Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	christian_a	church_n	profess_v	3,448	5	8.0722	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86599	An antidote against Hen. Haggar's poysonous pamphlet, entitled, The foundation of the font discovered: or, A reply wherein his audaciousness in perverting holy scriptures and humane writings is discovered, his sophistry in arguing against infant-baptism, discipleship, church membership &c. is detected, his contradictions demonstrated; his cavils agains M. Cook, M. Baxter, and M. Hall answered, his raylings rebuked, and his folly manifested. By Aylmar Houghton minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and teacher to the congregation of Prees, in the county of Salop.	Houghton, Aylmer.	1658 (1658)	Wing H2917; Thomason E961_1; ESTC R207689	240,876	351

I will say but this It is you and your party that strengthens the hands and revives the hopes of the Cavaleers And if by their opposites you mean the Round heads as they are called difference in opinion beside the foundation doth not take away the name and nature of a National Church no more then among the Jews SECT 4. H. H. You say Isa 52 15. Christ shall sprinkle many Nations Answ It 's granted but it doth not follow that he doth sprinkle whole Nations For believers have their hearts sprinkled o) Heb. 10.22 c. Therefore no National Church And I much wonder that you Ministers of the Church of England who for the generality hold that Christ did not dye for all men but only for some few elect persons should yet preach up Nationall Churches c. Reply 1 Mr. C. did not say that Christ sprinkles Whole but MANY Nations which phrase imolies that so many as are sprinkled by Christ in thos● Nations may give them the Denomination of sprinkled Nations if so why not of Nationall Churches 2. That all the Elect which have been are and shall be in this world should be called simply some few persons p) Ames Anti. Synod de morte Christi c. 2. p. 176. is a malignant restriction borrowed from your friends the Arminians 3. Your wonder may be stayed if you please to consider that they who hold that Christ dyed not for the salvation of ALL but only of the Elect q Mat 17.13.14 and 20.16 who comparatively are but a few indeed do not make election or Christs intention or interest in Christs death which in themselvs are invisible things The adequate ground or rule of Church-membership but acceptance of and incerest in the Covenant as it is externally and conditionally administred So that the visible Church is far more numerous then the elect or those for whose salvation Christ dyed Judas was a member of the visible Church yet Christ dyed not for his salvation Though Christ's death was in it self sufficient For then he had been saved it being impossible that the intention of the Father in giving Christ and of Christ in giving himself should be frustrated So then to preach that Christ did not dye for ALL men in our and the Scripture sense and yet to preach up Nationall Churches are not things inconsistent 4. For your scoffe of being seven years at the University I heed not but had you been two years there you might have learned to distinguish between inward and outward Covenant as to the Administration and to draw better conclusions or at least not to deny the conclusion in a publick dispute SECT 5. H. H. pag. 28. You say from Mat. 28.19 did not Christ command his Apostles to go into all Nations and preach and baptize I answer Do you not know that they never baptized whole Nations nor yet whole Cities but most hated and abused them c. We grant if a whole Nation can be converted by the preaching of the Word they ought to be baptized c. Reply 1. You chop and change Mr. C. words He said not whole but ALL Nations but do you not know that Infants are a considerable part of any Nation and doth not the whole include the parts 2. It 's granted we do not read of whole nations converted or baptized by the Apostles For God in his providence so ordered that the Gospel at the first preaching should not overspread whole nations at once but that it should be r) Mat. 13.31 32 33. as a grain of mustard seed c. As Abrahams family in process of time grew up to a Nation i. e. one family of believers became a Nation of believers else how can it be said ſ) Mar. 22.43 that the Kingdom of God or priviledge of being God's people in Covenant should be taken from them c. If they to whom the Gospel was brought and by whom it was received were not to be a nation in Covenant as the Jews had been 3. Are not all nations or any sort of nations to whom providence should bring the Apostles set in opposition to that only Nation of the Jews which had hitherto been a people in Covenant But now to be cast out and the Gentile world to be taken in And who can deny without great ingratitude that some nations since Christs time have made as full and universall profession of the true God Father Son and Holy Ghost and of owning the Fundamentall points of Christian Religion as the Jews when a Nationall Church made of the Lord Jehovah and of the Jewish Religion 4. For our baptizing Infants contrary to Acts 8.12 as you say answer hath been made before and for the Apostles baptizing some whole housholds you seem to grant Infant-baptism contrary to what you say p. 5.6 If Infants be a part of any whole houshold baptized 5. I cannot but