Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	according_a	add_v	affirm_v	34	3	6.4447	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50248	A defence of the answer and arguments of the synod met at Boston in the year 1662 concerning the subject of Baptism and consociation of churches against the reply made thereto, by the Reverend Mr. John Davenport, pastor of the church at New-Haven, in his treatise entituled Another essay for investigation of the truth &c. : together with an answer to the apologetical preface set before that essay, by some of the elders who were members of the Synod above-mentioned.	Mather, Richard, 1596-1669.	1664 (1664)	Wing M1271; ESTC W19818	155,430	150

same qualifications that Mr Cotton intendeth according to H●●●erm of Di●cipli●e Cap. ●2 Sect. 7. The word Continued is indeed added in pag 19. though not so in pag. 〈…〉 that Book but it is added in a Copulative way Continued and Confirmed w●ere all the parts must be taken together to make up the truth of such an Axiome Besides that the p●r●ons in question do make so●e profession of Faith and Repentance i e. in an Initial and Educational way so as sufficeth to their continuance in the visible Church though it may not at present suffice to full Communion Mr. Cotton was farre from conceiving that such non-scandalous persons as are the Subject of our Question are to be cut off or looked upon as cut off from continuance in the Church as besides what is cited of his in the Synods Preface may appear plainly out of this very Treatise which is well called by our Brethren An Excellent Treatise of the Holiness of Church-members for pag. 3. men ●oning a distinction of Mr. Ruther●urds That a Church may be termed no Church no Spouse jure meritò quoad vocationem passivam in respect of bad deserving and their not answering to the Call of God on their parts and yet the same Church remain de 〈◊〉 ●or aliter quoad vocationem Det activam the Spouse and Bride of C●rist He sai●● This Distinction I can admit if it be understood of a Church hat hath formerly answered the Call of God and submitted to the Ministry of the Gospel at least in outward propession of the fundamentals of sound Doctrine and pure Worship for such a Chur●h though they or ●heir children may afterward degenerate and go a wher●ng from God in Doctrine and Worship yet God in his patience and bounty is not wont so ●con to cast off ●hem as they cast off him The next generation after 〈◊〉 ●e● a ●horing from Go● and f●rs●ck the Lord God of their fathers and served Baalim yet still the Lord accounted them his People and sent them Iudges and Prophets to restore and recover them And pag 19 20. he mentions distinctly by way of Consectary from the Proposition here cited by our Brethren two or three sorts of persons w●o are not to be continued in the Church● though born and baptized in it viz. 1. The grosly Ignorant of the first Principles and Foundations of Religion 3. Persons notoriously Scandalous for any gross crime as I●latry Adultery c. but not a word of such an intere●ce as our Brethren s●em to make viz. the discontinuance or unchurching of such a sort of persons as are the Subject of our Question And it is observable all along in that Book that he pleads not for the un-membering of any that are once in the Church yea though they came in but by a Membership received in Infancy for of such he often expresly speaks and such were the Members of those Churches he disputes upon in Answer to his Opponents but onely such as are scandalous and wicked and deserve Excommunication and he would have them also un-membered by Excommunication and not by a Self-felony onely See pag 8 15 28 32 56 57 60. Preface Renowned Parker steaking of the interpretation of those words Laying on of Hands in Heb 6.2 cites many judicious Writers whose judgement he expresseth in words to this purpose That they who were baptize in minority when they are grown up after that the Church had approved their faith by the Symbol of Imposition of Hands they were admitted Members of the Church this was according to sound Doctrine in the Primitive times as Parker saith Now we demand how they can be admitted as Members who are already as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Chur●h But the Ancient Doctrine was That Children who were baptized in minority after they shall come to pro●ess their faith so as to be accepted of the Church may be admitted as Members Therefore according to the Ancient Doctrine such Children are not as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Church Answ. Whether the words Tanquam membra Admittehantur be Parkers own words or Calvins for he speaks as if he cited only Calvins words yet we ●inde not those expressions used by Calvin either on Heb. 6.2 or in his Institutions De Confirmatione though in both places is the substance of the thing which Parker alledgeth from him the matter is not great It is manifest from the whole discourse that Parker is there speaking of such as are admitted to full communion as we call it If he there used the term Members for Persons admitted to the Lords Table and to all Church-priviledges it is no harder phrase then hath been used in this Country