Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	assurance_n	faith_n	justify_v	2,314	5	9.2915	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81720	A boundary to the Holy Mount, or a barre against free admission to the Lords Supper. In answer to an humble vindication of free admission to the Lords Supper. Published by Mr. Humphrey minister of Froome in Somersetshire. Which humble vindication, though it profess much of piety and conscience, yet upon due triall and examination, is found worthy of suspension, if not of a greater censure. By Roger Drake minister of Peters Cheap London.	R. D. (Roger Drake), 1608-1669.	1653 (1653)	Wing D2129; Thomason E1314_2; ESTC R209198	85,461	218

pell mell to the Sacrament 3. I wish his conversion by entertainment of this opinion be not like that of the Galatians It s a common errour in these loose times to mistake perversion for conversion Such conversion calls for repentance which I wish to this godly man For further confirmation pag. 48. he propounds the tenour of the Covenant in a syllogism thus He that believes shall be saved adde I believe Ergo I shall be saved Then he denies that the Sacrament seals either the minor or the conclusion Answ The Sacrament seals what the Covenant of grace promises but the Covenant of grace promises and not only offers salvation to particular persons Rom. 10.9 That if thou shalt confess c. thou shalt be saved This is evident by the promise of salvation to believers in generall Mark 16.16 John 3.16 What is promised to a whole kinde is promised to every particular of that kinde Let Mr. H. tell me how the Sacrament seals the offer of grace to him in particular and I will tell him how it may also seal the promise of grace or salvation to him or any else in particular Where is it said in Scripture I offer to thee John Humphrey Minister of Froome c. grace and salvation by Jesus Christ will Mr. H. yet deny the offer of grace is made as particularly to him as if he had been named in Scripture Or where is it said Thou John Humphrey shalt not commit adultery c. yet doth not that command reach him as particularly as if he were named He that saies Omnis homo est animal rationale doth he not as truly say that Mr. H. is Animal rationale as if he had mentioned him by name In like manner when the Scripture saies All that believe shall be saved doth it not say that Mr. H. believing shall be saved If therefore Mr. H. de facto do believe it promises salvation as particularly to him as if he were mentioned by name or that I believing shall be saved as if my name were in the promise Where the condition is performed there the promise is absolute but when I believe the condition is performed Ergo the promise That I shall be saved is absolute This premised I resume What the Covenant promiseth that the Sacrament seals The Covenant promises that I shall be saved in particular Ergo the Sacrament seals that I shall be saved in particular But this is the conclusion which Mr. H. denied to be sealed by the Sacrament Next for the minor of his syllogisme namely That I believe I shall prove against him that this is also sealed in the Sacrament not to all Receivers but to all worthy Receivers thus as formerly What the Covenant ensures that the Sacrament seals the Covenant assures me that I believe Ergo the Sacrament seals to me that I believe The minor which onely is questionable I prove thus That which gives to me clear evidence that I believe that assures me I believe The Covenant gives me clear evidence that I believe Ergo. The minor is good because the Covenant affords infallible signes and evidences of faith in what heart soever it is and so of faith in my heart particularly or in any other heart whatsoever As therefore by the properties of a man I may know my self to be a man so by the properties of faith held forth in the Covenant I may know my self to have faith That Gospel which saies He who receives Christ for righteousness c. believes the same Gospel saies That I receiving Christ for righteousness do believe and so by consequence it faith absolutely that I believe But what the Covenant affirms that the Sacrament seals or ratifies namely that I believe in particular And this is the minor which Mr. H. denies to be sealed by the Sacrament For clearer explication consider that the minor or assumption of the Syllogism of assurance depends partly upon faith and partly upon sense or experience upon faith that the evidence is right in actu signato and not a false evidence upon sense or experience in actu exercito that this right evidence is in me For as a false evidence in me so a right evidence without me are both equally null and invalid as to assurance For example Would I know my faith is right and thereby come to assurance that I am in the state of grace I must look into the Word by a direct act of my understanding for a true and undoubted evidence of faith and into mine own heart by a reflex act whether that true evidence of saving faith be indeed in me As in the Syllogisme of assurance about my particular resurrection at the day of judgement the major That all