Selected quad for the lemma: grace_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
grace_n	fear_n	love_n	unsound_a	64	3	16.4036	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26864	Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1654 (1654)	Wing B1188; ESTC R31573	194,108	184

nor is God as it were obliged to perform his Covenant to such 13. The like may be said of the foresaid equivocal erroneous Consenting Accepting Covenanting If the errour be through the fault of the man himself his act may oblige himself though God remain disobliged and though he have no right to the thing promised by God Thus much I thought meet to say for the opening of that branch of the Question How far men unregenerate may be in Covenant as to their own act But the great Question is yet behind Whether these men be in Covenant with God as to Gods actual engagement to them so far as that Gods premise is in force for conveying actual right to them as to the promised blessings and so whether it be a mutual Covenant and both parties be actually obliged And thus I say that wicked men are not in Covenant with God that is God is not in Covenant with them Neither have they any right to the main blessings given by the Covenant viz. Christ Pardon Justification Adoption Glory Nor yet to the common blessings of this Covenant for they are given by the same Covenant and on the same conditions as the special blessings So that though they may have right to them at present on the ground of Gods present collation or trusting them with them as a servant hath in his Masters stock yet have they no right by Covenant For it is Godliness that hath the promise of this life and of that to come as being the condition of both and it is seeking first Gods Kingdom and Righteousness that is the condition on which other things shall be added to us The same holds of Church-priviledges and Ordinances quoad possessionens not proper to the faithfull So that in the conclusion I say that though wicked men have many promises from God especially the great conditional promise of Life if they will repent and believe and though they are also obliged by their own imperfect equivocal Covenanting with God yet God remaineth still unobliged to them and they have no actual right to the benefits of his promise because they have not performed the condition of their first right that is have not Covenanted truly with God or entred the Covenant which he propounded having not consented to his terms nor accepted Christ and Life as offered in the Gospel And therefore it is the most proper language to say that none but sincere beleevers are in Covenant with God For the rest have but equivocally Covenanted with God and God not actually engaged in Covenant with them for while the condition is unperformed there is no actual obligation on the promises and so it is no proper mutual Covenant And consequently these men in proper strict sense are no true Christians but analogically only Yet because we have no access to their hearts and therefore must judge of the heart by the profession and outward signes therefore we must judge these probably to Covenant with the heart who do profess to do so with the tongue and those to Covenant entirely and without errour in the essentials who profess so to do and therefore we must judge them probably to be true Christians and truly godly men till they retract that profession by word or deed and therefore we must judge them probably to be truly in Covenant with God and such as God is as it were obliged to justifie and therefore we must give them the name of Christians and men in Covenant with God and therefore we must use them as Christians in works of charity and in Ordinances and Church communion and so must use their children as Christians children The warrant for this usage and Judgement I must desire the Reader to take notice of in what I have written to Mr Tombes Objections on 1 Cor. 7.14 and to Dr. Ward and against Mr. Tombes Precursor more fully For to repeat all here again would be tedious and unnecessary When Christ saith to us If a Brother repent forgive him here by Repenting doth Christ mean plainly Repenting or the profession of it No doubt repenting it self Why but how can we that know not the heart know here when our Brother repenteth Will Mr. Bl. say therefore that none is obliged to forgive Rather we know that man must judge him to repent that professeth so to do and therefore forgive him that professeth it Not because professing was the assigned requisite condition but a sign of that condition and therefore we are to accept of no profession but what probably signifieth true repentance For if we knew a man dissembled or jeered us in professing repentance we are not bound to do by him as a penitent So God commandeth us to love and honour them that fear the Lord that are faithfull that love Christ c. But we know not who these be Are we therefore disobliged from loving and honouring them Or will Mr. Bl. say that we must not honour them lest we mistake and give that honour to one that hath no right to it as he saith about the Sacrament herein joyning with Mr. Tombes Those that profess to fear God and love him we must love and honour as men that do fear and love him yet in different degrees as the signes of their graces are more or less propable In some common professing Christians we see but small probability yet dare we not exclude them from the Church nor the number of true believers as long as there is any probability Others that are more judicious zealous diligent and upright of life we have far stronger probability of and therefore love and honour them much more Mr. Blake therefore in my judgement had done better if with that moderate Reverend Godly man Mr. Stephen Marshall he had distinguished between these two Questions Who are Christians or Church-members and Whom are we to judge such and use as such and to bring in the unregenerate in the later rank only Next we are to see what is Mr. Blakes judgement herein that we may not argue against him before we understand which yet I think I shall in some measure be forced to do or say nothing 1. I finde it very hard to understand what persons they be that he takes to be in Covenant 2. And as hard to understand what Covenant he means For the first I finde it clear that negatively he means They are not truly Regenerate persons but Positively how they must be qualified I finde not so clear Pag. 189. he saith it was with all that bore the name of Israel which is no further true then I have laid down in the former Conclusions so that it may seem that he takes all to be in Covenant that bear the name of Christians What though they know not what Christ or Christianity is Is taking a name entering into Covenant The poor Indians that by thousands are forced by the Spaniards to be baptized are said to know so little what they do that some of them forget the name

