Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n ghost_n holy_a son_n 5,168 5 5.9174 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A28379 An essay tending to issue the controversie about infant baptism from the parity, at least, of Scripture-light concerning infant-baptim [sic] with that of women's being admitted to the Lord's Supper, shewing that there is as good grounds out of Scripture for the one as for the other : occasioned by a tender made by H.D. in his late book against infant-baptism who is willing to put the whole controversie concerning it, upon this issue : together with an answer to the most material things in that book / Eremnalēthēs. 1674 (1674) Wing B3192; ESTC R25634 100,950 243

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

into Covenant with her Isa 62.5 Isa 56.4 6 7. and engage themselves by the strongest bonds to the Lord and his Church See this plainly Isa 44.3 4 5. One shall say I am the Lords c. I shall readily confess that Infant-Baptism of Inchurched-Parents keeps us upon the old bottom of that Ancient Covenant of Grace made with Abraham and his Church-Seed as well as his spiritual Seed and that is no dishonour nor damage to us But it keeps us not upon the old Romish Antichristian bottom nor doth it make us symbolize with the Church of Rome as it is now Antichristian but with the Church of Rome as it was once Apostolique planted and watered by the Apostles It 's known that Baptizing of Infants was in Use long before the Whore of Rome was in being And if she yet retain an Ordinance of God and we symbolize with her in that as far as it is God's Ordinance the Lord will not blame us for it though Men do ' Hear what Mr. Philpot saith Book of Martyrs Vol. 3. p. 607. Indeed saith he if you look upon the Papistical Synagogue only which hath corrupted God's word by false interpretations and perverted the true Use of Christ's Sacraments you might seem to have good handfast of your opinion against the Baptism of Infants But for as much as it is of more Antiquity and hath its beginning from God's word and from the use of the primitive Church it must not in respect of the abuse in the Popish Church be neglected or thought not expedient to be used in Christ's Church If this Argument be valid why do you use Baptism at all and Dipping Which thing the Papists use I hope it now appears that the mischiefs absurdities and contradictions that you have loaded Paedo-Baptism and Paedo-Baptists with are false mischievous and absurd and contradictory to the Truth and therefore not to be defended and charged upon us by you but to be repented of To your Chapter VI. Pag. 261. Wherein you say The Nullity and utter Insignificancy of Infants-Baptism is made appear in that it wants the Essentials to wit Matter and Form And coming to shew that it hath not a right matter in stead thereof you bring in the Subject and say The right Subject of Baptism is wanting Here I must crave leave to tell you that you miss it in your Logick For Matter is one of the two Essential Causes that gives being to the effect but the Subject is not so but in order of Nature at least it follows the Effect It is Argumentum modo quodam consentaneum and not Absolute consentaneum as Cause and effect are Here then is a Transition a genere ad Genus The matter of Baptism is Water and the External form of it is the due application of it unto the person in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost which I have shewed to be a pouring of water upon the face and not a dipping of the whole person under water raising him up again to figure our Burial Resurrection with Christ as you affirm it doth in the outward Ceremony of it I have spoken largely to that before evidencing it to to be a Sign and Seal of our Implantation into Christ Externally at least and so of our Union and consequently Communion with him in his Death Burial and Resurrection but not that the outward form of Baptism doth expresly and particularly represent those things unto us which is the thing you would have to introduce Dipping Here then we see are the Essentials of Baptism to wit Matter and Form the Subject is no part of the Essence of Baptism that belongs to the third Commandment But Baptism it self to the second The one is a piece of Instituted-Worship the other the Subject to whom it is applied and the Application as to Infants of Inchurched-Parents determined long before and never reversed but confirmed now in Gospel-times which cannot be said of Bells and Churches and such like things as Papists wickedly-Baptize An Infant of Inchurched-Parents is not of the Essence of Baptism it self as neither was heretofore an Infant of the Essence of Circumcision Baptism is one thing and the Infant is another The Infant is but one sort of the Subject of Baptism and is not of the Essence of the Ordinance as neither is a professing-Believer but he is one sort of the Subject Recipient to whom the Ordinance is dispensed The Infant Subject was determined in the Covenant long before and was never cast out and therefore should still enjoy that Priviledge it being the same Gracious Covenant for the substance that God made with Abraham and the Church in his Family that is come upon us Gentiles Gal. 3.13 and not another which being continued and extended to In-Churched-Parents and their Children in Gospel-days there needed not an Express Command for their Infants that they should be Baptized And this kind of Arguing is not from one Covenant to another as some would have it but from one and the same Covenant and the Initiatory Seal of it to another Initiatory Seal of it which by God's appointment is come into the place of the former long since abolished As for what you say pag. 263. There is no Covenant where there is no consent and therefore there can be no Covenant with Infants for they cannot give consent It is very untrue For 1. It is contrary to Scripture Deut. 29.10 11 12. How did the Infants of the Jews consent And yet God made his Covenant with them for they are expresly mentioned and were some of that Body of People that entred into a Covenant with God that day Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God Your Captains with all the Men of Israel your little ones that thou to wit Collective Israel of which the little ones were a part shouldst enter into a Covenant with the Lord thy God and into his Oath which he maketh with thee this day Here we have God making his Covenant not only with them but with their little ones expresly who were not capable of giving their consent but their Parents in whose Power they were did restipulate for them How contrary is your assertion unto this 2. It is also contrary to reason and common experience Do not Fathers often Covenant for their Children in Leases and Deeds of Land and also bind them to several Cnoditions and others Covenant to them and their Children Do they not often settle an Estate upon a Child that knows nothing of it and engage their Child to such and such Tearms though he be not capable of giving his consent yea sometimes a Child in the womb If therefore God that gave me my Child and also a Fatherly-power over him condescend to enter into a Covenant of Grace with me and with my Child Externally at least promising to be my God and the God of my Child Have I not power to enter my self and my Child into