Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	believe_v	book_n	church_n	3,763	5	5.1990	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57955	A vindication of the baptized churches from the calumnies of Mr. Michael Harrison, of Potters Pury in Northampton-shire. Being an answer to his two books, intituled, Infant baptism God's ordinance. By William Russel, M.D. A lover of primitive Christianity.	Russel, William, d. 1702.	1697 (1697)	Wing R2360A; ESTC R218555	79,105	138

Amity with him And therefore their opposing force to force in their own Defence and for the maintaining the Liberties of Europe cannot be otherwise than lawful This is our Case Mr. Harrison after himself was become a Dissenter could not be contented to enjoy the Liberty of his Conscience to Worship God by the Favour of our Rulers who have permitted him the quiet and peaceable Exercise of Religion in his own way but he must be disturbing his quiet and peaceable Neighbours Preaching and Printing against them in such a shameful and unpresidented manner that they were not able to be silent but Necessitated to write in their own Defence Whatever therefore is the Consequence of this Vndertaking we are to be excused and the blame must lye at his Door he being the Aggressor After his first Book was published Mr. Hercules Collins did write an Answer thereto which was sufficient to have silenced him from any further prosecution thereof together with that addition made by that eminently Learned Minister Mr. Richard Claridge But as if nothing had been done of this kind he runs over his old Nine Arguments again in his second Book without giving a solid Answer to any thing that those Gentlemen had said And for want of Truth Reason and Argument to defend his own Position he stuffs his Book with scurrilous and abusive Language railing and reviling ridiculing and reproaching both them and the whole Party So that his Books can be esteemed by sober judicious Christians no other than scandalous Libels And if this be the first Fruits of his Labour in print it 's adviseable he either stop here or alter his Mode of Writing for in both these Tracts he hath dipt his Pen in Gall and Vinegar yea in the Poyson of Asps That this is true will appear if we consider That he is not contented only to accuse the Baptists in general who whatever he thinks are no inconsiderable Party with Error Heresie and Blasphemy in Points of Doctrine but Vnchristian Carriages fearful Curses yea with Murder it self and that their Imployment hath been to Play with Rattles ride on Hobby-horses and wallow in their own Dung with much more of this kind which I have faithfully Collected from his two Books and placed together at the entrance of my own that the World may see what a Monster of a Man I have to deal with in this Vndertaking If therefore I have let drop any words which may savour of great Indignation against such a procedure I hope the Reader will make a Charitable Construction of it For as the Apostle saith in another Case He hath Compelled me Having thus given this brief Account both of the Occasion and Manner of Manageing this Vndertaking I shall commit it to thy serious and impartial Perusal and Consideration Begging that the Father of Lights may assist thee therein that thro' his Blessing it may be a Means of thy Illumination in the Truths of Christ and through his Grace of the Salvation of thy precious Soul W.R. The EPISTLE of the Author to Mr. Michael Harrison Teacher of a Presbyterian Congregation in Potters-Pury in Northampton-shire SIR YOur Person I know not but I can with great facility discern your Spirit and the Frame and Temper of your Mind by your two Books for it 's discovered almost in every Paragraph thereof I have endeavoured to shun following your Example Quoad potest with respect to the Nature of the thing and instead of Railing to give you Scripture Reason and Argument for what I have said But whether after all as to your self I have not lost my labour you are best able to resolve For my own part I have little hopes of such who set themselves to oppose and contradict the Truths of God in such a way as you have done However I have according to my power endeavoured your Conviction being exhorted by the Apostle 2 Tim. 2.25 In Meekness to instruct those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth But Dear Sir remember that in the Judgment of the Apostle it 's but a peradventure be not therefore high minded but fear For as our Lord said to Paul It 's hard for thee to kick against the Pricks to spurn against the Authority of Jesus Christ in his Word Sir One Eminent Instance of your Wilfull Opposition to Truth and the Conviction of your own Conscience is that you tell us about Aenon in John 3.23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim because there was much water there and they came and were baptized Now Sir You tell us it could not be supposed to be done by dipping nay almost impossible it should because of the extream scarcity of Water that there was not