Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
saint_n	believe_v	church_n	creed_n	1,645	5	10.6358	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96468	Truth further defended, and William Penn vindicated; being a rejoynder to a book entitutled, A brief and modest reply, to Mr. Penn's tedious, scurrilous, and unchristian defence, against the bishop of Cork. Wherein that author's unfainess is detected, his arguments and objections are answered. / By T.W. and N.H.	Wight, Thomas, ca. 1640-1724.	1700 (1700)	Wing W2108; ESTC R204122	88,609	189

of it at all Then as to Paul he comes 1 Cor. 11. and gives the Corinthians a rehearsal thereof upon their great abuse of that practice in such words as do not import a command but as often as they used it they shewed forth the Lords Death till he came his words cannot be called a command But supposing not allowing they could yet the Bp. must still be at a loss to find the command for the Supper four times repeated in these words Do this in remembrance of me Because we do not find them but three times expressly mentioned in all the Scriptures and but one of those times can reasonably be called a command at all if so it was not repeated at all nor will the Bp's Argument that the command was four times repeated hold good unless he prove it five times mentioned and so we leave it upon the Bp. and proceed Ibid. 18. Says the Bp. of W. P. he proceeds to what is more dangerous meaning then the prevarication plainly to diffuse his Poison this coming of Christ was Spiritual Answ We must needs say 't is a very uncharitable expression without cause and if it were such Poisonous Doctrine why did not the Bp. confute the substantial Scripture Arguments by which W. P. proved his Assertion which he ought to have done before he used such an expression But that the Bp. has not done unless carping at words and reviling him be doing it as will appear in what follows And first he begins with reproaching W. P. for paraphrasing upon these Texts Matt. 26. 29. Mark 14. 25. Luke 22. 18. where Christ told his Disciples He would drink no more of the fruit of the Vine till he drank it new with them in the Kingdom of Heaven upon which W. P. paraphrased and called Christ bread and Wine from Heaven See his Defence p. 98. whereupon the Bp. reviles according to his usual way and tells him that he and his Brethren uses to make and wrest Scripture c. By Mr. P's favour says the Bp. the Scripture no where stileth Christ Wine from Heaven Answ If we had dealt thus with the Bp. for downright perversions and wresting Scripture as we have before proved as he hath done W. P. without reason or ground we must tell the Bp. we should have treated him at another rate then we have done But to the matter Where did W. P. say the Scripture so said he only drew a natural consequence from the words of Christ and the Text it self is so plain that it needs no comment to prove W. P's paraphrase thereon for what drink or Wine was that which was to be drank in the Kingdom of Heaven but Wine from Heaven and who was Wine from Heaven but Christ who as he promised to drink with them so he promised Revelations 3. 20. to Sup with those that opened their hearts unto him Now who but a Man that wanted matter and was willing to take occasion to revile would Carp c. as the Bp. did more especially while Christ is called a Vine Bread from Heaven Water c. with a multitude of other Metaphorical Appellations in Scripture and had the Bp. been so well acquainted with the comfortable presence of Christ as a truly Spiritual Man which he pretends to be Really is c. he would never have reviled W. P. as he did on that account P. 19. The Bp. goes on telling us the Apostles continued the use of Bread and Wine after Christ was Spiritually come therefore says he this shewing forth his Death till he came was not by them understood of his inward and Spiritual appearance but of his second coming to Judgment for in that Case feeling so fully his being come in their hearts they would have desisted Answ Altho' the Apostles did feel Christ Spiritually come into their hearts and might also see no real Necessity for keeping up this practice yet it doth not therefore follow they would have presently desisted for these or the Like Reasons 1st Because they might think it needful to indulge the weak and carnal minded Christians among them who wanted such a sign to keep up their minds in remembrance of Christs Blood which was shed for them and that such weak and carnal believers were among them appears plainly by the sharp and reprehensive expressions in the Epistles writ by the Apostles to some of them likewise it plainly appears by Scripture that altho Christ was come in Spirit to some he was not so come in Spirit to others who yet waited for his coming see James 5. 7 8. 1 Cor. 1. 7. Secondly this practice might be continued among them were it onely that we find it contributed to keep up a Brotherly Fellowship and Communion in the Infancy of the Church which appears from Acts 2. 46. and they continuing dayly with one accord in the Temple and breaking Bread from House to House did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of Heart And here we may a little compare the present practice of those who use this Ceremony with those in the primitive times because the Bp. has something of it Their Breaking Bread was joyned with Eating their Meat quite contrary to the practice now adays and not only in that but other respects they disagree as W. P. hath noted Again how widely do they differ in their opinions of the thing it self 't is now called and believed by the Papists to be the very Body and Blood of Christ and the Protestants in the use of outward Bread and Wine say that the Body and Blood of Christ is in a Spiritual manner partaken of under that sign whereas in the primitive times the use and extent thereof as Paul tells us 1 Cor. 11. was in remembrance of and shewing forth Christs Death till he came which we believe was Spiritual in relation to that sign 3ly Why might not the Apostles as well continue in the practice of this sign after Christ was Spiritually come in their Hearts as in the practice of Circumcision Purifications Vows Shavings and other legal rites many Instances of which appear plain in Scripture which we might Instance but shall be brief and tell the Reader that what we have and shall write on this head is not intended for a Treatise thereof only as in Answer to the Bp's Objections referring the Reader as before to W. P's Defence and R. B's Apology who largely treats of this Subject The Bp. proceeds Ibid. 19. To invalidate W. P's allegation that Baptism and the Supper were not made an Article of any of the Antient Creeds and thereupon tells W. P. thus he has forgot or was never Catechized as he ought to have been or forgotten what he was taught to be the meaning of that Article I believe the holy Catholick Church the Communion of Saints that is in short says the Bp. I believe all the faithful are made one body by communion in the same Faith Covenant and Ordinances of Worship especially Baptism and the

