Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	apostle_n	church_n	foundation_n	1,820	5	8.3994	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85422	VVater-dipping no firm footing for Church-communion: or Considerations proving it not simply lawful, but necessary also (in point of duty) for persons baptized after the new mode of dipping, to continue communion with those churches, or imbodied societies of saints, of which they were members before the said dipping; and that to betray their trust or faith given unto Jesus Christ to serve him in the relation and capacity, whether of officers, or other members, in these churches (respectively) by deserting these churches, is a sin highly provoking in the sight of God. Together with a post-script touching the pretended Answer to the Forty queries about Church-communion, infant and after baptism. By John Goodwin, a servant of God in the Gospel of his dear Son.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1653 (1653)	Wing G1213; Thomason E723_15; ESTC R202234	72,402	91

more then the other But the Grand untruth here is that I should have disclaimed communion with these Churches because there is no example in Scripture of such Church-Constitutions c. my Anti querist is very much mistaken in this for I disclaim no action whatsoever upon this account because there is no example of this action in the Scripture as neither do I perform any action simply because there is an example of such an action here But the adequate ground of my disclaiming any action and so of communion with any Church whatsoever is that I find no sufficient ground in the Scriptures for my doing it But I may and do find sufficient grounds in the Scripture for my doing of many things of which I find here no examples However upon this mistaken ground of my disclaiming communion with these two Churches he goeth on his way merrily and builds as securely as he that mistakes the sand for a rock 4. He advanceth supposing yet further that I hold communion with Churches built upon Infant-Baptism Surely here is a pair of mistakes one about his own another about my practise For 1. Himself disclaims communion with those Societies of Saints which here he calls Churches meerly upon this account because they are no Churches 2. Whereas he chargeth me with holding cammunion with Churches built upon Infant-Baptism the truth is that I hold no communion with such Churches nor do I know any Church one or other built upon any Baptism whether Infant-Baptism or Beleever-Baptism The Churches with which I hold communion are BVILT upon the Foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone Ephes. 2. 20. 5. Neither is it at all pertinent to the business before him to inform his Querist or others that there is example in abundance in Scripture of Churches of a better Constitution he means then of Churches built upon Infant-Baptism such as he supposeth I hold communion with and that this is of Saints baptized after they had beleeved We do not beleeve that Baptism whensoever or howsoever administred is any part of or ingredient into a Churches constitution more then the Gospel it self or the preaching hereof or the service of the Lords Table A Church may be of a very ill constitution though all the members of it have been regularly baptized and on the contrary of a good and sound constitution though there have been some defect or irregularity in their Baptism Baptism is extrinsecal to Church-constitution as the washing of a mans face or hands is to the constitution or complexion of his natural body 6. Another mistaken ground upon which he builds very high is that the Querist and others of his Judgment plead the Precept os circumcising Infants under the Law as virtually requiring the baptizing of Infants under the Gospel I confess if we should plead thus we should plead much after the rate of those who plead the unlawfulness of Church communion with the Saints because they jump not in conceit with them in every circumstance about Baptizing We are far from either saying or thinking that the precept of circumcising Infants under the Law virtually requires the baptizing of them under the Gospel We hold that had there not been a precept given in or under the Gospel for baptizing the precept of circumcising Infants under the Law could not have justified us in our baptizing them under the Gospel We do not go about to prove the lawfulness much less the necessity of baptizing from the precept of circumcising this is a Grand mistake in the Antiquerist about the sence of his Adversaries but we receiving a precept from God under the Gospel for baptizing without any determination of or limitation unto any certain age of the persons to be by vertue of this precept baptized and finding the Councel of God to have pitched upon Infancy as the most meet age for the reception of a former Ordinance of like spiritual signification and import with Baptism judg our selves bound in conscience rather to be directed to the proper subject of Baptism by the Councel of God in a case of like nature then to consult the wisdoms or wills rather of men in the business This considered 7. How not impertinent only but importune and unsavery is that insultation If it be not good reasoning from circumcision to Baptism let the Pedobaptists bid adieu to their cause of Infant Baptism which is built and bottomed thereupon Alas good man the cause of Pedo-baptism is not at all built or bottomed upon any reasoning from circumcision to Baptism but upon the good Word of God it self Neither have we any reason or need to bid adieu to this cause although to please our friend the Antiquerist we should take our leaves of our reasoning from the subject of circumcision to the more appropriate subject of Baptism Yea this our good freind himself