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

ANSWER.

1. I have no need to deny the Major; but it is not sound: for they are called the Circumcision, i. e. the Circumcised; because they were actually Circumcised, and not because that all that were so had right to it. 2. To the Minor, I grant it; but with this note, that it is not because of their short faith that they were to be circumcised, but upon the Parents or their own profession and sincere consent to the Covenant. The Conclusion again containeth not your Thesis. There's nothing in it about [giving title] or any thing of necessary connection.

1. I have no need to deny the Major; but it is not sound: for they are called the Circumcision, i. e. the Circumcised; because they were actually Circumcised, and not because that all that were so had right to it. 2. To the Minor, I grant it; but with this note, that it is not because of their short faith that they were to be circumcised, but upon the Parents or their own profession and sincere consent to the Covenant. The Conclusion again containeth not your Thesis. There's nothing in it about [giving title] or any thing of necessary connexion.

ARGUMENT. V.

Mr. Blake. Those that are the servant of God, whom God owns as his servants, have right in his sight to be received into his house, and to be entitled to the Privileges of his Church. This we think should not be denied, and that God will take it ill if any shall deny it. But men short of that faith which Justifies, are owned of God as his servants, as is clear,