Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A34897
|
The arraignment and conviction of Anabaptism, or, A reply to Master Tombes, his plea for anti-pædobaptists by refutation of his examen of the dispute at Abergaveny and sermon on Mark 16:16 ... / by John Cragge.
|
Cragge, John, Gent.
|
1656
(1656)
|
Wing C6782; ESTC R28573
|
255,678
|
314
|
the word children saying they shall be all taught of God Mr. Tombes 5. Section THe seventh Argument is All that have faith may be baptized But some Infants have faith Therefore some Infants may be baptized But 1. The Major is not true of faith onely in seed or act secret and not made known 2. Mr. C. alters the Conclusion which should have been that all Infants of Believers may be baptized But then he durst not avoâ—ch the Minor that they all have faith at least in semine the contrary being manifest from Scripture and experience he proves the Minor 1. from Mat. 18. where he saith Christ expresly calls them believers but Christ calls not little children in age believers v. 6. it had been ridiculous to threaten so heavy a doom to the offending of little children in age who are offended with none so much as Nurses for dressing or chiding them when they cry but the Apostles and other Christian Disciples are there meant 2. They are said to receive the kingdom of God Mark 10. That is the grace of God remission of sins and life eternal now the kingdome is not received but by faith in Christ But onely elect Infants do receive the kingdom either by faith in the seed not in the act or by faith in the act secret onely and yet are not to be baptized till they make profession nor are all or any Children of believers as theirs elect Reply MY seventh Argument was All that have faith may be baptized Some Infants have faith Therefore some Infants may be baptized The major may have a threefold acceptation 1. All that have faith conferred or to be conferred in Baptism though not Physically or morally or ex opere operato yet of divine promise as some hold all believers Infants have because they cannot ponere obicem it will inevitably follow these if such are baptizeable 2. All that have faith of the parents or sureties imputed to them as in the old Cathechism they do perform by their sureties who do promise and vow them both faith and repentance in their names this granted makes Infants baptizable 3. All that have faith in feed secret act or habit may be baptized this he onely insists upon denying it because it is not made known confessing oft if it were known he would baptize them this exception denies not but they are baptizable but that he may not baptize them as if God had given them a right to baptism and no means to attain it and concludes as well against baptism of elders for if he baptize none till their faith be made known he must supersede till this mortal put on immortallity It is false that I alter the conclusion which in the dispute was some Infants may be baptized In the Sermon indefinitly Infants may be baptized sometimes as the mediunm affords I extend it to believers Infants yea unbelievers if under Christian education but the lowest is sufficient to overthrow his Tenet who denies all Infant-baptism It s but his dream that I have any need to avouch all Infants of believers have saith at least in semine and I think it hard for him to manifest the contrary from Scripture and experience All that maintain an impossibility of falling from grace in adultis does not so in seminal graces in Infants but I wave that The Minor I proved from Matth. 18. where Christ expresly calls little children in age as many interpret it believers from the authority of Luke who Chapter 9. 48. sayes Christ sayes that of the little babe he took up in his armes and set in the midst of them he that receiveth this little child in my name receiveth me Mark 9. 36. 37. he that recieveth one of these little children without mention of any other foregoing but the child it self taken into his arms receiveth me However little children were patterns they were to imitate in faith and humility propter quod unumquodque tale illud magis tale It is not ridiculous but rather blasphemous to say it is ridiculous to threaten so heavy a doom to the offending or scandalizing of little children in age whom he childishly and untruly sayes are offended with none so much as nurses for dressing or chiding them when they cry Mr. T. might know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by Budaeus and others offensionis causam afferre vel concitare to bring or procure a cause of offence which nurses do not He that should have said Mr. T. eldest son when an Infant was a bastard I think did scandalize him in defaming him and rendring him uncapable of temporal birthright but they that deny Infants spiritual birthright and church membership scandalize them much more This he grants that Infants are said to receive the Kingdom of God Mark 10. 10. that is the grace of God remission of sins and life eternal now the kingdom is not received but by faith in Christ Elect Infants dying do receive the eternal kingdom either by faith in the seed not in the act or by faith in the act secret only and yet are to be baptized before they make profession upon their birthright priviledge grounded on Gods promise and charâ—â—able hope of seminal or actual faith which is confined to professors and their children as such solis sed non omnibus for out of the visible Church we have neither commission to administer the Ordinance nor promise of Salvation Mr. Tombes 19 Section THirdly saith Mr. C. They please God therefore Christ blesseth them but without faith it is impossible to please God Answ The like Argument is urged by the Remonstrants at the Synod at Dort It is impossible to please God without faith therefore election which supposeth pleasing of God presupposeth saith The Answer is that Heb. 11. 6. the pleasing of God is meant of the works as Enoch pleased God walking with him and so Infants please not God and therefore may be without faith not of the persons in which sense Infants may please God that is be beloved with a love of benevolence though not of delight without faith 4. Faith must be allowed them or not salvation for faith purifieth the heart Acts 15. 9. and no unclean thing shall enter into heaven Answ Faith in the seed is sufficient to make them clean which is not denyed may be in infants though neither Isai 65. 20. sayes any such thing and Austins words expresse nothing but his own conceit according to the language of his time but faith in seed or act unknown doth not entitle to baptism Reply THey please God therefore declaratively not causally Christ blesseth them it being impossible without faith to please God The Argument but far unlike is urged by the Remonstrants at the Synod at Dort to prove foresight of faith in time to be the cause of election before time I speak of Infants that are in being and actually please God and receive his benediction which presupposeth their persons are accepted and they have faith these two
