Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	apostle_n	church_n	true_a	1,620	5	5.0143	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26948	Mr. Richard Baxter's last legacy in select admonitions and directions to all sober dissenters.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1697 (1697)	Wing B1297_VARIANT; ESTC R25271	57,203	76

People commanded to do that which all should do lest it should be wholly left undone If all the Congregation will speak all that the Clerk doth it will answer the primary desire of the Church Governors who bid the People do it Of Bowing at the Name Jesus And of Priests Altars c. Q. 86. Is it lawful to bow at the name of Jesus Answ That we may lawfully express our reverence when the names God Jehovah Jesus Christ c. are uttered I have met with few Christians who deny nor know I any reason to deny it If I live and joyn in a Church where it is commanded and peremptorily urged to bow at the Name of Jesus and where my not doing it would be divisive Scandalous or offensive I will bow at the Name of God Jehovah Jesus Christ Lord c. My judgment of standing at the Gospel and kneeling at the Decalogue when it is commanded is the same Q. 122. May the name Priests Sacrifice and Altars be lawfully used Answ The New Testament useth all the Greek names which we Translate Priests Sacrifice and Altars and our Translation is not intolerable if Priest come from Presbyter I need not prove that if it do not yet all Ministers are Subordinate to Christ in his Priestly Office And the word Sacrifice is used of us and our offered Worship 1 Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 13. 15 16. Phil. 4. 18. Eph. 5. 2. Rom. 12. 1. and Heb. 13. 10. saith we have an Altar which word is frequently used in the Revelations in relation to Gospel times We must not therefore be quarrelsome against the bare names unless they be abused to some ill use The Ancient Fathers and Churches did ever use all these words so familiarly without any Question oa Scruple raised by the Orthodox or Hereticks about them that we should be wary how we condemn these words lest we give advantage to the Papists to tell their Followers that all Antiquity is on their side The Lord's Supper is by Protestants truly called a Commemorative Sacrifice Of the Communion-Table c. Q. 123. May the Communion Tables be turned Altarwise and railed in and is it lawful to come up to the Rails to Communicate Answ 1. God hath not given a particular command or prohibition about these Circumstances but only general rules for Edification Unity Decency and Order 2. They that do it out of a design to draw Men to Popery or to incourage Men in it do sin 3. So do they that rail in the Table to signifie that Lay-Christians must not come to it but be kept at a distance 4. But where there are no such ends but only to imitate the Ancients that did thus and to shew reverence to the Table on the account of the Sacrament by keeping away Dogs keeping Boys from sitting on it and the professed Doctrine of the Church condemneth Transubstantiation the real Corporal-presence c. in this case Christians should take these for such as they are indifferent things and not censure or condemn each other for them 5. And to communicate is not only lawful in this case where we cannot prove that the Minister sinneth but even when we suspect an ill design in him which we cannot prove yea or when we can prove that his personal interpretation of the Place Name Scituation and Rail is unsound for we Assemble there to Communicate in and according to the professed Doctrine of Christianity and the Churches and our own open profession and not after every private Opinion and Error of the Minister Whether we shall receive the Lord's Supper at a Table or in our Seats Whether the Table shall be of Wood or Stone Round or Long or Square Whether it shall stand on the East or West side of the Temple or in the middle Whether it shall have Rails or no Rails All these are left to Humane Prudence As for standing at the reading of the Gospel Page 148. he says If I live where Rulers peremtorily command it as a signified consent to the Gospel I would obey them rather than give offence And for kneeling when the Decalogue is read That the thing it self is lawful is past doubt and if it be commanded and the omission would be offensive I would use it though mistaken Persons were present because I cannot disobey nor differ from the whole Assembly without a greater hurt and scandal than seeming to harden the mistaking Person and because I could and would by other means remove that Persons danger as from me by making him know that it is no Prayer And the rather because in our times the Minister may in the Pulpit tell the People the contrary We must not lightly differ from the Churches where we live in such things I like best to kneel in Prayer and Confession of Sins To stand up in Praises to God at Singing and Reading Psalms of Praise and other Hymns to set at Hearing the Word because the body hath necessity of some rest Of the Creed Q. 139. What is the Use and Authority of the Creed Is it of the Apostle framing or not Answ It s use is to be a plain explication of the Faith professed in the Baptismal Covenant And for the satisfation of the Church that Men indeed understand what they did in Baptism and professed to believe 2. It is the Word of God as to the matter of it whatever it be as to the order or Composition of the Words 3. It is not to be doubted but the Apostles did use a Creed commonly in their days which was the same with that now called the Apostles and the Nicene in the main 4. And it is easily probable that Christ composed a Creed when he made his Covenant and instituted Baptism Matth. 28. 19. 5. That the Apostles did cause the baptizable to understand the Three Articles of Christ's own Creed and Covenant and used many explicatory words to make them understand it 6. It is more than probable that the matter opened by them was still the same when the words were not the same 7. And it is also more than probable that they did not needlesly vary the words lest it should teach Men to vary the matter And Lastly No doubt but this practice of the Apostles was imitated by the Churches and that thus the Essentials of Religion were by the Tradition of the Creed and Baptism delivered by themselves as far as Christianity went long before any Book of the New Testament was written And the following Churches using the same Creed might so far well call it the Apostles Creed Of the Apocrypha Q. 150. Is it lawful to read the Apocrypha or Homilies Answ It is lawful so be it they be sound Doctrine and fitted to the Peoples Edification 2. So be it they be not read scandalously without sufficient differencing them from God's Book 3. So they be not read to exclude or hinder the reading of the Scripture or other necessary Church duty 4. So they

