A47585:262
Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ…
Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book entitled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author / by B.K. ...Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book intituled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author / by B.K. ...
London : Printed, are to be sold by Benj. Harris ..., 1698
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Laying on of Hands UPON BAPTIZED BELIEVERS, As such, Proved both fr… › Chapter 7
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.
2. When imposed as an Institution of Christ, a beginning Doctrine, or Oracle of God, a Foundation of Christian Religion, to which every Disciple of Christ ought to submit on penalty of Noncommunion, for rejecting a Fundamental Principle, tho not one word of Institution, Command, Precept, or Example for the same; and that under pretence of receiving more of the Spirit of Christ thereby, which is a Spirit of Love, Meekness, &c. There appears the Spirit of uncharitableness, judging. rending, and dividing the Body of Christ, and for asserting for Doctrine and Practice, the Customs and Commands of Men: it is for these things our Offences lie so well founded upon Deut. 4.2. and 12.23. Rev. 22.18. Prov. 30.6.
Answ. 1. Could we have such a liberty as to make a holy Institution of Christ only a formal or civil Ceremony or Gesture, or a thing indifferent, to do, or not do; our Brethren, it seems, would not be offended.
2. Were it a true Charge he brings, he would have cause to be offended with us; but whether it be a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ, and an Oracle of God, or a Tradition of Men, which we contend for, let the impartial Reader judg. Here is nothing offered by our Opponent to deserve any further Answer; it calls more for Reprehension than Confutation. Who seemed more censorious than Mr. Danvers, who charged his Brethren with what they most abominated, viz. tearing and dividing the Body of Christ, Will-worship, nay being under the dreadful Curse of Adding to the Word of God?