pitty your ignorance and impudence in saying we read but of 7 Churches in all Asia which is one quarter of the world For these seven Churches were in Asiaminor t) Asiam intelligit minorem scu eam Asiam partem c. Pareus in Rev. 1.4 Heylins Microcosm p. 520. called now Anatolia being but one of the 15 principall Regions of all Asia Besides these seven Churches mentioned in the Revelation there was a Church in Antioch u) Acts 11.26 with c 13.14 which Antioch was in Pisidia and Churches of Galatia w) 1 Cor. 16.1 with Gal. 1.2 now Pisidia and Galatia were Provinces in Asia the less Churches in Judea x) 1 Thes 2.14 now Judea was certainly one of the principall regions of Asia the greater y) Heylin pag. 520. and 521. see also 1 Pet. 5.13 The Church at Babylon that is in Assyria or Chaldea Beza and Diodat Many more instances might be given but these I hope are sufficient to convince that you may read if you look better more then seven Churches In ALL Asia SECT 6. H. H. You bring Rev. 11.15 The Kingdoms of this world are become our Lords c. I answer I told you already that such times shall be but they are not yet if they were wee should no longer pray Thy Kingdom come And in that day Satan shall deceive the Nations c. Rev. 20.3 Reply 1. Your reason to prove that these times are not yet is very weak For though when the number of the Elect shall be made up and be fully glorified there will be no need of praying Thy Kingdom come yet while the Kingdom is a coming and in perfecting It needs to pray so And doubtlesse the nearer it coms to perfection the more fervently it shall pray for perfection as Naturall bodies in their motion move swifter the nearer they come to the Center Now that the Kingdom wil not be absolutely perfected at that time you hint See the place you cite z) Rev. 20.3 7 c. Surely the loosing of Satan and his deceiving the

this Christs Disciples must and do bear his Cross and come after him But Infants while such cannot bear his Cross and come after him Therefore they cannot be his Disciples Reply 1. This Argument is of the same nature with most of the former It concludes only of such as are adult Disciples savingly taught of God sanctified by the Spirit and accepted of Christ whereas again the Question is of such who may make visible Church-members of which sort many are and must be Disciples who are without those characters as Judas and all Hypocrites more particularly 2. This is spoken to and of persons of years not to or of Intants as such verse 25.33 3. Though this is spoken to t) See Sect. 9. of this Chap. in your p. 78. yet They that are Infants now may hereafter do coming to years all this yea they have these principles in them by the Spirit as hath been said and proved that will certainly enable them if they live to years to do this 4. As Infants may and do with their parents enjoy the priviledges of the Covenant as you say free-born subjects do of a Kingdom so they may and do undergo the burdens and sufferings of the Cross of Christ and follow him in suffering So that Christ suffered in his Infancy poverty contempt banishment c. Luk. 2.7 Mat. 2.13 to 19. So they penury exile and death too for that Faith in Christ which their parents professe and they implicitely in and with them He is a●st anger in Israel that hath not heard of the Massacrings and sufferings of Infants with their parents for Religion sake 5. And this fully answers your ninth Argument being not new but dressed up in a new fashion only you have the knack of multiplying and so filling up Paper whereas you might have comprehended all these in one and made me but one labour but for the sake of the weaker I have been content to follow you in repeating as you inurging the same thing for substance 6. Onely let the Reader if you will not behold as in a glass clearly the rudeness and wildness of your arguing which reflects on the the Apostles as well as on us For if these characters mentioned in your nine foregoing Arguments be necessary for the making owning and sealing of Disciples and if the Apostles did not keep them from Baptism till they had such characters much less till they knew they had such Then either those which they baptized were not Disciples or else they went beyond and beside their Commission or rather their Commission required impossibilities of them What absurdities if not blasphemies do your unreasonable reasonings lead unto I will press this no further nor say any thing of your wonted uncharitable censuring as if wee never yet learned what a Disciple is and are none our selves CHAP. XV. Whether the Anabaptist's way of Baptizing bee Sinfull SECT 1. H. H. p. 86. I proceed to answer M. Baxter's eight Arguments by which he saith he proveth the Anabaptist's way of baptizing sinfull His first is this There is no word of precept or example in all the Scripture for the baptizing of the child of any one Christian at years of discretion Therefore to defer the baptizing them till then is not the Scripture way Answer page 87. I give him an example viz. Christ who was baptized at years of discretion Luk. 3.21 22. If M. Baxter deny his mother to be a Christian Luk. 1.46 46. I say he knows not what a Christian is and is no Christian himself But to retort there is no word of precept nor example in all the Scripture for baptizing an Infant Therefore that way is sinfull Reply 1. If by Christian you