Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	apostle_n	believe_v	word_n	5,252	5	4.0580	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63577	A true narrative of the Portsmouth disputation, between some ministers of the Presbyterian, and others of the Baptist, persuasion, concerning the subjects and manner of baptism held in Mr. Williams's meeting-place there on Wednesday, Feb. 22. 1698/9. The managers for the Presbyterians were, Mr. Samuel Chandler of Fareham. Mr. Leigh of Newport in the Isle of Wight. Mr. Robinson of Hungerford in Berks, moderator. For the Baptists were, Dr. William Russel of London. Mr. John Williams of East Knoyle in Wiltshire. Mr. John Sharp of Froome in Somersetshire, moderator. Transcribed from two copies taken at the dispute; the one by Mr. Bissel Town-Clerk of Portsmouth, and the other by Mr. Samuel Ring. Revis'd and publish'd by Dr. William Russel.	Bissel, Mr.; Ring, Samuel.; Russel, William, d. 1702.	1699 (1699)	Wing T2806A; ESTC R215290	67,061	90

in Christ as I teach every where in every Church Besides he doth not only tell them that he had so discharg'd his Office among them as to be free from the Guilt of their Blood but that he was also free from the Blood of all Men Ver. 21. Testifying to the Jews and also to the Greeks Repentance toward God and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ And I further add That if Paul never taught Infant-Baptism in the Church of Ephesus nor in the Church of Corinth nor in any other Place I hope you will then acknowledge it to be no Gospel institution nor any Part of the Counsel of God nor yet profitable for the Church of God And there is no Record in Holy Scripture of his so doing Mr. Leigh I say Paul's Writings are not the hundredth Part of what Paul preached We cannot suppose that in those six Chapters to the Ephesians he could contrive to put down the whole of his Preaching to them Dr. Russel Sir you might have spared all thisLabour for I am satisfied the People will not trouble themselves to seek for it any where else but only in the Writings of the New Testament and if they will take my Word I can assure them 't is not there to be found And I perceive you think so too or else you need not referr them to Paul's Sermons which are not written I have heard indeed of some unwritten Traditions that are lock'd up in the Pope's Ereast to be delivered out as he finds Occasion for the serving of a Turn but I never knew that the Presbyterians were ever intrusted with any such Treasure Mr. Leigh You say it is not to be found in the Writings of the New Testament I deny it Dr. Russel Then you deny my Minor which is the thing you should have done before only you were afraid of being brought to give an Instance Now by denying my Minor you say it 's somewhere so recorded in the Writings of the New Testament that Paul did declare the Baptism of Infants to be a Gospel-institution c. And to prove it is not I argue thus If it be so recorded in the Writings of the New Testament then Mr. Leigh or some body else is able to shew it But neither Mr. Leigh nor any body else is able to shew it Ergo It is not so recorded in the Writings of the New Testament Sir I have now brought it to an Universal Negative as I did with Mr. Chandler upon the former Argument and now it rests upon you to produce your Instance Mr. Leigh I will say it is in the Commission All Nations Dr. Russel Are you of Mr. Chandler's Opinion Mr. Leigh I will not answer you Dr. Russel Then I say it is not written in the Commission that Paul did ever declare any thing concerning the Baptism of Infants But what do you bring this for now You might have done it upon the first Argument when we were upon the Commission but it 's wholly improper now for this that we are now upon is Whether the Apostle Paul hath any where so declared it Reader Observe these Mens Trifling Do they not know as well as we that the Commission of our Lord for Holy Baptism was given long before Paul's Conversion and yet they have the Confidence to affirm before so great an Auditory That it is written in the Commission that Paul did declare the Baptism of Infants to be a Gospel-institution c. which is the thing expressed in my Argument Upon this the Reverend Mr. Chandler who had quitted the Work before began now in a great Fury to break Silence again saying You are a perfect Sophister your Arguments are full of Fallacies Dr. Russel It is an easie Matter for a Man to say so that understands not an Argument himself Mr. Leigh Then pray Sir begin again from Acts 20. 