Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	apostle_n	holy_a	write_v	1,802	5	5.6564	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62869	A plea for anti-pædobaptists, against the vanity and falshood of scribled papers, entituled, The anabaptists anatomiz'd and silenc'd in a public dispute at Abergaveny in Monmouth-shire Sept. 5. 1653. Betwixt John Tombes, John Cragg, and Henry Vaughan, touching infant-baptism. By John Tombes, B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1654 (1654)	Wing T1811; ESTC R206989	34,969	48

of the Anabaptists and their children yet would he be ashamed to say as he doth here of them That they are as vile as the children of Turks Tartars or Cannibals But that which he closeth with sheweth he was minded to affright the poor ignorant people as the Popish Priests did of old Fourthly saith he They would be without God without Christ without hope in the world not the children of God but would all be damned for out of covenant and visible Church ordinarily there is no salvation Answ. By Covenant he means doubtless no other than the outward covenant which is not shewed to be any other than baptism and indeed we do no otherwise put them out of the Covenant than by denying them baptism which being presupposed Mr. Craggs speech must needs imply that denying baptism inferrs all this Which cannot be true without conceiving That all that are unbaptized are without God without Christ without hope in the world not the children of God but of the Devil will be all damned have no salvation Which is not only more than what the Epistler makes hainous in me all that would be saved must be baptized after profession though it were understood by me onely of necessity of precept which Mr. Cragg himself asserts to be imported Mark 16. 16. but worse than Austin sayes whom Mr. Cragg himself called the hard Father of infants and saies went too far worse than the Papists themselves speak of the dying unbaptized Which shews that he preached this Sermon with a bitter and furious spirit His closing speech out of Covenant and visible Church ordinarily there is no salvation if understood of the Covenant of saving according to election I grant that neither ordinarily nor extraordinarily is there salvation if of the outward Covenant as they call it that is the outward administration of Seals it is certain there may be salvation unless profane contempt or willfull neglect against conscience do hinder salvation The speech out of the Church is no salvation hath been interpreted by Protestants of the invisible Church A person of years that believes though he be joined to no particular visible Church if there be not prophane contempt or wilful neglect against conscience may be saved But they that are only negatively or privatively out of the Church visible meerly for want of age to understand the faith and ability to make profession may ordinarily if by it be meant frequently constantly be saved though they be not ordinarily saved as ordinarily notes ordinary means preaching the word and profession of faith His last argument is That which hath continued since the Apostles times with blessed success must needs be lawful But infant-baptism hath continued with blessed success since the Apostles times Ergo The minor is denyed The blessed success he proves not In my Exercitation I shew many errours and corruptions which have come from it not by accident in respect of some persons that imbraced it only but even from the tendency of the practice it self I may ruly say that Paedobaptism hath been as cursed a root of corrupting the Churches and losing the gifts of the Spirit conferred at first commonly at baptism by laying on of hands as I think except some few any other corruption in the rites of Christian Religion But Mr. Cragg thinks to draw it down from the Apostles daies He begins with words of Dionysius Areopagita holy men have received a tradition of the Fathers which very words shew it was not Dionysius Areopagita mentioned Acts 17. he would doubtless have said I have received it from blessed Paul not have told what other holy men have received from the Fathers whom Mr. Cragg vainly conceives to be meant of the Apostles But the books that go under his name have been so often by so many learned men Papists and Protestants proved to be meer counterfeits that either it is much ignorance or much impudence that this is produced as his Salmasius sundry times speaketh of them as certain that the Author of them was not till the fifth age The Apostolical constitutions appear by many observations of Scultetus and others not to have been written by Clement but of much later time Irenaeus his words make nothing for Mr. Cragg as he cites them nor as they stand in his own works Origens speeches are in the Latin books translated by Ruffinus into which many things were foisted by him and these its probable were so as being so expresse against the Pelagians nor do I find he was ever alleged by Austin who gathered the most Ancient testimonies he could for Original sin and infant-baptism Therefore saith Vossius in his Theses of infant-baptism We less care for Origen because they are not in Greek Cyprians testimony is granted to be in the third Century and Ambroses and Austins and the Milevitan Councils and innumerable more but all upon the Popish errours of giving grace and the necessity to save a child from damnation Gregory Nazianzen and Tertullian before him disswade from it except in case of danger of death in appearance near out of which case the Ancients did not baptize infants and in that case the communion was given them But otherwise they baptized not infants no not of believing parents till they came to years and then they were first catechized in Lent and then solemnly baptized at Easter and Whitsuntide as may be gathered even from the Common Prayer Book in the Rubrick before