men shall rise is in tearms in Scripture the minor That I John or Roger am a man is not expresly in Scripture but depends partly upon faith as to the essentiall notes of a man recorded in Scripture partly upon sense I finding by a reflex act that those essentiall signes of humanity are in me from both which the conclusion flows necessarily that I in particular shall rise at the day of judgement And indeed had not a conclusion drawn partly from faith and partly from sense been firm Christs apparitions had not been a solid argument to confirm the resurrection which yet he proves partly by Scripture out of Moses the Prophets and Psalmes partly by sense and experience Luk. 24 39 46. and though it be possible in some cases sense may be deceived yet a man in his right wits may easily know that hic nunc sense is not deceived And were not this true no man could possibly be convinced of his estate or that he is a sinner or that his life is frail and short or that faith and repentance is his duty or any other Divine truth that concerns himself in particular since it s no where said in Scripture Thou Roger art a sinner thy life in particular is frail and short faith and repentance is thy duty but all these in Scripture are expressed onely in generall tearms Yet I hope it s as true de fide that faith and repentance is my duty as if the Scripture should say Thou Roger must believe and repent c. The major then in the Syllogisme of assurance is in tearms de fide The minor also as to the truth of the evidence is expresly de fide but as to the inbeing of the evidence it depends upon sense and experience the conclusion is de fide by necessary consequence though not in express tearms Now whatsoever is de fide that is sealed in the Sacrament so are all three Propositions in the Syllogisme though the minor is partly of faith and partly of sense therefore all three Propositions of the Syllogisme of assurance are sealed by the Sacrament contrary to Mr. H. his Assertion And since the minor in the Syllogisme of assurance namely that I believe is the conclusion in the pros-Syllogisme it follows

himself c. for he that is converted by actuall receiving doth not eat judgement but mercy 2. Suppose a man should be converted by that short exhortation take since that may be done by presence at the Sacrament without actuall receiving how will it follow that all must receive because some may be converted by the exhortation to receive any more then that all must be assured of their salvation because some are comforted by the exhortation to assurance which is not immediatly the duty nor at all the priviledge of unconverted persons in statu quo Page 66. For further proof He supposes a morall unregenerate man doth his best to prepare himself thence he infers Do we think now to such a man the Ordinance is necessarily fruitlesse c. then God help us Shall not his examination prayers c. conduce more to convert him then the bare preaching of a Sermon especially considering the Word doth but precede and is a part of the Sacrament Accedit verbum ad Elementum c. Answ 1. No naturall man ever doth his best to prepare himself 2. Notwithstanding all his preparatory acts he hath still the unworthinesse of person he coming as is supposed unconverted to the Sacrament 3. Therefore he comes to the feast without the wedding garment and whether conversion or confusion be the portion of such a guest let the text judge supposing as M. H. would have it the marriage feast be the Lords Supper We believe no Ordinance is the feast but rather the dish wherein the feast is served 4. I wonder M. H. should attribute more to a few dead acts of a naturall man then to the Word preached which is the great Ordinance set apart for the conversion of souls Acts 26.16 18. Rom. 10.14 17. as if he designed to advance nature and free-will above grace 5. Because he adds I but the word accompanies the Sacrament what followes thence but that any one may be present to hear and see but only worthy communicants are to receive and unlesse he can make out that actuall receiving of the Elements is a converting Ordinance Actuall receiving is neither a word nor an act of God but meerly an act of the creature and an outward act too and therefore hath not a cōverting power in it all he pleads from the antecedaneous acts will not conclude his free admission since the fruit of the visible and audible word or of Christs death declared may be attained by presence at the Sacrament though a person do not actually receive I would not here be mistaken as if I pleaded for a Sacrament without receivers which is a contradiction in adjecto but I see no warrant in the word why the whole Congregation should not stay at the administration of the Lords Supper and that with much profit as well as at the administration of Baptism though all do not partake nor can I look at their ancient Ite missa est as a divine precept but as an humane tradition For his instance pag. 57. Of a poor humbled soul hoping to meet Christ at the Sacrament c. I answer 1. If his humiliation and hope be right he is a worthy receiver and already