Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n catholic_a church_n communion_n 2,111 5 9.0012 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
A88693 Suspension reviewed, stated, cleered and setled upon plain scripture-proof. Agreeable to the former and late constitutions of the Protestant Church of England and other reformed churches. Wherein (defending a private sheet occasionally written by the author upon this subject, against a publique pretended refutation of the same, by Mr W. in his book, entituled, Suspension discussed.) Many important points are handled; sundry whereof are shortly mentioned in the following page. Together with a discourse concering private baptisme, inserted in the epistle dedicatory. / By Samuel Langley, R.S. in the county palatine of Chester. Langley, Samuel, d. 1694. 1658 (1658) Wing L405; Thomason E1823_2; ESTC R209804 201,826 263

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Respondent indeed But what he might have said as befitted a Respondent in a few lines he must spend many leaves upon though not altogether in the following part of his booke This being the very point of my argument and this place most fit to consider it more throughly I shall here make my reply to him upon it once for all §. 3. Visible unbeleevers is not taken saith he p. 47. in the same sense in the Major and Minor In the Major according to the ancient and famous sense of the Catholique Church for pagan Infidels for men without for non-receivers of Christian doctrine but positively standing under the delusion of some visible Idoll or Idolls In the Minor according to your moderne Brownisme that 's one of the flowers he useth to dress me a garland with and private sense for Christians within the Church baptized and adult but manifestly defective in their Christian Ethicks though orthodoxall otherwise in all points of faith and frequenters of our Church Assemblyes and solemnities as professedly of our Protestant perswasion in point of Religion and divine worship By the way I might reply What if these baptized adult persons are not orthodox in faith nor frequenters of our Church assemblies and Solemnities Are they then unbelievers in the first sense or must there be a third sense devised for them The Reader will observe this confusion But if he had applied this distinction such an one as it is he had done somewhat becoming the place he hath taken upon him But that he leaves at large Well since one good turn requires another I will endeavour to make out his Answer as he ere-while thought to do my Argument And it may be this Visibly unbelievers may be taken in a two-fold sense 1. For Pagan-infidels 2. Morbid-Christians under which term I suppose he will contain scandalous and notoriously-prophane Christians or else he saith nothing to the question Now take visible unbelievers in the former sense for Pagan-Insidels and then I grant the Major Those who are visibly unbelievers that is Pagans are such to whom the Lords Supper ought not to be administred And then I deny the Minor All who in word openly renounce Christ are not visibly unbelievers that is visibly Pagans But take visible unbelievers in the later sense for Morbid-Christians and then I grant the Minor Those who by word openly renounce Christ are visibly unbelievers that is Morbid Christians But then I deny the Major and say That those who are visibly unbelievers that is Morbid Christians are not such to whom the Lords Supper ought to be administred I appeal to any judicious Reader whether I wrong Mr. W. in this guessing at the application of his distinction and answer thereupon to my Argument And indeed this elsewhere he gives us in as his sense many times over and over p. 50. saith he You mis-judge in taking the Morbid Church members of our Parochial Assemblies to be unbelievers and Infidels positively as Pagans c. So p. 51 52 53. and passim alibi §. 4. Here Mr. W. asserts that to use the word Infidel or unbeliever for any but Pagans who never took on them a positive obligation to the service of the true God is Brownisme And that the Scripture and Catholique sense of the word doth onely denote Pagans But how hastily was this asserted by him shall be shewed in the following observations concerning the Scripture use of the word 1. Christ said to Thomas John 20.27 Be not thou 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not an unbeliever but a believer Was not he now in a possibility ex natura rei though baptized to have become an unbeliever by apostasie from the principles of the Christian faith especially this that Jesus is the Messias 2. Those two Texts 2 Cor. 6.14 15. Be not unequally yoaked with unbelievers What part hath a believer with an Infidel and Titus 1.15 To the unbelievers nothing is pure c. are both expounded by Dr Hammond whose reasons are worth weighing to be understood of the Gnostick Hereticks called there Infidels or unbelievers in that their doctrines and practices made so great an opposition to the Gospel 3. And on Matth. 