being so well acquainted with us cannot be ignorant but that we have many other pillars hewn out of the Rock of the Scriptures whereon we build our cause of Pedo-baptism besides what we argue from the subject of circumcision Yea himself hath of late been hewing and hacking at some of them whereof notice may be taken in due time but his attempts against them have rather proved them to be strong then any ways weak 8. How impertinently weak is that insulting demand also in the process of this answer And now which of the horns of this Dolemma will the Pedobaptists suffer themselves to be gored by Here the Anti-querist it seems turns Querist himself But if he hath not an happier stroke in Anti-querism then in Querism he had better harken unto the Proverb Manum de tabulâ and leave his paper as white as he found it The Pedobaptists need not fear goaring by either of the horns of his Dilemma they stand so staringly wide that there is roomth enough and enough for seaven men to pass abrest between them For first the mans Dilemma taketh it for granted that uncircumcised persons were excluded surely he means always not sometimes or in some cases only for this would sink the saying too far beneath his cause from acts of Church Communion whilst circumcision was in force Will he say that women were circumcised or that they were excluded form acts of Church-communion because they were uncircumcised or that all those who were not circumcised in the Wilderness were excluded from all acts of Church communion for Forty Years together 2. The said Dilemma very weakly supposeth that the Author of it may from the exclusion of uncircumcised ones under the Law from acts of Church-communion then as well argue to the exclusion of unbaptized or unduly baptized ones under the Gospel from Church-communion now as we reason from the subject of circumcision to the subject of Baptism I wonder upon what principle or ground in reason such a supposition or conceit as this standeth For what the Antiquerist offereth upon this account is no better then

known by his own fruit Luk. 6. 44. then is our Baptism no corrupt Baptism but the Baptism commended by Christ or however far from being a nullity For it is a true rule Nonentis nulli sunt affectus nulla opperatio Nullities or non-entities have neither affections nor effects or operations produce nothing which is proper to be produced by a real and truly excistent cause But that Baptism amongst us which our Brethren very inconsiderately and invita veritate vote to be a nullity is as efficacious as operative in respect of all the main ends of Baptism the Baptism I mean intended by Christ as theirs is or can be yea in respect of some of these ends if not all it hath the preheminency For 1. It doth as solemnly with as much authority and power with as express a signification to the understandings and apprehensions of the world about us testifie and declare us the profesed Disciples and followers of Jesus Christ as that Baptism practized by them can do Nay in this which is one of the most considerable ends of Baptism it is of the two more efficacious then theirs For their Baptism is comparatively a kind of Barbarian to the world nor do the generality of men interpret or look upon it as any thing more significative or assertive of their owning the Name and Faith of Jesus Christ then our Baptism which was also theirs untill they renounced it by substituting another in the place of it Yea the sence of the world and of the generality of persons amongst whom they live is so far from being either that by their Infant-Baptism they stood insufficiently declared the professed Disciples of Christ or that by their new Baptism they make any materiall addition unto that their Declaration that it inclines rather to this viz. That they betake themselves to a Re-baptism more to disobliege themselves from what their Infant-Baptism ingaged them unto then to strengthen or make valid that ingagement which at least as they apprehend cannot receive any addition of strength or validitie by any further Baptism but they are jealous that it may be disinabled or at least disadvantaged by such an after-Baptism Of which apprehension I wish they had not and yet much more that they may not in time have too just a ground But however nothing can be more evident then that that Baptism is most serviceable and efficacious to testifie or demonstrate a person man or woman to be a professor of and to own the Name and Faith of Jesus Christ in the sight of the world whose signification and import in this behalf is best known unto the world If so then is our Baptism as valid as efficacious in respect of this great end of Baptism as our Brethrens new Baptism can be and consequently is far from being a nullity 2. Our Baptism is altogether as operative as bearing as ingaging upon our judgments and Consciences to become the reall loyall and true Disciples of Jesus Christ as theirs can be upon theirs or could be upon ours should we come under it For out of the sence and conscience we have that we have been Baptized and still own and stand by that our Baptism we expect no other but the severest judgment and condemnation which belong to Covenant-breakers with their God from his hand if we shall be found unfaithfull under this our Baptismall ingagement And certain I am that our Brethrens new-Baptism can have no richer no fuller no more vigorous or potent an influence upon their judgements and conscience in this kind then so I wish that theirs may hold weight with ours in this ballance If our Baptism whilst it was theirs also had not the same weight of engagement upon their consciences which it hath upon ours have they reason to judge us for it and not rather themselves Therefore in respect of this great end also of Baptism ours is