differ toto coelo Hebr. 11. 6. Enoch pleased God by faith manifesting it self by works in walking with him which Infants cannot do at least in that degree and manner yet are not therefore without faith God loved them as elect from eternity with a love of intention but not before they were in being and had faith with a love of execution which he expressed by blessing of them I said from Scripture-grounds that faith must be allowed them or salvation denyed them but the latter was cruell and impious therefore the former must be godly and pious faith onely purifieth the heart Acts 15. 9. and no unclean thing shall enter into Heaven This he grants saying faith in the seed is sufficient to make them clean which is not denyed may be in Infants But denies that Isai 65. 20. sayes any such thing the contrary whereof hath been formerly proved He takes no notice of the Testimonies of Paraeus Hommius Beza Trelcatius and Vossius but girds at Austin who to Pelagius asking him where he places Infants baptized answers in numero credentium in the number of believers and addes nec judicare aliter ullo modo audebis si non vis esse apertè haereticus neither may thou presume to judge otherwise if thou wilt not be a plain heretick to shake of this load that is laid in the right saddle he sayes Austins words expresses nothing but his own conceit according to the language of the time when as indeed it is the language of Scripture and all ages saving John of Leyden's when he was backed with the German Boars and this present when by reason of our late distractions the hedge of discipline was broken down Mr. Tombes to get him a name with Erostratus took liberty to advance also his Idol thought Antipaedobaptism most plausible whereas according to all antiquity faith in seed or act unknown with Covenant-holiness doth intitle to baptism Mr. Tombes 18 Section THe eight Argument was answered before by denying the Major and Minor and his calling those that expound 1 Cor. 7. 14. of legitimation grosse Anabaptists doth but involve Melanchton Camerarius Musculus c. in the same censure and that it is no bastard as Dr. Featly called it but a genuine exposition is demonstrated at large in my Antipaedobaptism first part and 't is granted that Pagans children are holy in the Apostles sense if lawfully begotten for the sanctifiedness of the yoke fellow and holinesse of the children is not ascribed to the faith of the one parent but to the conjugal relation between them Rom. 11. 16. The first fruits and root are Abraham not every believier the lump and branches are Abraham ' s children by election and faith not every believers nor all Abraham ' s natural children and the holinesse is meant of saving holinesse not meer outward visible holinesse The breaking off and graffing in Rom. 11. 17. are meant of the invisible Church in which sense parents and children are not broken off or graffed in together See my Antipaedobap first part Reply THe eighth Argument was those that are holy with a Covenant-holinesse may be baptized Infants of believing parents are holy with a Covenant-holinesse Therefore they may be baptized The Major and the Minor which he sayes he denyed were proved before to which in the Sermon I further added the Testimonies of Vossius Bullinger Sharpius and his friend Hugo Grotius who all with the Assembly in the confession of faith greater lesser Catechism interpret 1. Cor. 7. 14. of Covenant-holyness nor legitimation as he sayes Melanchton Camerarius and Musculus do which are but three he can name amongst Protestants granting we have ten to one to the contrary he might have said ten times ten and have kept within compasse Dr. Featly called it rightly a bastard exposition which to prove genuine Antipâ—dobap first part he hath spent many words in vain rudis indigestaque moles Nec quicquam nisi pondus iners congestaque eodem Non bene junctarum discordia semina rerum It is absurd to say Pagans children are holy in the Apostles sense when the Apostle speaks there of special priviledges of Christians and the sanctifiednesse of the yoke-fellow and holiness of the children is ascribed to the faith of one parent not to the conjugal relation between them which they had before they were Christians The first fruits and root Rom. 11. 16. are Abraham as remote every believer more immediatly relating to their next posterity The lump and branches are Abraham's children not onely by election and faith but visible Church-membership which involves professors children and the holiness is meant as well of meer outward visible holiness as of saving holiness Thus Grotius loquitur Apostolus de sanctitate foederis credentium liberi foedere gratiae comprehensi sunt eatenùs sancti a Deo censentur The Apostle speaks of Covenant-holiness for the children of believers are comprehended in the Covenant of Grace and therefore are judged holy of God The breaking off and graffing in Rom. 11 17. are meant of the visible Church in which sense parents with children are broken off and graffed in together not of the invisible which would imply Popery Pelagianism and Arminianism if the invisible members the elect could be broken off See Mr. Blake Serm. pag. 7 8. his Answ to Mr. T. page 29. Geree Vindication pag. 23. Mr. Marshals Defence page 134. Cotton pag. 77. to 110. Cobbet pag. 151. to 168. Mr. Baxter pag. 44. to 50. Mr. Tombes 21 Section NInth Argument tells us of dangerous absurdities if Infants should be out of Covenant under the Gospel But this is not all one as to be baptized we may grant them to be in Covenant of grace and yet not to be baptized and to be baptized and yet not in the Covenant of grace But let us view the absurdites First Infants saith he would be loosers by Christs coming and in worse condition than the Jewish Infants were they with the parents were admitted to the seal of the Covenant which was Circumcision not parents with Children to Baptism Answ I ratheâ— think that by being not admitted to Circumcision the condition of parents children is the better by Christs Coming sith as Mr. C. teacheth here page 100. Circumcision is the yoke Acts 15. 10. Of which the Apoâ—â—le â—aith neither we nor our fathers were able to bear it and is so far from being the seal of the Covenant of grace that they are Mr. C. own words Circumcision was the seal or ordinance by which the Jewes were bound to observe the Doctrine and the Law meaning of Moses 2. Were it imagined a pure Evangelical priviledge yet sure it is not such a priviledge but parents and children did well without it before Abrahams time and all the femals from Abrahams dayes till Christs I suppose what ever priviledge it were it was abundantly recompensed by Christs coming without Infant baptism except a meer empty title of visible Church membeâ—ship which yet