27. Dr. Russel Truly Mr. Leigh I did not come so many Miles to spend my Time thus to go backwards and forwards after this manner Mr. Chandler You must do so if you understand the Rules of Tergiversation This was one of Mr. Chandler's Witticisms Dr. Russel If I do not understand those Rules when I have occasion for them I will come to you and learn But to return to Mr. Leigh for I have not done with him yet Sir you have assigned the Commission to prove that Paul did declare Infant-Baptism to be a Gospel-Institution part of the Counsel of God c. Now it 's impossible that should be written in the Commission as I have told you before You must therefore shew us where it is so Recorded in some other part of the New Testament and not assign a place where there can be no mention of it Mr. Leigh He says he gives us the Latitude of the whole New Testament but will not admit of the Commission because that doth not say that Paul hath so declared Dr. Russel And there is very good reason for it for the Apostle Paul is now under consideration as mention'd in my Argument who solemnly protesteth that in the discharge of his Ministry he had freed himself from the blood of all Men in delivering to them all that his Master had given him in Commission That he had not shunned to declare all the Counsel of God he had kept back nothing that was profitable for the Church of God but as faithful Steward of the Mysteries of God he did dispence the Word as himself declares in 1 Cor. 4. 1 2. And I verily believe that Paul was as Faithful as Eminent and as Laborous a Servant as ever Christ had upon Earth And therefore the force of my Argument depends upon this That if Paul never said one word about Infant-Baptism then it can be no part of the Counsel of God nor a Gospel Institution nor ever given him in Commission by his Lord and Master You have denied my Minor I have proved it by bringing you to an Instance by an Universal Negative You have assigned the Commission I have shewed you the impossibility of proving it from thence I have pressed you to assign some other part of the New Testament for an Instance I have not as yet been able no obtain it Here are divers Men of Parts and Learning among you can none of you produce so much as one Instance to prove it Surely the People must needs conclude you have none to give I therefore challenge you to produce the place where it is written that Paul ever said one word of Infant-Baptism And till that be done my Argument will stand good Mr. Leigh If Paul did not declare it if we have other places apparent and plain at least consequential it is sufficient Dr. Russel This is not an Answer to my Argument you might have gone here upon the other but cannot upon this why did you not assign some of those places then Mr. Chandler We deny the Consequence Paul might speak of it some where else though it is not found in his

the Commission of our Saviour Matth. 28. 19. Mr. Robinson Put it into a Syllogism Dr. Russel There is no need of that for Mr. Chandler hath granted every part of my Argument For 1. He hath granted that Infants have no Knowledge to discern between Good and Evil. 2dly That according to my Argument Infants are not capable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men. And then it must unavoidably follow they are not intended in Christ's Commission Mr. Leigh How Sirs Did we say Incompleat Disciples are not in the Commission Dr. Russel That hath been sufficiently spoke to already I shall therefore proceed to a new Argument Arg. 3. If the Apostle Paul did declare all the Counsel of God and kept back nothing that was profitable for the Church of God and yet did never declare the Baptism of Infants to be a Gospel Institution according to Christ's Commission then it is no Gospel Institution nor any part of the Counsel of God nor profitable for the Church of God But the Apostle Paul did declare all the Counsel of God and kept back nothing that was profitable for the Church of God and yet did never declare the Baptism of Infants to be a Gospel-institution according to Christ's Commission Ergo It is no Gospel-institution nor any Part of the Counsel of God nor profitable for the Church of God Mr. Chandler Your Argument is long Dr. Russel Not so long nor so hard to be understood Mr. Robinson Such long Arguments are never admitted in any Disputation Dr. Russel Let Mr. Chandler speak to the Argument Upon this Mr. Chandler finding himself unable to answer it notwithstanding he had two or three Prompters to instruct him he quitted the Place of a Disputant and Mr. Leigh desir'd to take it up which was admitted him upon Condition he would speak to that Argument which he promised to do Mr. Leigh I deny that the Apostle Paul did never declare Infant Baptism to be a Gospel-Institution Dr. Russel Then you deny my Minor which I thus prove If the Apostle Paul hath so declared it it is somewhere to be found in the Writings of the New Testament But it is not any where to be found in those Writings Ergo the Apostle Paul did never so declare it Mr. Leigh I deny the sequel of your Major for the