Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	body_n	part_n	soul_n	2,761	5	5.3627	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A35308	A solemn call unto all that would be owned as Christ's faithful witnesses, speedily and seriously, to attend unto the primitive purity of the Gospel doctrine and worship, or, A discourse concerning baptism wherein that of infants is disproved as having no footing nor foundation at all in the Word of God, by way of answer to the arguments made use of by Mr. William Allen, Mr. Sidenham, Mr. Baxter, Dr. Burthogge, and others for the support of that practice : wherein the covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai ... : together with a description of that truly evangelical covenant God was pleased to make with believing Abraham ... / by Philip Carey ...	Cary, Philip.	1690 (1690)	Wing C742; ESTC R31291	244,449	284

of the Supper whatever Circumstances were by the command of God to be Observed in the Celebration of the Type And after the same sort must we Reason if we will Reason aright concerning Circumcision and Baptism also And yet again Thirdly Even in the very Instance of this Argument Supposing a Corespondency of Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no Correspondency of Identity For although it were granted that both of them did Consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the Circumstance of Childrens being Circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Children and yet Baptism only to men of Reason Because Circumcision left a character in the flesh which being Imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came of Age. And such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the sign But Baptism Imprints nothing that remains on the Body and if it leaves a character at all it is upon the Soul to which also the word is added which is as much a part of the Ordinance as the Sign it self For which cause therefore it is highly requisite that the Parties Baptized should be capable of Reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Ordinance and the Impress to be made thereby upon the Soul Since therefore the Reason of the Parity doth wholly fail there is left nothing to Infer a Necessity of Complying in this Circumstance of Age more then in the other Annexes of the Type Then also the Infant must be precisely baptized upon the Eighth day And Females must not be baptized because such were not to be Circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it aright to prosecute the Analogy from the type to the Antitype by way of letter and Spirit and Signification That as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the Adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie some thing Spiritual in the Adherences of Baptism And therefore as Infants were Circumcised So Spiritual Infants shall be Baptized which is Spiritual Circumcision For therefore Babes had the Ministry of the type to Signifie that we must when we give our Names to Christ become Children in Malice and then the type is made Compleat The Seventh Argument for Infants Baptism and whereon the greatest stress is laid by Mr. Allen Mr Baxter and others is drawn from the Church-member-ship of Infants under the former Administration That because Infants were comprehended with their Parents in the Jews Church state they are so still under the Gospel and therefore to be baptized Reply We know very well that Mr. Baxter and others do Assert the Church-membership of Infants before Abrahams time and that therefore it is a Moral Institution and so not Capable of being Repealed as other Jewish Rites were But that is a groundless Fiction and cannot be at all proved from the Scripture The Discussion whereof shall be reserved for the latter part of this Discourse In the mean season That they were admitted Members of the Jewish Church is Evident And it is also as Evident that God hath now quite pulled down that House of his broke up House-keeping and turned the Servants Infants and all out of Doors Rom. 11. 17. 24. The Natural Branches are broken of and God hath now built him a New house into which God hath admitted none as his Houshold Servants but Believers only or such as Profess so to be Moses saith the Apostle Heb. 3. 5. 9. was faithfull as a Servant in all his house But Christ as a son over his own House Whose House are we if we hold fast the Confidence c. Where the Servants of the new house are discribed te be Beleivers not Infants and therefore called Living stones and a Spiritual House 1. Pet. 2. 3. And that the Old House the Jewish Church with all the Appurtenances and Priviledges of it is pulled down and a new One Built into which Infants are not to be admitted is Evident from the Apostles Reasoning Heb. 7. 12. For the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law Which must needs Include Circumcision with all the Appurtenances and Priviledges belonging to it And therefore as Infants Church-membership came in with the Law of Circumcision So it went out and was repealed with it They were t is true of the Houshold of Old but it was by a positive Law Shew us the like now or you say nothing Sure it is There is now no Institution that makes Infants fellow Citizens with the Saints and of the Houshold of God neither are they to bo so accounted till they believe and are able to do Service in the House And if you say that among men Infants are counted of the Houshold tho they can do no Service we Answer that as Comparisons do not run upon four feet so it doth not follow that because we count our Infants of our Family therefore they are to be accounted members of Gods Family the Gospel Church unless God by any Institution had made them so The Houshold of God is called the Houshold of faith or a House Consisting of Believers Now unless you can prove Infants to be Believers they are not of this House For all the Servants here must be Believers either Really or at least historically and Professedly which Infants cannot be If it be Objected That as the Jews and their Children are broken off So the Gentiles and their Children are Ingraffed in their Room according to Rom. 11. 20. Because of unbelief they were broken off and thou standest by faith We Answer That the Reason why the Jews and their Children were broken off was not because they had not Believing Parents For Abraham Isaac and Jacob were still the Parents of them all They were Abraham's seed when they were broken off as well as before But the true Reason was because the terms of standing in the Church were now altered For before the Gospel came they stood members of the Old Jewish Church though as much unbelievers for many Generations as they were when they were broken off But now Abraham's Church state is at an end and all the Priviledges and Immunities cease The Jewish Church must give way to the Gospel Church The Messiah being come and about to build him a New House into which none are of Right to enter but such as are profest Believers For the Old House or Jewish Church was not intended to abide for ever but only to the time of Reformation And then the Law must be changed the Priesthood changed the Priviledges and Ordinances changed yea the Covenant changed Which they not believing being willing to abide in the Old House still and to remain Church Members upon the account of a meer Fleshly and Natural Birth still crying out Abraham is our Father and we are his Seed and are Free and were never in Bondage Wherefore they were broken off and that whether they would or

