Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
duty_n day_n holy_a week_n 1,884 5 10.1877 5 true
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
A47585 Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book intituled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author / by B.K. ... Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704. 1698 (1698) Wing K74; ESTC R8584 65,265 127

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

was not admitted to the Eucharist Doubtless if the Church of Judea first planted in the order of the Gospel is to be followed or if that which was the practice of some of the Churches was also of every Church then both these Ordinances as well as the other beginning Principles must precede or are prerequisite to Church-Communion and Fellowship Object But doth not this straiten and narrow the Interest of Jesus Christ Answ Mr. Danvers's Reply to Mr. Wills about Baptism is a very good answer viz. This saith he is no other than Reformation in all Ages since the Antichristian defection hath been charged with and particularly that Reformation that has been endeavoured in that other Ordinance of the Lord's Supper therefore the Presbyterians cry out against the Independents for sinful Schism Fomentèrs of Faction and narrowing of Christ's Interest in their respective Separations and Church-Communions The same do the Prelats say to the Presbyterians and the very same do the Papists say to the Episcoparians If Mr. D. in the work of Reformation excels or has more light than such he speaks of in respect of Church-Constitution and Communion and resolves to pursue his work tho he is reproach'd on this account why should he blame us who according to our light labour after a pure and perfect Reformation or doth he judg he has got to such a degree of knowledg that he is perfect and needs no more light nor instruction and that the last Stone of Reformation and Restoration here is laid because Baptism shines forth in its primitive purity Remember him who said such was his Humility What I know not teach thou me and Apollos tho mighty in the Scriptures could stoop to the Counsel and Instruction of Aquila and Priscilla tho much inferior to him who taught him the way of God more perfectly Act. 18.26 6. Ought not we to stand fast and hold the Traditions we have been taught and is not this worthy of Commendation what saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.2 Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Ordinances as they were delivered unto you And are we not commanded to withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly and not after the Traditions we have received Besides can we comfortably have Communion with such as oppose a Command of God nay that make it but a Tradition of Men and an Antichristian Innovation And as in all Fundamentals of Salvation so in those of Church-Constitution we ought to be agreed before we can orderly sit down together 7. But to say no more I would caution all our Brethren to take heed what they affirm on this account I mean concerning us and this sacred Institution since they seem so cloudy in their understanding about those Scriptures urged as the great Warranty for our Practice If God has hid for reasons best known to himself this Truth of Imposition of hands from their eyes as he hath the holy Ordinance of Baptism from the Independents c. it will be their wisdom to forbear Reflections let them not be angry lest it be found to be a Truth of God and they consequently prove offended at Christ himself who left this as well as Baptism amongst the beginning-principles of his Doctrine Why should they be offended at us for having an equal love to all the Commandments of Christ I would hope they have reason to judg 't is from hence we so earnestly contend with them on this account 8. I cannot but marvel that our Brethren should call Laying on of hands a Doctrine or Tradition of Men and render those who plead for it guilty of adding to the Word of God and yet receive such into Communion at the Lord's Table as are in the practice of it What uncharitable thoughts do they retain of their Brethren and what guilt on this Consideration do they bring on their own Souls But let me close with one Caution more since they know 't is as sinful every way to diminish from God's Word as to alter or add to it let them take heed lest they be found guilty therein We have now traced Mr. D. quite through and have little more to do In page 53. he labours to remove an Objection brought against him from Antiquity and since he has fairly stated it take it in his own words As to the point of Antiquity tho 't is granted the Antients and their Followers ever since have erred not only in the Subject but in divers Circumstances about this Rite of Imposition of hands yet in-as-much as there has been all along such a witness born to the thing it self it makes for its Apostolicalness and confirms our Practice therein Now take his Answer to it It doth not appear saith he that such a Witness hath been born all along thereto for Mr. Baxter ingenuously acknowledges that Justin Martyr Ireneus and others in those times are silent about it c. And those Authorities that are pretended to assert the same in the first Centuries have been proved to be spurious and supposititious 2ly That pretence of antient Prescription without the Word of God to warrant it can never justify the Divine Authority of any Practice Answ 1. We fully agree with him viz. whatever is found in antient Prescriptions concerning this or any Practice signifies nothing if God's Word doth not witness to it But having such evident proof from God's Word to warrant this Precept we never judged it worth while to search into Authors concerning it neither should we have cited any now had we not been forc'd by our Opposers And as to what he says concerning Mr. Baxter's ingenuous Confession that Justin Martyr and Ireneus are both silent about it it signifies very little for first we have nothing but Mr. Baxter's say-so for it who may be has overlook'd some places of these Authors or probably not met with all their Works But 2. Since their Silence only is pretended it carries no great force with it must we of necessity produce all the Antients expresly witnessing thereto or else is all nothing that is brought from Antiquity in the Case We have mentioned several antient Witnesses and some of the 2d and 3d Centuries which are neither spurious supposititious suborn'd Witnesses nor Knights of the Post tho Mr. D. is pleased so to call them And now to conclude we must say again against what is mention'd p. 54. that there is a clearer Precept for Imposition of hands on baptized Believers as such than can be urged for that on Church-Officers or the observation of the first Day of the Week c. I have ground to conclude Mr. D. thinks it his duty to keep holy the first Day of the Week as the Christian Sabbath We gave Mr. D. no ground to say that which he did of us viz. Reproach the Wisdom of Christ and slight the Authority of the Holy Scriptures as tho we had not a sufficient Direction therein in all parts of God's Worship