mean the name or title I will be bold to say without danger of your charge that Mary was no Christian for the Disciples were called Christians FIRST in Antioch Acts 11.26 And I would gladly know whether you do or dare judge to use your own expression Mary the mother of Jesus to be no Disciple If you deny I am bold to say you erre not knowing the Scriptures you know not what a Disciple is and that you are none your self But if you understand the substance and truth as I may say of a Christian I cordially acknowledge her a Christian The name Protestant was not used till about Luther's time yet our Divines prove soundly against the Papists that the Protestant Doctrine i. e. The substance of our Religion was professed and practised long before even from the time of Christ and his Apostles to Luther's days This is helpfull not hurtfull to us but hurtfull not helpfull to you For as it shews that for substance the Covenant of grace under the Old and New Testament is one and the same though different in manner of administration as hath been proved so the same seal of initiation though in a different way of dispensation 2. As the mother of Jesus was a Christian So John Baptist even in his mothers womb may bee called a Christian who is said to leap for joy the same word with Maries rejoicing onely there z) Luk. 1.44 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 47. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Noune here a) Jo. 8.58 the Verb Thus Abraham was a Christian who rejoiced the same word used by Mary to see Christ's day to whom also the GOSPEL was preached Gal. 3.8 And thus all the faithfull of the Old Testament were Christians Now if you prove by consequence from that Scripture and truly that Mary was a Christian because shee rejoiced in Christ May not wee prove Infant-Baptism c. by consequence from Scripture too What will you not give YET that liberty which you take 3. For that in Luke 3. concerning Christ his being baptized I have spoken sufficiently to it and will not repeat in your page 38. 4. Your retorting the Argument hath wrought the extorting of this answer It 's strange you can find a Font in a broken Cistern page 8. and yet cann●● find in Scripture precept or example for baptizing one child before years of discretion though never so plainly held forth to you So that M. B. is so far from being wounded with the edge of his own sword that with the keenness thereof it cutts you to the heart SECT 2. H. H. same p. M. Baxter's second Argument is It 's utterly inconsistent with obedience to the rule of Baptizing Answer This is the same with the first Argument Therefore the same answer may serve Reply 1. Then the same Reply might serve too But Secondly you have cunningly left out the word ORDINARILY in M. Baxter's Argument which was a seasonable qualification and very needfull to prevent mistakes to which you have exposed him out of a spitefull design 3. Nay you answer not one word to all the Scriptures and reasons b) See plain Scripture proof c. 8. from p. 126. to 130. he brings clearly and soundly to confirm his Minor In which it seems you

much against Circumcision in Abrahams time and after as it is now against the baptizing of Infants i. e. nothing at all Thus whatsoever is not of faith is sin and without faith it 's impossible to please God but the Infants among the Jews had no faith though faith is the condition of the Covenant of Grace ever since it was set on foot For alas they are your own words b they can professe no Faith c. Therefore the Circumcision of Infants among the Jews was sin If this Conclusion be absurd and blasphemous confesse the other not a jot the better For to use your own words again doth not the word Whatsoever include all matters c Then Circumcision sure as much as Baptism SECT 11. H. H. This your president of the Thief on the Cross will not at all help you except in the like condition Then I confess a multitude of such penitent ones might be reckoned to be in a saving condition though not baptized But neither you nor I are in that streight as yet Therefore it will be no plea for us but if either of us be unbaptized we have time and liberty enough to consider and turn Psal 119.59 60. Reply 1. Here you again yield the cause viz. Baptism doth not constitute a Church-member c. for out of the Church there is no salvation r) 1 Pet. 3.20 with Eph. ● 23 26. Otherwise to use your own expression pag. 29. Secret things belong to God I hope now you will not flinch 2. Your supposal that neither you nor Mr. Cook are in the streight the poor Thief was in is nothing to the purpose Though you intimate that Mr. Cook and his brethren may be and I believe it if you had your will as those Joh. 16.2 for you that unchurch us would make no bones to kill us 3. You say If either of us be unbaptized A needless If. For you granted p. 24. That we were once baptized and you make no question but you have been baptized twice for failing at least you do not think your self unbaptized 4. It 's a miserable begging of the question that baptizing after your mode is the testimony and commandment of the Lord unlesse as hath been said in the like case 5. There is not one word of Baptism in Psal 119. ver 59 60. How pitifully do you pervert and misapply this Scripture also And I may say They who have made haste to be Re-baptized have made more haste then good speed