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	honour_v	parent_n	3,428	5	9.3487	5	true

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

commedet ex eo no son of Israel that is an Apostate shall eat thereof Thus we have an instance of debarring the Passeover for a pollution not ceremonial which should make him uncleane ceremonially so as to separate him from the company of others civilly And this we shall have occasion I thinke to improve further beneath Mr Cotton in his grounds and ends of childrens Baptisme p. 11 to shew the hainousness of the sin of a baptized parent who neglects to baptize his Infant quotes this place and saith Surely in the old Testament a man was accounted of God as uncircumcised himselfe if his children were uncircumcised And according to the analogy Mr. W. proceeds upon and reasonably enough in his solving the Question why Infants are not admitted to the Communion taken fromthe not partaking of the Jewes Infants at the Passeover p. 131. I say on the same analogy we may more particularly argue If a circumcised person formerly might not eat the Passeover if he circumcised not his males then a baptized parent now may not eat the Lords Supper if he bring not his infant to Baptisme and indeed supposing the command as cleere now for the baptizing of Insants as it was before for circumcising of male Infants the argumentation is strong enough §. 9. 3. I thus argue in the third place The Sacrament ought not to be administred to them whom we are no wise called nor obliged to administer to upon the account of administring to beleevers But we are no wise called nor obliged to administer the Sacrament to unbeleevers who are such in the sense and in respect of notorious disobedience to the Gospel upon the account of administring to beleevers Ergo the Sacrament ought not to be administred to unbeleevers who are such in the sense and in respect of notorious disobedience to the Gospel The Major is manifest the Minor I thus confirme If in other like cases where duties are incumbent on us respecting our behaviour towards others as so and so qualifi'd the obligation to those duties of our behaviour towards persons ceaseth when they are not visibly so and so qualified then we are no wise called nor obliged to administer the Sacrament to unbeleevers who are such in the sense and respect of notorious disobedience to the Gospel But the former is true therefore the latter also The Consequence is cleere For paria arguunt fidemque faciunt The Minor may be shewed in sundry like instances The Scripture enjoynes us several duties in our behaviour towards the wicked and godly the righteous and unrighteous although we cannot certainly tell who these persons are habitually and inwardly But all agree I thinke that those are to be taken and dealt with by us as such who are visibly in the wayes of godliness or impiety David describing the practices of an holy man Psal 15. among others reckons this ver 4. In whose eyes a vile person is contemned but he honoreth them who fear the Lord we must shun the company of the wicked Psal 119.115 we are to give to him that needeth and not as in a way of charity and necessary reliefe to them who need not But we know not ever who needeth that craves our almes he may counterfeit and if it appeare he doth counterfeit we are not obliged nor called to give unto him what belongs to the needy We must know persons to be Christs Disciples by their loving one another yet such love cannot certainly be known to us to be in others John 13.33 So also we are commanded Luk. 17.3 4. If thy brother trespass against thee rebuke him and if he repent forgive him But how shall I know when he repents It follows vers 4. If he trespasse seven times in a day and seven times in a day turn again to thee saying I repent thou shalt forgive him There is a two-fold forgiveness 1. that which is opposed to hatred grudges and unjust desire of revenge against him who hath wronged us Thus we are to forgive him who trespasseth against us whether he repent or no we are to love our enemies remaining such 2. That which is opposed to the not receiving him into familiarity and tokens of intimate and encouraging friendship as formerly And thus we are not bound to forgive unless he who hath trespasled do repent that is do manifest his repentance and his saying he repents may be a manifestation thereof sufficient to us that we may so far acquiesce therein as to be obliged to forgive him in this later sense But here Calvins caution is useful Addendum est saith he on the place Christum non privare fideles judicio ut slultè ad verbulum unum creduli fint sed tantum velle aequos esse humanos ut resipiscentibus manum porrigant si modo apparet ipsos ex animo sibi in peccat is displicere sed quoties probabile Agnum conversionis dederit peccator admitti vult Christus ad reconciliationens ne repulsae fractus deficiat Now he who hath taken away my goods and saith he repents and yet will not having them in his hand restore them to me by his wicked and wilfull detention overthrowes the credibleness of his verball profession and his saying I repent obligeth to this sort of private forgivenesse I have mentioned no otherwise then as it is a probable token of his serious repentance Nay though he is a wise son as the proverb goes who knows his own father yet is every child obliged to honor both his parents So manifest is it that we may be and are obliged in severall duties to those persons as so and so qualified whom we cannot certainly know to be such under the notion whereof we tender those respects to them But as our Saviour saith He that receiveth a Prophet or Disciple in the name of such that is who probably appeares to be such shall have his reward so here in these and such like cases But when persons appear to be in a way visibly contrary to these qualifications on which is founded any offices in sundry respects who doubts that our obligation to perform such offices to them then ceaseth When therefore such as by baptisme have bound themselves to believe that is to receive and obey the Gospel do yet notoriously appeare to be unbelievers in respect of their actuall disobedience to the Gospel we are not obliged to administer the Sacrament to as believers As on the contrary when baptized persons owning their baptismes appeare not to be in a way of notorious disobedience to the Gospel we are bound to administer to them as believers whether they are really and inwardly so or no. §. 10. 4. A fourth argument may be grounded on the forme of administration wherein the Minister saith to the Communicants according to 1 Cor. 11.24 Take eat this is the Body of Christ which is broken for you So Luke 22.19 20. And this Cup is the New Testament in Christs blood which is shed for