Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	baptize_v	child_n	infant_n	1,168	5	9.1746	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57976	A peaceable and temperate plea for Pauls presbyterie in Scotland, or, A modest and brotherly dispute of the government of the Church of Scotland wherein our discipline is demonstrated to be the true apostolick way of divine truth, and the arguments on the contrary are friendly dissolved, the grounds of separation and the indepencie [sic] of particular congregations, in defence of ecclesiasticall presbyteries, synods, and assemblies, are examined and tryed / by Samuell Rutherfurd ...	Rutherford, Samuel, 1600?-1661.	1642 (1642)	Wing R2389; ESTC R7368	261,592	504

commanded them for they have taken the accursed thing I answer This giveth us occasion to speake a little of the communion with other mens sins We partake these wayes of the Churches sins 1. When we worke with them and are helping causes this communion is unlawfull 2. When we counsell or perswade to false worship 3. When we omit what we are obliged to doe or commit that we should not doe from whence others are occasioned to sin for by morall interpretation he promoveth the sin of others who doth not give all due and obliged diligence to hinder the committing of sin 4. Those who consent to sin who approve and praise the fact and the committers of the fact 5. Those that doe not rebuke sinne 6. Those who are not displeased for it and doth not mourne for it Ezech. 9. and are not humbled for it and doth not pitty the sinner and pray that God in his mercy or justice may be glorified Now of all these we are to consider how Israel did properly communicate with Achans sin Some say there is a seventh way different from all when we in heart desire to doe what others doe wickedly in the externall fact As Israel also coveted in their heart what Achan tooke with his hands or when we doe the same sinne by Analogy that others are doing as the Marriners are punished for Jonahs sinne when as they were doing a sinne by Anology like the sinne of Ionah For Ionah fled from Gods presence as if God could not have followed him through the Seas and had been like the Idoll-gods and the Marriners did the same they worshipped an Idol-god and knew not the God that made the Heaven and the Earth Now wherein none of these seven wayes we partake of the sins of a Church how can their worship be defiled to us or have any influence to infect us but the truth is Israel were guilty of Achans sin because they did not carefully observe and wa●ne one another to take heed that they medled not with the accursed thing but Joshuah never dreamed of Separation from Israel for Achans sin and the Text saith not that for they could not separate from the Church for Achans sacriledge which was not known to them while God discovered the same else by this Text we are to separate from all Churches where there doth live hidden and covered Achans and unseen hypocrites and thus we behoved to remove and separate up to the Church tryumphing in Heaven or then with Anabaptists find a spotlesse Church on Earth 14. They object To be present at a Masse is to countenance an Idol-worship so to be present in a Church-worship where there is any errours in the worship is to countenance the errour for what worship we countenance to that we say Amen and so we must consent to the wrong constitution of a Church where are prophane people Answ. 1. ●o countenance a worship professedly Idolatrous where the name of the worship doth import the worshipping of a false god is unlawfull for others doe interpret our presence a joynt worshipping with them But our presence at every lawfull worship that is acknowledged lawfull doth not give so much as interpretatively signification of our consent to every particular in the worship because hearing discerning choosing or refusing beleeving or not beleeving according as you find the points agreeable to Gods word or dissonant therefrom doth interveene betwixt your presence at the worship and your consent to the worship now the act of consenting approving and receiving the point of worship is formally to partake of the worship else we could not obey the precept 1 Thess. 5. 21. Try all things some things in the Preacher are to be borne with the Preachers of the Separation have not an Apostolick and infallible spirit if any of them preach unsound Doctrine the presence of the hearers doth not involve them in the guilt of the Preachers erronious worship The Pharisees corrupting of the Law was knowne and rebuked by Christ but yet Christ forbad Separation Heare them saith Christ Mat. 23. they sit in Moses his chaire CHAP. XII Quest. 