baptism It is most false that all ages all Churches agree in infant-baptism Some Churches never had it some Churches five hundred years ago of the most godly and learned that then were did oppose it and practice the baptism of believers only If Mr. Fox and others did account Anabaptists hereticks it was for other tenents than this Mr. Baxter himself saith no sober Divine did ever reckon the Anabaptists as hereticks meerly for the errour of rebaptizing Plain Scripture proof c. part 1. chap. 1. Yet Mr. Cragg bespatters Anti-paedobaptism thus it robs the Scripture of its truth infants of their right parents of their comforts the Church of its members Christ of his merits God of his glory Sure he hath learned the art of him in the Comaedian to calumniate boldly imagining somewhat will be believed though there be not a word true But there is more of this venome behind That it is the mother of many other errours Hence sprung the Ranters Socinians Antitrinitarians Shakers Levellers they that are above Ordinances Antiscripturians Will any believe that from the tenet which doth so stifly maintain an Ordinance should spring the errour of being above Ordinances Or that the errour of Antiscripturians should spring from that tenet which doth so strictly insist on the Scripture Let Mr. Cragg shew any the least connexion between Antipaedobaptism and the errours he names and he saith something else if only the persons and not the tenet be guilty of these errours he doth but calumniate He might with like reason say The Christian religion is the mother of many other errours hence sprung Ebionites Cerinthians Nicolaitans Gnosticks c. Such kind of criminations are most stinking and base slanders unworthy a sober minded man much more a Divine in a pulpit speaking to many people who examine not but take all for true which such Rabbins talk with confidence The like may I say of the judgements of God Those in Germany were by war the events that have happened in our daies should teach us to be sparing in our judging Mr. Cottons speech was according to his prejudice Solomon Eccles. 9. 1 2. Christ Luke 13. 1 2 3 4 5. teach us more sobriety than so easily to pronounce of Gods judgements If we should judge of men and tenents by outward judgements Job had been condemned justly One man had his house burned that did not sprinkle his child thousands have had their houses burned who did and perhaps upon occasion of that abuse by means of provision for the feast May not we as well say God thereby judged against infant-sprinkling Thousands have prospered after their refusing to baptize infants thousands have fain into calamities after they have baptized them May not we this way as well decide for Antipaedobaptists as against them Divines that maintain the Scriptures to be their rule should not thus judge of what is true or false by Gods dealing with mens persons which is often upon secret reason not discemable by us but by his word which is our rule and wherein he hath revealed his mind The rest of Mr. Craggs speech is as vain Doth this benefit come to parents and children by infant baptism that God is not ashamed to be called their God and the God of their seed after them Heb. 11. 16. what a ridiculous conceit is this The text saith that through the faith of the persons it is that God is not ashamed to be called their God not their God and the God of their seed much less a word of infant-baptism as if such a benefit came by it All the benefit he talks of that comes to infants is either a meer empty title or else it comes to infants as well without baptism as with it The Devils dealing if it be as Mr. Cragg saith makes it appear the faith is good into which the pretended baptism is but not that the Baptism is right Enough of this frothy unconcocted Sermon calculated for the ignorant and superstitious common people and the profane loose Gentry who mind not godliness in earnest and for the blind Teachers of those parts who know not the Gospel but mind their own profits more than the understanding of the truth From whom the Lord deliver the dark parts of this Land and provide teachers for the people after his own heart that it be not as now it is in too many parts The blind lead the blind and both fall into the ditch FINIS

A PLEA FOR Anti-Paedobaptists Against the Vanity and Falshood of SCRIBLED PAPERS ENTITULED The Anabaptists Anatomiz'd and silenc'd in a Publique Dispute at Abergaveny in Monmouth-shire Sept. 5. 1653. Betwixt John Tombes John Cragg and Henry Vaughan touching INFANT-BAPTISM By John Tombes B.D. JOB II. 2 3. Should not the multitude of words be answered and should a man full of talk be justified Should thy lies or devices make men hold their peace and when thou mockest shall no man make thee ashamed LONDON Printed by Henry Hills and are to be sold at his house at the sign of Sir John Old-Castle in Py-Corner 1654. A Plea for Anti-Paedobaptists against the Vanity and Falshood of SCRIBLED PAPERS SECT. I. The reason of this writing is rendred THere came newly to my hands a Pamphlet wherein the Intitler speaks like a vain braggadochio as if the book had ript up the Anabaptists as he terms them and like a Prelate had silenced them though there was but one whom with any face it could be pretended that he was anatomized or silenced who yet speaks and writes for the truth which these Opponents do endeavour to disgrace and rejoiceth that he lives to find that these men have no other thing to charge him with than his contending for a reformation of that prophane abuse of infant-sprinkling and that they have no other encouragement from him to persist in their Paedobaptism but a fond hope of his returning to that sinful practice The Libel hath a Frontispice which pretends to shew the manner of the Anabaptists dipping but most falsly sith it represents it to the eyes of the Beholders as if they held persons by the heels when they baptize them which is otherwise than their practice The pretended manner of Laying on of hands and Washing of feet is unknown to me if they do use it yet they have such likely proofs from Heb. 6. 