Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	church_n	tradition_n	3,170	5	9.1818	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79489	A Christian plea for infants baptisme. Or a confutation of some things written by A.R. in his treatise, entitutled, The second part of the vanitie and childishnesse of infants baptisme. In the answer whereof, the lawfulnesse of infants baptisme is defended, and the arguments against it disproved, by sufficient grounds and forcible reasons, drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture. S.C.	Chidley, Samuel.	1644 (1644)	Wing C3836A; Thomason E32_2; ESTC R11383	164,121	171

Exod. 12.48 Baptisme is to us as Circumcis●on was to the Jewes directed by the infallible rule of Gods Word which rule was never yet abrogated therefore it standeth in force and is not a vaine tradition and seeing God himselfe administred Baptisme upon infants before the Law was given in Mount Sinai how dare you say it is not of God Next after this you cast your eye upon an Author A. R. whom you * See Pag 7. lin 25 26. call A l●arned and able Author of our times whose expression you say you cannot but take notice of Ans It may be you call him learned and able because as you say he confesseth himselfe unconvinced of the lawfulnesse of the Baptisme of infants by demonstration of Scripture for it And yet he taketh the Baptisme of infants to be one of the most reverend generall and uncontrouled traditions which the Church hath and which he would no lesse doubt of then the Creed to be Apostolicall And upon this beliefe and confession of his you Paraphrase * In lin 31. to Pag. 8. saying No more would I doubt thereof if I could be convinced by any demonstration of Scripture for it But seeing demonstration of Scripture neither to us is nor by him can be produced for it I doe and must remaine still unconvinced with him and must needs take it to be a meere humane device To which I answer That the doubting conscience cannot be satisfied unlesse God doe it by his Word or Spirit but if the Lord doe open your eyes and give you sight to apprehend and comprehend this light then in it you shall see clearly this truth even the lawfulnesse of the Baptisme of holy infants But if God doe not by his Spirit open your heart the tongue of men and Angels cannot convince you but you must still remaine unconvinced But how can you expect that this Author whom you call Mr. Daniel Rogers should produce Scripture for the Baptisme of Infants while he is as he saith himself unconvinced of it by demonstratiō of Scripture except you did expect that he should have played the hypocrite so have gon against his Conscience you should know that Whatsoever is not of faith is sin And it doth not argue as you infer that because no demonstration of Scripture is brought by him that therefore none at all is brought to you by those who are convinced of it by the authoritie of Scripture This cannot be true which you affirme considering the many Scriptures which you acknowledge have been alledged for to prove the Baptisme of infants The demonstration whereof hath been sufficiently shewed unto you and therefore if you take it not for satisfaction you may remaine unsatisfied and still unconvinced though convicted with your alledged Author and take it or rather mistake it as you esteem it for a meere humane device But further you say A. R. Pag. 8. Nor is this Author alone in deeming the Baptisme of infants a traditions for many of the Ancients with him have so declared it Origen calleth it a Ceremony or Tradition of the Church In Levit. hom 8. in Epist ad Rom. lib. 5. Augustine calleth it a Common Custome of the Church De baptismo contra Dona. lib. 4. cap. 23. Et de Genesi ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. To which I say that things may be traditionall and c●mmonly and customarily practised and yet have sufficient ground and warrant in the Scripture Origen But in citing Origen you doe not tell us what he sayth in the same Epistle to wit that the Church received Baptisme of infants from the Apostles Augustine And in citing Augustine you doe not declare what he sayth in contra Donatist lib. 4. cap. 23 24. that the Baptisme of Infants was not derived from the authoritie of man or Counsels but from the tradition or doctrine of the Apostles But next of all you say Erasmus * Lin. 9 lib. 4. de Ratione Concio sayth that they are not to be condemned that doubt whether Childrens Baptisme were ordained by the Apostles c. To which I answer No more will I condemne those who in weaknesse doe doubt of the Baptisme of Infants but rather pittie them and pray for them and labour as the Apostle biddeth us concerning those that are fallen through infirmitie To restore them with the spirit of meeknesse But when their sinne cometh to such a height The obstinate though ignorant are to be rejected when they reject the truth that they resist the truth and run on wilfully and blasphemously with a leaprous headines and that against the Scripture and the very light and law of reason and will not heare good Counsell nor receive wholsome instruction then they are not to be borne with but condemned Whereas you say further that Ekius * Lin. 12. calleth the Baptisme of Infants a Commandement and ordinance of man In Echiridion I answer You should know that it is a Commandement and ordinance of God In the Scripture Whereas you produce the Papists * Lin. 15. and the Authoritie of Counsells * Lin. 23 to jump with you and your first learned Author cited by you against the Baptisme of Infants to prove it not to be warranted in the Word but grounded upon tradition and not upon the Scripture I answer It evidently appeareth that these your erronious conceptions and peremptory conclusions are builded upon a sandy foundation I pray you tell me How can they beleeve a thing by Scripture that judge the Fathers above the Scripture And as you thus bring humane unsufficient Testimony to prove the Baptisme of Infants to be a humane invention so you doe the like in labouring to make knowne the time when it was invented a meere dreame and vaine conceipt of your owne a thing farre above your reach And you would by your humane Authors beare your Auditors in hand as if the Baptisme of infants were invented some hundreds of yeares after Christ which is neither certaine probable nor possible and yet you cite other humane Authors for it whose historicall relations as you have set them downe have no bottom upon truth and therfore are to no purpose against the Baptisme of holy Infants And therefore your citing them maketh nothing for your purpose neither But you ought rather in this to mount above humane testimony and leave these your two cited Authors to reconcile themselves Goe to the Law and to the Testimony * Isa 8.29 for whatsoever is not according to that hath no light in it and there see what time the baptisme of infants was administred I thinke that Circumcision of infāts was not invented nor administred before the Baptisme of infants As for the time of the invention thereof I will not intermeddle or take upon me to determine at this time forasmuch as it is sufficient for us to know that God is the Author and instituter of it the administration whereof was in the