Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	bind_v	earth_n	loose_v	17,667	5	10.9453	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26886	Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending them against several sorts of opponents, especially against the second assault of that pious, reverend and dear brother Mr. Thomas Blake / by Richard Baxter ...	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1658 (1658)	Wing B1212; ESTC R39868	418,313	558

may receive without recourse to the Law of God in Specie Without Scripture it may be known that a Precept is not the same thing with a Promise or Deed of Gift and that a Power of Administring to one that demandeth is different from a Power to demand it or any just Title that may warrant a claim 4. If this will not serve you I add Lex distinguit ergò distinguendum est 1. You confess that a Dogmatical Faith is necessary to our Title And what is that equally Coram Deo Exclesiâ If a Jew say I will go and deride Mr. Blake I will tell him to day that I believe in Christ and I will be Baptized by him and tomorrow I will scorn Christ to his face will you say that this man hath equall Right Deo judice as he hath Ecclesia judice I will not be too confident of my understanding your minde but upon consideration I think you will not 2. Matth. 22. and Luke 14. The servants had power to bring in by perswasion that person that had not on the wedding garment though they were to perswade him to come as a meet guest and so with that garment yet the performance they left to himself But yet he had no warrant for his access in that condition and he meets there with a judgement of God which was distinct from that of the Church which with a Friend how camest thou in hither c. left him speechless Nor would it have saved him to have said Lord I was taught by learned Divines that there is no Forum Dei to judge of my Right to Sacraments besides the Forum Ecclesiae and I had Right in the judgement of the Church and therefore so I have in thine And thousands will finde this Plea prove uneffectual if they shall be encouraged to use and trust to it 3. 1. Cor. 11.31 32. I think there is a judgement of the Lord mentioned against unworthy receivers that is not the same with the judgement of the Church Nor is it my opinion that it was the Churches judgement which laid some of them in sickness some in weakness and some asleep God took cognisance of mens not examining themselves and eating and drinking unworthily which was an eating and drinking damnation to themselves and of their not discerning the Lords Body and that further then the Church did 4. It hath till now been taken for granted that there is a twofold forum or judgement exprest in Mat. 16.19 and Mat. 18.18 Where binding on earth and binding in heaven are distinguished and loosing on earth and loosing in heaven The Treatisers that have wrote of the power of the Keyes and the Expositors upon this Text have not thought that these two were but one nor did offer so injuriously that I say not reproachfully to expound Christs words If you say that though they be not the same yet they agree for that shall be bound or loosed in heaven which is bound or loosed on earth I answer that is quando clavis non errat When the Church judgeth justly as the truth is For God will not judge erroneously or unjustly because man doth so Yea though the Churches error be inculpable as if they absolve or excommunicate a man upon the full testimony of false witness c. yet God will not therefore judge as they Though he will justifie their act of judging yet he will not censure the true Title of the person to communion accordingly nor binde or loose in heaven according to any mistaking sentence Many other Texts do sufficiently evidence this distinction But because Mr. Blake doth pag. 187. and often so peremptorily renounce this distinction in this controversie I shall yet add one or two Reasons to shew the necessity of it Arg. 1. If the judgment of God the judgment of the Church concerning mens Right and claim here be all one then either the Churches judgement is infallible in this matter or Gods judgement is fallible But neither is the Churches judgement infallible nor Gods judgement fallible Therefore they are not both one The force of the consequence is evident And for the Minor 1. To say Gods judgement is fallible even that which he doth himself immediately exercise of which we speak is to Blaspheme 2. To say that mans judgement here is infallible is to speak 1. That which cannot be proved 2. More than the Papists yea more than the Italian Papists say of the Popes For Bellarmine himself will confess him fallible about such personal causes as these whether such a mans cause be good or bad c. 3. If the judgement of man be in this case infallible then no man was ever wrongfully admitted by the Church and so the argument would hold à facto ad jus such a one was admitted therefore he had Right to claim and Receive But the consequent is intolerable For 1. It hindereth all hypocrites in the world that should believe it from repenting of their unjust claim and Receiving and justifieth them all Coram Deo but sure it will prove an uneffectual justification 2. The same it doth by all Ministers that ever administred the Sacraments It teacheth them to justifie themselves as infallible and to disclaim Repentance for any mistake He that dare tell all the Ministers in the world that they never gave a man a Sacrament without Right Coram Deo or all the Receivers in the world that they never received it without such Right as will warrant their claim and Receiving will shew whether the weakness even of good mens arguings may seduce Moreover if the Minister be infallible in this case then either by an ordinary ability of discerning or by extraordinary priviledge The latter is not pretended by any Protestants or Papists that I know of The former cannot be said unless it be also said 1. That all other men as wise be Infallible as well as they 2. And that therefore the case hath such evidence that no Minister can possibly be mistaken in it But this cannot reasonably be said For 1. If an Infidel or Pagan come in scorn to be Baptized and profess a Dogmatical faith when he hath it not the Minister cannot know his heart 2. And if Mr. Blake will say that the very scornful words of such a Professing Pagan are a sufficient title coram Deo yet the Minister may possibly mistake his words and think he saith I do believe when he saith I do not believe 3. Or the Minister may easily mistake the extent and nature of Mr. Blakes Dogmatical faith and think that the Infidel doth profess that Dogmatical faith when it is but some faith yet lower than it or but part of it Furthermore if Ministers be thus infallible then none of their Acts can be Nullities but the contrary is true and hath been the Judgement of the Church expressed in many Councils de rebaptizandis non legitime baptizatis quoad essentiam baptismi And this would put us hard to the