Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	call_v	church_n	see_v	2,640	5	3.5798	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89333	A messenger sent to remove some mistakes; or A desirous instrument for the promoting of truth, unity, peace and love in the church of Christ. By way of answer to a book, untruly and improperly intitled, A vindication of that righteous principle of the doctrine of Christ called laying on of hands upon baptized believers. / By Thomas Morris, a servant of Jesus Christ. Also Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley about his practice of laying on of hands, with his answer, and R. E. reply.	Morris, Thomas, Baptist.; Everard, Robert, fl. 1664. Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley.	1655 (1655)	Wing M2811; Wing E3541; Thomason E838_23; Thomason E838_23*; ESTC R207456	30,573	49

our meetings with many vain janglings And Secondly insteed of more of the manifestations of Gods Spirit I see nothing but unsound arguments effected by your kinde of laying on of hands And thirdly insteed of being further strengthened in Gods way there are many can witness with me from sad experience how that your kind of laying on of hands hath weakned the Church of Christ and frustrated many proceedings which tended for the good of the Church of Christ as in the relation to the choice and ordination of Officers and also much hindred the increase of the Church but how you will answer these things you know not I confess you have cited many excellent Scriptures in these two last Chapters if you had not wrong applied them but having wrong applied them they are of the more dangerous consequence therefore let all that fear God take heed and so much as to your fift chapter In your last chapter you say that some do question whether this is any command of Jesus Christ viz. laying on of hands upon Baptized Believers but by the way I must tell you that this is like many other of your rash and improper assertions for laying on of hands upon Baptized Believers is an action not a command for command receives its being from God but actions receive their being from the creature enabled thereunto by the Creatour but I shall take your meaning namely that you mean that there is a command from Jesus Christ which injoins Baptized Believers to suffer hands to be laid upon them for proof of which you say doctrines are equivalent to commands and how Robert Everat at a dispute at Tharpe did grant that doctrine and command are tearms equivalent and then you say that in the second epistle of John verse the 6. compared with the 9. we shall find that the same thing which is called command in the one place is called doctrine of Christ in the other but that is but your own words but because I love plain dealing suppose it should be granted that doctrins are equivalent to commands yet it will not follow that their proper quality is one and the same for the proper quality of doctrine is to teach and the proper quality of command is to bind or oblige the creature to the doing the thing taught yet their equivalency doth appear in that they as branches spring both from one root and like streams flow both from one fountain and thirdly the one hath as much authoritie to teach as the other hath to command yet as in relation to their proper signification or quality they are two distinct things as I said before But if it were so that doctrine and command could be proved to be both one in all respects yet they that have neither doctrine nor command for their practice are never the neerer as you have not But because your practice viz. laying on of hands upon Baptized Believers as a distinct thing for which as you say Christ hath given order by it self without respect had to the attaining that great gift the Holy Ghost which we call extraordinary or without respect had to instating into office or healing infirmities or to the suffering persecution I say because this your practice will appear to be either a truth or an error from the right understanding of that Text Hebr. 6.1 2. Therefore I shall desire to take that counsell which Paul gave to Timothy 2 Tim. 2.15 Namely rightly to divide the Word of Truth and now first I shall endeavour to shew the weakness and unsoundness of those things you conclude or lay down from Hebr. 6.1 2. and then declare what I understand from it only this I think we agree in viz. That the tearm Principles in this place signifies only beginning things and not at all chief things because then this absurdity would follow viz. That then the Hebrews must leave the chief things and go on to practise those of less concernment and as for the tearm foundation which doth as it were open the sense of the former tearm Principles it also notes out only the beginning of things and now what you say from the Text and so now I shall take notice of your laying down Laying on of hands Hebr. 6.2 to be a part of the foundation of the Church for you running a parallel between Moses and Christ in the 80. page of your Book you cite the 1 Chro. 28.12 to prove that David had command from God for every thing done in the material house or Temple where say you Was there a command for the stones to be laid upon the soundation in the first house and then say you Is there not a command for lively stones to be laid upon the foundation in the latter house which you desire may be well considered and so I hope it shall Answer First consider what you are here proving a command for it is laying on of hands or subjection to laying on of hands spoken of in Hebr. 6.2 which laying on or subjection to laying on of hands you do here cleerly note out unto us to be a part of that foundation upon which the lively stones are to be laid now in this latter house and for my further satisfaction of this to be your opinion I have not my ground only from what you