Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	child_n	covenant_n	parent_n	1,796	5	9.1412	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49441	A treatise of the nature of a minister in all its offices to which is annexed an answer to Doctor Forbes concerning the necessity of bishops to ordain, which is an answer to a question, proposed in these late unhappy times, to the author, What is a minister?	Lucy, William, 1594-1677.	1670 (1670)	Wing L3455; ESTC R11702	218,889	312

Jesus seeing their faith said to the sick of the palsie S●n thy sins be forgiven thee Observe they were divers persons whose f●ith he saw and but one to whom he spake and because some avoid it and say that within this word their is involved his who was sick his faith as well as theirs who carried him although this will appear a forced explication to them who consider the Text yet let it be granted I hope they will no● say his faith alone then theirs co-operated with him in the work then they could operate themselves for no second causes do cooperate one with another but when each hath the power then they had force of themselves towards the procuring of this blessing Consider then the blessing Son thy sins are forgiven thee what this was appears by the Dispute which followed the Scribes said He spake blasphemy none can forgive sins but God and our Saviour proved immediately that he was God in the 21. verse by saying to the sick of the palsie arise take up thy bed and walk and did the miracle so that it appears evidently first that faith precedes to induce Baptism before men can come to God that the coming of Infants is by others feet that the faith pre-required in Children is other mens faith for as it is with all supernatu●all works there is a passive faith in the object necessary to make it capable of that miracle without which miracles in the course of Gods ordinary doing them are not wrought and with which all things are possible both for our selves or those which belong to us and this faith in a Father is powerfull for his Son in a Master for his Servant So is it in B●ptism faith is necessary to this great work of Adoption but faith of others in Children is only necessary and this is excellently exprest in the practice of the Civil Law which whether it received its rise from this or Circumcision or that the same principles which direct one are evident in the other I dispute not but it is some comfort even in Religion to see it illustrated by the wayes of prudent nature and the universall Axiomes of it This then is so illustrated although Adoption requrie the consent of both parties yet personally that is only done in such as are sui juris grown to such years as they are masters of themselvs and their own actions but such as are of such weak years as they are governed and under parents they can be and are adopted by their parents to another an adopting Father and their Covenants for the behalf and in the name of the Child both oblige the Child to filiall duties towards his new Father and likewise the Father to a fatherly care of the Son both in life by protecting him and in death by estating him in his Inheritance Thus did God with the Children of the Jewes at Circumcision that act by the Parents made the Child a debtor to that law and God to his Covenant of mercy to him So here is the hand of God accepting this act of Parents for their Children in Nature in the Law and in all footsteps of Gods Government the same discipline is observed I will conclude somewhat like that passage in Petrus Claniacensis a man famous for learning and piety as any of that Age in the Treatise of his against the Petro-brusians whose Opinions agreed in the point with our Anabaptists You see multitudes of men in Scripture had a faith prevalent for others and those but single persons or a few men that carried the Paralytick shall not the faith of the world of the whole Church be effectuall to these Infants A Father begs for his Son a Master for his Servant shall not Christian Parents yea the Christian Church be heard in prayer for these Infants God hath Covenanted Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name he will give it you John 16. 22. Ask say Divines constantly faithfully for good things according to Gods will non ponenti Obicem either for himself or others who do not stop by self-wickedness the power of prayers can then the constant prayers of the Church with that unshaken faith of hers be denyed its efficacy in a thing so pleasing to God to such persons who actually can put no hinderance to the power and efficacy of that prayer These things in Christian men canot be denyed and therefore in brief to the Argument Faith in all introduceth this Covenant in Baptism and moves the receiver to be adopted to God and therefore observe that the Apostle as he verse 26. Ye are all the Children of God by faith so in the 27th verse he brings a reason For as many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ. The reason why they are the Children of God by faith is because that such as have this faith are moved to be baptized and they put on Christ. The faith of him who is master of his own actions makes him be baptized the faith of him who is master of his Childs actions causeth him to bring his Child to this Adoption and yet methinks it hath not only power concerning this blessing before the act of Adoption to bring men to it but even in it to accept it for although there were all the affection in the world to it before yet if faith fail in the Act that man would hold from accepting such a Covenant whereby he had no confidence to be blessed but this faith doth only make him Covenant but it self is not the Covenant Thus I suppose I have spoken abundantly to Mr. Hookers second Argument and to such Objections which I have thought upon as most opposing this Doctrine I have delivered and although I could frame many more of this nature yet what is said to these will serve the turn for them likewise and therefore I let them pass SECT X. Mr. Hookers third Argument answered THomas Hookers third Argument page 54. is thus framed This Tenent doth necessarily evidence the Church of Rome to be a true Church which is thus gathered Where all the members are true members there the Church is a true Church But all the members in all the Congregations of Rome are true members Ergo. This Minor he proves because they are baptized I would first know what is the harm if we allow the Church of Rome to be a true Church true in the essentials of a Church though sick and full of corrupt Doctrines I have shewed and it is most true that many men be in a Church yea in the Catholick Church and not be saved and perhaps there may be an whole Church such as Mr. Hooker would have and scarce a man of them saved without the same means as many in the Church of Rome are saved by And therefore by the way I adde that the Church of Rome is not only a Church but a saving Church such as I doubt not but multitudes are saved in for they have not only a Doctrine