Words were spoken to the Church at Ephesus and what do you talk of Paul's Epistles he wrote but one that I know of to the Church at Ephesus Dr. Russel Part of the Words in my Argument were spoken to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus but I have neither Ephesus nor Church of Ephesus nor Paul's Epistles in my Argument Why do you not answer to the Argument Mr. Leigh We have not the whole of the Apostle Paul's Writings in the New Testament and this that he wrote to the Church of Ephesus is but a small part thereof Dr. Russel Pray speak to the Argument You see I have no such Expressions in it as are taken up by you Mr. Leigh I will do it by a Simile You know that Paul wrote divers Epistles and in them of different Subjects It is as if a Man should write a Book of several things and when he hath finished it one comes and cuts off six Leaves thereof and after this there is a Question arises whether such a Man hath writ any thing about such a particular Subject Now it doth not follow that because it is not contain'd in the rest of his Book that therefore it is not in the six Leaves that were cut off Dr. Russel If Mr. Leigh speaks ad Rem as I suppose he thinks he doth then I thus infer upon him First That he doth by this allow that there is no Mention made of Infant-Baptism in any of those Writings of the Apostle Paul's that we have bound up with the rest of the Holy Scriptures Secondly He supposes there may be something said of it in those six Leaves that were cut off after he had finished his Epistles Now the Assembly of Divines tell us that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the only Rule to direct us in Matters of Worship But whether Mr. Leigh be of their Mind I cannot tell Mr. Leigh Yes I am Dr. Russel Then what you mean by it I know not but I believe they meant what we have in the Bible and not what is contained in those six Leaves that were cut off or else they designed to put a Cheat upon the whole World which I do not suppose But as touching those six Leaves I conclude our Brethren have them not in their Custody because I never heard them speak any thing in the least concerning it For my own part I can speak for my self I never saw them nor heard of them till now neither do I know any thing of the Matter But if Mr. Leigh or his Brethren have them in their Custody I desire they would produce them And when they have so done if they will please to favour us so far as first to prove that those were the very six Leaves that were written by Paul we will take the Pains to examine them And if it then appears that there is any such thing contained in them as Mr. Leigh speaks of we will allow it Mr. Leigh was angry hereupon saying What do you talk of our being the keepers of them and what do you talk of all the New Testament is all the New Testament the Apostle Paul's writings Dr. Russel I say I do not confine you to Paul's Epistles much less pretend all the new Testament to be of the Apostle Paul's Writing as you would insinuate to the People but my Words are It 's no where so declared in the Writings of the New Testament And do you produce one Instance that it is if you can for that will put an Issue to our Controversie Mr. Leigh You would refer what Paul saith to the Church of Ephesus to the whole New Testament Dr. Russel I hope you will own the Holy Scriptures to be the only Rule to direct us in Matters of Worship Here Mr. Leigh breaks in upon the Doctor not permitting him to speak what he had to say but instead thereof he saith I will not own that we have all the Sermous that Paul preached to the Church at Ephesus and if we had he might preach it to some others though he did not to them for this was spoken to them Dr. Russel I refer you to the Scripture You say that Paul might declare some such thing and yet it may not be recorded in the Scripture The Words are plain I have not shunned to declare to you all the Counsel of God Acts 20. 27. And in Ver. 20. I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you And I do not suppose that Paul taught one Doctrine in one Church and another Doctrine in another For in 1 Cor. 4. 17. He tells that Church Timothy shall bring you into remembrance of my ways