mentions two Scriptures for proof viz. Acts 9.17 and Acts 8.14 15. in which affirmation he altogether begs the question and proves nothing nor removes what has been said to this very point In this I must withstand him for he goes too fast I should be glad could I be an Instrument in the hand of Christ to rectify their understanding herein who doubt about it for they seem to be much mistaken about that Text Acts 9.17 but especially that in Acts 8.14 15. I shall therefore offer something in the first place to this Doth not the Scripture say plainly in Acts 9.17 that Ananias put his hands upon Saul that he might receive his sight why should he say then it was for the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit If that which is exprest to be the effects of Ananias his putting his hands on Paul was the only end of that Service which is according to his own arguings upon Acts 8.14 Acts 19.16 then it was only for his sight for it is said he received his sight but not a word of his receiving the Holy Ghost when he laid his hand upon him that he was sent to Saul that he might receive the Spirit is granted but whether by laying on of hands or some other means is yet to be proved And this being an extraordinary case and different from that in Acts 8.14 15. viz. Ananias his laying hands on Saul as a blind Man that he might receive his sight which answers to that in Mark 16.18 and Peter and John laying their hands on them in Acts 8.14 as on baptized Believers as such for their receiving the Holy Spirit makes nothing to the Controversy depending tho Mr. D. hath put them together as if the Subject Manner and End were one and the same But Secondly to proceed to that Scripture Acts 8.14 where mention is made of Peter and John's laying their hands on baptized Believers in Samaria which our Brethren affirm was also to confer the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit but how much they are mistaken herein shall be examined Since it appears not that the Apostles at Jerusalem did either send Peter and John to Samaria upon that account or that they laid their hands upon those believing Samaritans to that only end 't is very strange Mr. D. or others should affirm any such thing therefore to prevent this mistake let us once again examine these Texts Now when the Apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God they sent unto them Peter and John who when they were come down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit 't is not said the extraordinary Gifts but the Holy Spirit those you see are the express words for as yet saith the Text he was fallen upon none of them only they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus then laid they their hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost Vers 14 25. I know 't is objected from the following words that the Spirit came upon them in some visible or extraordinary manner because Simon saw that thro' laying on of the Apostles hands the Holy Spirit was given This is only a supposition for who can tell what kind of Manifestations of the Spirit might appear in them to convince Simon that they had the Holy Spirit The Text doth not say they either spake with Tongues or wrought Miracles But if for arguments sake we should grant they receiv'd the Spirit in some extraordinary manner as those in Acts 19. it would not follow that this was the absolute end of this Service for if we may reason as they and others have done after this manner that what was the effects of their laying their hands upon them was the end why they laid on their hands and that End is by none attained in these days therefore Laying on of hands is not practicable in these days we shall shew you the sad Consequences and Absurdities that would follow such an Inference To proceed 't is said Acts 4.31 that when the Apostles had prayed the place was shaken where they were assembled Now mark because this Miracle was wrought as the effect of their praying can it be thought that was the end of Prayer or that we must not pray because no such effects are wrought now And when Philip had baptized the Eunuch Acts 8.39 't is said the Spirit caught away Philip that the Eunuch saw him no more what a strange thing was this that followed Baptism But now because this Miracle followed as the effect of that Administration then shall we conclude it was the end of the Ordinance of Baptism But again in Acts 10.44 while Peter was preaching the Word to Cornelius and unto those that were in his House 't is said The Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the Word so that they spake with Tongues c. Now shall we say the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit or Miracles were the end of Preaching because such kind of Effects followed preaching Surely none will argue so that understand themselves for if that was the End of preaching because it was the Effect that followed and that Effect now never following we may say as many do Preaching is ceased if he and others argue right for such and such extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit followed say they when baptized Believers did come under laying on of hands in the Apostles days and these Gifts are not given now therefore that Ordinance is ceased it being only for the Confirmation of the Gospel Now say I by the same Argument all the Institutions of Christ may be denied as well as laying on of hands As First Meeting and assembling together see Acts 2.1 't is said They were all met together with one accord in one place and suddenly there came a Sound from Heaven as of a rushing Wind and it filled all the House where they were sitting Vers 2. And there appeared unto them cloven Tongues like fire and sat upon each of them Vers 3. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with Tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance Here is no mention of any other Ordinance save only assembling together God graciously being pleased first to confirm the Time of Worship under the Gospel viz. the first Day of the Week for so was the day of Pentecost as Tradition has handed it down and mind what effects followed But First 'T is not so now shall we therefore assemble together no more Secondly When the Apostles prayed the House was shaken but 't is not so now doth Prayer therefore cease to be a duty Thirdly When Christ was baptized there was a voice heard from Heaven saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased and the Spirit came down in likeness of a Dove And when the Eunuch was baptized the Spirit caught away Philip but such Effects follow not now when Persons are baptized ergo it's not the duty of any