Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	aaron_n	child_n	person_n	14	3	5.0624	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66525	Infant=baptism asserted & vindicated by Scripture and antiquity in answer to a treatise of baptism lately published by Mr. Henry Danvers : together with a full detection of his misrepresentations of divers councils and authors both ancient and modern : with a just censur of his essay to palliate the horrid actings of the anabaptists in Germany : as also a perswasive to unity among all Christians, though of different judgments about baptism / by Obed Wills ...	Wills, Obed.	1674 (1674)	Wing W2867; ESTC R31819	255,968	543

of the Covenant in as much as a Covenant with a Seal is a greater benefit than to have a Covenant without it Thirdly He saith if it should be granted that Circumcision was a Seal of the New Covenant belonging to all the children of Israel then would not the baptizing children of Believers answer it Neither amount to so great a priviledge And why 1. There were all the Familes and Tribes of Israel and all proselyted strangers with their children without distinction of good and bad to be circumcised But here only one of a City or two of a Tribe for Believers are but thin sown and the children of unbelievers and wicked men are to receive no such benefit in the Judgment of so many Answ I repent the losing of so much time as I am put upon in answering such frivolous objections but such wrangling will never advantage their cause First Then it is not true that all their children were circumcised for in the case of Excommunication if a person persisted in impenitency amongst other punishments this was one his Male-children were not circumcised Godwin's Moses and Aaron l. 4. c. 2. 2. Let it be considered that the Church of God is now of Greater extent under the Gospel that it was then Isaiah 54.12 The desolate hath more children than the married enlarge the place of thy Tents and let them spread the Curtains of thy habitation c. So chap. 60.6 The multitude of the Sea shall be converted unto thee and the riches of the Gentiles shall come unto thee who are these that fly like clouds and as the Doves to the Windows v. 8. And when these come in their children come in with them and so the number of the baptized do infinitely exceed the circumcised the extent of the Gentile Church so much exceeding that of the Jews we find three thousand came in a day and five thousand at another time in the Acts. 3. Whereas he saith wicked men are to receive no such Benefit that is for their children in the judgment of so many It is the judgment of many more that they ought if they profess the Christian faith although I conceive not the priviledge of ignorant and scandalous persons Secondly He adds another reason which is exceeding weak and that is Because we are at an utter uncertainty when we have a right Subject for if the Parent be an Hypocrite or no elect person which is beyond our reach to understand we cannot know whether the child be fit for Baptism Answ And how can those of his way tell when they have a fit Subject for Baptism are they sure all whom they baptize are elect persons and sincere we have told him before de occultis non judicat Ecclesia A serious profession is sufficient and we are to judge such professors in probability Believers and may on that ground admit their children to Baptism We have a rule for baptizing and that we are to follow and a rule to know those that are baptizable but none for an infallible judgment of mens sincerity we are not called to judge of this matter nor is it in our power and 't is not our sin if we be deceived Mr. Baxter says well to this in his Answer to Mr. Tombes how do you know saith he to him whom you should baptize whom doth the Scripture command you to baptize If you say as Apol. p. 94. that it is those that make free serious understanding profession I would know whether it be the profession it self the bare profession which God bestoweth this privilege on or whether it be the faith professed if it be real faith then without that there is no Baptism if it be bare profession or if we may call it false faith then false faith or profession without faith is the condition of baptizing And if it be real faith the Baptizer cannot know that if it be said that in common estimation they are Believers then common estimation renders one capable of Baptism When these men have answered the point for themselves they have answered it for us Thirdly and Lastly he saith Neither can the child when he is grown up have any certain knowledge that such a Ceremony hath past upon him in Infancy