no whit more a nullitie then theirs 3. And lastly nor can we or they reasonably and upon ground judge that our Baptism as we call Baptism is less edifying strengthening comforting to the inner man then theirs Our souls through the grace and goodness of our good God unto us have prospered as much under that Baptism which we own and by means of it as far as we are able to compute as we can upon consultation had with al Oracles that are like to inform us in the point expect they would or should have done under that Baptism whose threshold our Brethren place so neer the threshold of Christ himself I beleeve there are thousands yet abiding under our Baptism who would not willingly exchange spirituall estates with the best of those who to better their estates in this kind have sought security under the wing and shelter of a new Baptism yea I make very little question but that if our Brethren of this new Baptism at least many of them would deal ingeniously and freely and what is this but Christianly with us in the point they would acknowledge and confess that they carried far the greater part of that spirituall treasure of which they are at present possest from under that Baptism which they forsook unto that which they have taken in exchange for it Yea I heartily wish for the sake of some of them whom I know that their New Baptism doth not help to diminish their Old grace Therefore in respect of this great end also and benefit of Baptism the building up of the inner man in Grace and peace our Baptism is no whit behind theirs but if experience will be allowed to umpire much before it I know no other end of Baptism but what is easily reduceable to one of these three Set them then to judg as the Apostle speaketh in another case who are least esteemed in the Church whether that Baptism be like to be a nullity which acts and performs and this with authority and power all the ends services purposes and intents of Baptism yea and in most of them if not in all quits it self at a more worthy rate of efficacy and success then that which pretends to the honour of being the sole reality and truth CONSIDERATION XVII It is no where to be found in Scripture that any Church of Christ or imbodied society of Beleevers was commanded by God or Christ or his Apostles to be Dipped nor yet threatened or reproved by any of them for the non-practise of Dipping If this be denyed let the Scriptures one or more be produced for as yet none have been for the justification of such a Denyal Is it not then presumption in the Highest and an assuming of an Anti christian power to impose Laws upon Christian Societies which the Lord Christ never imposed yea and to censure and scandalize them with the odious and reproachful terms of Anti-christian and unclean only for the transgressions of their own Laws Nor will it serve the turn to pretend that it is to be found in Scripture that particular members of Churches or

amongst the Saints and which hath put the Christian world about us into a flame is by one of the gravest Authors and and greatest Apostles of the Anti-paedo baptistical Faith called and that with evidence enough of truth a carnal Ceremony † i. e. an external Rite of some sacred signification or import Now to make new partition walls of carnal Ceremonies and this not only between Abrahams spiritual seed and the prophane Gentile part of the world but between one part of this blessed seed it self and another so that the one because of this Ceremony rising up in their way may not come at to enjoy any spiritual communion with the other is it not the founding of a new kind of Judaism in the world and the making work for Christ to be crucified a second time for the dissolution of it CONSIDERATION X. Ignorance in some things appertaining to the knowledg of God and the mystery of Christ whether found in a Church or in particular persons rendereth neither the one nor the other unclean upon any such terms but that both may lawfully and without the least tincture of guilt be conversed with in a Church-way Otherwise there will neither Church nor Member be found upon Earth but whose communion will defile us in as much as the Apostle speaking as well of himself and his fellow Apostles as of the intire successive body of Christians in all ages saith We know in part and we prophecy in part 1 Cor. 13. 9. Again where Churches or persons know but in part it cannot be expected they should practise in whole or in full He is a good Christian who practiseth and walketh up to his light though he doth not walk above it yea although his light be somewhat low and mixt with much darkness And though an erring or mistaking Conscience will not simply or totally justifie a concurring practise yet will it justifie it comparatively it being better to follow the dictate or light of a mis-guided or mis-taught Conscience then to rebel against it Otherwise sad were the case of those sacrilegious Church-breakers who out of Conscience I judg no worse of many of them practise this enormity Now then they who give sentence against a Church or people as unclean for communion only because they do not practise Baptismal Dipping must ground the equity of such a sentence either 1. Upon their non-conviction of the necessity of such a practise or 2. Upon the non-practise it self which they must suppose either to be concurrent with or repugnant unto the light of their Judgments and Consciences If the former of these the ignorance or non-conviction of a Church or people of the necessity of Dipping be pretended for a ground of the sentence we speak of to justifie this pretence it must be proved that every mistake or dissatisfaction in Judgment in any controversal Point whatsoever of like difficulty or disputeableness with that about the necessity of Dipping rendereth a Church