to signify and profess that your Old man or fleshly Lust is dead and buried with him and you rise thence to signify and profess that you rise to Newness of Life In his third Argument against Mr. B●ake he saith quoad modum with respect to the Manner It is commonly confest by us to the Anabaptists as our Commentators declare that in the Apostles time the Baptized were Dipt over head in Water And though we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of Dipping yet we presume not to change the Use and Signification of it Dr. Cave In his Primitive Christianity pag. 320. saith That the Party baptized was wholly immerged or put under Water which was the almost constant and universal Custom of those times whereby they did most notably and significantly express the great End and Effects of Baptism for as in Immerging there are in a manner three several Acts the putting the Person into Water his abiding there for some time and his rising up again thereby representing Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection c. Dr. Nicholson late Lord Bishop of Glocester In his Exposition of the Church-Catechism saith in pag. 174. And the ancient manner in Baptism the putting the Person Baptized under the Water and then taking him out again did well set out these two Acts the first his dying the second his rising again And in the same Page upon Col. 2. 12. he saith Into the Grave with Christ we went not for our Bodies were not could not be buried with his but in our Baptism by a kind of Analogy or Resemblance while our Bodies are under the Water we may be said to be buried with him Dr. Fowler present Lord Bishop of Glocester In his Scope of the Christian Religion upon Rom 6 4. saith Christians being pl●nged into the Water in Baptism signifieth their undertaking and obliging themselves in a spiritual sense to die and be buried with Jesus Christ that so answerably to his Resurrection they may live a holy and godly Life Dr. Tillotson late Archbishop of Canterbury In his Sermon upon 2 Tim. 2. 19. saith Anciently those who were Baptized put off their Garments which signified the putting off the Body of Sin and were immersed and buried in the Water to represent the Death of Sin and then did rise up again out of the Water to signifie their Entrance upon a new Life And to these Customs the Apostle alludes Rom. 6. 4. Dr. Jer. Taylor late Lord Bishop of Down In his Ductor dubitantium lib. 3 cap. 4. saith The Custom of the ancient Church was not Sprinkling but Immersion in pursuance of the sence of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in the Commandment and Example of our Blessed Saviour And this agrees with the Mystery of the Sacrament it self for we are buried with him in Baptism saith the Apostle The Old-man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water and when the Baptized Person is lifted up from the Water it represents the Resurrection of the New-man to Newness of Life The Learned Joseph Mede In his Diatribe on Titus 3. 5. saith There was no such thing as Sprinkling used in Baptism in the Apostles time nor many Ages after them Mr. Daniel Rogers None of old were wont to be Sprinkled and saith he I confess my self unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for Infants Sprinkling It ought to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution which is Dipping And he betrays the Church whose Officer he is to a disorder'd Error if he cleave not to the Institution which is to Dip. Rogers's Treatise of the two Sacraments part 1. chap. 5. The famous Reformer Luther Luther de Baptismo tom 1. fol. 71. in the Latin Edition printed at Wittemburgh saith Baptism is a Greek word it may be translated a Dipping when we dip something in Water that it may be covered with Water And although it be for the most part altogether abolished for that they do not Dip the whole Children but only Sprinkle them with a little Water they ought nevertheless to be wholly dipt and presently to be drawn out again And in Tome 2. fol. 79. concerning Babylon's Captivity The other thing saith he which belongs to Baptism is the Sign or the Sacrament which is the dipping it self into the Water from whence also it hath its Name Nam baptizo Graece mergo Latinè Baptisma mersio est For Baptizo in Greek is in Latin Mergo to dip and Baptisma is dipping And a little after speaking of Rom. 6. 4. he saith Being moved by this Reason I would have those that are to be Baptized to be wholly dipt into the Water as the Word doth sound and the Mystery doth signifie And when Complaint was made to him and other Divines at Wittemburgh That a Child had been Sprinkled at Hamburgh and their Advice desired upon it he wrote to Hamburgh to acquaint them that their Use of Sprinkling was an Abuse which they ought to remove Ita mersionem Hamburgi restitutam esse So Dipping was restored at Hamburgh Author Joannes Bugenhagius Pomeranius in his Book printed Anno 1542. He was Contemporary with and a Successor of Luther at Wittemburgh The Learned Grotius On Matth. 3. 6. Mersatione autem non perfusione agi solitum hunc ritum indicat vocis proprietas loca ad eum ritum delecta John 3. 23. Acts 8. 38. Et allusiones multae Apostolorum quae ad aspersionem referri non possunt Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 2. 12. Mr. John Calvin On John 3. 