for many years yet that argues not that we do or that Parker did think Children to be no members before It is observed of the Ancients that they sp●ke more securely before the Rise of Pelagius men are less curious in Expression when they speak about Points of which no Controversie is moved and wherein their judgements are otherwise sufficiently known As what is more abudantly and univers●lly agreed on among all our Divines then this that The Children of Believers are Members of the Church or a part of it Parker within six Lines of the place cited calls them in Ecclesiâ nati Born in the Church and opposeth them to Extranei i. e. to such as are without Dr. Ames gives it as the Doctrine of the Protestants The Infants of the faithful unless they were to be accounted Members of the Church they cu●● not to be bapti●ed Vrsin and Pareus say Omnes iique soli c. All and onely th●●e are to be baptized by Christs Command who are his Disciples Mat. 28.19 i. e. those that are and one to be accounted Members of the visible Church whether they be adult persons professing Faith and Repentance or Infants born in the Church Again The Infants of Christians do as well as the adult belong to the Covenant and Church of God and are therefore to be baptized because the whole Church ought to be baptized C. techet Explicat pag. 367. This truth is joyntly 〈…〉 Protestant a●d Reformed Churches as appears in the Harmony of their Confessions The Children of t●e faithful are Gods peculiar people and in the Church of God 〈…〉 pag 397. Reckoned in the number of Gods people Bohemian 〈◊〉 pag. 399. God doth together with the Parents account their posterity also to be of the Church F●●nc C. ●●mon p●g 401. They condemn the Anabaptists who hold tha● 〈◊〉 ●e no● 〈◊〉 the Church ●f God Confession of Auspurg pag. 404. Infants belong to the Covenant an● Church of God as well as the adult saith the Pal●tinate Catechism Que●● ●4 Now ●●is being so that it is the manifest Doctrine of all our Divines that Children are Me●bers ●f the Church and neither did they imagine that when ●d●lt they drop ●ff by a Self ●●lony or we know not how For

the Form or to make it a part thereof It is wont to be said Efficiens non ingreditur Essentiam The act of Covenanting on our part whereby we are brought into the Church is but an Efficient yea but an instrumental Efficient the Book calls it a Precrean cause pag. 37. that is still but an Efficient yet consider it in contradistinction to Divine Institution it can but instrumentally procreate But the form or formalis Ratio of Membership is to be within the Covenant or within the Church 1 Cor. 5.12 Whatever causality our Act in pro●essing and Covenanting do contribute to bring us in it can be but an Efficient And hence it doth not denominate or constitute the formality of our Membership Object But Formally here is referred to personal not to membership Ans. If so it be yet still the same Answers hold unless it mean no more then every one grants and so be nothing to the purpose If the meaning onely be that Infants do not enter into Covenant by an act of their own proper persons who ever said or thought they did what need we labour in finding out distinctions to deny them that which no body ever challenged for them or to what purpose is that But the Question is Whether Infants be not personal members or personally and formally members although they never yet put forth an Act of covenanting in their own persons we affirm it because they have the forme of Membership or the adjunct of formal membership cleaving to their own persons by Divine Institution And so we say they are personally and formally Members though they have not yet acted any thing in their own proper persons You seem to deny it and bring a distinction to clear your meaning the former Branch of which distinction as your selves explain it grants the thing that we plead for the latter Branch as you also explain it denies no more then we deny viz. That they enter by their own proper personal Act. But the mistake lies in making this viz. Entring by ones own proper Act to be formally personal membership whereas that is formally personal membership that doth formally and properly constitute the person a member and so Being within the Covenant doth the Infants in question though they never yet acted in their own persons The distinction should rather stand thus As personal membership is taken properly and formally so it agrees to Infants i. e. their persons are Recipients of the adjunct of proper formal Church-membership but as personal membership is taken improperly and very improperly indeed i. e. for the membership of such as have by themselves or by their own personal profession entred into Covenant so Infants are not capable of personal membership Thus it might be granted But why should we use personal membership in so improper a sence or insist on a sence that toucheth not the cause in question The sum is that if by Personal membership taken formally be meant onely entring by their own proper personal act then the distinction is needless and not ad Rem But if it be meant so as to deny what we affirm then it is overthrown by your selves in the former Branch Grant