectors to eat drink or converse in any kind with any such as these which they daily doe without any scruple and cannot avoyd yea then it would be a sin against this Text for a wife child kinsman Master Magistrate Prince constantly to convers or eat with such a scandalous husband parent kinsman servant neighbour Pastor fellowservant Subject or they reciprocally with them if scandalous then if any Member of the Parliament or of any Corporation Colledge Innes of Court or the like should but eat together at meales with his fellow-members who are thus scandalous in any Common-Hall or at any Ordinary or Corporation-feast they should sin against this Text which I never yet heard any Anabaptist Separatist Independent Presbyter or Divine affirm neither of which make any conscience of not repairing to the Lord Majors or any other publike City-feast where they are sure of good fare because they were certaine there to meet and eat with some covetous or other scandalous persons with whom Saint Paul prohibits them no not to eat Which precept Christ himselfe and his Apostles should have transgressed in eating and drinking with Publicans and sinners for which they were s taxed by the over-precise Pharises If then this Text extends not to oureating at meales with such scandalous christians in cases of necessity expediency where either our natural civill relations or cōmon civility engage us to it so as we delight not intheir company or do it notvoluntarily out of free choice when we may avoid it without offence as the very Objectors I suppose wil grant and S. Paul resolves ver. 11. then by the self-same reason it can be no offence at all against this Scripture to eat or drink with such at the Lords Table at this his publike Feast and great Supper to which all Christians are invted if we beleeve Christs owne Parable Mat. 22. 1. to 15. Isa. 55. 1. Rev. 22. 17. in such cases wherein we may lawfully eat drink with them at our own theirs or other mens Tables Secondly our Objectors themselves affirme that it is lawful to hear pray read the Scriptures ●ing Psalmes repeat Sermons fast and performe all other christian duties in the company of such scandalous Christians as are here particularized without any violation of this Text If then we may keep company or hold communion with them and they with us in all other Ordinances till they be actually and judicially excommunicated from the Church and them then why not likewise in the Lords Supper too since this Text and all others cited for proofe of excommunication or suspension by our Opposites prohibit communion in them al alike or els in none Thirdly admit Ministers themselves be polluted with any of those Vices suppose with covetousnesse as too many are yet none of the Objectors dare averre that it is a sinne against this precept for any of their Congregations to receive the Sacrament from or eat the Lords Supper with them no more then to joyne with them in prayer fasting or to heare them read preach catechize expound or sing Psalmes together with them since the goodnesse or viciousnesse of the Minister as t all accord doth neither adde ought to nor detract any thing from the efficacy of the Sacraments or any publike Ordinances which proceeds from God alone If then we may receive the Sacrament from and eat it with a covetous Minister without any sin or contradiction to this Text then why not likewise with a covetous Neighbour or fellow-parishioner Fourthly the Objectors grant that a Christian may lawfully receive the Sacrament with persons secretly guilty of these and other grosse sinnes with close Hypocrits who guild over their vices and unregenerate Christians not really sanctified who are neither ignorant nor notoriously scandalous in their lives without scruple or offence against this Text Therefore they may lawfully doe it in point of conscience with such who are notoriously scandalous before their actuall conviction excommunication especially if they professe sincere repentance for their sins past and reformation of their lives for time to come as all do at least in their general confessions before the Sacrament if not in their own private meditations prayers preparatory devotions twixt God and their owne soules Fifthly it is not the meere guilt but onely the scandall ill example and contagion of notorious sinnes that subjects men to the censure of excommunication in regard of others least they should infect and draw them on to imitation of them as Paul resolves 1 Cor. 5. 6. else those very sins which are not notorious and those infirmities of which the best Saints themselves are frequently guilty should subject them unto excommunication or suspend them from the Sacrament and then what mortall man almost should be admitted to it It is not then such sinners bare receiving with us or ours with them that can any way hurt much lesse deter or keep us from the Sacram●nt for they eat and drink damnation onely to themselves not others in case we imitate them not in their sinnes or receive no contagion from their company Sixtly the Objectors will grant that there is a necessity lyes upon Ministers to administer and on people to receive the Sacrament at all convenient seasons That God onely infallibly knowes the hearts and reall preparations of all Communicants in the very best of whom there are many failing and corruptions which make them in themselves unworthy to communicate That all who come to receive doe alwayes make a generall and joynt confession of their sins before God and the Congregation acknowledging and bewayling their manifold sinnes and iniquities which they from time to time have committed in thought word and deed against the Divine Majesty professing that they doe earnestly repent and are heartily sorry for all their misdoings