23. Baptism was performed by John and Christ by dipping of the whole Body in Water And in his Institutions lib. 4. cap. 15. sect 19. he saith thus Caeterum mergaturne totus qui tingitur idque ter an semel an infusa tantum aqua aspergatur minimum refert sed id pro regionum diversitate Ecclesis liberum esse debet Quanquam ipsum baptizandi verbum mergere significat mergendi ritum veteri Ecclesia observatum fuisse constat Here you may see that although he thinks it a thing indifferent whether it be done by Dipping or Sprinkling and that thrice or once only and that it 's left to the Churches Liberty according to the diversity of Countries yet he comes in at last with his Quanquam notwithstanding the word Baptism signifies to Dip and it is evident that the Rite of Dipping was observed by the Old Church The Case is so clear as a learned Writer hath noted that Calvin up and down his Works doth often confess that the ancient manner of Baptism in the Primitive times was by Dipping the whole Body under Water Piscator On John 3 23. saith That Baptism was performed by Dipping the whole Body under Water The Dutch Translators Matth. 3. 1. Joannes de Dooper John the Dipper Vers 6. Gedoopt in de Jordaen Dipt in Jordan Vers 16 Ende Jesus gedoopt zynde epgeklommen uyt het water And Jesus being Dipt he climbed or came up out of the

hath signified to the People in his preaching that there are plain Scriptures to be brought for the proof of Infant Baptism and now is the time for him to produce them I urge it upon him to assign but one Instance and you will not suffer him so to do Mr. Leigh 'T is not Mr. Chandler's Sermon it is the Question before us that you must regulate Dr. Russel If you say you have no Scripture proof for Infants Baptism I have done But why must you prevent Mr. Chandler I hope here are some Honourable Persons and others that understand Nature of this Controversie and they may reasonably expect that those who have made such a Noise about it can give some tolerable Instance for it and if they will do that we will proceed to examine it Mr Robinson There are many here know how that Mr. Chandler hath asserted and proved that Infants are the Subjects of Baptism but you are not to call on him for that now You did by your Friends undertake to prove the contrary and it rests upon you so to do Dr Russel I have already proved the contrary and my Argument will stand good till you give your Instance Mr. Robinson If you will change Sides Mr. Chandler you may admit this Trick Dr. Russel Can you at other times boast of so many plain Scriptures for your Practice and now you are brought to the Test about it you are not able to produce one what will the People think of you Mr. Leigh I will undertake in any Dispute Philosophical or Divine in this manner immediately to turn the Opponency upon the Respondent When I cannot prove the Assertion I will presently say If you can bring any solid Proof for your Practice it is true if not false And I appeal to the Moderator whether it be not his Business to keep the Disputants to the Rules of Dispute Mr. Robinson The Moderator is to regulate them if they transgress Bounds but you have grossly transgressed I appeal to any that understand Logick whether this be sufferable for him thus to turn the Opponency upon Mr. Chandler Then Dr. Smith stood up and said If I must speak then by your Leave according to what I always understood He that asserts must prove Dr. Russel Then they having asserted that Infants are the Subjects of Baptism they are to prove their Practice especially when they are forc'd upon it by an Universal Negative We desire but one single Instance and they will not assign it Mr. Robinson No you are to prove your Argument Dr. Russel I have done that already and therefore if Mr. Chandler will confess he hath no Instance to give I will proceed to a new Argument This Mr. Chandler refused to do and yet would not give his Instance Dr. Russel If Mr. Chandler can give no Instance here are divers other Ministers Gentlemen of Parts and Learning Have none of them an Instance to produce If you thus refuse to produce it the People will think you have none to give Notwithstanding this none of them could be prevailed upon to do it although they were called upon and challenged to give any one Instance where it was so written if they could Whereupon Dr. Russel spake to this effect Gentlemen It may be you think I have but one Argument if you will say no more to this I am not willing to tire out the Auditory I will therefore proceed to a New Argument But take notice by the way that my first Argument stands good till you give your Instance to the contrary Arg. 2. If Infants are not capable to be made Disciples of Christ by the Ministry of Men then they cannot possibly be the Subjects of Baptism intended in Christ's Commission But Infants are not capable to be made Disciples of Christ by the Ministry of Men. Ergo They