or people unclean for Communion But I look to see Jesus Christ as he is long before this be proved 2. If the ground of the said sentence be the latter the non-practise of dipping then in case it be supposed that this non-practise be a matter of conscience in the Church or people we speake of and confirm to their judgments they are adjudged unclean for not defiling or not sinning against their conscience But far be it from us to suspect our Brethren in the Faith of such a judgment as this If it be supposed to be contrary to their judgment and that in refusing to practise Baptismal dipping they go against their consciences then are the Supposers judgers of evil thoughts supposing that which they cannot prove indeed have no ground or reason at all to suspect but ground in abundance to conclude the contrary So that they can upon no Christian or reasonable ground pronounce any such hard sentence against their non dipping Brethren as of uncleanness for Church Communion And if they would but please plainly and clearly to declare wherein they place the high demerit the unpardonable crime of non-dipping whilest men remain dissatisfied either touching the lawfulness or necessity of the practise I verily beleeve they would soon be ashamed of their notion and out of hand pull down all they have built upon it CONSIDERATION XI When the Apostle writeth to the Churches in his days in sundry the inscriptions of his Epistles unto them wherein he describeth them he insereth the mention of their sanctification their calling to be Saints their being beloved of God their Saintship their faithfulness in Christ c. but never so much as hinteth their having been baptized Which is a strong presumption at least if not a demonstration that in case it be supposed that all these Churches were baptized yet the Apostle did not look upon their Baptism as any part of their Church-ship or of the visibility thereof much less as any essential part or point of either For if such a thing shall be supposed what reason can be imagined why their Baptism should not once or twice at least have been mentioned in their discription as well as their Faith Sanctification calling c. so frequently and well-nigh constantly I mean one or other of them So then it is a plain case that the Apostle doth not estimate the truth of Churches by the observation or practise of Baptism much less by the practise of such or such a determinate kind of baptizing but by the Faith and Holiness of the persons inchurched Baptism is never mentioned so much as by way of commendation either of Church or person at least not more then the observance of other ordinances no not when several other matters of praise are insisted on in reference unto either See 1 Cor. 11 2. Rom. 1. 8. 1 Cor. 1. 4 5. Ephes. 1. 5. Luk. 1. 6. Acts. 11. 24. to pass over other texts of like import and yet many things may be commendable in either which are not essentially requisite to their being And doubtless if men were not under some strong enchantment and the rational powers of their Souls strangely held in reference at least to the subject we now speak o● such an imagination as this would never have been found amongst all their thoughts That Baptism according to one mode or other should be a constituting principle of a true Church CONSIDERATION XII When the Apostle Paul instructeth Christian Churches with their respective members who and what manner of persons they are who are unmeet for their Christian Communion he mentioneth Fornicators Covetous Idolaters Railers Drunkards Extortioners Disorderly walkers c. but never persons of an holy and blamless conversation whether baptized or unbaptized If our Brethren reply that there was no occasion why he should mention persons unbaptized in as much as there was none such in these days who lived holily or had the names of Brethren amongst Christians We answer 1. That our Brethren are still

understandings nor with all the additional help of the light hitherto afforded us by our Brethren tell how to beleeve or conceive that all the Land of Judea and they of Ierusalem with all the region round about Iordan were all over-powered by any such high hand of Faith who yet came thick and threefold troops upon troops and companies after companies to be baptized of John and were baptized accordingly CONSIDERATION XIV For those who are babes in Christ and weak in the Faith yea for those who know but in part and higher then thus neither doth their knowledg it self rise who think they know more then all the world besides to mistake where in a manner all the judicious learned and grave all the zealous faithful and best conscienced Christians and Servants of God throughout the world Fathers Martyrs Reformers and others for sixteen generations together even from the days of the Apostles until now have mistaken and not been able to discover the truth or mind of God is doubtless the most venial and pardonable mistake that can well be imagined yea although it should be supposed that the subject matter wherein or about which this mistake hath been be of very great weight and consequence Such as this and no whit worse or more culpable then this is the mistake if yet a mistake it be of those Churches and Saints who judg it no ways necessary nor agreeable to the mind of Christ for them to desire a baptismal dipping having been regularly as they conceive and sufficiently baptized in their Infancy Now the common and best-known principles of reason and equity and of Christianity most of all upon mistakes of the most-venial nature and which are incident to the best the most watchful and faithful of men teach men to inflict the lightest punishment whether by censure or otherwise if any at all that well may be If then to judg and condemn a Church or people of God as a