say in print but also upon a certain time at Earlshilton as you were a preaching to a great audience about laying on of hands you were showing the weakness of that opinion of those who held that the laying on of hands Hebr. 6.2 was meant of Officers in denial of which you said that it could not be that because there cannot be officers in a City before the foundation of the City be laid And when you had ended your speech I desired you to tell me what you meant by the City and what by the foundation you told me that by the City you meant the Church and by the foundation you meant these six particulars which you called principles to be the foundation of the City which is the Church the same doth Mr. Fisher affirm in his long argument and two or three times more in his book but now I desire you and all other whom it may concern to consider what you have made the foundation of the Church of viz. of the creatures actions works or duties for repentance is the creatures action work or duty and so is faith John 6.29 and so is Baptism and so is subjection to laying on of hands and also Faith to the Resurrection and eternal Judgment Now these being all actions works or duties of the creature being imperfect in the best of Saints are too sandy to make a foundation for the Church But if it could have been proved as it never can that the actions of the creature are the foundations of the Church yet you would render your selves confused builders in bringing that which you call a part of the Churches foundation and lay it upon the top of

the house after it is built for I have heard you grant in your exercise at Markfield that Faith and Baptism do render a Church rightly constituted and if so then that you call a part of the foundation is laid upon the house after it is built and not onely so but you lay it upon every single stone belonging to this house if they will suffer it but wise builders do not use to do so therefore in this also you render your selves confused builders but when you see that the actions of the creature will prove too sandy a foundation for the Church of Christ to be built upon then you say you mean Christ in his doctrine or to speak plainly that this doctrine it self is the foundation of the Church as in page the 29. of your Book line 16 17. But for answer to this though it is true the doctrines of Christ are usefull and very excellent in their places and for those ends and uses God hath appointed them yet they cannot be the foundation of the Church for these reasons First because of the unsuitability of the matter for the rest of the matter of the Church doth consist of lively stones believing-men and women Pet. 2. And what must the rest of the matter viz. the foundation be made of words that cannot be because t is inconsistent with the rest of the matter of the house A second reason why doctrines cannot be the foundation of the Church is because of the shortness of their duration in comparison of the duration of the Church as will appeare thus for when men have done sinning that doctrine which teacheth repentance shall cease and when we injoy that by sense which we have now but by Faith the doctrine which teacheth us to believe shall cease and when we have wholly mortified the old man and are perfectly risen to newness of life that doctrine which teacheth Baptism shall cease and when the Tyrant or oppressor is taken off that doctrine which teacheth sufferings from the hands of wicked men shall cease and when the Resurrection and eternal Judgment are past these doctrins which teach as in relation to them shall cease now if these doctrins should be the foundation of the Church when the Church comes in its most triumphant state viz. after the Resurrection it will have lost its foundation Ergo not for that use Thirdly doctrins cannot be the foundation of the Church because God hath appointed them for another use viz. to fit the matter for the building Secondly for to inform the builder how to lay the fitted matter into the building And thirdly how to order it well when it is built and therefore it is compared to a Hammer and to an Axe and to a Line so that it cannot be the foundation but rather the Instrument wherewithall the builder fits his matter for the building as Christ told his disciples John the 15.3 saith he You are clean through the Word which I have spoken to you where you see the Word fits the matter for the house by clensing of it and in the 2 Tim. 3.17 It is said that the Scripture serves to perfect the man of God and throughly to furnish him to every good work and so presents the matter viz. The lively stones fit for their masters use now the doctrine being the chief instrument which fits the matter for the house no wise builder will lay his tooles under the house for the foundation of it so that you may see from these three reasons that though doctrines be excellent in their place and for that end and use God hath appointed them yet they cannot be the foundation of the Church But if we look into 1 Cor. 2.11 Paul tells us what is the foundation in these words Other foundation can no man lay than that which is Jesus Christ Now I desire you and the Impartial Reader to consider whether it is his person or his doctrine which all along in Scripture is called Jesus Christ for that which is properly called Jesus Christ is the foundation of the Church now if we take him for the foundation which is indeed the foundation and none other can be laid then the Church shall never want a foundation as in John the 8.35 Christ saith of himself The son abides in the house for ever and therefore it stall never be unprovided Question But some may say upon what account is Christ the foundation of the Church as in his Person Answer Christ is the foundation of the Church in Person upon this account in that he is the first born of many Brethren Rom. 