Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	find_v	scripture_n	2,794	5	5.7360	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94733	An apology or plea for the Two treatises, and appendix to them concerning infant-baptisme; published Decemb. 15. 1645. Against the unjust charges, complaints, and censures of Doctor Nathanael Homes, Mr Iohn Geree, Mr Stephen Marshall, Mr John Ley, and Mr William Hussey; together with a postscript by way of reply to Mr Blakes answer to Mr Tombes his letter, and Mr Edmund Calamy, and Mr Richard Vines preface to it. Wherein the principall heads of the dispute concerning infant-baptism are handled, and the insufficiency of the writings opposed to the two treatises manifested. / By Iohn Tombes, B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1646 (1646)	Wing T1801; Thomason E352_1; ESTC R201072	143,666	170

of the Supper The quoting of mine owne text were enough I will set down his words as I find them that the Reader may judge whether there be truth in it that I have snatched his word● from their own Defence and whether he did not oppose demonstration of Scripture to ●●●ritt●n tradition The words are thus I say this for the setling of such as are not wilful that 〈◊〉 take the baptism of Infants to be one of the most reverend generall and uncontrouled traditions which the Church ha●h and which I would no losse doubt of then the Creed to be Apostolicall And although I confesse my selfe yet unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for it yet first sithence Circumcision was applied to the Infants the eighth day in the Old Testament Secondly there is no words in the New Testament to infringe the liberty of the Church in it nor speciall reason why we should bereave her of it Thirdly sundry Scriptures affoord some friendly proofes by consequent of it Fourthly the holinesse of the child externall and visible is from their parents who are or ought to be chatechised confessors penitents and Protestants in truth which priviledge only open revolt disables them from therefore I say the Seed being holy and belonging to the Covenant the Lord graciously admits them also to the Seale of it in Baptisme If Master Marshall please he may write backe to his reverend and learned friend that the supposed Anabaptist thinks his plaister too narrow for the sore that he seems to eate his own words that his words help me to shew that he once thought it indeed one of the most reverend generall and uncontroled traditions which the Church hath and which he would no lesse doubt of then the Creed to be Apostolicall which if he meane it of the Creed called the Apostles as it is now Parker in his booke de descensu ad inferos and others have shewed to have been made long after the Apostles dayes and the tale of their meeting to compose it in the exposition on the Creed attributed to Ruffinus or some other to be of no credit And for Scripture Master Rogers findes but friendly proofes somewhat like Bellarm●nes pie probabiliter credi potest and that there is no word in the New Testament to infringe the liberty of the Church in it which if Master Rogers can satisfie himself with he may I professe I dare not so play with my own conscience and I thought this was fit to be told Master Marshall to shew that I was not the only man that questioned whether his proofes for Infant-baptisme were so undeniable as he would have them and that 's enough to shew the unreasonablenes of the violence of his spirit against those that differ from him And for his Quaere why he should not answer me silentio contemptu I presume Master Marshall hath long since done that office of a friend to tell him it is written Rom. 14. 10. Why doest thou set at at naught thy brother I had said not as Mr Marshall repeats it Master Ba●l cuts the sinewes of the argument from Circumcision but me thinkes Mr Balls words cut the sinewes of that argument And so they do plainly For if however Circumcision and Baptisme agree or differ wee must looke to the institution and the agreement is not enough to conclude that Baptisme belongs onely to members in Church-Covenant and their children because it was so in Circumcision without an institution as the new England Elders reason by the same reason however Baptisme and Circumcision agree or differ yet Baptisme will not belong to Infants because Circumcision did so by vertue of proportion without an institution which if Mr Ball or Mr Marshall could shew they needed not trouble us with the Command about Circumcision of male infants to prove Infant-Baptisme which is indeed to maintain that the ceremoniall saw still binds which is plain Judaisme But what sayes Mr Marshall to this If Mr Marshall cut the sinewes of the argument from Circumcision to Baptisme himselfe was very much mistaken in his his own meaning and intention because in the same place he makes them parallell in this and I might have done well to have informed the reader so much I was told there was a very intelligent man that said he was sorry that I had Mr Marshall for my Antagonist as knowing him to be apt to mistake which he conceived would be a vexation to me and indeed I find his words true For whereas I said only Mr