spurious and unclean Congregation with whom no man can joyn in Church-communion without polluting himself in the sight of God be an high and heavy censure which I presume no man questions then must they who inflict this censure only upon the account of the demerit of the aforesaid mistake needs be extreamly irregular unrighteous and unreasonable in so doing And yet they who in the open view of the world inflict it by an actual hasty and as it were a frightful rending and tearing off themselves from such Churches inflict it upon the hardest and most unchristian terms that can be imagined And give me leave here only to add this that I know no more pregnant a symptome of a strong inchantment delusion or distemper then when a petty handful of men are rank of confidence and conceit that all the world are out of their witts but themselves and that they are as so many stars of the first magnitude and all other men but as the snuffs of so many Candles CONSIDERATION XV That Baptism how duly soever administred is no Churchmaker but at the highest a Church-adorner and this possibly in some cases only too is evident from hence that the Lord Christ whilst he was yet unbaptized was as much the head and as legitimate an head of the Church as after his baptism And as Christ obtained not the Head-ship of the Church nor right unto it by being baptized so neither do beleevers obtain their right to membership in a Church by their being baptized Yea it is but conjectural and traditional Divinity to affirm or hold that all the members of all the Churches in the Apostles days were baptized Certain I am that Baptism cannot rationally pretend to so much Interest to constitute ●● legitimate members of Christian Churches under the Gospel as circumcision might to constitute the members of the Iewish Church under the Law Yet this Church was altogether as true a Church and all Abrahams children by Isaak as true members of this church when and whilest they had no practise of circumcision amongst them as viz. during their Fourty years journeying through the Wilderness as when it was in the most regular and standing use among them Yea doubtless Abraham and his family were as much the Church of God before the Ordinance it self of circumcision was delivered unto him as afterwards And why the Iewish children before the eight day should not be judged members of that church as well as after I understand not Therefore without all controversie Baptism is no builder of Churches although as some men now set it on work it is a puller of them down Nor doth it at all savour of Gospel dispensation that God should build his spiritual Temple upon Foundations made of a carnal ceremony or that he should deny that poor and mean priviledg comparatively of Church-membership unto that Grace I mean Faith unto which he hath vouchsafed that High and Heavenly prerogative the making of men to becom the Sons of God Besides that which is no where mentioned as commending any man either unto God or men more then or so much as many other duties or qualifications cannot reasonably be judged more necessary to any mans regular admission into Church-fellowship then those other things Now Baptism is no where represented in the Scriptures as commending any man either unto God or men nor as any considerable testimony of any mans Faith vast multitudes of people having been baptized by Iohn yea and by Christ himself or his Disciples whereas there were very few true beleevers amongst them Mat. 3. 5. Mar. 1. 5. Luk. 7 21. Compared with Iohn 1. 11. Ioh. 3. 32 Acts. 1. 15. whereas other qualifications as Faith Love Righteousness Holiness Humility the new Creature the hearing of the Word the searching of the Scriptures with many others of like character are frequently insisted upon as matters of worthy testimony unto those in whom they were found yea and some of them of signal acceptance with God Therefore certainly it is a most groundless and importune conceit to estimate the truth of a Church of Christ by the Baptism of the members or to deny unto such congregations or bodies of Saints the legitimacy of Church-ship upon a pretence and conceit of their not being baptized which are in all things which commend a Church either unto God or men the Glory of Churches yea and in the Apostles sence 2 Cor. 8. 23. the Glory of Christ himself CONSIDERATION XVI The main if not the only ground and reason why our newbaptizing and baptized Brethren reject the Baptism so esteemed and practised among us is because they suppose it to be a meer nullity and to have nothing in it of the Baptism appointed by Christ Upon this their supposition they proceed with the utmost severity against us they excommunicate us and deliver us up to Satan that we may learn rightly to baptize But if the Lord Christs rule be true a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit Mat. 7. 18. And again that every tree is

beleeve it is much harder for the Anti-querist to escape goaring as he calls it by one or other of the horns of this Dilemma then we found it to make an escape from both the horns of that Dilemma which was prepared by him to do the mischief 12. Concerning the Text 1 Cor. 12. 