Lords Supper Answ Is it not very strange that the Bp. who in p. 3. tells Mr. P. as he called him as to his Paper once for all implication of Faith is not a profession of Faith and not only so but would almost unchristian us for not being more explicit in that Paper Gospel Truths should now tell us by believing the holy Catholick Church the Communion of Saints that the points in Question namely Baptism and the Supper c. are implyed We must needs tell him and all may see that either he assumes a Latitude to himself by a strange sort of implication far beyond what he will allow W. P. and the Quakers or it must be confest that Water Baptism and the outward Supper and which we think is undeniable are not made an Article in that Confession and consequently his Proof falls to the ground with his Assertion But as to the true Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints we can readily subscribe to the Article and do truly own the Communion of Saints but deny it consists in eating outward Bread and drinking outward Wine while we suppose the Bp. himself will not deny that very Wicked and Ungodly Men have partaken of the outward sign whereas we say none can truly partake of the Communion of Saints but those who are truly such and which consists in Spiritual participation of the Body and Blood of Christ according to John 6. 35. 1 Cor. 10. 16. 2 Cor. 13. 14. P. 20. The Bp's next Instance is no more to the purpose then the last he tells us in the Constantinopolitan Creed compiled about the Year 379. or 380. when rebaptizing Hereticks had turmoiled the Church 't is exprest I believe one Catholick Church I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of Sins that is says the Bp. persons being once Baptized and thereby ingrafted into the Church ought not to be Baptized again which is the true sense of one Baptism and not what Mr. P. suggests Answ The Bp. who so much faulted W. P. p. 14. for not citing Treatise or Page doth as before take the same liberty again in this Citation But suppose we should allow what he hath here cited which we do not how will the acknowledging one Baptism the occasion mentioned by the Bp. prove his point he brought this for an Antient Creed and as such we might expect his proof that Water Baptism and the Supper were made an Article therein whereas there is no word of the Supper expressed nor yet implied that we can perceive In short then this Instance falls with the first Then as to his saying Persons once Baptized c. is the true sence of the one Baptism and not what Mr. P. suggests Please Reader to view W. P's Defence p. 85 86. and see whether what W. P. says be his own Suggestions On the contrary W. P. cites Ephes 4. 5. One Lord one Faith one Baptism which one Baptism he plainly proves by several Scripture Arguments to be the one saving Baptism of Christ by the holy Ghost The Bp. is out if he thinks his bare Assertion against W. P. will pass for proof while he is silent to all the Arguments advanced by W. P. The Bp. should have remembred he told us p. 18. that Water Baptism without the New Creature or Baptism of the Spirit was not sufficient to the Salvation of adult Persons or words to the same effect which bespeak two Baptisms when the Apostle tells us Eph. 4. 5. but of one Baptism and if but one that not in … as Water is but the saving Baptism of the Spirit as was plainly prov●●●y W. P. This considered how could the Bp. now affirm that Persons once Baptized i. e. with Water is the true sence of one Baptism since himself confesseth Water Baptism is not sufficient to Salvation c. We suppose he will hardly say being once Baptized with Water produceth the Baptism of the Spirit and so maketh the one Baptism if not 't is worth his Consideration how to reconcile his Assertions in these two places with the Apostles one Baptism Ephes 4. 5. Now to the Bp's third and last proof about the Antient Creeds in which the Bp. Cites not only Treatise and Page but part of the Articles too but omits the main part of all namely the Year we must tell the Bp. this will make no more to his purpose then the former proofs for tho' we should allow the Citations true and that they are from the poor Waldenses whom W. P. commends for the good Qualifications he found in them Yet this Creed is too late to be accounted antient as in the time of Vladislaus King of Hungary the first King of that name according to Heylen's Cosmogr which was in the Year 1440. and the second in 1491. but whether we are right in the time or not yet 't is so late that 't is rank Popery to assert as the Bp. has laid it down viz. No Man is saved who eats not the body of Christ which body is not consecrated but in the Church and by a Priest Again that none are saved unless Baptized and that Infants are saved by Baptism The Bp. was much in the right to question what authority W. P. would allow the Waldenses in this Creed supposing it theirs To be sure say we none Nor will he allow it to be antient any more then those made in the dark time of Popery and therefore this proof also falls with the rest and if we should ask the Bp. himself what authority he would allow the Waldenses in this Creed will he undertake to vindicate it from point blank Popery we suppose nay As to what the Bp. saith of Tradition and consent of all Nations that will come under consideration in what follows Ibid. 20. The Bp. frames an Argument upon those two heads viz. Baptism and the Supper to prove us outwardly no Christians tho' in so doing he must bring himself under like circumstances in a parallel case Ibid. 20. The Bp. says to renounce or cast off the outward badges of the profession of Christianity which our Lord Christ instituted and his Apostles delivered and which the Apostolical Churches received and constantly practized which all Christian Churches ever since has held to is to renounce or to cast off the outward profession of Christianity but Mr. P. and his party renounce or cast off those outward badges of the profession of Christianity which Christ Jesus appointed and his Apostles delivered which the Apostolical Churches received and constantly practized which all Christian Churches have ever since held to therefore Mr. P. and his party have renounced or cast off the outward profession of Christianity that is outwardly are no Christians as to their hearts the Bp. leaves them to God and judges not Answ The Bp. in this Argument takes that for granted which we do not own namely that outward Baptism and the Supper were to be continued down in the Churches as Institutions of Christ as