2. and our Saviours practice and command John 13. as might have deterred the Author of this Frontispice from exposing the ordinance of Baptism and those other rites to contempt had he any reverence to holy things and regard to Chrisis appointment But the Frontispice of Dr. Featlies book and this with the Epistles and other passages do give occasion to intelligent persons to conceive that this sort of men do make but a sport of Christs Ordinance and that they have little mind to search for or receive truth but to expose them that are for believers baptism and against infant-sprinkling to the contempt of light and profane wits and to the hatred of the ignorant and superstitious common people And I conceive that this book is published by men of that spirit who seek to make odious the endeavoured reformation of ignorance superstition profanenesse and ungodliness which abounds in those parts and to uphold those either loose or formal pretended Ministers who take upon them to teach but do indeed as Elymas the Sorcerer Acts 13. pervert the right way of the Lord Surely did they seek the truth in love they would not so insult over tender consciences as they do encourage the looser sort and deter the enquiring souls from the wayes of Christ For my self as I have found from others so I deprehend in these men the same unrighteous spirit in their reporting my answers and publishing them in print without my revising of them though it were proposed and as I remember yielded by one that in a private way I should have his arguments sent to me in writing for the other after 2 Copies of his Sermon sent me yet I wrote to know whether he would own them nor did publish any thing though I had sent some animadversions on the notes I received of which I was told one copy was shewed to Mr. Cragg himself and not disowned by him And I do account it a shameful practice which these men and another before have used towards me that after I have been drawn to a verbal extemporary dispute and no common notary agreed on yet my answers are published by them without ever allowing me the sight of them that I might either own them or amend them afore the printing and publishing them But I see faction so prevails with them that like as if they were of the Romanists minds they allow themselves liberty to use any arts as pious frauds to bear down the truth of Antipaedobaptism And this they do with so much insolency as may stir up the inconsiderate to trample upon their Antagonist and create prejudice against the truth Which hath necessitated me in this hast to write this SECT. II. A view of the Epistles is taken WHo the J. T. P. or J. W. is I know not What the first Epistle saith of Austins rule it is neither true for then the observation of an Easter and sundry other superstitious rites should be from the Apostles nor if it were true is it true of infant-sprinkling that the whole Church held it sprinkling being not used in sundry ages instead of baptism and infant-baptism as it is now used opposed by Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen and only the Popish doctrine disclaimed by Mr. Cragg of the necessity of baptizing infants to their inheriting heaven taught by the writers called Fathers As false it is that the baptizing believers called by these Anabaptism had its spring and rise from Nicolas Stork and others there named it being commanded by Christ practiced by the Apostles continued in the first ages without any infant-baptism and when infants were baptized it was very rarely onely in case of danger of the neernesse of death to the infant and when reformation of other Popish abuses was sought the reformation of this was sought with the first some hundreds of years afore Luther As vain is the assignation of the causes of Anabaptism which is indeed true baptism whereas the true cause is the shining forth of light from the Scriptures and other Authors not discerned formerly as now The true reason why our books and practice are permitted is because they have at least so much appearance of truth as is sufficient to make wise men to let them alone lest they haply should fight against God The Epistlers reasons are but his own ignorant surmises Though disputes are useful yet such unworthy artifices as I find in and after them are a just reason for me to wave them especially with such men as I have met with What the successe hath been of the disputes mentioned its not so proper to me to enquire The publishing of that at Bewdley in so unbrotherly manner hath I imagine diverted many from the truth who if they had not been willing to be deluded had never been caught with such a cheat as is the mock-titled book Plain Scripture proof for infant-baptism The rest of the disputes have not gained that I hear any credit to Paedobaptism but on the contrary among the intelligent It is true I was importuned to visit some friends at Abergaveny and did preach