Ball 's words cut the sinewes of that argument M. Mar. mistakes it as if I had said Mr Ball intends to cut the sinews of that argument and that then he was mistaken in his own meaning and intentions I confesse it were a very strange thing to charge so understanding a man as Mr Ball with such a mistake of his owne meaning and intention but it is no such strange thing for a learned man to speak that which may be brought to inferre the contrary to that he intended and if this be to abuse men then all arguments by retortion are abuses Bellarmin l. 5 de justificatione c. 7 prop. 3. had said propter incertitudinem propria justitiae periculum inanis gloriae tutissimum est totam fiduciam in sola Dei misericordiae benignitate repouere This King James in his Apologie for the oath of Allegiance brings to prove that he overthrowes thereby all his former dispute about inherent righteousnesse though Bellarmine had put in a speciall caution in the next words to prevent that inference and King James left out that caution in the recitall yet Bishop Andrewes in his Torturae Torti and many other learned men justified King James and that rightly Mr Marshall pag 147. saith thus And I am sure you must agree with me Sixthly that of all these testimonies you have cited out of Chamier there is not one word against my interpretation or for the justification of yours yea and I kn●w also that you will agree with me Seventhly that the learned Chamier in a large dispute doth confute your interpretation and vindicate my interpretation as the onely true and proper meaning of this text even in that very pla●e where you quote him And therefore I know the reader will agree with mee whether you doe cr●● that you doe but abuse your Authour and Reader both in making a flourish with Chamiers name nothing to the purpose and thereby would m●ke the Reader to conceive Chamier to be of your side when he is point-blanke against you And in the same page First you severall times 〈◊〉 the learned Beza as if he were of your m●nd in the interpretation of this text to construe it of matrimoniall holinesse I confesse the cause depends not upon Beza's judgement but your reputation depends much upon ●●king this good that you should dare to 〈◊〉 Authour as interpreting it for you who interprets it exprofesso against you p. 159. I perswade

Ancients especially the Greeke Church have rejected the baptisme of infants for many hundred yeares meaning in the first ages after Christ But as yet neither Mr Marshall nor his friend have shewed me sufficient reason why I should retract it For what he brings out of Photius and Balsamon men of much later standing about the later Canons and Imperiall lawes of the Greekes and one of the 8 Canons concluded in Carthage against the Pelagians requiring infants to be baptized proves not but that the Greeke Church rejected baptizing of infants many hundred of years in the first ages nor doth it overthrow that of Grotius that many of the Greekes he doth not say the Greeke Church in every age to this day doe keep the custome of deferring the baptizing of little ones till they could themselves make a confession of their faith Yea the lawes brought by Mr Marshall rather prove it For why should lawes be made for it but because many did neglect it And the story out of Balsamon about captives of Christians rather shewes that some were not baptized when little ones even among Ch●ristians because they determine if there were no witnesses to prove their Baptisme though children of Christians they should bee baptized As for Grotius his being a friend to the Socinians it is nothing to me who knew not Grotius nor his wayes nor ever pleaded for him Yet I remember I have read that though he was accused thereof long agoe by Ravenspergerus hee was justified by Vossius and what ever Rivet Maresius Laurentius charge him with yet his works have a place among the learned and may be read and made use of cum judicio at least as the works of Papists Lutherans Prelatists c. who yet may be tainted with errours Even Theophilus Philokyriaces Loncardie usis if I mistake not Master Marshals friend doth in the very title page of his Dies Dominica and in the book make use of Barenius his testimony in his Annals an authour and work as much excepted against ●● Grotius Nor doe I find that in that wherein I made use of Grotius he hath deceived me or I or he wronged the truth or our Reader Mr Marshall pag. 54. of his Defence saith that he perceived I have made great use in this controversy of an Arminian booke commonly known by the names of censura censurae Whereas I never read the book or made any use of it till I read this passage in Mr Marshals Defence But since I confesse I have read chapter 23 of it and am by that I find there the more confirmed in that truth wherein I concurre with that Authour though the truth is the chiefe light I had for antiquity in this matter was some little reading of my own and that which I read in Vossius his theses theol de paedobaptisme But because Mr. Marshall hath accused me as having correspondencie with them who are not likely to help me with any certain intelligence that it may appeare that I used what diligence I could to