Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	bear_v	fruit_n	tree_n	1,451	5	8.5127	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

the Miserere for you vent your excrements at your mouth 2. Yet I see an excellent fragment of charity like Pilates justice First to condemn M. B. as a child of the Divell and then refer him to his Master But it 's well that there lyes an appeal from Mr. Hag. to the Lord c) Naturam expellas Furca licet usque recurre● though you cannot leave your old humour you must revile him before you leave him Le ts now hear your answer SECT 12. H. H. page 94.1 If it be the onely way for coveteous Landlords and Phisicians as he saith then if the Divell had not put it into your head before yet M. B. like a diligent servant hath done it now Reply 1. What a foolish inference is this Is Mr. Baxter a servant of the Devill because he discovers practices of his Factors Did d 1 Sam. 8.10 Samuel prompt Saul to a Tyranny because he painted out the oppressions of an Arbitray Government Was Elisha a servant of the Devill When he foretold e 1 King 8.12 Hazaells cruelty or was our Saviour a diligent servant 〈◊〉 Sathan Matth. 26.21 23. When he said to his Disci●●es one of you shall betray mee and he that dippeth c. ●●●rely Christ did not put it into his head but Sathan put 〈◊〉 into his heart Were Paul and Peter and Jude such ser●ants as to put it into M. Haggars head 2 Tim. 3.6 to creep into houses and lead captive silly women c. 2 Pet. 2.3.10 To make Merchandize of souls Jude 8. To speak evil of dignities and many more lessons which you have learned But now Mr. B. must be catechized and asked 2 Questions about these diseases SECT 13. H. H. Question 1. Whether Mr. Baxter can say in his conscience that he ever did know any dipt person died of it or fell into any of those diseases afterwards if he had be would have named them in his book c. We have many Gentlewomen c. that can prove Mr. Baxter a false accuser and I can boldly say that many who have been weak and sickly before and given ●ver by Doctors have recovered health and strength c. Reply 1. Though Mr. Baxter names none yet it follows not but some have dropt into the grave after they came dropping out of the water I leave him in his reply to give you instances enough neither do you name any for what you assert may not I say I question not if you had known any such you would have put down their names in your Book But 2. You act the part of a Mountebanck now and tell us stories not inferior to the Popish Fables concerning the consecrated Host Did ever Christ institute that Ordinance of Baptism for a bodily cure 3. Some sick persons have recovered after private Communion and some children been cured of the Chin-cough after a draught of consecrated Wine is this therefore an owning of God's Ordinance It is not always prudentiall to judge of the cause by the event a false Prophet may foretell a truth in the event and yet not be credited nor counted a true Prophet Deut. 13.1 2 3. 4. I would fain know First whether you did ever dip any in cold water in Winter for so M. B. lays the case p. 134. or ever knew any Dipp'd in such a season in this climate If not your bold assertion proves nothing Secondly whether you have no Winter converts it so according to your own rule they must be baptized as soon as they are Discipled and then make an experiment whether among all your Gentlewomen and Ladies you canfi●nd so hot an zealot before you talk so largely SECT 14. H. H. Objection People become Ranters afterwards and that 's a sign of judgment and not of owning God's Ordinance Answer That is after they are again gone away from the Faith and deny the Ordinance of Christ which once they owned then as 2 Pet. 2.21 c. Reply 1. If by the Faith you mean your way c. I have no Faith to believe it or you 2. You have conjured up a spirit which you cannot lay and you confound whil'st you seek to confirm your Anabaptism As this Objection is impertinent to prove Dipping no murder whether any turn Ranters or no so your answer is dis-satisfactory For it implies that Dippers may and oft do fall away from the Faith and deny the Ordinance of Christ from such the Lord deliver us 3. It 's true that when men are gone from the truth and deny the Ordinance of Christ they turn Ranters i. e. when they deny Infant Baptism as sad experience and Mr. Baxter hath shewed An Anabaptist and a Ranter differ not specifically but gradually as a Cub and a Bear Do you shew if you can one simple Anabaptist that denies nothing but Infant-Baptism and is not tainted with some other grosse Error or Heresie Yea the Ranters themselves do not deny but defend that which you call the Faith and Ordinance of Christ Anabaptism The school is the same onely they are gotten into the higher Fourm whither M. Haggar and the rest if God prevent not are removing SECT 15. H. H. Quest second