8.29 First in the Fathers love the first fruits of them that slept and first upon every account and so the first lively stone in this spiritual building which must needs be the beginning of this building and the beginning of this building is the foundation of this building and so you see Christ is the foundation or beginning of the Church and none other can be laid and he having three places in this spiritual house is also said to be the chief Corner-stone Ephes 2.20 And thirdly he is also the head of this house Ephes 1.22 And so the wisdom and goodness of God doth most gloriously appear in making choice of such a holy perfect durable and lovely lively stone to be the foundation cornerstone and head of this house Therfore take heed of putting Christ out of any of his places and setting other things in his stead for it is not a sleight matter to put any of the things of God out of their proper places Now we have seen that these particulers Heb. 6.1 2. cannot be the foundation of the Church neither in respect of actions nor doctrine let us examin what those foundations or principles are Heb. 6.1 2. The Authour exhorts the Hebrews to leave the principles or foundation which tearm foundation explains what is meant by the tearm principles viz. the beginning for foundation is a beginning leaving the beginning may some say of what why saith the Author according to Mr. Tindals translation which you confess in your Book page the 74. is a plain translation and I also in that place Heb. 1 2. Judge it to be the truest translation that ever I saw for faith the Author leaving the beginning of Repentance of Faith of Baptism of Doctrine of Laying on of hands of Resurrection and eternal Judgment So that it is clear that the Author doth not apply the tearm foundation or beginning to the whole worke of repentance nor the whole work of Faith nor to the whole work of any of the other five but only the first steps or degrees of repentance are here called foundation or beginning and so the first steps are degrees of all the rest but if the tearm foundation or beginning should here have been applyed to the whole work of Repentance and so of all the rest we must leave out the tearm of and read it thus therfore leaving the foundation

sort or kind of laying on of hands which you conceive to be first practized and then go on to perfection in relation to the number of those sorts or kinds of laying on of hands which remain But that your opinion cannot be true upon this account I thus prove because though it is true that all the Saints may subject to on sort of laying on of hands viz. that of suffering persecution it s not possible all the Saints by way of subjection should perfect the number of sorts or kinds of laying on of hands because all the Saints shall never subject as Officers nor as sick parties nor by way of receiving the extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost And seeing this therefore your opinion that Men should leave the beginning or first sort and go on to perfection as to the number of sorts that remain of laying on of hands cannot be true because it is not possible all the Saints should do it and as it cannot be true upon your account to leave the first and to go on to perfection as to the number of sorts of laying on of hands on the other hand it both may and must be true from Heb. 6.2 that Saints are to leave the first steps or degrees of subjection to one single laying on of hands and go on to perfection in the remaining degrees of the same subjection to one and the same sort of laying on of hands which will hold true in the case of suffering persecution and not in any other as I have already proved Ben. His third reason against subjection to laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 to be meant of suffering persecution is because the laying on of hands we here contend for it is a principle of Christs Doctrine whereas contrary ways for wicked to persecute the Saints is a principle of the Devils Doctrine Tho. Answer See how confused your own reasons render you in your opinion for in the beginning of your foregoing reason you confefs that the laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 peculiarly belongs to Christian Men in point of subjection and yet in this your third reason have turned the Case quite contrary in that you seem to note out unto us that those parties instructed by the Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.1 2. were layers on and not subjectors to laying on of hands But if you agree with me that the parties instructed by the Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.2 were subjectors to and not layers on of hands as that you must do except you can prove all the Church of the Hebrews to be Administrators So that Christ teaching the Saints to suffer for the Gospel though it be from or under the hands of wicked Men is no point of the Devils Doctrine but of his own and you have deceived your self because in this your third reasons you seem to apply this point of Christ teaching to layers on and not to subject to laying on of hands So that you may clearly see the weakness and unsoundness of all these reasons you have rendred against my opinion from Heb. 6.2 viz. that subjection to laying on of hands there held forth is meant of the Saints suffering persecution from the hands of wicked Men for the Gospels sake But again Master Fisher denyes that it is meant of the Saints suffering persecution from the hands of wicked Men because saith he it is included in the Doctrine of Baptisms and therefore would be confusion and a tautology to express it over again under the tearm Laying on of hands Answer Because I would have no objection unanswered I shall say something to this subtle reason and first it is improper to apply or call Baptism or any of the other five by the name of