24.51 he makes those two words hypocrites and unbelievers of equall importance i. e. saith he Knaves false deeeitfull persons expressed by S. Luke in setting this down ch 12.46 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unbelievers or unfaithfull And he renders the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rev. 21.8 unfaithful that fall off from Christ 4. The Jewes after Christs ascension who received not Jesus for their Christ or Messias were unbelievers in Scripture-sense Act. 14.2 and 17.5 yet were they not then Pagans under no positive obligation of worshiping a false God And an excommunicate person who hath been baptized and still professeth the Christian faith is to be dealt with as an Heathen yet he is no Pagan nor absolutely cut off from the Church as hath been shewed above And the Apostle tells us that the Jewes were broken off by unbelief though they were Church-members before Rom. 11.23 5. Belief doth ordinarily in Scripture-sense denote such a professed acceptance of the Gospel-call as includes sincere obedience and visible believing visibly sincere actuall obedience And on the contrary unbelief and unbelieving may in Scripture-sense denote wilfull disobedience and rebellion against the Gospel and visible unbelief such visible notorious rebellion or actuall disobedience Therefore some disobedient within the Church may be termed unbelievers For the Concrete is rightly denominated from the abstract a just man from justice so an unbeliever from unbelief prevailing The Antecedent is manifest in many Scripture-instances 1. That believing to which justification and pardon of sin is annexed is a sincere and obedientiall believing 2. And so also is that to which salvation is promised But to a Scripture-believing is annexed justification Act. 16.39 and pardon of sin Act. 10.43 And also to it is promised salvation and that most frequently Act. 16.31 Rom. 10.9 1 Cor. 1.21 Gal. 3.22 Eph. 1.19 2 Thess 1.10 Heb. 4.3 10.39 John 3.15 16 18 36. 6.35 40 47. 11.25 26. 12.46 Rom. 1.16 9.33 Mark 16.16 1 Pet. 2.6 1 Iohn 5.10 3. It may also be observed how Abraham is called the Father of believers in respect of that eminent and exemplary faith of his which was truly justifying and saving and included in it sincere actuall obedience Rom. 4.3 Gal. 3.6 So not to believe is not to obey Rom. 15.31 Rom. 10.16 They have not all obeyed the Gospel For Esaias saith Lord who hath believed our report And this is referred to the Jewes who were Church-members at least before Christs death And those in the later time who should depart from the faith may be called unbelievers those departers from the faith mentioned 1 Tim. 4.1 2 3 4. the learned Mr. Mede doth shew are meant of Papists and the grand apostasie of the Antichristian Man of Sin So those who draw back from the truth
whatsoever For I am of opinion there is no need of excommunicating or suspending a man after he is dead nor of judging of him in order thereunto §. 4. 4. Mr. W. tells us Papists are Christians But we need not suspend them from the Lords Supper their phansie of transubstantiation and other heretical Mormoes save us the labour I know not why Papists may not without destroying their principles tender themselves to receive with us unless the necessity of their obedience to the Popes prohibition hinder them and yet that is not a principle to the French Papists But if a Papist remaining such and owning transubstantiation Popish Indulgencies merit in the Jesuits sense prayers to Saints religious adoration or worshipping of Images c. tender himselfe to receive will Mr. W. admit him why them doth he not plainly say he would as indeed his doctrine leads him to admit him if the Papist be not excommunicated in such sense as I thinke none in England are But those words of his save us the labour I suppose intimate that if they did not withdraw themselves from our Communion but should tender themselves to receive we should be at the labour of suspending them And yet Papists are not forbidden to come to Church nor separated from all other Ordinances in the Church And then the universal negative Mr. W. pretends to defend that no baptized person adult intelligent not excommunicated may be debarred the Lords Supper if he tender himselfe is againe battered by another Instance which his own pen hath afforded May not a Papist be baptized adult intelligent and not excommunicated the publique Congregations if he exclude not himselfe as some others doe And yet I thinke Mr. W. grants he may be kept back from the Lords Supper whiles he professedly remaines a Papist and it s to my admiration that this Gentleman can so confidently defend the said universal negative before mentioned and yet overthrow it by divers such concessions as this in his booke §. 