A26886:449
Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…
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 ...
London: printed by R.W. for Nevil Simmons, 1658
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The 18th Argument [Mr. Blake overpassing, answers the 19th which is, It is not communicable to any but the penitent:1 therefore not a converting Ordinance] or, [That Ordinance that is not communicable to any but the penitent, is not converting: But, &c. Mr. Blake denieth the Major to be true, unless limited, and giveth an instance; Reproof is for Conversion: yet not to all: all converting Ordinances are not promiscuously to be applied to all.] Repl. An unanswerable Argument, and a mere impertinent Answer. Is it not a wonder how the Major could be denied? without distinguishing of Penitence, and saying that the Sacrament is communicable to the impenitent as to saving Repentance, but not as to common Repentance, and therefore may convert to saving Repentance. But he answer as if the Major had been this. [That Ord•nance which is for conversion, is for all]: when it's contrarily, [That which is for the converted only is not to convert] *So that Mr. Blake saith nothing at all to the Argument, when he pretendeth to deny the Major, which taken of sound Repentance is as undeniable as that [The Medicine that is only for the living, is not to make the dead alive]: so (the Ordinance ⟨p. 138⟩which is only for the Penitents is not to convert men to repentance.] To which he answers, by saying that [Converting ordinances are not to be promiscuously applied.] Whats that to the Major, or Argument? The Pope dwelleth not at Rome, because the Turk dwelleth at Constantinople. So much for these Arguments and their Answers: the rest I shall pass over which Mr. Blake hath about Sacraments being converting Ordinances; Only telling him, that I confidently deny his great Assertion, pag. 241. [the unconverted have a fundamental proper right to the Lords Supper] and yet do not find my self in any [inextricable snares:] nor will by difficulties be frighted to that opinion.
The 18th Argument [Mr. Blake overpassing, answers the 19th which is, It is not communicable to any but the penitent:1 therefore not a converting Ordinance] or, [That Ordinance that is not communicable to any but the penitent, is not converting: But, &c. Mr. Blake denieth the Major to be true, unless limited, and giveth an instance; Reproof is for Conversion: yet not to all: all converting Ordinances are not promiscuously to be applyed to all.] Repl. An unanswerable Argument, and a meer impertinent Answer. Is it not a wonder how the Major could be denied? without distinguishing of Penitence, and saying that the Sacrament is communicable to the impenitent as to saving Repentance, but not as to common Repentance, and therefore may convert to saving Repentance. But he answer as if the Major had been this. [That Ordnance which is for conversion, is for all]: when it's contrarily, [That which is for the converted only is not to convert]