an Initiating into the Church though as the Church it self is a different Church from that under the Law so it hath different Subjects and Church Members and those to be Admitted upon different Grounds and to different Ends and in a different manner The one to be done in a private House and by a private Hand the other in some publick Place by the hand of some publick Minister appointed by the Church to administet the same But it follows not that because there is some Analogy between Baptism and Circumcision therefore one cometh in the room stead and use of the other For by the same reason we may as well conclude that Baptism cometh in the room and stead of the Ark Manna Rock c. And from such like Arguments drawn from Analogy what Jewish Rites may not be Introduced to the Justification of the Roman Church in their High Priest-hood and all other their innumerable Rites and Ceremonies which without any Institution of Christ or New Testament Authority they have Introduced upon the account of Analogy with Old Testament Rites and Ceremonies And therefore if we will follow this way of Reasoning from Infant Circumcision to Infant Baptism we must fall back not only to Popish but Jewish Ceremonies also Nor is that Plea sufficient to avoid it to say we bring not in a new Rite in Baptizing Infants if we use it not as Christ appointed So they might say of Bell Baptism and the Pharisees of their washing of Hands Cups and Vessels of Brass yet condemned by Christ because not Commanded but after Mens Traditions taught Papists say they bring not in a New Rite in their Mass yet we charge them with a great Sin in making it a Propitiatory Sacrifice and the Priest a Sacrificing Priest as the Jews The Corinthians did not bring in a new Rite yet when they used it otherwise than Christ appointed it was not to Eat the Lord's Supper 1 Cor. 11. 20. It being the Apostles Rule to use it as it was received by him of the Lord. And they that admitted Infants to the Lord's Supper or shall do it may say as much as you for Infants Baptism that they do only apply an Instituted Ordinance by way of Proportion to such Subjects though they are not Expresly called to a Participation thereof Object 12. But it is yet further Objected That though 't is true when God made a Promise to Abraham to be a GOD to him and to his Seed The Seed there mentioned is applyed to Christ Gal. 3. 16. He saith not unto Seeds as of many but as of one And to thy Seed which is Christ Yet this is not to be understood of Christ Personal but of Christ Mystical as in 1 Cor. 12. 12. And so is to be understood of the Visible Church of which Infants Born of Believing Parents are a part To this we Reply That we must not be put off with bare Affirmations but we expect Solid Proof from Scripture as to the point in hand it being evident that the Apostle Gal. 3. 16. refers not to Gen. 17. 7. but to Gen. 12. 2. 3. and Gen. 22. 17 18. as shall be afterward made manifest And whereas you say that the Promises are to be considered as made to Christ Mystical that is to the Visible Church the contrary appears Gal. 3. 16. where the Apostle affirms that Christ was the Seed to whom the Promises were made And in Verse 19 He saith the Law was added because of Transgressions 'till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made Where it is Observable that the Law that is the Mosaical Administration is said to be before the Seed was come and was to have its Period then Now if by the Seed Christ be not to be understood Personally but Mystically for the Visible or Invisible Church take which you will then the Law could not have been before the Seed For God had His Church in Abraham's Family 400 Years at least before the Law was of which Christ was the Head and they His Mystical Body And so by this Interpretation the Seed should have been before the Law contrary to the Apostle who makes the Law to have been before the Seed and to have its Period when the Seed to whom the Promise was made was come And now the Promises running to Christ Personal GOD makes Him over for a Covenant to the Elect and all the Promises in Him Isa 42. 6. So that in Christ he is Our GOD and in Christ He takes us to be his People In Christ and a right to the Promises Out of Christ and Strangers to the Covenants of Promise Eph. 2. 12. So that it is evident that the Promises were first made to Christ Personal and in Him to His Mystical Body the Church who are united to Him by Faith Secondly As to that Scripture 1 Cor. 12. 12. For as the Body is One and hath many Members and all the Members of that One Body being many are one Body So also is Christ It rather seems also to be meant of the Invisible Church of true Believers than of the visible For the Apostle there calls none the Body of Christ but such as had received the Gifts of the Spirit And such as by one Spirit as the concurring Cause had been Baptized into one Body yea such who had received the Spirit to profit withal such that had a real Sympathy one with another Verse 26. If one Member suffers all the Members suffer with it If one Member be Honoured all the Members rejoyce with it All which cannot in any tollerable Sense be applyed to the visible Church amongst whom there are many Hypocrites that never received the Spirit nor by the Spirit could sympathize one with another But however it be most certain it is that Infants are not called the Body of Christ if it be meant of the visible Church Indeed by Virtue of the Grace of Election some of them may be Members of the Mystical Body the Invisible Church but not at all Members of the Visible Especially from this Chapter where it is said that if one Member suffer all the Members suffer with it and the Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every one to profit withal which cannot be applicable to Infants For none in this Chapter are counted the Body of Christ but such as are useful to the Body as an Eye an Ear a Hand a Head c. as v. 21. The Eye cannot say to the Hand I have no need of thee nor the Head to the Foot I have no need of you From whence we draw these two Conclusions First every Member in a Church stands in need of the help of all the other Members Secondly That every Member in a Church must be useful in his place to the rest of the Members But of what use are Infants to the rest of the Members in respect of Edification So that notwithstanding this Objection It is plain that all the Promises respecting Spiritual