them to be personal Members subjectively you therein grant them to be so formally deny them personal membership formally you deny it subjectively These do mutuò so ponere tollere being used in any sence that is proper and pertinent to the present Dispute But consider whether it would sound rationally to say that Paul was not formally a personal Roman or not formally a Roman free-man in his own person because he did not buy his freedome with his own money or that a Childe who hath an Inheritance left him is not formally a personal owner thereof because himself did not purchase it or that Infants are personal Subjects in such a Kingdome Members of such a Family subjectively onely not formally because they did not become such by their own previous personal act These and such like shew how improper and incongruous it is to make ones own personal act to be that which constitutes the formality of personal membership Preface It 's strange to us to conceive that they should have this personal formal membership and yet that they should not be Subjects capable of formal personal Censures Ans. They are capable in regard of their Relation and state in the Church though not in regard of natural Capacity nor in regard of demerit for an Infant cannot Ecclesiastically deserve publick Censure It is not strange to conceive Infants to be Subjects of such a Prince though at present uncapable of civil Tryals and punishments It suffices that Infant-members are in a state of subjection to Church Discipline and ingaged thereto for afterward though at present naturally uncapable of the exercise thereof The new born Infant is not capable of Domestical Discipline either Rod or Rebuke but that hinders not his being a formal personal Member of the Family Preface We neither do nor ever did deny that the persons of Infants of believing confederate Parents are brought under the Covenant onely we conceive that their membership is conjunct with and dependent upon the Membership and Covenant of their Parents so as to live and dye therewith Hence when the Parents are Excommunicated the membership of the Infant-childe is cut off because Excommunication puts an end to the outward Covenant which Death it self doth not do and if the Root be destroyed the Branches cannot live Ans. That the childes membership depends upon the membership of the Parent as the Instrumental Cause or Condition of the childes first Entrance into the Church or becoming a Member we readily grant because Divine Institution admitteth onely the Children of Members to be Members and so much Mr. Cottons words here all●dged in the Preface do truly teach But that the childes membership is so wrapt up in the membership of the Parent as to live and dye therewith as if it had no proper and distinct membership of its own is surely a deep mistake and will if followed overthrow that subjective personal membership before granted unto Infants and that which is here also owned viz. that their persons are brought under the Covenant If the persons of the Infants be brought under the Covenant then their persons are within the Covenant or their persons are Confederate then not onely the person of the Parent but the person of the childe hath the formality of membership upon it And as the person of the childe in regard of its natural being though for the first existence thereof it depended under God upon the Parent yet when once it is born into the World it is not so conjunct with and dependent upon the person of the Parent as to live and dye therewith so why should the membership of the childe be thus dependent seeing the Book to which this Preface is prefixed affirmeth p 37. that the Parent is a procreant Cause as of the Childe● natural Being

come to the Lords Table nor have any hand in the Management of Church-affairs as Elections of Officers Admissions and Censures of Members untill as a fruit of the foresaid help and means they attain to such qualifications as may render their admission into full Communion safe and comfortable both to their own Souls and to the Churches In sum we make account that if we keep Baptism within the compass of the Non-excommunicable and the Lords Supper within the compass of those that have unto Charity somewhat of the Power of Godliness or Grace in exercise we shall be near about the right Middle-way of Church-Reformation And as for the Preservation of due Purity in the Church it is the due Exercise of Discipline that must do that as our Divines unanimously acknowledge for that is Gods own appointed way and the Lord make and keep us all careful and faithul therein not the Curtailing of the Covenant which may be man's way but is not the way of God wherein alone we may expect his Blessing The good Lord pardon the Imperfections and Failings that attend us in these Debates accept of what is according to his Will and establish it save us from corrupting Extremes on either hand and give unto his People one Heart and one Way to fear Him for ever for the good of them and of their Children after them ERRATA in the Book following PAge 12. Line 18. their Infancy reade from Infancy pag. 22. lin 16. he added r. here added pag. 49. lin 4. there r. here pag. 53. lin 