cannot possibly be the Subjects of Baptism intended in Christ's Commission Mr. Chandler repeats the Argument and then saith Here if you mean by being made Disciples Actual and Compleat Disciples I deny your Major But if you mean such as are entered into a School and given up to Instruction then I deny your Minor Dr. Russel Repeats his Major and desires Mr. Chandler to tell him what he denies in it For saith he my Words are plain to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men. Mr. Robinson Mr. Chandler distinguishes between Compleat and Incompleat Disciples Dr. Russel But what then doth he mean by denying my Major Mr. Robinson He denies that they that cannot be made Compleat Disciples are not intended in the Commission I hope the Reader will observe how often Mr. Chandler was at a loss and Mr. Leigh and Mr. Robinson were forced to help him out with their Distinctions and equivocable Expressions Here Dr Russel seeing they would not be brought to give any direct Answer turns his Hypothetical into a Categorical Syllogism Whosoever are uncapable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men they cannot be the Subjects of Baptism intended in Christ's Commission But Infants are uncapable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men Ergo They cannot be the Subjects of Baptism intended in Christ's Commission Now let Mr. Chandler tell me what he means by being made Compleat or Incompleat Disciples by the Ministry of Men according to my Argument if he can Mr. Chandler I mean by Compleat Disciples such as are actually capable of Learning By Incompleat such as are entered in such Places in order to be taught We send Children to School before they know a Letter Dr. Russel My Argument speaks not of such but of those who have understanding and are capable to be made Actual Disciples which Infants are not Mr. Chandler That such as are so capable are the only Subjects of Baptism you are to prove it Dr. Russel Then you deny the Major Mr. Chandler Yes as to your Hypothetical Argument Dr. Russel If you had done this before you had saved your self and me much trouble Then I prove it thus If our Lord in that Commission given for Holy Baptism hath commanded his Apostles that were Men to make Disciples by their Ministry and after that to Baptize them then the Consequence of the Major is true But our Lord in that Commission given for Holy Baptism hath commanded his Apostles that were Men to make Disciples by their Ministry and after that to Baptize them Ergo The Consequence of the Major is true Mr. Leigh I distinguish thus They may be entered into the Church in Order for Learning and so they are Disciples before Baptism Yet in a more visible Sense they are made Disciples by Baptism Dr. Russel Then you suppose Infants not capable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men. Mr. Chandler Not solemnly invested Dr. Russel We are not talking of that the Question betwixt us is Whether they are capable to be made Disciples by the Ministry of Men. Will you assert that Mr. Leigh We assert they are Disciples as Children of

way into Jordan Dr. Russel Notwithstanding this Flourish of a pretended Probability you know that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie to Dip as all the great Lexicographers and Criticks do tell us and that its proper and native Signification is to Dip into Water or to Plunge under Water and that I could give you many Instances of out of Scapula Stephanus Schrevelius and many others And they also tell us That if it be used for Washing it is in a remote Sense and if it be taken in its primary Sense it 's such a Washing as is by Dipping or Plunging into the Water and being covered therewith But that you may see I am not singular in my Opinion I will shew you that your own Expositors do thus render it and some of the greatest Men among the Protestants that ever wrote since the Reformation of which I have made a Collection out of their own Works because I would not wrong them I shall begin with the Testimony of those learned and judicious Divines of your own Perswasion who were those that continued Mr. Peol's Annotations upon Matth. 3. 6. These are their own words Were Baptized that is Dipped in Jordan Upon John 3. 