of God then Mr. Cragg cannot gather from John 3. 5. infants baptism From Mark 16. 16. is rightly gathered that believing is to be before baptism and yet from Mark 1. 4. it is not rightly gathered that we must be baptized before we can hear the word preached or repent For the text doth not express that John baptized afore he preached but recites these two as connexed yet the latter is put first not because first done but because he was to set down more amply what he preached Though we cannot know that the person to be baptized hath a saving faith yet a saving faith is the rule of baptism to the person baptized he should not undertake that ordinance without a saving faith and in respect of the baptizer so far as he can discern he should require a saving faith of those he baptizeth Dipping over head or baptizing over head after profession of faith is no invention of man but the Command of Christ practice of the Apostles and their Successors for many ages and infant-baptism was opposed many ages afore John of Leyden who though he were otherwise not to be justified yet I do not remember that any hath written he ever confessed that he had that doctrine from Satan But Mr. Cragg saith Baptizing is in Greek any washing whether by dipping or sprinkling And he cites Ravanel who hath made a Dictionary according to the present use of terms But he shews not out of any of the Pillars as he calls them of the Greek tongue that baptizing in Greek ever signifies to sprinkle He confesses that Casaubon in his notes on Matth. 3. 6. distinguisheth between baptizing and rantizing or sprinkling But saith The whole state of the question is determined against me because he addes that their judgement is deservedly long since exploded and trampled down that would have baptizing to be by dipping seeing the force and efficacy of this mystery consists not in that But 1. by Mr. Craggs leave the question is plainly determined for me by Casaubon when he distinguisheth between baptizing and sprinkling for that is the question not wherein the efficacy and force of the mystery consists 2. Though Casaubon were a very learned man yet this speech of his is not right For we are to observe what Christ appoints though the efficacy and force of the mystery of Sacrament consist not in it as we are to break bread not take a wafer-cake down whole drink wine in the Lords Supper because of the institution though the force and efficacy of the mystery consist not in it Mr. Craggs speeches out of Aquinas and Dominicus à Sato are of no weight with them who know who those Doctors were to wit Papists and very unskilful in the Greek language It is as vain which Mr. Cragg saith the Israelites were baptized when their feet did but touch the water for the text saith Exo. 14. 29. they walked upon dry land in the middest of the Sea and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left and therefore their feet did not so much as touch the water much less were they sprinkled with it And if the Israelites were baptized in the cloud and yet no water upon them then the text 1Cor 10. 2. doth not prove baptizing to be by sprinkling but proves plainly that as Hugo Grotius said they were baptized that is they were as if they had been baptized or as other they were analogically baptized that is in proportion or likeness not formally that is according to what is meant by that term It is without proof yea false which Mr. Cragg saith Where is mention●●●●●● in the Gospel of washing themselves of Cups of Vessels of Tables this cannot be meant of plunging in water so often but rinsing For water was not so scarce but that they might do it by dipping as well as sprinkling He might have seen Ainsworth on Levit. 11. 32. who out of the Hebrew Canons tells us All that are unclean whether Men or Vessels are not cleansed but by dipping or baptizing in water And wheresoever the Law speaketh of washing a mans flesh or washing of clothes for uncleanness it is not but by dipping the whole body therein Me thinks Mr. Cragg should allow Anabaptists to make consequences though they allow not his And that John Baptists and Philips going down into the water proves something me thinks Mr. Cragg should not deny sith it cannot reasonably be imagined they should go down not to the water as Mr. Cragg would have it but into the water whereas for baptizing a person a man might easily have fetched or taken water out of any spring to baptize with if it had been so to be done by sprinkling and not by dipping But if he please to see a book intituled Of Baptism written by an eminent man in the State he might see many of the prime writers even leading Protestants gathering dipping thence as used then in baptizing The like they do from John 3. 23. Of which whatever Geographer or Traveller saith Enon where John baptized was a little brook that one may stride over scarce knee deep and therefore not capable of dipping which doth not follow deserves not to be believed in this Out of Rom. 64 we do not press a necessity of dipping because of the resemblance but from the resemblance alluded to shew the use then ingenuously confessed by Mr. Vaugban and therefore should be the use still Nor doth it follow we must ly● three daies and nights in water the resemblance of Christs burial is to be continued though not the duration Whatever other resemblance there may be of our burial with Christ yet we are to follow the institution and practice set down in Scripture from which he that swerves as Sprinkless do do sin against Christs command whatever any Divines or Assemblies of men say to the contrary It is well Mr. Cragg confesseth That if he were to baptize converted Turks or Pagans of ripe age he might baptize them by dipping it shews that it is only for infants sake that the institution of Christ is altered and so one corruption hath brought in another What he addes Provided their garments were not first baptized or washed intimates he would have them naked which Mr. Baxter would conclude to be against the sixth and seventh Command and he may do well to school Mr. Cragg for it His reason is as foolish though the Garments be baptized in water yet are not baptized with that use that the person is but by accident nor baptized as Bells to drive away Devils Nor is by baptizing the garment any worship done to it as the Church of Rome doth to the image For then the baptizing the body should be worshipping it the Garments and body are not worshipped at all by baptizing and therefore foolishly is it compared to Romish Superstition and Idolatry He that affirms that baptizing without dipping is not lawful that it is will-worship that the sprinkling used