Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	foot_n	lord_n	wash_v	4,431	5	10.4086	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89189	A sober ansvvere to an angry pamphlet, or, Animadversions, by way of reply, to Robert Barclays late book (entituled, Truth cleared of calumnies) in answere to A dialogue between a Quaker and a stable Christian by VVilliam Mitchell.	Mitchell, William, 17th cent.	1671 (1671)	Wing M2294; ESTC R43708	69,116	149

the hearts of people so that understanding the words of the Baptism of the spirit there should be a confounding of the duty commanded with the mercy and blessing promised therfore the Baptism which Christ cōmanded is Baptism with Water as is verified by the Apostles practise which is to continue as the Preaching of the word unto the end of the world Page 51. He undertaketh to elude the Scriptures cited by me as holding forth the excellent end and uses of Baptism the first was Act. 2.28 To this he saith that here is no mention of outward water Ans Neither is there mention of outward water 1 Cor. 1.16.17 and yet be grants that baptizing there hath reference to water 2. He saith that repentance and remission of sins may be and are found without water Baptism Ans Therefore Baptism with water is not absolutly necessary to salvation which we readily yeeld 3. He saith where Baptism with water is both these are frequently wanting Answ Ergo the Papists are in an errour who affirme that Baptism doth ex opere operato conferre grace Second Scripture is 1. Pet. 3.21 To this he saith that the words following clear the meaning not to be water Baptism not the putting away of the filth of the flesh Answ These words do indeed manifest that Baptism of it self is not available unto salvation and so the Popish opus operatum is struck at as if by the meer receiving of Baptism grace were conveyed The like may be said to what he alledges in answering the other Scriptures viz. Act. 22.6 Ephes 5.26 Gal. 3.7 in all which he proceedeth upon a wrong supposition as if we thought that Baptism of it self or by any force of the outward element of water were effectual to cleanse the soul and to work grace and regeneration Now this is far from our thoughts who make the efficacy of it to be onely the power and operation of the Holy Ghost accompanying the ordinance in the right use of it He addeth that Baptism with water is but a figure which was to give place to that one Baptism Epes 4.5 Answer This one Baptism was the Baptism which Christ commanded and it hath been cleared that this Baptism was Baptism with water so that that one Baptism cannot be called the substance and Baptism with water the shadow seeing they are the same thing and therefore it remaineth that baptism with water is an ordinance of Christ and the Lord concurring with it a profitable meane to further our Salvation And whereas he reflects upon our baptizing of Infants and the manner ●f it it must be adverted that the quarrel betwixt Quakers and us is not whether Baptism belong to Infants or whether it should be by sprinkling or dipping but they are against all Baptism with water even of adult persons not allowing this so much as the name of an ordinance of JESUS CHRIST XI HEAD Concerning the LORDS Supper He granteth page 52. that Christ was the Authour of the Lords Supper and that the Disciples were enjoyned the observance of it but he saith this provss not that it was to be of perpetual continuance Answ Hereby is proved all that was intended namely that the ordinance of the Supper hath Christ for the Instituter of it and therefore it is called the Lords Table 1. Cor. 10.21 and the Lords Supper 1. Cor. 11.20 Why then doth the Quaker vilify this Ordinance by speaking of it with that addition the Lords Supper so called cannot he find in his heart to give it that name which the Scripture giveth it He saith That by breaking bread Act. 2.42 is meant their ordinary eating Answer The eating there is not ordinary but Sacramental eating which usually is expressed by this phrase of breaking bread a part being taken for the whole Act. 20.7 1. Cor. 10.16 Neither doth Act. 2.46 make it evident that their breaking of bread was their ordinary eating This text speaketh not of dayly eating but of continuing daily in the Temple And though they did eat from house to house yet the Syriak expoundeth it expresly of the Eucharist and it is thought that the Faithful abode sometimes in one house and sometimes in another for fear of persecution It seemeth the Gentle-man knoweth not well the way of PROTESTANT CHURCHES who thinketh that their Sacramental eating is but once or twice in a year they plead that it should be often and the practise of some is answerable in that they communicate once in a fortnight and others once every moneth And albeit we do not go to this ordinance to make a full meale for our bodies liberal feeding of them at such a time would make the better part to be neglected yet as much is made use of as serveth to represent the Spiritual nourishment of Believers by Jesus Christ and more is not requisite He addeth page 53. That the eating mentioned Act. 2.46 is conjoyned with this that they sold their possessions and if we make the Apostles example and practise our rule why do we not sell our possessions as they did Answer We hold not our selves bound to follow the Saints and Apostles in every thing all their practises are not to be imitated by us And therefore we distinguish their practises some of them were accidental or occasional being occasioned by the special necessity of times and seasons these are not alwayes binding but onely when cases and seasons are alike and of this nature was their selling of their possessions Then some of their actions were upon such grounds as are of perpetual and common concernment to one Church as well a another to one Age as well as another and these actions are still obligatory thus we ought to follow them in breaking bread or in the ordinance of the Supper because this concerns the Churches of Christ in this Age as well as in their Age seeing the Lord left it as a standing and lasting monument of his love to continue untill his coming againe in the clouds as shal be made good in due time He asketh Why we do not abstaine from eating blood and things strangled as they did Answer The command in reference to these things was but temporary and there is a plaine repeale of it in that Christian liberty is extended to whatsoever is sold in the shambles of that saith the Apostle eate making no question for conscience sake 1 Cor. 10.25 He asketh againe Why we do not wash one anothers feet which they were as solemnly commanded to do as to take and eate Ioh. 13.14 Answer How is it then that we do not read in all the Scriptures that ever the Disciples practised this thing They continued in breaking bread but where is there mention of their washing the feet of one another The great designe of this command was to teach the Apostles humility and love and mutually to condescend for one anothers good even to the meanest and lowest services our Lord and Masters patern of humility should make fellow servants ashamed of