Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	endeavour_v	favour_n	great_a	60	3	2.1343	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A58206	Anabaptism routed: or, a survey of the controverted points: Concerning [brace] 1. Infant-Baptisme. 2. Pretended necessity of dipping. 3. The dangerous practise of re-baptising. Together, with a particular answer to all that is alledged in favour of the Anabaptists, by Dr. Jer. Taylor, in his book, called, the liberty of Prophesying. / By John Reading, B.D. and sometimes student of Magdalen-Hall in Oxford.	Reading, John, 1588-1667.	1655 (1655)	Wing R443; ESTC R207312	185,080	220

of man as its ground but on the meer institution and gracious promise of God therefore ●t ought not by anyman be denied infants in respect of their present defect or want of understanding or the acts ●hereof in faith repentance c. they being comprehended in All Nations The minor appears in S. Peters answer to his hearers prickt in heart Repent and be baptized every one of you for the remission of s●●● For the Promise is unto you and unto your children c He saith not Be baptized for ye have repented ye are of age and a good understanding but Be baptized c. for the Promise is to you and to your children though they cannot yet actually believe repent understand c. yet they have Gods promise for the ground of their sealing on whose grace and ordinance the whole power and vertue of the sacrament dependeth But his grace and Ordinance depend not on any excellency ability or act of man therefore the Apostle fetched not the reason of his Exhortation from their age or repentance but from the promise and mercy of God calling them who were far of 26. For conclusion I take up this congeriem of arguments out of the learned Urs●●●s That opinion is pernicious which robs poor Infants of their right which obscureth the grace and mercy of God who would that Infants of Believers should from the womb be reckoned members of his Church which derogates from the grace offered in the new Covenant making it less then that in the old which weakneth the comfort of the Church and faithful Parents which denyeth Infants that seal which should differ them from the children of Jews and P●gans which contradicteth the Apostles reason Can may man forbid water that these should not be baptiptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we which keepeth Infants as much as man can from Christ he expresly saying Saffer little children to come unto me which without a Covenant they cannot do spiritually nor without the external seal sacramentally Now such is the opinion of Anabaptists denying Christians Infants Baptism CHAP. IV. Anabaptists Arguments concerning the necessity of Dipping over head and ears in Baptism examined and answered THe envious Philistims will still be casting earth into Isaacs wells of livings waters to stop them up Satan envying man these waters of life in the Laver of Regeneration e●tsoon casteth in scruples to obstruct and make void the holy ordinances of God to deluded souls by causing them to renounce their Baptism and Christ whom they sacramentally had put on therein by taking on them another Baptism under a vain pretence that they were not susceptive of Baptism in their infancy nor lawfully baptized neither at all truly if happily they were not dipped under water for they say the institution of Christ requireth that the whole man be dipped all over in water so that the Anabaptists now hold that dipping the whole body into water is essential to baptism so necessary that except they are so dipt they are not duly and truly baptized according to the institution of Christ. Since the infancy of the Gospel Satan hath not ceased to trouble the Church concerning baptism Some of the Jews would have circumcision joyned with baptism the Archontici condemned baptism with a curse the Novatians deferred if to the last because they understood not the power of this ordinance of God to cleanse the whole life but thought that there was no mercy for him who sinned after baptism Liberius the Monk as also Fidus would have childrens Baptism tyed to the eighth day Anabaptists not only deny believers children Baptism as the Pelagians and Donatists did of old but affirm That dipping the whole body under water is so necessary that without it none are truly baptized as hath been said So the subtil enemy still assaileth Baptism in one part or another that we may not unaptly apply that to him his factors which Tertullian once said concerning the most impious Persecutor Nero He that knows him well may understand that nothing but some great or singular Nero● And indeed we ought more highly to esteem Gods favor in sealing us into his Covenant of grace and more seriously and carefully endeavour to answer thereto in newness and sanctity of living by how much more the enemy rageth against it The Protestant Church holdeth that the word and the element make the Sacrament and that neither sprinkling is simply necessary nor washing or dipping unlawful but that according to the convenience of times places and persons either sprinkling washing or dipping in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost is the true form of Baptism and that caeteris paribus either of these three applications of the water have the same effect and may as convenience serves indifferently be used being fit to signifie the application of the benefit of Christs blood for the remission of sin and cleansing therefrom But our Antagonists say We are buried with Christ by baptism into his death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead even so we also should walk in newness of life Rom. 6. 