22 23. There John was Baptizing because this Aenon was a Brook or River that had much Water It is from this apparent that both Christ and John Baptized by Dipping the Body in the Water else they need not have sought Places where had been a great plenty of Water Before Dr. Russel had read this last Sentence wholly out the Presbyterian Ministers even Mr. Leigh himself as well as the rest of them fell a hissing so loud and set others of their Party to make a noise also by their ill Example that altho Dr. Russel went on with his Work yet the Noise was so great that it wholly drowned his Voice that he could not be heard Whereupon Mr. Sharp the Moderator call'd out aloud to still this great Noise and spoke to this effect What is the reason of this Hissing Gentlemen are you not asham'd You preach to others the Doctrine of Sanctification and Self-denial and to act thus your selves I am asham'd to see it I pray good People take no notice of it now When Dr. Russel perceived they would not forbear this Hissing and uncivil Carriage he forbore to read any farther And when Silence was obtained he addressed himself to the Ministers after this manner Sirs What is the matter with you Must I n●● be permitted to recite your own Authors and some of the gre●test Men that have written since the Reformation Although their Testimony against us is of little value because they are Parties in the Controversie yet when the clear evidence of Truth shall enforce a Confession from their Pens that we are in the right it is then a great Testimony for us Here is first of all Pool's Annotators certain learned and judicious Divines that say in that matter as we do and they are Men of your own Party There is also Dr. Hammond saith the same Here the Doctor was interrupted again and they cried out What do you tell us of Dr. Hammond What have we to do with Dr. Hammond Dr. Russel Why certainly Gentlemen Dr. Hammond is not thus to be despised upon his Judgment about a Greek word I have also Mr. Baxter Wollebius Tilenus the Learned Perkins and Luther also who was against Sprinkling and practised Dipping and so did the rest of the Divines at Wistenburgh Mr. Calvin also although he did allow a Liberty of Sprinkling in cold Climates yet he saith as I do as to the Signification of the word Baptiz● that it signifies to Dip and was so used in the Primitive Church There is also the Dutch Translators they do every where render the words that are used to express this Ordinance by as we do and they call John the Baptist Joannes de Dooper John the Dipper And I know not of any place but it 's so exprest And these are Presbyterians Men of your own Religion Upon this one of the Ministers said What! do you understand Dutch Dr. Russel said Yes he understood it but he could not speak it readily They replied We will try that for we have a Gentleman here that understands Dutch very well Dr. Russel You may ask that Gentleman if you think fit he can satisfie you that what I say is true But they had 〈◊〉 Discretion than to call the Gentleman out to confute themselves Dr. Russel I have also the Testimony of the Dutch Annotators who say the same thing And these also are Men of your own Persuasion And to add no more I have also the Testimony of the Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster And I hope they may be of some credit with you But they would not suffer him to proceed in the Reading thereof to the People but cried out We are Protestants and will not pin our Faith on other Mens sleeves Dr. Russel What! not the Assembly of Divines I thought though you had no regard to my words you might have had some regard to the Assembly of Divines You know I do not wrong these Authors and therefore what must the People think of you to oppose your selves thus against these great Men and such multitudes of them that are of your own Persuasion as many of them are and the rest some of the greatest Men since the Reformation Surely the People cannot take it kindly at your hands to reject the Authority of these Men in a matter of this Nature Their Answer was We do reverence these Divines but adhere to what they say no farther than it agrees with the Word of God Dr. Russel We say that in this Particular what they have written doth agree with the Word of God Mr. Leigh You have recourse to the prime Signification of the Word whereas we must take it according to its Acceptation in Scripture And I offer it to the Consideration of the Learned whether the prime Signification of the Word be a sufficient Argument in this case And here he makes his Rhetorical Excursions about a Mathematician an Angel a Foot-boy that carries a Letter a Physician c. and concludes thus but we must go to the Scripture Acceptation of the Word And I challenge you to bring one place of Scripture where it must be understood that it was done by Dipping Dr. Russel It is very well Mr. Leigh will allow that I have given the People the proper Meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that its prime Signification is to Dip. Now he might have spared all the rest that he hath said for we do not lay the stress only upon the Etymology of the Word but also upon the concurrent Testimonies of Holy Scripture that it was so understood and so practised by John the Baptist Christ and his Apostles and so represented by the Metaphors made use of as a Burial and a Resurrection to set it forth by as also