Doctrine as will appear because there must be a clear distinction put between Doctrine or teaching matter onely which comes from God and the thing taught which on the Creatures part is to be perforformed For Repentance Faith Baptism sufferings for the Gospel Faith in the Resurrection and general Judgement being the Creatures actions performed either internally or externally being capaciated thereto by vertue of the doctrinal or teaching matter which comes from God must needs be improperly called Doctrine and therefore Master Tindal in his Translation sets down the tearm Doctrine which our common Translations apply to be Baptism as a distinct thing by it self between Baptism and laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 and so partly Baptism and laying on of hands which you so often tell us follows next in order the one to the other so that you may see how improper it is to call Baptism or any other action of the Creature by the name of Doctrine seeing it belongs onely to the Creators teaching and not to the Creatures action In the next place Master Fisher reading it Baptisms Heb. 6.2 in the Plural number is not like to be true 1. Because most of the Greek Copies if not all and many of our common Translations and Master Tindals which is one of the antients plain and soundest Translations we find read it Baptism in the singular number Again to read Baptism Heb. 6.2 in the Plural cannot be right because it cannot be proved that all the Church of the Hebrews to whom this was spoken were either Baptized with sufferings or with the Spirit that they were not Baptized within or under sufferings is clear because the Baptism of sufferings consists of an over-flowing or an over-whelming measure of sufferings which many if not all times takes in death it self as for instance the two Sons of Zebedec and also Christ himself Luke 12.50 where saith he But I have a Baptism to be Baptized with and how am I pained till it be accomplished From whence its clear that every degree of sufferings is not the Baptism insuffering because Christ had suffered very many things before he spake these words and yet he saith he had his payning or streightning Baptism to be Baptized with still so that every degree of sufferings is not the Baptism in sufferings But as the tearm Baptism signifies in all cases so it must be an over-flowing or an over-whelming measure which renders a Man Baptized with sufferings with which measure of sufferings it cannot be proved that the Church of the Hebrews were all Baptized for though they had suffered great afflictions yet it was no other than what Christ had suffered before he begun his Baptism of sufferings viz. to be made a mocking stock And as it is in the case of being Baptized in sufferings so it is in the case of being Baptized in or with the Spirit for every degree of receiving the Spirit will not render a Man Baptized with the Spirit as is clear from Acts 1. ver 5. where in the 4. ver Christ commanded his Disciples not to depart from Jerusalem but wait for the promise of the Father which saith he ye have heard of me And then in the 5. ver saith John truly Baptizea with water but ye shall b● Baptized not many days hence Where we may observe that the Disciples here spoken of too were not yet Baptized with the Spirit for if they had it need not be promised to be dispensed upon them a few dayes after And though they had not the Baptism of the Spirit when these words were spoken to them yet they received so much of the Spirit as that they were true believers true converts born of the Spirit which render Men capable of Salvation able to cast our Devils and to heal all manner of sickness and diseases Mat. 10.1 and yet not Baptized with the Spirit So that you see every degree of receiving the Spirit is not the Baptism of the Spirit but it must be such an overflowing measure of the Spirit whereby a Man is able by an immediate power to speak all Languages as appears from Acts the 2. ver 2 3 4. compared with Acts the 1. v. 4.5 Where Acts the 1. v. 5. it was promised to be given to them a few days after and in Acts 2. being some days after you see it was given and also it was viz. a power to speak with tongues which all beleivers in those days were not able to do as is clear from 1 Cor. 12.29 30. So that we may see from these grounds which I have laid down how at that time not any of those spoken to Heb. 6.1.2 were Baptized in sufferings Neither is it likely they could all speak with tongues and so not be Baptized with the Spirit so that Master Fisher reasons against that subject to laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 to be meant in the case of suffering persecution for the Gospels sake grounded upon that text reading Baptism in the Plural is quite taken of and he that well considers what I have spoken in this Book may see the weakness and unsufficiency of all the grounds he hath alleaged by his laying on of hands And also here is discovered the mistakes of those who put no difference between to be Born of the Spirit and to be Baptized with the Spirit which fits Men to Preach the Gospel to all Nations which was the special end of that gift as appears from Luke 24.49 compared with Acts the 1. ver the 5. Chap. 2. v. 4. Thus with as much moderation and tenderness as I could and not let you suffer I have answered to the substance in what is contained in your Book I might have been larger but that I think I shall be forced again to put Pen to Paper as in relation to this thing I intreat you and all others who it may concern not to slight or condemn any thing that is here spoken of till you have often read and well considered it and if God shall have used me as an Instrument to speak convincingly to the consciences of any I desire that they will give God the Glory and strive to learn that heard lesson of Self-denyal FINIS