13. where the Apostle saith not as our Anti-querist citeth the words shorter by the head that they were all baptized into one Body but BY ONE SPIRIT they were all baptized c. this Scripture I say we argued somewhat at large in the last of our Considerations and found war in the heart of it against Church-constitution by Water-Baptism And running is no posture for repetitions Only whereas my Friend the Anti-querist challengeth me that some while since I interpreted this Scripture comportingly with his notion the truth is that I do not find such a line in any fragment of the history of my life extant at present in my memory yet because I dayly find so little stedfastness in my memory as I do I had rather in the business trust my Friend and his memory then mine own But this I well remember that long since I learned this Christian Principle from an Heathen Philosopher {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} A man must be content to sacrifice even his own sayings and opinions upon the service of the Truth This kind of sacrifice I have oft offered and if my Antagonist and some others could be perswaded to consecrate themselves Priests of this Order with me the water of Baptism would be no longer a fire to divide between Friends and Friends But they rather chuse to be Priests of that Order whose Hierourgy or Priestly Function mainly stands in sacrificing the body upon the service of the rayment or the substance upon the service of the shadow 13. Whereas he demands Ought not that which was a reason to them he means the Apostles in the primitive times not to admit Church-members into Church fellowship we pardon the impropriety without Baptism to be a reason unto us likewise to steere the same cou●se c. doth he not very impertinently and groundlesly suppose that they had a reason not to admit the admission he speaks of He hath not hitherto so much as intimated unto us any reason at all of such a non-admission in the Apostles as that now mentioned If that should be granted him which he will never be able to prove viz. that the Apostles did not admit into Church-fellowship without Baptism yet it will not follow from hence that therefore they had a reason to admit none without it especially if the case were so as the Anti querist seems to suppose it viz. that no unbaptized person ever desired such admission of them And suppose for argument sake that they had de facto admited into Church-communion only unbaptized persons it would not follow from hence that therefore they had reason to exclude all others as all that were baptized in case they had desired it If all who desired Church-fellowship and consequently all who were admitted unto it were baptized is this any argument or proof that therefore in case others had desired it they must needs have been rejected If a man should go a fishing upon the Seas and should catch only of one sort of Fish as suppose Whiteings would it follow that therefore he had reason to catch no other 14. How importune and impertinent are these words also If so then farewel all Gospel obligations For if we may take liberty to cast away one Law of Gospel Order and Worship then why not two and so three and in the end all c. For doth he not here suppose that separating from Churches or persons unbaptized though esteemed in the world and by all but himself and his baptized is or was a Law of Gospel Order binding Christians of the first age Surely this Law is written on the back-side of some of Pauls Epistles where no man did ever read it And they that take liberty to cast away this Law are more like to bid all Gospel obligations welcome then to bid them farewel Secondly he supposeth that those rules by which the Apostles ordered themselves in their times were binding to Christians of that age which is broadly importune and truthless For the truth is that no rule whatsoever by which the Apostles ordered themselves as Apostles and certainly they ordered themselves by many such rules as these was binding unto any other Christian of that age but unto themselves only Thirdly and lastly he supposeth it a grand absurdity and tending to a dissolution of all Gospel Order to imagin that there were any Gospel rules binding only to Christians of the first age of the Gospel Doth he think that when Christians of the age he speaks of sold their possessions lands and houses and brought the prices of them and laid them down at the Apostles feet they did this irregularly or without rule or without a rule binding unto them If this latter then it follows that either Christ himself or his Apostles prescribed some rules which were not binding no not unto Christians of this first age Or doth he think that that rule by which those Christians acted in the case specified is binding unto us now Yet that Rule respected charity and self-denial and so in reason should be more binding unto us now then rules respecting only an outward rite or ceremony Again it was a rule binding unto those Christians he speaks of that their women praying or prophesying should have their head covered and that men on the contrary should have their heads uncovered Doth he judge this rule binding unto us now Or do all men sin who Prophesy i. e. joyn with him that preahcheth the Word in the act of hearing with their heads covered I beleeve there are many who should sin much more if they should Prophecy with their heads uncovered viz. all those who by reason of weakness or tenderness are like to suffer in their healths if they should sit uncovered for an hour or two together in a cold place and cold season There is the same confideration of a frosty-dipping to persons that are valetudinary of a crazy and infirm constitution though it were supposed that there was a rule binding Christians of that age and of those warm Countries to dip at all times immediately upon their beleeving Instance might be given in several other Gospel rules which were binding unto Christians of the first age at least unto those particular Christians to whom they were prescribed and yet are not so unto us now The rule which prescribed the Holy kiss which prescribed the speaking in an unknown tongue by two or at the most by three 1 Cor. 14. 27. which prescribed the holding of the peace to him that was speaking in the Church in case any thing were revealed unto another 1 Cor. 14. 30. which prescribed abstaining from meat offered to Idols and from blood c. were