4. But Christ in his burial was covered that he might thence rise out of the eart● therefore in Baptism we must be covered and as it were buried under water that we may rise again as Christ did We answer 1. Similitudes run not on four feet types signs and similitudes are not to be extended beyond the scope and meaning of the Speaker as might be shewed in almost innumerable instances lest not only absurdities but horrid blasphemies should be thence inferred The Ark in the Deluge was a type of Baptism 1 Pet. 3 20 21. what must the type and truth agree in all things must all the world be drown'd and only eight persons saved I doubt you would hardly agree among your selves which should be the eight The red-sea and cloud figured baptism 1 Cor. 10. 1 c. what would you have your disciples baptized with the sprie of two neighboring seas and a cloud of fresh water raining on their heads Jonah's being in the Whales belly was a type of Christs burial and resurrection you would not have your disciples in their conformity be three days under water These instances may shew the vanity of stretching types and signs to every fancy of Hectic braines and now deal ingenuously what reason or warrant have you to wrest this similitude to what you please in those similes which are most apt there may be many disconveniences found Or what commission can you dream of that gives you authority to draw this alledged Scripture beyond the Apostles scope and purpose rather to that which seems to favour your fancy and practise of immersion then to another sense 2. Those expressions Rom. 6. 4. are meerly figurative and therefore do not at all bind us to any external or literal sense or observance in the maner of baptizing if the

Councel it was determined or when it began must be thought to have descended from the tradition of the Apostles themselves and therefore we hold it as we are commanded 2 Thes. 2.15 and we believe it is necessary to be held because 't is so commanded That which you say that it was not determined in the Church till in the eighth age after Christ and but in the year 418. in the Milevitan Councel will easily appear false for the Councel of Carthage in Cyprians time who flourished about the year 250. determined that children might be baptized and that even before the eight day against the opinion of Fidus as was before noted out of Cyprian but you say that infant-baptism was not determined in the Church untill the Milevitan Councel 1. I demand Doth a determination by a succeeding Councel exclude a determination of the same thing by a foregoing● or doth it conclude a thing to be no Apostolical tradition What think you then of our Christian Sabbath will you say that the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath that our Christian Sabbath might succeed was not an Apostolical tradition or that it was not sufficiently determined in the Church untill about the year 364. because then there was a Canon made for the same in the Councel of Laodicea Nay but the practice of the Apostles was a sufficient determination thereof And truly Ecclesiastical Canons as also municipal Laws and Statutes may with good reason be made for confirmation of things rightly and long before sufficiently determined where some emergent opposition to the former requireth a due revisal and further expression interpretation or confirmation of the same 2. I say that there needed no determination by a general Councel before any opposition was made publickly against a received custome of the Church but so soon as it was questioned and openly opposed by the Pelagians then the second Milevitan Councel was called against Pelagius and Celestius It were but a weak argument against an Apostolical tradition if we should find little or no mention thereof in any writer in some ages of the Primitive Church seeing that besides that there were some of them obscure generally without Ecclesiastical Writers what necessity can be alleadged that in every age some writers must make particular mention and rehersal of all Apostolical traditions or practices of the Church when an uninterrupted peace thereof sufficed and no opposition gave occasion of providing for defence Indeed when any turbulent and disobedient spirit of contradiction brake out to disturb the peace and unity of the Church then the Ministers disputed preached or wrote as need required or Councels were called which could not come together from divers Nations without much trouble and charge and therefore they were not assembled except in case of some urgent necessity and then their Canons were agreed upon for suppressing of emergent errors and that in all reason for what need arming without an enemy to make Statutes provisions Ordinances or Canons without some present danger might possibly teach men to offend or erre who without such occasion had not minded it at all The first Apostolical Synod had an apparent cause certain men taught the brethren saying Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses ye cannot be saved Then the Apostles and Elders ●ame together to consider of this matter So the four first Councels had their several occasions The Nicen Councel was called by Constantin to suppress the damnable heresie of the Arians The Councel of Constantinople was called against Maedonius and Eunomius denying the deity of the holy Ghost in the reigne of Gratian and Theodosius The Councel of Ephesus in the reigne of Theodosius the younger against Nestorius and Caelestius and the Calcedon Councel was gathered against the heresie of Eutychus and Dioscorus so was the Councel of Gangris against Eustathius The first Councel of Carthage against the rebaptizing Donatists the Arelatense was occasioned by their appeal and the second Milevitan Councel was called against Pelagius and Caelestius his great Factor denying infants original sin and baptism So that the non determination of a thing for many ages in the Church the Church constantly holding and practising it proves nothing but that no body opposed it all that time and had Pelagi●u●s heresie concerning infant-baptism after the Milevitan Councel and after the writings of Jerome Augustin Optatus and others still slept I know not why any man should now have written or spoken against it I grant you say it was practised in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel St. Augustin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absolutely necessary and that was in his heat and anger against Pelagius who had warmed and chased him so in that question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of ●●re concernment then this You grant the practice of infant-baptism in Africa and that some of them thought well of it It hath been proved that an ancient Councel there established it as a custome of the Church derived from the practice or tradition of the Apostles obeying Christ's general precept to baptize all nations that none of them before Augustin pretended it to be necessary cannot be true for they would not have practised a thing of so high concernment except they ●ad held it to be necessary on the part of the administrers Further I say that the Churches of Africa were of a very ancient plantation as were also the Churches of Asia of which was Justin Martyr by birth a Samaritan which is of Asia the greater and he was for infant-baptism above all controversie the sound of the Apostles preaching went into all the earth and their words unto the ends of the world and therefore all the Christian Churches were first planted according to the Gospel and traditions of the Apostles among which we have shewed infant-baptism to be one for good cause therefore they thought well of it and so do we That none of them did ever before Augustine pretend it necessary is apparently false for it was in liking and use in Cypriant time as hath been proved therefore if Augustin were the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary to salvation and in his heat against the Pelagians did something innovate it hurteth not our cause who do not affirm so rigid a necessity of baptism as we have said formerly But you sa Nor at all in other places we have the testimony of a learned Pedobaptist Ludovicus Vives who in his annotations upon S. Augustin de C. Dei l. 1. c. 2● affirms neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari That infant-baptism was not at all practised in other places is very untrue as appeareth by that which hath been alleadged out

to come What is this to our deferring Infants Baptism in the Rule which in some cases may reasonably and lawfully be done As for example Suppose an infant neer some Mahumetan border were found and the parents not known we may and ought to demur But what makes this against baptizing infants of parents known to be within the Church But you say To which if we add that the parents of S. Augustine S. Hierom and St. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did they not baptize their children before they were 30 years of age it will be very considerable in the Example and of great efficacy for the destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles This may make a formidable noyse in some vulgar ear 't is true which Mr. Homes notes pag. 188. that the opinions or practices of some few conclude no more against the generall tenet and practice of the Church then the Hills and Vallies do against the roundness of the world But to what purpose do you propose any of these examples to your clients imitation If not why inferre you them Possibly the parents of some great and excellent men might erre in such omission of duty or there might be some in vincible lets or obstructions to their desires however you would not have your childrens Baptism deferred ●0 years To the particulars I say Possidonius in the life of Augustine saith that he was born of honest and Christian parents and that he received of St. Ambrose Bishop of Milan both the wholesome doctrine of the Catholick Church and the Divine Sacraments But Augustine saith he believed and desired baptism from his childhood the cause of the delay thereof he putte●h on a sudden great sickness and his fathers unbelief but if the parents were then Christian when he was born and either understood not or neglected his Baptism what is this to our cause I know nothing hence following but that if so they neglected they were culpable We read of his dangerous estate while he was a Maniche and his mothers constant and importunate tears and intercession for his conversion as her sorrow for the delay thereof which at last happily obtained according to that which the Prelate answered her It cannot be that the son of those tears should perish After his conversion he seriously learned and happily taught others not to defer infant-baptism