converted and so not a fit instance or medium to prove M. H. his conclusion If his hope and humiliation be not right then he is in the condition of the former and by his hypocrisie drawes further guilt upon himself 2. This poor soul if rightly humbled hungers after Christ rouls upon him and adheres to him which are proper acts of saving and justifying faith though he cannot rise up to faith of evidence nor can any man avoid despair unlesse he lean upon Christ or somewhat else All which clearly prove this person to be converted and that therfore the Sacrament is to him only a means of edification and comfort His third instance pag. 58. of the Disciples of Emaus is to as little purpose as the two former unlesse he can prove 1. That then they were in the state of nature 2. That that breaking of bread was the Sacrament Luk. 24.30 3. That they were converted by that breaking of bread Dictates so absurd that the very naming of them may be a sufficient confutation Although a man may be converted at Rep. Pag. 58. it is not by the Sacrament it is occasionally but not intentionally a converting Ordinance Here before I proceed any further I must tell M. H. he frames an Objection for us very unhandsomely A converting Ordinance occasionally not intentionally little better then a contradiction the very notion of an Ordinance implying divine ordination or appointment of any thing by his revealed will as a means of conversion edification comfort and benefit to the creature and how this can be properly called a not intentionally converting Ordinance is to me a paradox Let him prove actuall receiving to be a converting Ordinance and we shall not doubt but it is so intentionally To the Reply M. H. answers That it being granted the matter is upon the point yeelded partly because none are expresly forbidden to come and partly because all occasions must be taken for our salvation Answ 1. The cause is not yeelded unlesse it be proved that actuall receiving is a converting Ordinance since the end of conversion may be attained by presence at the Sacrament without receiving but the danger of eating and drinking unworthily cannot be incurred without receiving 1. Cor. 11.27 29. which yet hath no influence in order to conversion By presence much benefit may be gained without danger of unworthy receiving by receiving much guilt may be contracted without hopes of benefit to the unconverted Secondly If receiving be a converting Ordinance how dares M. H. exclude either Children distracted or excommunicated persons from it especially since these have most need of it and those are best taught by sense who have not so free an exercise of reason Yea why should Heathen be denied the Lords Supper more then the word preached if it be a converting Ordinance Are not they also bound to use all means and take all occasions of conversion to use M. H. his own words But if all hath been said will not take with us M. H. at last hath found out a way wholly to root out this subtilty which he thinks the spirit of errour hath insinuated into the hearts of many godly men by three things he hath more to say c. Answ By the way observe this mans presumption and censoriousnesse 1. In charging so many godly persons to be acted with a spirit of errour in this particular 2. In his confident undertaking wholly to root it out by what he hath to say which though mountains in his own conceit yet when they come to be scanned we hope by Gods assistance to make appear they scarce deserve the name of molehills and with a sling and stone of Gods making fear not to incounter with this great and vaunting Goliah who by big words bids defiance to

one that doubts groundedly and hath no grace at all 1. It cannot convert him understand me still of actuall receiving as hath been formerly shewed 2. It cannot confirm him unless it be in sin by sealing judgement to him For can he be confirmed in grace who hath no grace at all 2. Where he saies The Receiver seals not necessarily to the condition in esse but in fieri I answer He seals as necessarily in point of duty to the condition in esse or de praesenti as in fieri or de futuro and that man who ingages not to believe at present plaies the hypocrite in ingaging to believe hereafter It is not with elicit as with imperate acts in the former he that truly wills them doth in part perform them whence Divines make a true desire of faith one degree of faith and he that in truth desires and resolves to beleeve hereafter may as well act that resolution now since faith it self as well as the resolution of faith is an act of the will And this M. H. would speak in those words Page 86. If he resolve now for the time to come without procrastination to walk according to the Covenant Is not faith the first step of this walk He that resolves in truth to beleeve cannot but desire to beleeve and the true desire of faith is both Scripturally and by the consent of Divines one degree of faith Thirdly By the very act of receiving he seals to faith in esse or de praesenti in point of profession the very language of his receiving the Elements is I receive Christ signified and offered to me in particular by them and therefore he that receives the Elements and doth not act faith at the same instant he playes the hypocrite wofully mocks God and Christ and as the mockers of Christ were guilty of his death so is every unworthy receiver Pag. 86. He proceeds The faith therefore that is absolutely requisite to a beleever is not assurance but consists I take it of these two things only 1. An historicall assent to the Gospel c. 2. A resolution to submit to the Government of Christ c. Let a man then but believe his Creed and resolve to go on in no known sin that is the main c. pag. 87. Answ 1. I easily grant assurance is not absolutely requisite as a means but only in point of duty namely that every one is bound to labour after it and in order unto our benè esse or comfort 2. Against every Sacrament a Christian is bound in an especiall manner by soul-searching examination to make out his evidence and if he have truth of grace and take pains to search he will by Gods grace finde so much truth in himself as may bring him to some assent about his good estate though usually this assent be much assaulted and weakned with doubting for removing whereof the Sacrament is an especiall help But 3. Whereas M. H. professeth to know no other kindes or ingredients of saving or justifying faith but only an historicall assent and a good purpose or resolution 1. I must tell him he is very defective on the one hand as omitting the speciall act of justifying faith namely adherence or leaning upon Christ for justifycation and salvation which is an act of the will not of the understanding nor will his historicall faith for kinde go beyond the faith of hypocrites yea of devils Iam. 2.19 and will aggravate a mans damnation if the faith of adherence follow not upon it 2. I must also tell him he is as excessive on the other in mistaking a good resolution for a constitutive part of faith which is either an antecedent or a consequent and effect of faith antecedent if it be a Legall consequent if an evangelicall resolution I wish M. H. would study fundamentalls better before he come to be so criticall about superstructures By his following discourse pag. 89. its apparent he speaks very confusedly about the spirituall estate of a Christian For 1. He supposeth a man hath not saving grace and yet that at the same time he is willing to accept of Christ to leave sin and yeeld to Christs termes all which are most precious saving graces Afterwards he compares these graces to a little gold mixed with much drosse in a lump of Ore yet at last concludes God can make grace of these least beginnings as if at present they were not grace till God does as it were transubstantiate them and turn our water into wine By all which its apparent the man doth not sibi constare and no wonder then if he bring his Reader into a labyrinth Object 9 The Ordinance is polluted if all be admitted Pag. 76. The summe of his Answer is That the Ordinance is defiled only to the unworthy receiver not to the admitters or joyners Answ Though we place no great confidence in this Argument nor believe the presence or actuall receiving of a wicked person doth simply defile either the Sacrament or the communicants as had an unclean man eaten of the Passeover supposing he neither touched any clean person nor any part of the Passeover but that he ate that Ordinance had been Levitically polluted only to himself yet connivance both in the admitters and joyners contracts morall pollution as he that suffers another to sin where he may and ought to hinder him or at least do his endeavour in order thereunto is partaker of his sin Lev. 19.17 1 Tim. 5.22 His application of Mark. 7.15 and of Peters vision to the Sacrament is ridiculous pag. 77. For do we hold that any either person or meat is Levitically unclean Contra dares he deny that any person yea any meat may be morally unclean namely as defiled with sin or occasions of sin Tit. 1.15 That which enters into the mouth defiles not a man Levitically but morally it may defile him and that either by his intemperance or irreligious receiving of it as eating the forbidden fruit defiled our first parents and he who when he may hinders not these sins is himself defiled by sinfull tolleration We believe as well as himself pag. 79. That the unworthinesse of another should not make the true beleever separate from the Sacrament Yet if I know another grosly ignorant or prophane and do not either endeavour to reform or discover him his unworthy receiving shall be set upon my score alone without any prejudice to the other communicants If it be a priviledge of the Gospel to have free Ordinances and to account no man unclean in the use of them ib. How dares M. H. set a spirituall rayl as he calls it about the communion Table and thereby refine and spiritualize old superstition to use his own termes by keeping from the Sacrament Children and distracted persons who have a better right to it then many prophane ones that his charity can admit and yet in one breath accuse and condemn us for doing the like to that he allowes in himself