SECT 12. H. H. pag. 26. You tell us that the Church of England was constituted in or anon after the Apostles daies and by the Ministry of the Word were converted from Heathenism to Christianity and then persons of years were baptized upon profession of Faith and Repentance I Answer What then what is your Church now the better for that which was done 1600 years ago if you walk not in the same footsteps which they did then I can prove as well the Church of Rome d) Rom. 1.7 was then a constituted Church according to the order of the Gospel But doth that make the Pope and his Crew now to be a true Church If they be why do you separate from them but they are not neither are you c. Reply 1. I accept of your grant That the Church of England was constituted in or near the Apostles dates and acknowledge we are not now the better for it if we had razed the Foundation relapsed to Heathenism and had been called e) Hos 1.6 7. Loruhamah and Lo ammi But seeing God since the plantation of the Gospel in this Nation hath raised up som faithful witnesses reserved some sincere Professors of his truth and still the Fundamentals of Christian Religion have been owned and Antichrists yoke cast off It cannot without great injury but be acknowledged that the first constitution of the Church in this Land is much to us who desire and indeavour to be built and to build on that Foundation Eph. 2.20 The Church of the Jewes was the better for God's constituting their Church in Abrahams family if we may believe their f) 2 Chron. 20 7. Neh. 9. vers 7 8. plea and though they did degenerate yet the Foundation was never razed nor the first constitution abolished 2. On the former account we are better without question for outward priviledges and possibility of salvation as the Jews were Rom. 3.1.2 with Chap. 9 4.5 or as the poor cripple g) John 5.5 that did lye at the Pool o● Bethesda for cure 3. If by our not walking in the footsteps of those who were first constituted a Church in this Nation you mean that wee do not first repent and then bee Baptized You might as wel charge the Jews who circumcised their children on the eighth day for not walking in Abraham's steps and therefore not a jot the better that their Church was first constituted in him for he was circumcised at h) Gen. 17.26 99 years old Nay it seems you charge us for not taking care that all the children in this Nation may live in ignorance and Idolatry that so being by the Gospel converted they may be baptized after their example For they cannot be converted from Heathenism as they were and so be baptized after their example exactly unlesse they live in Heathenisme as they did If this be your meaning and charge I pray Lord lay not this sin to your charge 4. That Scripture doth not prove what you assert unlesse by a far-fetcht and strained consequence And as the word Constituted is not there so neither those words ACCORDING to the ORDER of the GOSPEL there or elsewhere in any one place of Scripture You are wise above what is written though I deny not but the Church of Rome was once a rightly constituted Church 5. Seeing you declare your self so great a friend to the Church of Rome as equalling us with them and also pronounce us no Church and so excommunicate us with your brute Thunderbolt as if you were another Pope and dis-regard the counsell and admonition of the Church so censured and nullified by you I leave you to the judgement of him who is Lord and King Husband and Patron of his Church wishing you if you bee not past hope of profiting by Scripture to weigh what is written Jude 8. to the 17 verse SECT 13. H. H. You say that they and their children were then admitted into the Covenant and Church as Abraham and his family were by circumcision I answer that it still remains for you to prove that they and their children were admitted into Church-fellowship I deny it prove it if you can or else you have done nothing c. Reply 1. As you say of the Sacrament pag. 14. So wee do not read in your sense of the word Church-fellowship in all the holy Scriptures Therefore how should we prove that children were admitted into Church-fellowship But 2 That all the Faithfull are the children or

Indeed it may seem strange that the Land of Canaan should be given to Christ Gen. 15.18 But the Apostle so interpreting it you and I must believe it though perhaps we cannot satisfactorily explain it yet for the Readers instruction I conceive that as the Evangelists and Apostles do unfold many mysteries wrapped up in sacred Oracles that we perhaps could never have thought on without their explication e.g. ministers maintenance 1 Tim. 5.18 with Deut. 25.4 and Elias praier Jam. 5.17 18. with 1 King 17.1 and 18.42 and many more instances so God would have us know that as to us Christians *) 2 Cor. 1.20 all promises are yea and Amen in Christ exhibited so to the Israelites in Christ to be exhibited and that they could not have right to that earthly Canaan much lesse enjoy it by Covenant least of all the heavenly kingdom shadowed thereby but by Christ that according to the Flesh was to be born of Abraham's seed whose humane nature had then no existence but that person in whom the humane nature should subsist was in being before to whom the Father committed the disposal of this inheritance c. in which respect it 's said I have given Gen. 15.18 SECT 5. H. H. p. 56. I wonder how