get most certain intelligence when I applyed my selfe to answer Mr Marshals Sermon I presumed to write this ensuing letter to that famous learned Gentleman Mr John Selden of the Inner Temple Clarissime Vir INter theologorum placita haec obtinent baptismum Ioannis Christs circumcisioni Judaicae succedere ejusque locum occupare atque inde paedobaptismi ri●um deduci Mihi verò cum de paedobaptismi origine tum de successione baptismi in locum circumcisionis an vera tradant Theologi isti gravis diu insedit dubitatio Baptismi enim institutum longè aliud esse à circumcisione paedobaptismum in Ecclesiis Christianis nonnisi in seculo post Apostolos secundo obtinuisse plurima suadent Inter alia vero istud urget quod legerim alicubi quanquam libris jam spoliatus locum judicare nequeam baptismi ritum fuisse satis notum ante Joannis Baptistae tempora in admissione Proselytorum aut Discipulorum apud Judaeos interrogatio Pharisaeorum non de novitate ritus sed de authoritate baptizantis quaerentium Joannis Evangelii cap. 1. Co● 25. idem innuere videtur Et forsan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud eundem cap. 3. Com. 25. ad usurpationem istius ritus spectabat Paedobaptismum verò ignotum fuisse primaevis Ecclesiarum Christianarum temporibus asserit Ludovicus Vives comment in Augustini de civitate Dei lib. 1. cap. 27. Quapropter vir ornatissime super istis apicibus doctrinae successione scilicet baptismi●● lecum circumcisionis paedobaptismi origin● te cujus periti● in rebus scriptis Hebraicis Ecclesiasticis veritatis amor animique candor satis spectantur latè praedicantur consulendum duxi Pla●eat itaque claritudini tu● mihi quanquam obscure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tamen tanquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super ●stare animi sententiam tui impertire Et quoniam sat scio te plurimis iisque gravissimis negotits occupari responsum tuum se● pluribus seu pa●cioribus verbis tempore à ●eipso posite expect abit Dignitatis vestrae observantissi●● JOANNES TOMBES Londini ●●dibus Recto●is Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 church 〈…〉 August●●●4 1644. Though the answer was no other then a reference of me to the books I might meet with in Stationers shops yet I conceived this advantage I had by it that what I found in books extant might be the more safely relyed on and that my diligence to discover the truth would be the more apparent for which I denied my selfe rest and without recompense from men layd out more then my estate could beare But M. Mar. seems ready to catch at any thing that may make me suspected and so bring my writing out of credit p. 78. of his Defence thus he speaks I am misinformed by good friends who know love you very well if your self incline not this way to baptize any whether Turks or Heathens who onely would make a profession of their faith in Iesus Christ then admit them to al other ordinances not have them excommunicated à sacris but onely à privato consortio though their lives should prove scandalous To which I say that I deny not but that in private conferēce lamenting the sad condition of these nations that are likely to cut one anothers throats about the differences between Presbyterians Independents I have said that I doubted whether ever excommunication à sacris or the Presbyterian or Independent Ecclesiasticall government would be proved to be Jure Divino by Christs appointment And I confesse that I take it to be but a matter of prudence whether each congregation have it's compleat power and order within it selfe or that it bee ordered in some things by an assembly of select persons out of divers congregations and whether congregations and pastours be fixed or unfixed And I doubt whether the power of the keyes Matth. 16. 19. be any other then doctrinall whether Matth. 18 15 16 17 18. contain

grassing in may be either by faith or by profession of faith and therefore I say the same with him should be to tell me that he can bring as much from my words for him as I bring from his words for me which conceit is but vain for my words are nothing but the opening the distinction of the various kind of ingraffing no assertion in those words what insition is meant Rom. 11. 17. and for the words Mr Marshall alleageth out of my Examen pag. 65. of which he saith And truly Sir in these words to my understanding you grant not only my interpretation of this place but even the question controverted betwixt us I shall shew to be a mistake in answering his objection against the interpretation I give of the ingraffing into the invisible Church having first observed that Master Gerees words in his vindic paedob●aptsmi confirme my interpretation against his owne in the Chapter next before when he saith Chap. 1. Sect. 4. pag. 19. The holines there is meant not actuall holinesse but potentiall in regard of Gods election And Mr Blake pag. 94. we by faith are graffed in for them Rom. 20. The onely objection of waight is that then some branches of the invisible Church may be broken off and so election made revocable and Apos●asy from grace maintained and hereupon Mr Marshall accuseth me as symbolizing with Arminius and puts this in the margine