Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
conscience_n answer_n baptism_n filth_n 1,162 5 11.2400 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A23672 A retraction of separation wherein VI arguments formerly erected for the service of separation upon the account of infant baptisme are taken down, and VI other arguments for saints generall communion, though of different perswasion, are erected in their room : together with a patheticall swasive to unity, peace, and concord as our generation-work in speciall / by William Allen. Allen, William, d. 1686. 1660 (1660) Wing A1071; ESTC R25232 56,266 79

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

then my present-practice of free communion with reformed godly Congregations of Pedobaptists but much more to perswade others to joyne with me therein I shall through Gods assistance endeavour these two things 1. To take downe those Arguments by which I once endeavoured to build up Separation 2. Propose some Arguments to evince the lawfulnesse of Church-communion between the godly both Pedobaptists and Anabaptists and the unlawfulnesse of denying their communion one with another upon account of their baptismall difference In the doing of which I suppose I shall have occasion to consider all that is considerable on the other hand either of Arguments or Objections Which done I hope will be of good use to cure and prevent the evill of Separation of godly from godly upon other accounts also as well as this My six former Arguments for Separation taken downe FIrst I would here give notice that my six Arguments formerly published in countenance of Separation of godly from godly upon the account of Infant Baptisme are laid downe for the most part rather Motive-wise then Argument-wise and doe not rationally conclude the thing for which they were brought I shall therefore contract and reduce them in the best of their strength into form of Argument and then discover in what respects they are inconcludent of the position touching Separation which should have been proved by them First Argument for Separation is to this effect Those Churches may not be held communion with in whose constitution such a part of the foundation of Christian Churches as the doctrine of Baptisme mentioned Heb. 6.2 is wanting But such are the best of the Churches of the Pedobaptists Therefore c. Answ That it is the duty of every Christian so farre as he contributes any thing towards the erecting a house for Christ therein according to the best of his understanding and as much as in him lies to endeavour that it be built according to the pattern in the Mount I mean the Scriptures and that no part of the foundation through his default be left out I easily grant and still assert But that that part of the foundation which consists in the doctrine of Baptisme mentioned Heb. 6.2 is wholly wanting in the Churches of the Pedobaptists I doe deny or if there be some part of it wan●ing in them yet that such a partiall defect is any sufficient ground of separation from them I doe also deny and shall here offer something to shew that it is a great mistake so to think 1. That part of the foundation which consists in the doctrine of Baptisme is not totally wanting in the Assemblies of the godly Pedobaptists For about the doctrine of Baptime the Pedobaptists doe agree with the Anabaptists in many weighty points though they differ in some other 1. They both agree that water Baptisme is an ordinance instituted by the Lord. And 2. To be continued in the use of it to the end of the world 3. That all that are converted from another to the Christian religion and profession ought upon such conversion to be baptized as those whose Baptisme after faith is recorded in Scripture were 4. That to be baptized is a professed putting on of Christ and that Baptisme is a badge of Christs professed Disciples distinguishing them from such as doe not own Christ 5. That all that are baptized are thereby obliged to cease living any more to sin but are bound thereby to live a new and holy life unto God 6. That all the Disciples of Christ ought actually to be under this ingagement In all these they both agree 7. As the one hold themselves actually engaged to the lawes of Christ by their Baptisme after faith so doe the other by that which they account a sufficient Baptisme though received before faith 8. As the one doe the things to which Gospel-Baptisme does oblige so doe the other Although then the Pedobaptists be supposed to be defective in the doctrine of Baptisme in relation to some of the subjects of it and it is but some and likewise in relation to the form of administration yet agreeing in so many of the substantiall parts of the doctrine of Baptisme as is before mentioned we cannot say justly that there is an utter failer in them as to this part of the foundation There are two parts of the doctrine of Baptisme the one concernes the putting away of the filth of the flesh the other the answer of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Christ from the dead If they are defective in that part of the doctrine which concernes the putting away the filth of the flesh yet they are orthodox and sound in that part which concernes the answer of a good conscience towards God which according to the Apostle is the greater and better part 1 Pet. 3.21 A partiall defect and that too in the lesser part of the foundation does not make a nullity in it no more then the want of a hand or an eye or a leg makes a man to be no man And if a woman should separate from her husband when wanting any of these upon pretence that he is no man she would not be held innocent Defects in and about holy things though great and notable doe not alwayes cause a privation of the ends of the holy things themselves The manner of Jacobs obtaining the blessing was greatly defective and full of sinfull mixture but yet did not nullifie the blessing it selfe It was a great defect in the Office of high Priesthood when God would have but one high Priest at one time and him during life Num. 35.25 28. Heb. 7.23 for men to set up two or else to make an annuall election Joh. 11.49 51. 18.13 Acts 4.6 but yet whoever thought for all that that all the administrations of such an high Priest were nullities and that no body was the better for them 2. It s a great mistake likewise to think that every partiall defect in the foundation of a compleat Church constitution is a sufficient ground of separation For 1. It s very probable that something of that which is comprized in the doctrine of Baptisme a part of the foundation Heb. 6. is wanting as it was enioyed in the primitive Church in the best constituted and well ordered Church at this day in the world For when the Author of that Epistle speakes of the doctrine of Baptismes in the plurall number what can we so reasonably understand by it besides the Baptisme of water as the Baptisme of the Spirit And however all that are Christs have his Spirit Rom 8.9 Gal. 4.6 yet I have as I think else-where rendred it probable from Mat. Doubt resolved p. 37. 3.11 Acts 1.5 2.3.4 11.16 compared that the Baptisme of the Spirit was a priviledge peculiar to the primitive times and is not now enjoyed by any that we know of Wherein also I know I have the concurrant judgement of many of the Baptists at least So that its