as may appear by that which hath been alledged out of him As for St. Hierom they also say that both his parents were Christian and that he was diligently taught and brought up of them at home and that with Bonosus presently even in his Parents embraces and Nurses gentle language he received in Christ and presently he was instructed in the rudiments of Christian piety which very probably importeth his infant-baptisme rather then that he had any Nurses at his being ●0 years old That which Erasmus who gathered his story out of other Authors after saith on Hieroms Epistle to Damasus that he would follow the saith of that Citie in which he had received the garment of Christ as the same Erasmus gives the sense in the life of Hierom proves not that he was not baptized before he was 30 years old for Hieroms words are to this sense because the Eastern Churches have rent the seamless Coat of Christ by their schismes so that it is hard there to know where the Church is therefore I thought it meet that I should consult with Peters Chaire and the faith commended by the Apostles mouth Rom. 1. thence now requiring food for my soul where long since I tooke on me the garment of Christ. What was it which he called Peters Chair What the Citie of Rome Was that faith which the Apostle commended onely there or then when Hierom wrote in all the Western Church his words concerning the Eastern Churches divisions by reason of the Arian faction and the following concerning the great distance at which Hierom being then in Syria near Antioch was make it plain that he spake of the Western Church in which he was baptized probably in oppido Stridonis where he was born not in Rome As for Erasmus's opion of his being baptized in Rome 't is grounded but upon an opinor I think saith he he meaneth it not of his Priestho●d or orders And what solidity is there on these conjectures to conclude that Hieroms parents though Christian defer'd his baptism until he was 30 years old or what wil it advantage you if it were true there may be such lets to sealing as to Israel in the Wilderness and God bare with them 40 years together yet they should have circumcised the male children at eight dayes old upon a severe penalty Gen 17. 14. an inevitable necessity varieth not the rule Concerning the last instance in Ambrose I find that his Father was Deputy or Governor of France but whether Christian or not I find nothing in Paulinus who wrote his life and you avouch no Author for that you say We read that after he was chosen Bishop of Milan after Auxentius the Arian by the joynt suffrages of the discordant parties and being though much against his own will confirmed in that charge by Valentinian the Emperor he was baptized and with the Church held Infant-baptism against Pelagius and the Donatists upon this ground Because every age is subject to sin therefore every age is fit for the Sacrament let the reader mark how this also is very considerable in the example and of what great efficacy it is for the destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles as the pleader saith But seeing he can raise no stronger batteries against it he might more easily and certainly conclude that it will stand whether he will or no. But however saith he it is against the perpetual analogie of Christian Doctrine to baptize infants This is gallantly spoken if he could tell how to prove it or any part thereof Besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptize them c. This is his Argument all that for which Christ never gave any precept for the doing it and which neither himself nor his Apostles that appears did is against the perpetual Analogie of Christs Doctrine but Christ never gave any precept to baptize them c. ergo I answer This foundred Argument lame on both feet doth poorly charge 1. 'T is not true that all is against the perpetual Analogie of Christs Doctrine for which no express precept of Christ or practice of himself or his Apostles appears for there are many things circumstantial and indifferent neither commanded nor forbidden which yet on second thoughts you will not say are against the perpetual Analogie of Christs Doctrine I might instance the postures or numbers or sexes or places where in the receiving the Lords Supper Where do you read of any command of Christ or practice of himself or Apostles that the Communicants should stand or sit or

from the womb for many dying young are saved which being conceived in sin and born the children of wrath● they could not be without regeneration and sanctification And truly when I consider what marvelous instinct God giveth to the new-cast young of beasts to take the brest as well as to new-born infants for their bodily preservation I cannot but conceive that the good God gives infants on whom he hath set his own image which consisteth in understanding sanctity immortality c. some admirable though to us secret light of mind and capacity of that which is snbordinate to the preservation of their immortal souls 2. Children under the Gospel have no less capacity then children under the Law had who yet received the seal of the same righteousness of faith in their infancy and were circumcised to newness of life Rom. 2. 