Certain disputations of right to sacraments, and the true nature of visible Christianity defending…

It is therefore little to his main purpose or cause, that Mr. Blake sect. 13. Prop. 11. pag. 200. attempts to prove that (the Lords Supper with the word as appendant to it, may be serviceable to bring up those of Covenant-Interest to the terms and Propositions of the Covenant, may serve to work a man of Profession of faith unto faith saving and Justifying: a man in the Name the Lord's, to turn unfeignedly and sincerely to the Lord.) For x. his half Professor is not in the mutual Covenant (which its like he means by Covenant-Interest.) 2. The distinction between a Nominal Christian and a Sincere; a Profession of Justifying faith, and that faith it self, leaves out the persons that he hath to defend; that is, The Professors of another species of Faith. 3. Its one thing to prove that the Sacrament may convert the unconverted, that is, that its possible, and that it is a thing that eventually hath come to pass; and another thing to prove, that it is commanded to the unconverted or allowed them to be used to that end. The later is the thing that should be proved by him, and not the former only.

It is therefore little to his main purpose or cause, that Mr. Blake sect. 13. Prop. 11. pag. 200. attempts to prove that (the Lords Supper with the word as appendant to it, may be serviceable to bring up those of Covenant-Interest to the terms and Propositions of the Covenant, may serve to work a man of Profession of faith unto faith saving and Justifying: a man in the Name the Lord's, to turn unfeignedly and sincerely to the Lord.) For x. his half Professor is not in the mutual Covenant (which its like he means by Covenant-Interest.) 2. The distinction between a Nominal Christian and a Sincere; a Profession of Justifying faith, and that faith it self, leavs out the persons that he hath to defend; that is, The Professors of another species of Faith. 3. Its one thing to prove that the Sacrament may convert the unconverted, that is, that its possible, and that it is a thing that eventually hath come to pass; and another thing to prove, that it is commanded to the unconverted or allowed them to be used to that end. The later is the thing that should be proved by him, and not the former only.

But because his Proposition is somewhat more bashful than some of the Arguments brought as to prove it. (which have the face to look further) I shall briefly examine them.