he having no infallible mark thereof whereas the circumcised Infant had an indelible character and mark in his flesh to assure him that he had received that Rite Answ That they had a sensible mark to mind them of their Circumcision is true though some of them had an art to make it invisible as Beza notes upon that place 1 Cor. 7.18 Let him not gather his Circumcision We have the note in our Margent Bible which was done as he quotes it out of Celsus and Epiphanius when the Surgeon by art draweth out the skin to cover the part circumcised Godwin hath the same in his Moses and Aaron and puts the question how it is possible for a man after once he hath been marked with the sign of Circumcision to blot out that character and become uncircumcised For thus some Jews for fear of Antiochus made themselves uncircumcised 1 Mac. 1.16 Others for shame after they were gained to the Christian Faith uncircumcised themselves and then tells us what is before This by the way But the Author saith he that was circumcised had a character or mark to assure himself that he had received that Rite To this I reply in the words of Mr. Brinsley True such a sensible mark they had But how did they know that that mark was given them for any such religious end and purpose That they received it as a Sacrament a Seal of the Covenant betwixt God and them Other nations there were and that many who used Circumcision even as the Turks do at this day and I find in Mr. Godwin the same in his sixth Book of Miscellaneous Rites It was used saith he though not as a Sacrament by many other nations by the inhabitants of Colchis the Ethiopians the Trogloditae and the Egyptians Now then how did the Israelites know it was given them to such a religious intent why herein they were to give credit unto the testimony of others viz. the Parents and other witnesses and Mr. Godwin in the aforesaid Book tells us from the Jewish Doctors that when a little child was to be circumcised one who supplied the place of a witness whom they called by the name of Baal Berith and Sandak that is the Master of the Covenant held the child in his arms whilest it was circumcised that so he might bear witness to the Circumcision and of the name given the child at that time Such was the use of the later Jews and it seemeth that the practice was ancient even as ancient as Isaiah's time So those two learned expositors Junius and Tremelius interpret that place Isa 8.2 He took unto him faithful Witnesses Witnesses to what saith Mr. Brinsly why to the Circumcision of his Son of whom he speaketh in the verse

piece of Ridicule for there is no such Confession to be found unless it be in Vtopia Nay there is nothing looks like a Confession that excludes Infants from Baptism as appears after all their endeavours to prodace it See this p. 46 47 48. of the 2d Part of our Answer 8. He Professeth ingenuously amongst all his search that except those two passages 1 the Confession presented to Laodislaus the 12th Article of which is for Infant-Baptism and that in the Spiritual Almanack which declares the Baptizing of their Children he can find none Very good however he hath not gained much advantage to his cause having found two Confessions for Infant-Baptism but never one against it for he must reckon the lying accusations of the Papists that they were against Baptizing Children when they only abhorred their filthy Ceremonies and purged themselves from the calumany by putting forth their Confessions in which they Profess their judgment for it 9. Lastly In may little search I have found another Cnfession and such a one as may shame the Author for his prevarication and that is it which we have before mentioned in the 2d part of our Answer p. 65. The Confession made at Angrongne where the Heads of every Family with the Pastors signed several Articles and the 17th is for Infant-Baptism as before Of the Witness pretended to be born by the Novatians and Donatists THe Novatians and Donatists saith the Author gave Witness against Infant-Baptism as Austin's 3d and 4th Book against the Donatists doth demonstrate wherein he manageth the Argument fof Infant-Baptism against them with great Zeal c. Reply 1. In this the Author is guilty of a great mistake and we have no Authority for this thing but his ipse dixit his own saying so neither the Magdeburgenses that write largely of their Opinions nor any of the Church-Histories nor Danaeus in his Opusculum nor Zanchy who treats of them in his Volumes nor Beza nor Mr. Fox in his Acts and Monuments nor Clark that hath a large Story of them nor any other that ever I could meet with assert this that the Donatists were against Infant-Baptism 2. Though the Novatians Donatists and Pelagius denyed Original Sin yet all three allowed and practised Infant-Baptism Dr. Featly in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 31. 