5. 5. Mr. W. tells me I delude men with the contracted notion of saving faith and I may tell him 1. that he doth as much delude men with the contracted notion of doctrinal or dogmatical faith 2. And that it s not the notion of saving faith but the resting in a common verbal profession of Christianity crying Lord Lord which will be found to be the great deluder of men when the day of trying all things shall come And then he informes us that Sacraments are not seales of a personal and inward faith only They are visible scales of the righteousnes of faith i. e. of the doctrine of faith in Christ unto justification in the sight of God without the workes of the Law From whence he inferres And why should not all baptized persons adult and not excommunicated personally testifie their assent to this doctrine by taking the consecrated bread and wine into their hands as the visible similitudes of the body of Christ sacrificed for us c. To which I reply Who hath said that they are seales of a personal faith only But doth not Mr. W. here grant as well he may that they are seales of a personal inward faith though not only Sacraments are considered 1. in respect of the Institutor and Author 2. of the Receiver both wayes they are seales In respect of the Author they seale his tender of the Covenant of grace wherein salvation is freely promised to all that beleeve In respect of the Receivers they are instituted and appointed by God for their solemn sealing or testifying their beleeving and obediential embracing of the Covenant of grace in the blood of Christ And as the Administrator is to attend both so in subserviency to his Master both these are to be designed by him in the celebration of the holy mysteries The seales as is often said are commensurate with the Covenant sealed If a single covenant or meere promise tendered to all who will beleeve that they shall be saved might be sealed with the Sacraments there were nothing in the nature of the Sacraments which should hinder the administring of them to heathens remaining such to whom this Gospel is to be preached Mark 16.15 John 3.16 But it s manifest these seales can be administred only where there is visibly a mutual covenant viz. God promising justification on the condition of faith to the Communicant and the Communicant visibly closing with that condition of beleeving to justification This is manifest in that famous text Mr. W. relates to which is Rom. 4.11 concerning Abraham his receiving Circumcision as a seale of the righteousness of faith §. 6. This text requires our most serious perusall And here I shall observe That though Gods sealing or confirming his promise or single covenant of grace is not excluded yet this text doth very eminently refer to the sealing or confirming of Abrahams personal faith and that not only a dogmatical but justifying and saving faith professed by him in receiving Circumcision The Question Paul disputes in the context is whether a man may be justified without the works of the Mosaical Law as such and he proves our affirmative in the example of Abraham Abraham was a righteous person and justified by faith his faith was imputed to him for righteousness that is God dealt with him and accepted of him through Christ as if he had been perfectly righteous in himselfe having pardoned his sins as the phrase is explicated v. 6 7 8. That this is the cleere and easie importance of the phrase of imputing a thing to another I thinke I first learned from our learned Wotton on John 1.12 a notion much better than fine gold which is demonstrated by two places of this Epistle where the same manner of speech is used Rom. 2.26 If the uncircumcision keep the Law shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is he shall fare no worse than if circumcised so Rom. 9 8. Now that Abraham was thus justified without those Mosaicall works the Apostle proves 1. In that he was justified before the workes of the Law as such were in force For he was justified before he received Circumcision one use whereof afterwards was to engage the receivers thereof to all the Mosaical Law Gal. 5.3 2. In that Circumcision in its designe and intendment and to Abraham effectually was to be a seale of the righteousness of faith before received and hence as well as from other texts Divines so unanimously conclude that the Sacraments are not instituted for the unconverted but converted I say instituted For its vaine to speake of the possibility of conversion in the event by or at the Sacrament as thence to inferre the manifestly prophane and unconverted may be admitted For no one can say of an heathen or excommunicated person if he be sinfully present and partake that he shall not may not be converted at or by that sinfull partaking The spirit bloweth where it listeth The concurrent judgement