Water to dip such multitudes in That at Aenon where John was baptizing there was not much water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but Oculus an Eye a very little Fountain now here you speak directly contrary to the very Letter of the Text For the Holy Ghost saith There was much water And you say There was not much water Which must we believe This is a bold and daring Assertion Now Mr. H. Collins in his Answer to your first Book sufficiently confutes this Assertion of yours not only from Scripture but by the Authority of Learned Men who also were for Infant-sprinkling as the Learned Lightfoot Dr. Hammond Erasmus and that profound Critick Mr. Poole who all testifie there was Pools of Water many Waters gushing Streams of Water and that the Word so signifies both in the Greek and Syrian Languages Now if you had confessed your Error in your Second Book you had heard nothing from me about it But in your second Book you persist in your opposition hereunto for you say in page 33. Mr. Collins saith I have contradicted the Scripture in saying there was not much Water there Which you are pleased to say is no contradiction for notwithstanding the Scripture saith otherwise yet you say what I have said is true And you bring the Evidence of the Learned Piscator after all this to contradict your self The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 videntur significare plures rivos c. That the words signifie many Rivers c. If there was many Rivers as your Author saith no Man can doubt but there was much water and that it was a fit place to dip multitudes in And why you brought this Testimony unless to confute your self I know not The next Testimony you bring is Hierom Aquae multae erant illic there was much water there But because that would have directly contradicted your self you say which Holybuse Englishes many Waters And you say the Town had its Name from some Fountains of Water springing there And you further say That Aenon come from the Hebrew Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gnajin a Fountain A Man would have thought all this had beeh a full Confutation of your self and you had been

from Gen. 1.1 when according to his own Assertion all true Believers are in the Covenant of Grace and so are the Elect of God in a true and proper sence and the fit subjects of Baptism And if he would himself who is yet an unbaptized person truly believe and be baptized and by a Gift from Christ did once become a Teacher in the true visible Church he might then baptise penitent Believers upon a foundation that himself acknowledges to be good and warrantable from the practice of the Apostles But for his baptizing Infants as he hath no authority for it from the Word of God so by his own Confession he hath no Foundation for it as they are in Covenant because he doth not know they are so But 2dly He saith page 7. That all Infants of such believing parents i. e. External and Visible Professors are in the Covenant of Grace and have as much a right to Baptism the Now Seal of the Covenant as the Infants of the Jews had to Circumcision the then Seal of the Covenant And saith This is the principal thing designed from this Text meaning Gen. 17.7 c. Well if it be so it shall be considered but I pray who told him these things he hath so boldly asserted For in the first place If all Infants are not within the Covenant of Grace how comes it about that all the Infants of such believing Parents qua talis are in that Covenant Hath he not forgot what he wrote in the very Page before That the Covenant of Grace is God's gracious Promise of delivering from a state of Sin and Death and bringing into a state of Salvation by Jesus Christ all that by faith fly to and lay hold on him and could it enter into his imagination that little Infants can by faith fly to and lay hold on Christ And if they cannot then it 's plain this Gentleman hath been guilty of a Self-contradiction from which he can no ways extricate himself Mr. Collins had given him sufficient notice of it by saying surely the Gentleman hath forgot himself in the Definition of the Covenant of Grace and hath sufficiently confuted this Assertion but I find it 's as yet a Work he cares not to undertake to recant his Errors when he is detected for them But 2ly How doth he know that Infants have as much a right to Baptism now as the Infants of the Jews had to Circumcision He gives us neither Reason Argument nor Scripture in this place to prove it and therefore we must consider it our selves All the Answer I think needful to give is this Infants were commanded by God to be circumcised Gen. 17.10 Every man-child among you shall be circumcised Ver. 12. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised And the particular Direction is given Ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin Here you see is the Command of God both for the Work it self the Subject upon whom and the time when it was to be performed So that God's Command gave Infants then a right to Circumcision Now let but Mr. H. shew us any such Command in all the Scriptures for the baptizing of Infants and we will thank him for we never yet could find it in all the Book of God And till he doth we have no reason to believe what he so confidently asserts to be true But 3ly Mr. H. asserts That Baptism is the now Seal of the Covenant I know not how he will prove it for I am sure it 's an unscriptural Notion For the Holy Scripture doth no where tell us that Baptism is the seal of the Covenant but hath plainly told us that Christians were sealed with the holy Spirit Ephes 1.13 14. After that ye believed ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of our Inheritance And I will rather believe the Apostle Paul than Mr. H. And this leads me to consider what he hath asserted in his first Chapter Part 1. CHAP. III. HAving in the former Chapter confuted those Arguments he hath brought from Gen. 17. to prove Infants Baptism I come now to consider his five introductory Considerations which he saith are very needful for the right understanding the Controversy of Infant-baptism 1. He saith That a Doctrine or Practice may be proved to be of God two ways 1. By the express Words of Scripture 2. Or from evident Consequences drawn from Scripture As to the first It is a great Truth And thus we can prove our Practice of Believers Baptism with all the Perspicuity imaginable as I shall make appear when I come to treat of that Subject Therefore he must from his own Rule acknowledge that our Practice therein is of God But I am sure he is conscious to himself that the Practice of Infant-baptism cannot be proved by the express Words of Scripture because he finds fault with us for urging them to it in Page 10. where he brings us in saying bring us a plain Text and we will believe it and represents it as an unreasonable Demand But if his Passion hath not so far transported him as to make him forget what Subject-matter he is treating of he might have forborn those Reflections against us For I do affirm that Baptism is a part of Instituted Worship and therefore whilst he pretends to practice Infant-baptism he is obliged to shew us where it is expresly commanded in the Word of God or otherwise how does he know it is the Will of God that it should be practised at all For all Instituted Worship hath its Foundation only in the Will of the Law-giver as he hath revealed it unto us and unless he hath found out some other Rule of Faith and Practice besides the Word of God he is bound to submit himself to the Authority thereof in the Determination of this Controversy To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them Isa 8.20 2. He endeavours to perswade us That evident Consequences drawn from Scripture are sufficient I might deny this in the Point under Consideration because Baptism is a part of Instituted Worship For altho' this may be true about speculative Points in Divinity it is no necessary Consequence it must be so in positive Duties But I will not insist upon it but for Arguments sake allow it to be true And therefore let him proceed as soon as he pleases to prove the Baptism of Infants an Ordinance of God by evident Confequences drawn from Scripture and I will allow it As for his second Observation it is applicable to himself and not to us and therefore I shall leave it at his own door 3. He saith Those Doctrines which were clearly revealed and fully consirmed in the Old Testament tho' little or nothing be said of them in the Now Testament and were never repealed are yet to be owned received and believed as if much had been said of them in the

be a true Visible Church who do not thus admit Members by Regeneration but by Generation only and we have great reason so to do because they have only Humane Invention for their Foundation and not the Authority of God's Word as I have already shewed in this Treatise to which I refer you 2. He tells his People that we are you see no Churches no Ministers no Christians c. whereas there is nothing of Ministers intended in this Article as all may see that read it but that of Ministers under the Name of Elders or Pastors is contained in the 15th Article But he that writes in haste may repent at leisure 3. He saith We do by that make them no Christians I must confess I know not what his People are but I hope they are men of greater Charity and Moderation than their Priest or else I am sure they are not well qualified Christians But how can he think so from that Article when the design thereof is to shew who are orderly Members of a true visible Church and do therein declare that every one before they are admitted to baptism are to be true penitent Believers and he knows 't is our avowed principle not to admit any other but such only that in the judgment of Charity are so What sorts of Persons he accounts Christians I know not but I do account such to be so that are true penitent Believers and I hope there are many such in the World altho' they do not agree with us about some of the external modes of Worship but