the Preachers of the Church of England dare affirm That Believers children are in Covenant before believing by virtue of their parents Faith and yet they hold that God did hate and had reprobated Esau before he was born or had done good or evil c. Reply 1. You need not wonder if you will consider the distinction even now hinted of being in Covenant viz. Externally thus all that profess acceptance of the covenant are by God's grant with their children in covenant and internally so as to partake of the saving benefits of the covenant Thus none but those who are circumcised in heart are in covenant This distinction is none of our coyning but obvious in Scripture To go no further then your instance of Esau who was in covenant outwardly though not inwardly for he was circumcised as well as Jacob because of God's command Gen. 17.10 11 12. where parents circumcising their seed is called a keeping of God's covenant and circumcision a token of the covenant and the omitting of it a breaking of his covenant and yet he was hated of God Rom. 9.12 13. before he had done good or evil And when he was come to age x) Heb. 12.16 17. he was an hypocrite and prophane person and so wanted the inward efficacy of the Covenant The children of Believers may be in covenant then externally though reprobated externally Rom. 11.1 2. where it's evident all Israel were his people in covenant outwardly but onely his Flect whom he fore-knew his people in covenant internally 2. I wonder rather that you should hold that God did not hate Esau before he had done good or evil Are not you one of those y) Your p. 53. Qu. 6. that deny faith in part of the Scripture for it is so written Rom 9 11 13. Here again you smell too strong of the Arminian cask who deny peremptory or personal reprobation of any 3. Mr. B. and Mr. C. have weighed you and your principles in the ballance of the Sanctuary and have found you and them too light and they do not marvel that you confound your own principles and other mens too for want of a Scripture-distinction SECT 6. H. H. Again If Believers children be in covenant because they are believers children then grace comes by Generation and not by Regeneration which is absurd Reply We do not say Believers children are in covenant because Believers children but because God hath made a covenant with the faithful and their seed much lesse do we say that the inward blessing of the Covenant is given to an● because believers children though we grant it an effect of God's favour or grace that those which are born of parents in covenant are externally in covenant as born of such by virtue of God's promise Least of all do we say That grace i. e. the favour of God comes by generation or regeneration either That any are born visible and external Church-members is a fruit of God's meer common grace or favour that any are made members of Christ by Regeneration and indued with true holiness is a fruit of his peculiar grace but neither Generation nor Regeneration the cause of grace properly taken SECT 7. H. H. If they be in Covenant by virtue of their believing parents then all the world ever since righteous Noah must needs be in Covenant for they and we all came of him Reply 1. It follows not Noah's sons presently Apostatized from their father's God and so did the greatest part of the other families Of Ishmael and Esau though born of godly parents and so they did cast themselvs out of Covenant 2. If parents dedicate their children to the true God whom they own and bring them up in the true Religion which they profess and become not Apostates to Idolatrie Atheism and Hethenism they and their children are externally at least in covenant But if they so Apostatize they cast themselvs and their children out of covenant who so remain till by the Gospel they are brought back again into covenant else the faith of one parent continuing in the faith intitles the child to federal holiness according to God's Word and promise 1 Cor. 7 14. SECT 8. H. H. But Mr. C. saith in his Font Uncovered pag. 45. That he doth not hold falling from the inward efficacy of grace and true sanctification c. Answ So then it seems by his own confession it is not true and then it must needs be false and it 's well if they fall from false grace and sanctification c. for they that fall from false must needs fall to true as they that fall from true fall to false else they abide as they were Reply 1. Of four answers made by Mr. C. to a second Objection you have snatch at one for your advantage as you think and passe by all the other which you could not reply to Cunningly done 2. That very one singled out by you discovers as your strange humour to pick quarrels so your miserable impotency to overthrow the truth For these very words you cite hold forth the distinction of being outwardly under the Covenant of Grace which is common to the whole visible Church Elect and Reprobate and the partaking of the inward efficacy of grace which is peculiar to the effectually called which distinction turns your charge into meer smoke 3. The Arminians argue in their writings a) Called scripta Antisynodalia just as you do yet the consequence is as sensless as the former For there is no necessity of falling from false grace to true c. For they may and oft do fall to open wickedness which is no very good fall though you say b) 2 Pet. 2.20 21 22. it 's well if