35. his r. this pag. 60. lin 7. of that r. of the pag. 66. lin 1. do run r. do not run pag. 98. lin 11. do administer r. so administer In Answ. to the Preface Pag. 11. lin 33. mor r. more pag. 16. lin ult into r. unto A DEFENCE OF THE ANSWER and ARGVMENTS of the SYNOD Met at Boston in the Year 1662. Concerning The Subject of Baptism and Consociation of Churches Against the REPLY made thereto by the Reverend Mr. Iohn D●venpor● in his Treatise Entituled Another ESSAY for Investigation of the Truth c. THE Reverend Author in this his Essay before he come to speak to that which the Synod delivered doth premise Eleven or Twelve Positions by which he saith the determinations of the Synod are to be Examined and so far and no further to be approved and received as a consent and harmony of them with th●se may be cleared c. pag. 8. Concerning which Positions we will not say much because the Intendment in this Def●nce is onely to clear what is said by the Synod against what this Reverend Author saith against the same in his 〈◊〉 and therefore untill he speak to what the Synod delivered we think it not needful to insist long upon these premised Positions Onely this we may say concerning them That though su●dry things in them be sound and good yet the Posi●ions themselves being not Scripture but his own private Collections therefore we do not see that we are bound to take these Positions as the Standard and Rule by which to judge of what the Synod saith But if the Synods Doctrine be agreeable to Scripture we think that may be sufficient for defence thereof whether it agree with the premised Positions or not And when himself pag. 1. doth commend it as a good Profession in the Synod that To the Law and to the Testimony they do wholly referre themselves had it not been also commendable in him to have done the like rather then to lay down Positions though he conceives them rightly deduced from Scripture and then to say Nothing is to be approved further then it consents with those Positions Himself may please to consider of this But to leave this of the premised Positions and to come to the main Business Concerning The Subject of Baptism the first Proposition of the Synod is this viz. They that according to Scripture are Members of the visible Church are the Subjects of Baptism The second is this viz. The Members of the visible Church according to Scripture are Confederate visible Believers in particular Churches and their Infant-seed i. e. Children in 〈◊〉 whose next Parents one or both are in Covenant Now what saith the Reverend Author to these That which he saith is this I cannot approve the two first Propositions without some change of the terms In the first thus They that according to Christs Ordinance are regular and actuall Members c. The second thus The actuall and regular Members of the visible Church according to Christs Ordinance c. pag. 9. Answ. So that the Alteration required is That in stead of Scripture it be said Christs Ordinance and in stead of Members Actuall and regular Members But a necessity of this Alteration doth not appear for as for the one particular can we think that th●re i● any such difference between the Scripture and the Ordinance of Christ that 〈◊〉 may be Members of the visible Church and so Subjects of Baptism according to the f●●er and yet not according to the la●ter● If it be according to the Scripture may it not ●e said to be according to Christs Ordinance Sure when Christ himself bids us Search the Scripture Job 5.39 and when the Bereans are commended for searching the Scripture whether those things were so which were Preached by Paul Acts 17.11 and when all the Scripture is for our learning Rom. 15.4 and doth contain a perfect Rule in all things that concern Gods Worship whether Natural or Instituted as this Reverend Author saith in the first of his premised Positions upon these grounds it may seem that what is according to Scripture needs not to want our approbation for fear left it agree not with the Ordinance of Christ. And indeed how can that be taken for an Ordinance of Christ which is not according to Scripture that being considered also which is said by the Reverend Author in his second Position That whatsoever Christ did institute in the Christian Churches he did it by Gods appointment as Moses by Gods appointment gave out what he delivered in the Church of Israel Now if all that is instituted by Christ be according to Gods appointment and that the Scripture contains a perfect Rule concerning all Instituted Worship and so concerning all Gods appointments it may seem a needless thing to withhold our approbation from that which is according to Scripture as if it might be so and yet not be according to the Ordinance of Christ. Besides how shall we know a thing to be an Ordinance of Christ if it be not according to the Scripture And for the other Alteration desired that in stead of Members it be Regular and actuall Members may we think that men may or can be Members according to Scripture and not Regular nor actuall Members If the Scripture be the Rule and ● perfect Rule then they that are Members according to Scripture are Members according to Rule and so are Regular members And