Whether M. Baxter bee not convinced in his conscience that some or all of those diseases he speaks of do not frequently raign upon many that never were Dipped in cold water Now let all impartiall people judge whether M. Baxter be a good Tree by the fruit hee bears What though his intentions be good yet he must be one of those Rom. 3.8 Reply It is granted many die of the fore-mentioned diseases that were never Dipt and I hope have continued such trees to the death as have have had no cause to be ashamed of their fruit But I am ashamed of your scurrility and abuse of Mr. Baxter who saith Dipping in cold water in cold weather is one not the one●● cause of perishing because some temperate people die of Fevers will it follow that Surfetting Riot Drunkenness are not a means of those mortal distempers What poor shifts are these SECT 16. H. H. p. 95. The next thing that Mr. Baxter speaks of is Mr. Tombs his salving up all this with saying That they may be baptized in warm water Answ I am not of his judgment in that for I believe it is his weakness Reply Yet you could say pag. 36. Mr. T. is of age and able to answer for himself questionless why could you not say so here but there you give him a bit and here a knock there his Advocate here his Judge there a Shem in shew here a Cham indeed to uncover his nakedness and weakness SECT 17. H. H. Then we cannot agree among our selvs therefore not to be believed Answ 1. I would not have people believe us but the Scripture Acts 17.11 2ly The truth must be believed and practised though we do not agree 1 Cor. 1.12 c. Acts 15.39 3ly Mr. B. and his brethren do not agree well e. g.

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

and condemn him of weakness therein but I have no reason to do so to M. Baxter SECT 3. H. H. It 's enough saith M. Baxter p. 23. to make them Disciples that they are devoted to learning if they live c. So that he would prove them Disciples or Scholars first and have them taught afterwards strange doctrine and unheard of Divinity Reply 1. You leave out M. Baxter's first answer viz. They can partake of the protection and provision of their Master as the children of those the Israelites bought and enjoy the priviledges of the Family and School and bee under his charge and Dominion and that is enough to make them capable of being his Disciples This is not the first time you abuse M. Baxter and your Reader 2. You are like those mentioned even now Act. 17.18 19. no matter how strange his doctrine be if true 3. I think it is neither strange Doctrine nor unheard of Divinity to call the Jewish Infants Moses Disciples Jo. 9.28 and so Christs to whom Moses was subordinate as M. Baxter p. 22. which you cunningly pass by And were not the Twelve first Disciples and Paul also and taught afterwards Act. 9. Secondly you bewray your ignorance of the Scriptures which you charge on M B. and M. H. c. very insolently SECT 4. H. H. p. 74. But M. B. stoutly backs it with a learned Argument Is it not common to call the whole Nation of Turks Mahometans old and young and why not then our selves and children Disciples of Christ As the man that hired a Philosopher to teach him and his children were they not all then Disciples of that Philosopher Answer But is this M. Baxters plain Scripture proof I admire that a man professing so much seriousness c. p. 2. should resolve to make the Apostles words true of himself 2 Tim. 4.3 4. c. Reply 1. You told us a story of Dr. Story p. 55 56. may not M. Baxter say Is this M. Haggar's plain Scripture proof that he tells us of in the title of his Book Physician heal thy self 2. You need not admire to bee sure not much admire at this story as you call it It 's brought rather for illustration then for probation 3. I rather much more admire that you who profess so much purity should bespatter him with so much impure language as wickednesse folly blasphemy c. with which your book is stuff'd SECT 5. H. H. If I should grant that little children as soon as they go to School are Scholars yet are they then fit to learn the things of God Jo. 3 12. Reply 1. M. B. tells you p. 14. That believers Infants are Disciples relatively long before they actually learn to which you say nothing 2. When they begin to learn their letters g) Prov. 22.6 Eph. 6.4 2 Tim. 3.15 wee are with the soonest to teach them the things of God 3. Though they may not be fit to learn the things of God yet it 's fit we should teach them even grown persons within our charge may and must be taught though by reason of their ignorance sottishness and dulness they are unfit to learn 4. What grosse mis-application of Scripture have wee here again But it 's your guise to apply that to Infants which is spoken to adult SECT 6. H. H. p. 75. He is a man voyd of reason that sends his child to School before it can speak or understand yet M. B. affirms such to be