12. Whither or no doe some warrantably teach that baptisme should be administrated onely to Infant● borne of one at least of the nearest Parents knowne to be a believer and within the covenant And who are to be admitted to the Lords Supper NOt only these of the Separation but also others whom we doe most unwillingly oppose in this hold that Baptisme is to be denyed to Infants whose nearest Parents one at least are not knowne to be within the covenant That our mind may be knowne in this we propose these distinctions to the learned and godly Reader to be considered 1. There is an inherent holines and there is a federall holines whereby some are holy by covenant that is have right to the meanes of salvation which right Turks and Pagans have not 2. People or persons are two wayes within the covenant 1. Truly and by faith in Christ and according to the election of grace 2. In profession because the word of the covenant is preached to them as members of the visible Church 3. There is a holines of the covenant and a holines of covenanters and there is a holines of the Nation flocke and people and a holines of the single person 4. There is a holines of election in Gods mind and a holines reall and of the persons elected 5. There is a federall or covenant-holines de jure by right such as goeth before Baptisme in the Infants borne in the visible Church and a holines de facto a formall covenant-holines after they are baptized Hence our first Conclusion All the Infants borne within the visible Church what ever be the wickednesse of their nearest Parents are to be received within the Church by Baptisme 1. Argument If the children of wicked parents were circumcised all without exception notwithstanding the wickednesse of their parents then the children of these who are borne in the visible Church of Christians are to receive that same seale in nature and substance of that same covenant of grace which is baptisme But all the children of most wicked parents were circumcised without exception Ergo so are the children of Christians borne in the visible Church The proposition cannot be denyed by our brethren 1. They say circumcision was given only to members of the visible Church to whom the doctrine of the covenant Gen. 17. 7 8. was preached and these were professors only within the visible Church of the Jewes as M. Best saith and if children were to be circumcised because God said I will be your God and the God of your seed then because this promise is made to Christians and to their seed in the new Testament Acts 2. 38. they should be baptized ver 38. be baptized every one of you c. ver 39. for the promise is made to you and to your children Whence it is cleare as these who were

externally in covenant were onely to be circumcised so these who are externally in covenant in the christian Church are to be baptized I prove the assumption that all the male children were to be baptized without exception 1. From Gods commandement Gen. 17. 10. Every man-child amongst you shall be circumcised ver 11. Every man-child in your generation he that is borne in the house and bought with money of any stranger that is not thy seed the uncircumcised must be cut off from his people he hath broken my covenant Here is no exception but all must be circumcised 2. Also many must be circumsed as these to whom the Lord gave the Land for a possession and was Abrahams seed according to the flesh but the land was given to the most wicked of Abrahams seed so cap. 8. 3. That all the children of the wicked are circumcised is cleare Josh. 5. Because Joshuah at Gods commandement circumcised the children of Israel ver 2. 3 7. whose wicked parents the Lord had consumed because they obeyed not the voice of the Lord unto whom the Lord sware that he would not shew them the Land which the Lord sware to their fathers And Heb. 3. 10. of that generation the Lord said They doe alwayes erre in their heart and they have not knowne my wayes there was in them an evill heart an hard heart an unbeleeving heart ver 13. 15 18. and yet God commanded Joshuah to circumcise their children therefore there was no more required of the circumcised but that they were Abrahams seed according to the flesh and by that same reason there is no more required of infants that they may be baptized but that they be borne in the christian Church for the Christian baptisme and the Jewish circumcision in substance are all one Rom. 6. 4. Col. 2. 11. Jer. 9. 26. Jer. 4. 4. 1 Pet. 3. 21 22. This is so true that circumcision is put for the Nation of the Jewes Acts 11. 2. Rom. 2. 26 27. Gal. 2. 7. Gal. 6. 