A63200:188
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that…A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that…
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.
London: printed by T. Paine and M. Simmons for Thomas Underhill, 1644
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 strength of this Consideration stands in the parity which is betwixt the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament,1 Circumcision and Baptism, for parum par est ratio, but this parity is not found in every thing (as is manifest by the particulars alleged in the Consideration it self.) And we must justly require some reason to prove them like in that particular, but to unfold it more fully, we will consider three things. First, how far an argument may be drawn soundly from one Sacrament to another, or wherein the Sacraments agree, and wherein they differ. Secondly, What we are to think of the proposition it self. Thirdly, whether the Reason of Circumcision and Baptism be one in that particular.
The strength of this Consideration stands in the parity which is betwixt the Sacraments of the Old and New Testament,1 Circumcision and Baptisme, for parum par est ratio, but this parity is not found in every thing (as is manifest by the particulars alleadged in the Consideration it self.) And wee must justly require some reason to prove them like in that particular, but to unfold it more fully, we will consider three things. First, how far an argument may be drawn soundly from one Sacrament to another, or wherein the Sacraments agree, and wherein they differ. Secondly, What wee are to think of the proposition it self. Thirdly, whether the Reason of Circumcision and Baptisme be one in that particular.
- 1Erast so objects against Bern-Sicut a Circumcisione ad Baptismum argumentamur ut probemus infantes esse baptizandos, ita etiam licet ab agno Paschatis ad Coenam Domini, &c. whereto he truly replieth. Ego vero, non nego licere &c. at non temere & universaliter. Beza contra Erast. pag. 23.Erast so objects against Bern-Sicut a Circumcisione ad Baptismum argumentamur ut probemus infantes esse baptizandos, ita etiam licet ab agno Paschatis ad Coenam Domini, &c. whereto hee truly replyeth. Ego vero, non nego licere &c. at non temere & universaliter. Beza contra Erast. pag. 23.