of his book pag. 144. and in the Index and thereby thinks to cut scores with me for accusing him as symbolizing with Arminius pag. 69. of my Examen To which I answer 1. That there is a wide difference between Mr Ma●shals case and mine I shew that Mr Marshals tenet agrees with Arminius his tenet and I quote Arminius his words in the margine and therein I did justly For Arminius also understood his speech of outward administrations to wit the preaching of the Gospell in the end of his Anti-perkins and both Mr Marshall and Arminius agree that the infants of the wicked for these outward dispensations are comprehended in their parents according to the tenour of Gods justice But I expressely rejected the tenet of Arminius about revocable election and Apostasy from grace which if they should follow from my interpretation I conceiving otherwise yet were not I to be charged with symbolizing with Arminius as Mr Marshall doth in his professed tenet 2 But I conceived I had prevented this objection pag. 64. of my Examen at those words The meaning is not that some of the bra●ches in the invisible Church may be broken off but only such as were so in appearance and I alleaged Iohn 15. 2. as an instance of the like expression shewing in that very similitude that the word branch in Christ is sometimes meant of that which is so in appearance sometimes of that which is so in truth and so in like manner it may be used Rom. 11. 17. And thus Chamier ●om 3. paustrat Cathol l. 13. c. 21. answers Bellarmin urging Iohn 15. 2. for falling away from faith But Mr Marshall tells me I professe I understand not how this distinction gives you the least help I reply that it plainly avoyds the consequence objected against my interpretation for though the branches in one passage be meant of the branches in appearance and the breaking off that which was so in appearance yet other places as in the same verse in the ingraffing may be meant of true ingraffing into the invisible Church in like manner as it is Iohn 15. 2. But because upon more accurate examination I conceive that is not the genuine answer I shall therefore let it passe 3. I say when the Apostle saith the branches were broken off he meanes it of the branches that were truly such and of the ingraffing that was truly such into the invisible Church but that by the branches are not meant singular persons but the people or as M. Mar. speaks p. 137. the body of them were the branches spoken of ●n this place M Geree p. 16. Nor is it either the Arminians tenet or any errour to say that the body of a people which were once the elect people of God and ingraffed into the invisible Church because the generality or a greater number were such among that people are broken off from election and the invisible Church For a people or nation is not a consistent being but a fluent being as a river which is the same river still though not the same water and therefore as when Cyrus turned Euphrates from it's own channell hee may bee said to have turned away the same river Euphrates that was created at first though it were not the same numericall water so when God rejected the Jews from being his elect beleeving people he broke off the same people that were the true branches of Abraham the true root in the invisible Church and yet no one particular person who was elect or in the invi●●ble Church by faith broken off which is the Arminian doctrine And this I find observed by each of the three Authours alleaged before from Marlorat Hyperius at v. 2● is thus alleaged speaking Quemadmodum nunc rejectus est populus Iudaicus qui tamen electus fuerat ita potest adhuc fieri ut a●●quando rejiciatur populus Gentilis qui nunc electus est alioqu singul●s electos de populo Iudaico vel de populo Gentili reprobari impossibile planè est Ad hunc inquam modum si quicquid de ruina metuenda electis sequitur non de singulis electis sed de populo ex quo descendunt interpreteris multis te molest●is liberaveris Calvin ad verse 21. praecipuè verò notandum Pauli sermonem non tam ad singulos homines quàm ad totum Gentium corpus dirigi Bucer ad verse 22. De Gentibus loquitur universim non de singulis hominbus And indeed the text leads me to this interpretation For when it is said verse 23 24. that they shall be graffed in God is able to graffe them in again these which are according to nature shall be graffed in their own olive which cannot be understood of the same person but of the same people Thus have I besides my first purpose put into this Apology this large dissertation about Rom. 11. 16 17. c. partly because by Mr Gerees conference with me and another and his words to me ●indic paedobap pag. 17. I commend this Scripture to your serious consideration for I conceive it gives clear evidence to what I affirm I perceive this text is his chiefe hold for Infant-baptism and in Mr Blakes new answer to my Examen pag. 69. I find these words your examination Rom. 11. 16. hath been under examination and if there be strength in those exceptions there is weaknesse no where Mr Blake in his answer to my letter pag. 30. saith thus If the ingraffing bee by saving faith onely to derive saving grace personally inherent as a fruit of election