this seems to be done on purpose to exasperate the Spirits of his People against us but I hope they will not be so unwise as to mind what such a Clamorous Pen saith against us without better evidence Having cleared our selves from this Abuse I think it highly reasonable to know who it is he owns for Churches and Ministers for those that are rightly constituted according to the Primitive Pattern he is against so that it must be some others Now in Part 1. page 6. Mr. H. saith Whoever will be a Member of the Christian Church must be baptized 2. He tells us That Persons being knit to Christ by a vital union as they are living branches in him and the Elect of God is not a ground for Baptism and yet he confesses that thus only the Elect are in Covenant 3. When he comes to give us an account who are in the visible Covenant which in his Language is visible Church-members he saith page 7. Thus all who profess Christ Tares and Wheat Wise Virgins and Foolish this is the ground of Baptism He is much mistaken about the Parable of the Tares in Mat. 13. to apply it to Visible Church-members for our Lord doth not say the Field is the Church but the field is the World The good Seed are the Children of the Kingdom i. e. the Church and the Tares are the Children of the Wicked One i. e. the Devil the Harvest is the end of this World and the Reapers are the Angels c. Now had I been to plead against some of the cursed persecuting Tyrants of the World or against those bloody persecuting Principles and Practices of your Old Friend John Calvin I would have used this Text for an Argument against them as genuine and proper but it hath no relation to the visible Church for the Tares are the Rabble of the wicked out of the visible Church and such who shall be damned ●ternally for the Angels shall cast them into a Furnace of fire c. But however it seems they will serve Mr. H. to make Church-members of for he saith in the words following They are to be accounted Believers in Covenant and their Children to be baptized and that all Infants of such believing Parents are in the Covenant of Grace and yet in the same page he saith We do not baptize persons as the Elect of God or Infants as the Infants of the Elect for we do not know who belong to the Election of Grace But self-contradictions are common with him I shall make some few Remarks upon it and so proceed to what I intend 1. That if all the unconverted Hypocrites among all that profess the Christian Name be but baptized they are Believers in the Covenant of Grace then by his own Principle they must all be saved for they can never fall totally and finally 2. That if all the Infants of such are in the Covenant of Grace then they also must needs be saved by his Doctrine It 's an easie way to bring Persons into the Covenant of Grace if sprinkling a little cold Water on their Faces will do it 3. That notwithstanding all this it seems he doth not know that any one either of his Church-members or their Infants are in the Covenant of Grace neither doth he baptize them as such for he plainly confesses he doth not know who belongs to the Election of Grace Then it 's as plain that he is not sure that any of his Members or their Infants shall be saved and then they are at charge to maintan him to very little purpose Nay further he doth not know by this confused way of arguing that any of those Churches Ministers or Christians that belong to those visible Churches he talks of are in any more hopes of Salvation than those Heathens he speaks of in another place whom he with Calvin of old condemns to the pit of Hell for no other imaginable Reason than the Decree of God built only upon this Supposition because God will have it so But God will not entrust these rasn Men to be Judges of the World For he hath committed all Judgment to the Son otherwise the poor Anabaptists would be under bad Circumstances I now proceed to prosecute my Design to discover who it is that he intends by Ministers By Ministers he must needs intend those that were before described to be Members viz. Either his carnal Professors or Infants born of them Infants he cannot mean because they are not capable If you would therefore be satisfied he hath told you it is all the Ministers that profess Christ besides those of our way For there lyes the Antithesis For he saith we disown them all so to be but our selves and he owns them or else he hath no reason to be angry with us I hope we are not to understand that he is displeased with us for disowning them whom he disowns To be short The Membership and Ministry of the Presbyterians Episcopal and Romish Church are all built upon the same foundation which will appear if you ask but a few Questions 1 Que. Whether the Presbyterians do not own the Church of England to be a true Church Their Answer must be Yes because we received our Baptism from them and never repeated it and therefore they must be a true Church or else our Baptism is no true Baptism 2 Que. Whether the Presbyterians do not own the Bishops and their