15. which speech could not stand if most part of the children of the Jewes for the parents wickednesse were to be uncircumcised neither doe we reade in Gods word that ever the children of wicked Iewes were uncircumcised and if their circumcision had beene a prophaning of the covenant and dishonouring and polluting of the holy things of God the Prophets who rebuked all the sinnes of that Nation would not have passed in silence that which should have beene a Nationall sinne in them and as God determineth the quality of these that eate the Passeover that they be circumcised people and so Iewes so doth he determine the quality of these that are to be externally circumcised Gen. 17. every male child Some answer that these infants Iosh. 5. circumcised were the infants of parents dead in the wildernesse and so they were not now under the care and tutorie of their parents but under the care of others and so they might be circumcised Answ. But the death of the parents did not change their Church-state for they were still the children of wicked parents whose carcases fell in the wildernesse and that in Gods wrath Hebrews 3. 2. Argument If John Baptist Mat. 3. 5. baptized Jerusalem and all Judea and all the regions round about and that without any further examination of the aged so they would confesse their sinnes and yet he called them a generation of vipers and so the seede of murtherers and evill doers such as are vipers and Christ said Mat. 18. that of their children and such like was the Kingdome of God then the children of Pharisees and Publicans and wicked persons are to be baptized so their parents professe the doctrine of the covenant but the former is true Ergo. 3. Argument If Peter Acts 2. 38 39. command every one of the Iewes to be baptized by this argument because the promise saith he is made to you and to your children and to as many as the Lord shall call then all are to be baptized to whom the promise of the covenant and externall calling by this covenant is made but the promise of the covenant is made to the seede of the wicked within the visible Church Ergo the seale of that promise is to be conferred upon them I prove the assumption When God said to Abraham I will be thy God and the God of thy seed by the seed of Abraham he cannot meane the nearest of Abrahams seed only to wit the nearest sonnes for so by that he should have been Abrahams God and Isaacks God only and not Iaacobs God and the God of the seed of Jacob which is against the tenour of the covenant now if God be the God of Abrahams seed farre off and neare downe to many generations the wickednesse of the nearest parents cannot breake the covenant as is cleere Ezech. 20. 18 19. v. 22. v. 36 37. v. 42 43. Psal. 106. v. 40 45 46 Rom. 3. 3. Lev. 26. 44 45. spoken of the sonnes of wicked parents and if these children stand in the covenant for Gods names sake and God say expresly Ezech. 20 18 19. to the sonnes of wicked parents who grieved his holy spirit in the wildernesse walke in my statutes and walke not in the statutes of your fathers I am the Lord your God then they were in covenant notwithstanding of the wickednesse of their fathers and therefore by our bretherens argument the seales of the covenant should be bestowed upon them 4. Argument If the Lord shew mercy to the thousand generations of them who love him and keepe his commandements then the wickednesse of the nearest parents doe not remove the mercy of the covenant from the children because the mercy extendeth to the thousand generations But the former is said Exod. 20. in the second commandement and therefore for the sinnes of their nearest parents they are not excluded from the mercy of the covenant and therefore neither from the seales of that mercy If our brethren say we have no assurance of faith that their thousand generation upward hath been lovers of God and keepers of his commandements and so the children in faith cannot be baptized I answer first by this argument you cannot deny baptisme to them in faith 2. You have not certainty of faith which must be grounded upon infallible verity that their nearest parents are beleevers you have for that only the judgement of charity as Camero saith well and this faith you have infallibly that the sinnes of no one or two or foure persons doe interrupt the course of Gods immutable covenant in the race of covenanters borne in the visible Church Rom. 3. 3 4. Iosh. 5. 2 3 4. Levit 26. 41 42 43 44. Ezech. 20. 14 17 22. 5. Argument The infallible promise of the covenant I will be thy God and the God of thy seede which is made to us Gentiles as well as to the Jewes Gal. 3. 10 11 12 13. must make a difference betwixt the