the Keyes John 20. Now then they and they only that we read of had from Christ this Commission those Questions come not to be handled whether Bishops Priests or Deacons have this power there was yet no such distinction of them as I find but whether the Apostles only or no I do not find any other the Seventy had a Commission to baptize among the Hebrews as well as they their Commission of preaching and baptizing equal but what that was I know not but here all the power is granted to the Apostles In whom and whom alone I can discern all the Ministerial power belonging to mens Souls so that they or men sent by them have this power or none I know there is a great dispute whether Laymen can baptize and the Church of Rome is mightily offended with Calvin for saying they cannot but I do not find the least Argument out of Scripture to confute him and certainly this place of Mat. 28. seems exceeding strong for his Cause and they themselves grant that the ordinary Minister of Baptism is Sacerdos by which word they understand Bishop and Priest that in their Absence a Deacon may and so go on to the little Orders but in extremity a Layman For my part I grant for certain that the Apostles were the only men Ordained for it I conclude that baptism is necessary and that it is a great Mercy of God to the Children of believing parents that they are capable of it that baptism is necessary is evident out of the Dialogue betwixt our Saviour and Nicodemus John 3. 3. Except a man be born agai● he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God vers 5. Except a man be born of Water and the Spirit he cannot c. vers 6. A reason is given That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh as if he should s●y nothing can work ultra sphaeram Flesh there ore cannot inherit more than Flesh nor be in a better than ●●eshly estate and that is not the State of Heaven therefore there must be some way by which that which is flesh and blood may become Spiritual which alone is by baptism That which Calvin most ●●g●niously urgeth That Children which dye uncircum●ised are not to be judged damned may thus be Answered That their bond of Circumcision was dated the eighth d●y and therefore nor due before the date but ours of baptism being without da●e is due presently So that then ours is like the State of those who were not Circumcised the eighth day when Circumcision was due not of those before the eighth day when it was not due Now upon this reason the Care of the Church layd a mighty Charge upon all preachers to be diligent to preach all dangers which might surprise Children before they come to do their Duty Now although I place such a necessity as that we see no ordinate means without it of Assurance of Heaven yet I will not despair of Gods mercy to such who adde not evil of their own Acting which should hinder the Effect of Christs Death and the daily prayers of the Church for all men And therefore with Calvin I think it a rash adventure of any man to open the Gate of Heaven who hath not the key committed to him which was not given to him yet I question if he hath turned the key in the Lock whether it do not open the door although he hath not the legal power which Calvin cannot deny but that it hath been an universal Opinion of the Church and for all ● see in his 18th Section of his 4th Book of his Institutes he doth not deny but it is valid and I believe he would not allow to re●b●ptize such a Child which he knew had true b●ptism according to matter and form but I am confident no man ever had ●his power given him from God but the Apostles and therefore it must needs be a mighty presumption in that Man who without Authority ●ven him should dare ●o put Gods Seal to any Article or Covenant by which he might be obliged to any Duty SECT IV. Whether administring the Communion was appropriated to the Apostles in our Saviours life THE next thing to be examined would be Whether in his Life-time our Saviour did appropriate the Administration of the Communion to the Apostles only and because we see that Commission only given to them nor ever semblance of any thing to the Contrary because it is a Work of so great height in its self because as the other so this Sacrament Conveys with it a Covenant on Gods part and because from Christs time downward the right of Consecrating was never pretended to by any Man untill now I cannot but think it a monstrous pride in such men who having no Authority from the Apostles should dare to undertake it and although I have heard of such an Opinion yet I never heard or read any reason for it SECT V. Whether the Power of the Keyes was given to them only AND then next I will examine Whether the power of the Keyes was given to them and them only by which power I understand the power of binding and loosing the power of Government and ruling in the Church and Church Affairs Here are two pretenders the on● that it was given to St. Peter only the other that it was given to the whole Church I will examine both First for St. Peter this Controversie betwixt the Church of Rome and Us hath been so vastly handled in such large Volumes as it would be a little impudence to offer at it in these few sheets and to stop my intended Course with tedious disputes which have so often been repeated and Canvased by others only I will point my singer at that which I think may Occasion a Reader in Studying this Controversie to fix himself upon what is pertinent and to take notice of such Things as may easily induce him to the Truth for though I am perswaded I could adde something at least ●llustrations to some Arguments which are Discussed in this Controversie yet that would drive me from satisfying your doubt and make my few lines swell to a Volume I only say thus much That in all those places Mat. 18 19. John 21. 15 16 17. which are the main pillars upon which St. Peters prerogative is setled no man living can shew me other power which a man can Conceive reasonably to be Conferred on him than on the whole body of the Apostles In those two places 28 Mat. 19. c. and 20. John 21. if we should understand him a Rock in the 16. of St. Matthew which yet without Partiality a man cannot do But rather think that St. Peters Confession was that Rock upon which the Church was built or that our Saviour who by his Confession was acknowledged the Son of God was that Rock hath with some a great Consent of Antiquity yet should we grant him there to be termed a Rock yet it must be no otherwise than derivativè