29. But you say And then have they but one member of the distinction used by S. Peter they have that baptism which is a putting away the filth of the flesh but they have not that baptism which is the answer of a good conscience towards God which is the only baptism that saveth us I answer 1. You vainly dispute è non concessis 't is not granted nor can it ever be proved that elect children in baptism are not formed new in righteousness and holyness and so your superstruction concerning their having only that baptism which is a putting away the filth of the flesh but not the rest necessary to salvation is frivolous 2. The answer of a good conscience toward God is an effect of the inward baptism by the spirit of Jesus peculiar to the elect Now if your reason hence taken for the exclusion of infants from baptism the external seal were good by the same reason none but the elect or those who have the answer of a good conscience towards God must be admitted to baptism and whom then might you with good conscience baptize certainly but few and for ought you can certainly know none For in these last and worst dayes what know you but that they who fairly profess faith and repentance c. may yet notwithstanding be meer hypocrites And where is then their answer of a good conscience toward God 3. I say what secret light and sweet confidence elect infants have in God I know not sure I am they have that which is and shall be sufficient to their salvation in Christ though they die before man can teach them mor●● and why shall man exclude them from the external Seal of Gods Covenaut with them as being born within the Church of which they have as evident and a more easie capacity then children had of circumcision God gives Infants the incomparably greater and more excellent part sanctity and sealing to salvation and shall man presume to deny the less and subordinate part the external Seal of Christs visible Church whereof Reprobates born within the Church have a capacity 4. Faith good conscience repentance c. are in the elect those fruits whose seeds were sowen in baptism and as hath been said were it reasonable to say we may not sow untill the fruits thereof appear Nay but we therefore sow in hope that we may in due season see and reap the fruits thereof 5. Whereas you say that the answer of a good conscience towards God is the only baptism that saveth us I answer 1. It is not the answer of a good conscience that saveth any man though a good conscience be an excellent signe of our salvation by Christ for Being justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ by whom also we have access by faith c. 2. Your reasoning is fallacious your medium being homonymical For allowing you the signe for the cause yet if that which saveth us though it may be true if understood concerning persons of years and as good conscience an undoubted effect of regeneration is opposed to the bare seal thereof without any inward effect of the spirit I say if it be understood of Infants as in your sense excluded from a capacity of good conscience or the acts thereof it is very false except you will also exclude all Infants from salvation which were against the express doctrine of Christ. As infants you say by the force of nature cannot put themselves into a supernatural condition and therefore say the Poedobaptists they need baptism to put them into it so if they be baptized before the use of reason before the works of the spirit before the operation of grace before they can throw off the works of darkness and live in righteousness newness of life they are never the near I answer 1. Neither can men of years by the force of naeture put themselves into a supernatural condition supposing you mean subordinate to salvation and what then can the use of reason without the works of the Spirit advantage them hereto Shall not they therefore that have the use of reason be baptized 2. What do you herein say which might not as well have been objected against the circumcision of infants Would you have concluded them never the neer because at eight dayes old they had not the use of reason to know what or why it was so done unto them before they could throw off the works of darkness and live in righteousness and newness of life 3. If you will have none baptized before the works of the Spirit before the operations of grace c. when and whom may you baptize For the wind bloweth where it listeth and thou hearest the sound thereof but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the Spirit God can and doth sanctifie infants as in the elect infants dying such must be granted if you have so much reason or charity as to think that at least some of them are elected and saved and he can and doth sanctifie in age sometimes in the very last act thereof as appeared in the penitent thief how then will it follow that infants are never the neerer if they be baptized before the use of reason c. 4. We must understand that baptism comprehendeth first the sign water and the whole ceremony sprinkling washing or dipping into water in the Name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost Secondly the things themselves signified by the visible and externall things which are sprinkling of the blood of Jesus on the baptized for the remission of sins mortification of the old man quickning the new man into certain hope of resurrection to eternall life to come Thirdly the commandement promise of Christ whence the sign hath authority and power of sealing and confirming these things unto the baptized They then that say baptism is an externall sign and washing of the body and therefore a bare and effectless sign do fallaciously dispute dividing that which God who cannot deceive us hath joyned together by giving us