3. Danaeus in his Opusculum speaks of the Origianl De Donatistis corum Origine Progressu Doctrina pag. 673. to 676. Progress and Doctrine of the Donatists from pag. 653. to 676. where though he sets down the Errors of the Donatists and gives us the sum of all Austin's Disputes with them speaks not a word of this but in divers places shews they were for Rebaptization of such as were Baptized by Hereticks or not in their own Churches which Austin vehemently opposeth and this I conceive is the ground of the Authors mistake and which I am the more inclinable to believe because he hath a particular tract of all the Heresies collected by Austin Augustinus de Haeresibus Cap. 69. p. 995. Danaeus and the 69th Chapter is de Donatistarum Erroribus The Errors of the Donatists And in it is no mention made of their being against Baptizing Children and in the 38. Chap. of the same Tract we have an account of Novatus from whom they are called Novatians and of the Errors they held but not one hint of any such thing as Antipaedobaptism they were also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quatenus a reliquo Christianorum hominum caetu se tanquam Sanctiores separant pretending that they were more pure than any of the Churches of Christ besides Posterior aetas ad praegravandam bonam S. Sancti Evangelii causam homines vere Evangelicos infami Catharorum nomine calumniata est ut Waldenses pauperes de Lugduno Arnaldistae ab Arnoldo quodam c. which title of Catharists or Puritans came in process of time saith Danaeus to be used to the reproach of Holy-Men so saith he the Waldenses and poor Men of Lions were branded with the infamous name of Catharists 4. But let it be taken for granted that the Novatians and Donatists were of kindred to the Author and his party as indeed the Lineaments of their Faces and Complexion are in many things alike with some that are against Infant-Baptism ye●● do not know what honour will redound to then cause from it for both the Novatians and Donatists were vile persons and always condemned for Hereticks We shall therefore give the Reader an account of their Rise Errors and Agreement I dare not say with those called Anabaptists amongst us in every thing that shall be set down but most exactly with those in Germany before mentioned Novatus Under the Persecution of Deeius the Roman Emperour Anno Christi 250 being the 7th Persecution rose up the first Quarrel and Heresie of Novatus who in those days made a great disturbance in the Church holding this Opinion That they who once renounced the Faith and for fear of torments had offered incense to the Idols although they repented thereof yet could not afterward be reconciled nor admitted to the Church This Novatus being first Priest under Cyprian at Carthage afterward by stirring up discord and faction began to disturb the Bishoprick of Cyprian to appoint there a Deacon against the Bishop's mind or knowledg and also to allure and separate certain of the Brethren from the Bishop After this he went to Rome kept there the like stir with Cornelius setting himself up as Bishop of Rome against Cornelius altare contra altare as the Magdeburgenses have it which was the Lawful Bishop of Rome before The which to bring to pass he used this practice First he had allured to him to be his Adherents 3 or 4 good Men and Holy Confessors which had suffered before great torments for their Confession Afterward he inticed three simple Bishops about the coast of Italy to repair to Rome under pretence to make an end of certain Controversies then in hand This done he caused them whether by making them drunk or by other crafty counsel to lay their hands upon him and to make him Bishop and so they did Fox Acts Monum 1. Part p. 84. We have it also for the most part in the Magdeb. Cent. 3. Cap. 7. p. 186. Sub Decio Schisma Novati He for his wicked Opinions was condemned in a Synod at Rome Magd. Cent. 3. Cap. 9. p. 293. Donatus In the year of our Lord 331 or a little more early there sprang up in Africa the Donatists taking their name from Donatus This Man Initium ejus haereseos Hieronimi Chronicom in Annum Christi 331. Paulo antiquiorem Donatum facit Magd. Cent. 4. C. 5. p. 375. Donatus cumsua parte Schisma illud in Haeresim convertit Magdeb. ibid. They speak of their cruelty Cent 4. Cap. 5. p. 379. Clark of the Persecution of the Donatists p. 89 90. in his Martyrology as the Magdeburgenses inform us Cent. 4. c.