believe all the Creed and Word of God but I will not have Christ Reign over me at the present but I promise that hereafter I will see Doctor Drake against Mr. Humfrey whether they would admit such Hierom argues thus from Baptism to the Administration of the Lords Supper therefore I may do it as to the receiving Quamobrem oro te utaut sacrificandi ei licentiam tribuas cujus baptisma probas aut reprobes ejus baptisma quem non existimas sacerdotem Neque enim fieri potest ut qui in baptismate sanctus est sit apud altare peccator Hier. Dialog adv Luciferian Argu. 17. That Doctrine which feigneth an un-sealed Covenant for giving right to the Seal of the Covenant of Grace is unsound But such is Mr. Blakes therefore No Scripture can be brought to prove such an outward Covenant of Gods And it is against the common reason and custom of men that a second Covenant should be drawn to convey right to the Seal of the first Covenant seeing right to Covenant and Seal go together and if there must be another Covenant to give right to that then by the same reason there must be another to give right to that and another to that and so in infinitum To the Antecedent it is apparent that Mr. Bl. distinguisheth ex parte Dei between the outward and the inward Covenant It is probable that he thus distributes them from the blessings promised whereof some are inward and some outward for though he explain not himself fully yet I know no other sense that it will bear It is evident that his outward Covenant hath no Seal For it is a Covenant de sigillis conferendis If therefore it have a Seal it is either the same which is promised or some other Other I never heard of they nowhere tell us what is the Seal of their outward Covenant The same it cannot be for the same thing cannot be the materia foederis or the Legacy it self or the benefit given and the Seal too of that Covenant whereby it is given Argu. 18. That Doctrine which makes it the regular way in Baptism for all men to promise that which they can neither sincerely promise nor perform is unsound but such is Mr. Blakes therefore The disabilitie which I here speak of is not such as is in a Godly man to do any good without Christ and the Spirit as is in the second cause to act without the first or in a partial cause to act without its compartial but such as is in an unregenerate man to do the work of the Regenerate or in any broken instrument or disabled agent to do its own part of the work till it be altered and made another thing as it were For the consequence it is evident in that 1. No man should ever perform Gods command concerning covenanting 2. And no mans word were fit to be taken concerning the performance of his own Covenant 1. Whether God may or do command some men or all men that which they have not abilitie to perform is nothing to the point For yet he gives some of them abilitie and causeth them to perform it when he makes it necessarie to salvation But in this case God should enable no man regularly to that Baptismal Covenant which he commandeth nor should any obey his command For he commandeth them sincerely to take him for their God and promise to Love Believe and Obey him hereafter For to dissemble he commands none But this no unrenewed Soul can do or ever did to this day They cannot resolve it therefore they cannot sincerely promise it and if justifying Faith must regularly begin after baptism as being the great condition to which it engages and not prerequisite then it is only unregenerate men that are the regular subjects of baptism 2. And its plain that he who cannot sincerely promise and therefore doth it dissemblingly or with a half heart nor is able to perform his promise is not to be credited God himself never enableth an unregenerate man to believe and repent savingly while he is such in sensu composito and therefore is it likely that it is ordinarily and regularly such dead men that must Covenant to Repent and Believe to justification Renewing Grace must intercede which is not in their hand how then can they promise to do the works of the truly Gracious God may invite and command the dead to live yea and to do the works of the living because he gave them life and gives them means for revival But I know not where he calls such men to promise to do it much less is the constant Baptismal Covenant such Argu. 19. If the Distribution of the Church into visible and invisible be but of the subject by divers Adjuncts and not of a Genus into its Species then that part or those members which are meerly visible are indeed no part or members of the Church so distributed but are only equivocally called a Church Christians Church-Members c. But the Antecedent is true therefore The Antecedent is not only the common Doctrine of the Reformed Divines against the Papists but is expressly affirmed by Mr. Blake in this his Book The consequence is undeniable in that Adjuncts are no part of the Essence much less the Form or the whole Essence and therefore cannot denominate but equivocally instead of the Essence Note that visibile is not the same with visum Argu. 20. If the man without the wedding Garment had coram Deo Right to be there then would not the Lord have challenged him therein with a friend how camest thou in hither not having on a wedding Garment If you will help him that was speechless to an answer and say for him Lord he was compelled to come in al thy command I Reply He that compelled him by invitation did not only bid him come but to come not only to come in but to come in as a Guest should to honor and not disgrace the Feast At lest it should have been known as implyed It was no unrevealed thing Argu. 21. If Circumcision were the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith even a Justifying Faith already in being then so is Baptism but the former is certain Rom. 4.11 12. He received the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being uncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that Righteousness might be imputed to them also The last words confirm the consequence also Argu. 22. Many texts of Scripture shew that it was Justifying Faith that was by God required in the aged in baptism which I will cite together and not stand to fetch an argument from each alone Act. 2.38 39. was before cited verse 41. It was they that gladly received the word that were Baptized Act. 8.37 also is before spoke to It must be believing with all the heart Mar. 16.15 16. is very plain first Christ