Crook Dike Stock Smith Dr. Preston Sibbs Stoughton Taylor and abundance other such yea such as Bishop Jewel Grindal Hall Potter Davenant Carleton c. Dr. Field Smith Jo. White Willet c. yea and the Martyrs too as Cranmer Ridley Hooper himself Farrar Bradford Fillpot Sanders c. Could I separate from all these on the Reasons now in question Yea Calvin himself and the Churches of his way were all separated from by the Separatists of their times And though Ministerial Conformity is now much altered as to Ingagements many of the Assembly of Divines that are yet living do Conform again nor would I shun Communion with the Reverend Members of that Assembly Twiss Gataker Whitaker and the rest if again they used the Liturgy among us And if the old Conformists such as Bolton c. were alive and used now the same Liturgy and Ceremonies as they did then which was worse than now I could not think their Communion in Prayer and Sacraments unlawful nor Censure that Man as injurious to the Church who should write to perswade others not to separate from them Read over some of the old Non-conformists Books against Separation as Mr. Jacob's the Independent against Johnson and Mr. Bradshaw and Mr. Gataker's Defence against Cann Mr. Gifford Darrell Paget c. and fullest of all at the beginning of our Troubles Mr. John Ball in Three Books In these you will find the same Objections answered or more and greater And I profess my Judgment That our ordinary Boasters that think they know more in this Controversie than the old Non-conformists did as far as I am able to discern are as far below them almost as they are below either Chamier Sadeel Whitaker or such other in dealing with a Papist Objections answered But what if there be gross and scandalous Sinners are Members of the Church Answ If you be wanting in your Duty to reform it it is your sin but if bare Presence made their sin to be ours it would also make all the sins of the Assembly ours But what if they are sins committed in the open Assembly even by the Minister himself in his Praying Preaching and other Administrations Answ 1. A Ministers personal Faults may damn himself and must be matter of lamentation to the Church who ought to do their best to reform them or get better by any lawful means But in case they cannot his sin is none of theirs nor doth it make his Administration null or ineffectual nor will it allow you to separate from the Worship which he administreth You may not separate from him unless you can prove him or his Ministry utterly intolerable by such Faults as these 1. An utter insufficiency in Knowledge or Utterance for the necessary parts of the Ministerial Work as if he be not able to Teach the necessary Points of Christian Religion nor to Administer the Sacraments and other parts of Publick Worship 2. If he set himself to oppose the ends of his Ministry and preach down Godliness or any part of it that is necessary to Salvation Or be a Preacher of Heresie preaching up any damning Errour or preaching down any necessary saving Truth 3. If he so deprave the Publick Worship as to destroy the Substance of it as in putting up Blasphemy for Prayer or Praise or commit Idolatry or set up new Sacraments or impose any Actual Sin on the People But there are other Ministerial Faults which warrant not our Separation as 1. Some tolerable Errours of Judgment or Envy and pettish Opposition to others Phil. 1. 15. 2. It is not unlawful to joyn with a Minister that hath many Defects in his Ministration or manner of Worship as if he preach with some Ignorance Disorder unfit Expressions or Gestures and the like in Prayer and Sacraments 3. It is not unlawful to joyn with a Minister that hath some material Errour or Untruth in Preaching or Praying sobeit we be not called to approve it and so it be not pernicious and destructive to the ends of his Ministry If we run away from all that vent any Untruth or Mistake in Publick or private Worship we shall scarce know what Church or Person we may hold Communion with For 1. a small Sin may no more be done or owned than a greater 2. And then another Man's Weakness may disoblige me and discharge me from my Duty Of Subscription with Assent and Consent particularly concerning Infants baptized Q. 152. Is it lawful to subscribe or profess full assent and consent to any religious Books beside the Bible seeing all are fallible Answ 3. It is lawful to Profess or Subscribe our Assent and Consent to any Humane Writing which we judge to be true and good according to the Measure of its Truth and Goodness As if Church-Confessions that are sound be offered us for our Consent we may say or subscribe I hold all the Doctrine in this Book to be true and good And by so doing I do not assert the infallibility of the Author but only the verity of the Writing I do not say that he cannot err but that he erreth not in this as far as I am able to discern Q. 35. Is it certain by the word of God that all Infants baptized and dying before actual sin are undoutedly saved Answ I think that all the Children of true Christians do by Baptism receive a publick investiture by God's appointment into a state of Remission Adoption and right to Salvation at present though I dare not say I am undoubtedly certain of it But I say as the Synod of Dort Art 1. That believing Parents have no cause to doubt of the Salvation of their Children that die in Infancy before they commit actual sin that is not to trouble themselves with fears about it For if such Infants were admitted to outward Priviledges only then which is my second Reason we have no Promise or Certainty or Ground of Faith for the Pardon and Salvation of any individual Infants in the World and if there be no Promise there is no Faith of it nor no Baptism to Seal it and so we make Anti-paedobaptism unavoidable Whereas some mis-interpret the words of the old Rubrick of Confirmation in the English Liturgy as if it spake of all that are baptized whether they have right or not the words themselves may serve to rectifie that mistake And that no Man shall think any detriment shall come to Children by deferring of their Confirmation he shall know for truth that it is certain by God's Word that Children being baptized have all things necessary for their Salvation and be undoubtedly saved where it is plain they mean they have all things necessary ex parte Ecclesiae or all God's applying Ordinances necessary though they should die unconfirmed supposing they have all things necessary to just Baptism on their own part which is but what the Ancients were wont to say of the baptized Adult but they never meant