Christ's Disciples and would have them sent to Christ's School But the comparison should be thus As little children when first they go to school to learn their letters are called mens Disciples so those babes in Christ 1 Joh. 5.12 the first day they go to Christ's School to learn the Principles c. Heb. 6.1 are Christ's Disciples or as we call all the Turnks old and young that are born of the flesh Mahometans so all born of the Spirit Christians i. e. such as are spoken of 1 Joh. 2.12 13. with 5.21 As for M. Baxter's man that heard the Philosopher I passe it over as a cunning devised Fable c. Reply 1. If M. B. affirm such to be Christ's Scholars how can you for shame say he would have them sent to Christs School their being Scholars presupposeth a sending 2. You set up again a man of straw and then fight with it Valiantly done Comparisons you know do not run on all four Here is the piety and prudence of Christ to count and own them who cannot speak or understand his Scholars belonging to him the Master of the Church Mar. 9.41 3. Why do you say they that are born again c. are Christians and not Disciples Are not all Christians Disciples Acts 11.26 Now if some Infants are born again by the Spirit into the kingdom of Christ they must be Christians or Disciples especially by your former Doctrine viz. Dying in Infancy they are saved by Christ Are any saved by Christ but such as are sanctified born again Disciples Here you plainly yield the cause 4. If that concerning the hired Philosopher be a story how is it a Fable This cunning devised answer of yours is not worthy of a reply SECT 7. H. H. p. 76. Mothers say M. Baxter can teach their children partly by action and gesture and partly by voice c. And me thinks you should not make an Infant less teachable then some bruits But nurses will tell you more in this then I can Answer Oh excellent Divinity and plain scripture-proof whence it follows that Nurses are better Divines then M. B. 2. That some bruits are capable of being Christ's Disciples I am sure that his words imply noless Therefore his answer to M. T. for want of a better may be more fitly applied to him then to M. T. viz. Oh what cause have we c. m) M Baxter's plain Scripture p. 19. Reply 1. I have given the Reader the sum of this 76 p. leaving the bibble-babble to your self and silly Proselytes 2. Your arguing is so ●idic●lous that I may justly cry out Oh excellent Divinity and plain Scripture-proof promised in your title page For Nurses can tell better then I saith M. Baxter how teachable Infants are Therefore you infer Nurses are better Divines then M. Baxter which is just like this Banks can tell you how teachable his horse was and an Huntsman how teachable his doggs are Therefore Banks an Huntsman are better Divines then M. Haggar Or if those please you not a Black-Smith or a Butcher can tell you how teachable their Apprentices are Therefore a Black-Smith or a Butcher are better Divines then M. Haggar Again M. Baxter saith ye should not me thinks make a child less teachable then some bruits you infer here and you are SURE his words imply no less that some bruits are capable of being Christ's Disciples I deny your Major or consequences viz. If Infants are not less teachable then some bruit beasts then some bruits

boasting we can trust our Master for a livelyhood whiles we are about his work 4. Whereas you would have us content with what the people will freely give us you have no precept for that What is said in Mat. 10.8 Freely ye have received freely give is proved but a Temporary command and that in reference to those miraculous works mentioned in the beginning of that verse Besides you bewray whose Successors you are viz. Even of those false Teachers who were crop● into the Church of Corinth and boasted of themselves and their doct●ine and that they would preach the Gospel freely and to cried down Paul Ministry 2 Cor. 11.12 13. being themselvs deceitful workers and transforming themselvs into the Apostles of Christ 5. As you superciliously judge your self and illiterate mechanick men better able to go through the work of the Ministry then we So unwares you call your selvs Hirelings as well as us for you say p. 123. And to be content with the wages Christ hath a lowed them and who but Hirelings receive wages SECT 6. H. H. same page Third Obj. 1 Cor. 9.7 Who goeth a warfare at his own charges Answ True neither do any go awarfare at their enemies charges such you say are the An abaptists Therefore you cannot in conscience expect any from them because you war not for them but against them That Scripture onely shews you should have charges of them you fight for and good reason if the cause be good but it must be freely if you force them you fight not for them but against them and make them your enemies and l●se your privil●g●s Reply 1. If it be true you grant as much as is d●sired