seed of Christians and the seed of Turks and Pagans and these that are without the true Church of Christians But if so that the sinnes and wickednesse of the nearest parents cut off their children from the mercy of the covenant and hinder God to be their God then these infants are in no better case through the covenant made to their grandfathers and generations upward then the sonnes of Turks and Pagans for they are strangers to the covenant and have no right to the seales of the covenant no more then the children of Turks I prove the proposition I will be thy God and the God of thy seede extendeth the covenant to the seed of the faithfull to many generations downeward untill it please the Lord to translate his Sonnes Kingdome and remove the candlestick from a people Neither can the meaning be I will be thy God and the God of thy seed except the nearest parents of thy seed be unbeleevers for that is contrary to the Scriptures aboved cited Neither can they say that the children of unbeleeving parents borne within the christian Church have right to the covenant and the seales thereof when they come to age and doe beleeve and repent for so the children of Turks if they beleeve and repent have that same right as is cleare Isaiah 56. 6 7. Acts 10. 34 35. 6. Argument If God in the covenant of grace and Evangell will not have the sonne to beare the iniquity of the father except the sonne follow the evill wayes of his parents and so make the fathers iniquity his owne then cannot the children of wicked parents be excluded from the covenant and the seales of the covenant for the sinnes and wickednesse of their nearest parents But the former is said Ezech. 18. 4. The sonne shall not beare the iniquity of his father Now infants as yet being free of actuall sinnes have not served themselves heires to the iniquities of their fathers Neither can it be said as some say the children of Turks are not to be baptized because their parents are without the covenant and yet these children being free of actuall transgressions beare the iniquity of their fathers I answer God keepeth a legall way with Turks and all that are without the Church and covenant of grace and we suppose the child borne of wicked parents to be in the case of election and so really within the covenant and it is ordinary enough that chosen and redeemed infants be born of unbelieving parents in that case who can say that God layeth their fathers iniquities on them in spirituall and eternall punishments such as is to be reputed without the covenant and dying in that estate to be damned for ever 7. Arg. If the root be holy so also are the branches Rom. 11. 16. Now this holinesse cannot be meant of personall and inherent holinesse for it is not true in that sense if the fathers and fore-fathers be truly sanctified and beleevers then are the branches and children sanctified and beleevers the contrary wherof we see in wicked Absalom borne of holy David and many others Therfore this holinesse must be the holines of the Nation not of persons it must be an holines because of their elected and chosen parents the Patriarches and Prophets and the holy seed of the Iewes and so the holinesse federall or the holinesse of the covenant If then the Iewes in Pauls time were holy by covenant howbeit for the present the sons were branches broken oft for unbeliefe much more seeing God hath chosen the race and Nation of the Gentiles and is become a God to us and to our seed the seed must be holy with holinesse of the chosen Nation and holinesse externall of the covenant notwithstanding the father and mother were as wicked as the Iews who slew the Lord of glory 8. Argument If the speciall and only reason why Baptisme should be denied to the children of nearest Parents who are unbelievers be weake and contrary to the Scriptures then is this opinion contrary to Scripture also but the former is true Ergo so is the latter for not only the speciall but the only argument is because these children are without the covenant seeing their nearest Parents are without the covenant but this is most false many waies 1. God commandeth as I shewed before that the children of most wicked Parents Josh. 5. should be circumcised Ergo God esteemed them within the covenant notwithstanding of their fathers wickednesse 2. The Lord tearmeth the children of those who slew their sonnes to Molech and so ostered them to Divels to be his sonnes Ezech. 16. 20. Moreover thou hast taken my sonnes and my daughters which thou hast borne to me and these hast thou sacrificed to them to be devoured is this of thy whooredomes a small matter v. 21. That thou hast slaine my children c. So Ezek. 23. 37. If they be the Lords sonnes and borne to the Lord howbeit their Parents were bloody murtherers and sacrificers to ●Divels then God esteemed these sonnes within the covenant and who are we to exclude them out of Gods covenant 3. The sonnes of most wicked Parents dying in their i● fancy may be saved and of them God hath his owne chosen as we see in many aged ones borne of wicked Parents Ergo the wickednesse of the Parents is a weake ground to say they are without the covenant especially seeing we affirme God hath his decrees of Election and Reprobation of infants Rom. 9. 