that Ministers as well as souldiers must be mainteined not at their own but others charges 2. It 's false that none go a warfare at their enemies charges The State wa●●s against Papists in 〈◊〉 ●●●ly at the charges of the Papists in England The●●fore 〈◊〉 one your frequent inconsequences They or you a● 〈◊〉 ●●emies therefore we cannot in conscience expect an● from them 3. It 's as false that we war not for them soil the Anabaptists But against them we fight not against their persons for whom we pray but against their practices against which we pray and preach too Therefore if this be all as you say we can have from that Scripture that we should have charges of them we fight for then they are to bear our charges and furnish us with necessaries 4. The rest is but a piece of Seditious doctrine 1. No maintenance unless the quarrel be good Must the common souldier fit in judgment on the cause 2. This maintenance must be free and not forced May not souldiers or Constables distrain for non-paiment of the monthly Taxe 3. Forcing is a losing of privilege Is not the former instance an Argument rather of gaining and confirming your privilege SECT 7. H. H. p. 126. Fourth Objection You say who planteth a Vineyard and eateth not of the fruit thereof Answ True But you never planted the Vineyard of the Separatists and Anabaptiss therefore you may not eat of the fruit of their labors except you buy it or take it from them wickedly by force Nay you say we are not the Lord's Vineyard but rather an accursed people like the ground that brings forth thorns and thistles therefore you cannot possibly expect any fruit of us for men cannot gather grapes of Thorns nor Figgs of Thistles Reply 1. If it be true you grant again as much as is desired 2. The Vineyard of the Separatists and Anabaptists as they are now called and termed were once planted by us and had so continued if you had not broken down the wall and stollen away the plants Nay the Lord himself may complain of you as he doth of Israel I had planted thee a noble Vine wholly a right seed how then art thou turned into the degenerate plant of a strange Vine to me Jer. 2.2 3. Your exception is a meer begging of the Question 4. We do say You are a Vineyard but bringing forth wilde grapes Isa 5.2 3 4. your Vine being the Vine of Sodom Deut. 32.32 and of the fields of Gomorrah your grapes are grapes of gall bitter clusters 5. As the Frenchman they say had rather leese his God then his jest So you are content to be thorns and thistles rather then we should have the grapes and figs of maintenance from you I pitty your lamentable abuse of Scripture 6. If we cannot possibly expect any fruit from you much lesse force you yet it seems by you we may from the Vineyard which we tend and dresse SECT 8. H. H. same pag. Again you will say Who seedeth a flock and eateth not of the milk thereof Answ Truth But you do not feed the flock of the Separates and Anabaptists nay you say they are not of the flock of Christ but Wolves and Tygres therefore you have no right to their milk nor can you expect any from them Reply 1. The Separates and Anabaptists were once of our flock till you ●tole them away and therefore by your expression you grant We might then eat of their milk 2. If they be degenerate into an●h●rd of Wolves and Tygres yet while they live within the Fold of our parishes we may by the law of the land which is not repugnant to the law of God as hath been shewed require lawfully milk from them i e. subsistence or maintenance 3. As we HAVE fed them so we WOULD feed them if you had not stollen them away or they themselvs leapt out of the pasture And it is a great Question Whether we may not claim them as part of our flock still Absolon could not shake off the relation of Davids son though he did shake off naturall affection to David and by rebellion endeavoured to dethrone him A Landlord may demand and exact rent of his Tenant though de doth treacherously attourn to another a meerstranger compritively SECT 9. H. H. same p. Lastly you say we must not muzzle the mouth of the Ox that treadeth out the corn Answ True But what is that to the other beasts that tread out no corn but rather destroy it and will not suffer it to grow till the Harvest but will pall up wheat and tares together contrary to Matth. 13.28 29 30. Reply 1. If by beasts you mean the Ministers of the Gospell you include your self by saying OTHER BEASTS and who they are that tread out no ●orn I cannot imagine we have now no dumb Sir John's nor bare Readers but such as are apt to teach b) 1 Tim. 3.2 with and c) ch 5.17 labour in the word and doctrine 2. Though Christ doth not tell us in the explication of the parable d) I●ta ad parabolae sinifieatione●n no pe●tnebant M●ulta eni●n in parabol●s non ad significa●dam sed ad in len dam narra●i●nem adh●bentur Maldon in loc who the men were that sle●t and who