11. no lesse then of aged the contrary whereof wee know Arminians teach 9. Arg. If externall profession be sufficient without longer examination to baptize the aged as we see in Simon Magus Act. 8. 13. and in Ananias and Saphira Act. 2. 38 39 44 45. compared with Act. 5. 1 2. by the Apostles practise Then the profession of faith in the fore-fathers is enough for us to judge their fore-fathers within the covenant and consenters to the covenant for when many thousands at once are said to enter in covenant with God as is cleare Deut. 29. 10 11 12 13. Josh. 24. 24 25. 2 Chron. 15. 9 10 11 12. they could not give any larger proofs or evidences of their faith of the covenant then a solemne assembling together and a verball oath or a saying Amen or So be it as Deut. 27. 14 17. after which they were reputed in the covenant and so their seed also in the covenant Augustine his mind is that such infants are not to be excluded from baptisme so Bucan Calvin Wallens the Professours of Leyden Let us heare shortly what our brethren say on the contrary M. Best and others object Those only are to receive the seale of the covenant whose Parents at least one of them in externall profession are within the covenant but infants borne of wicked and prophane parents are not borne of parents in externall profession within the covenant Ergo the infants of wicked parents are not to

they by Gods providence may be cast into a country where they are not and cannot be without due examination members of a setled Church as one may heare the word and joyn in publick prayer with any true Church he cometh unto and so having Christian-communion with a true Church he hath by that same also Church communion For baptisme is not like Burgess● freedome in a city a man may be a free Citizen in one Towne or City and not be a free citizen to have right to the priviledges of all other Cities but he who is Christs free-man in one Church hath Christian freedome and right to communion therby in all Churches and may have Church-communion in all true Churches but hee that is a free Burgesse in one City is not free in all Thirdly they object If Baptisme be given to all promiscuously the Church shall not be the house of God to receive only Gods family but a common Inne to receive all cleane and uncleane So Best citing Cartwright Baptisme is to be administred say the Separatists onely to the seed of the faithfull because such only are accounted to the Lord for a generation which he begetteth and receiveth in his Church to declare his righteousnesse in Christ Psalm 22. 30 31. Rom. 4. 11. and Rom. 11. 16. Math. 10. 13 16. Answ. Cartwright in that place is only against the baptizing of infants of excommunicate parents who are cast out of the Church but as the Church is a house so there are in the house of baptized ones both cleane and uncleane Neither are they all barnes of the house who are within the house the profession of cleannesse and holinesse and of the faith of Christ maketh it a house different from the society of Pagans and In●idels 2. Wheras M. Best urgeth that none should be baptized but members of the visible Church he maketh all baptized members of the Church how then must they be all visible Saints clean persons and holy For baptisme maketh not the thousand part that are baptized to be visible Saints 3. This Generation begotten of the Lord and received into the Church to declare his righteousnesse Psal. 22. is not such only as are to be baptized for that generation v. 30. is a seed that serveth the Lord and v. 31. declareth his righteousnesse All infants whether of faithfull or unfaithfull parents doe alike service to God and alike declare his righteousnesse that is to say infants of what ever kinde can doe no service to God If their meaning bee the infants of faithfull parents circumcised shall serve God and declare his Righteousnesse when they come to age First this Text saith not they are the seed of the faithfull onely that shall serve God For the seed of the faithfull such as Ammon Absolom and Davids seed often refuse to serve God and declare his righteousnesse and the seed and children of wicked Parents as Hezekiah the sonne of wicked Ahaz and Josiah the sonne of wicked Amon doe often serve God and declare his righteousnesse So they cite Scriptures that by no force of reason doe speake for them as Rom. 4. 11. and Rom. 11. 16. say nothing but if the root be holy with the holinesse federall and of the externall profession So are the branches but the place speaketh nothing of true inherent holinesse for then all holy Parents should have holy and visible Saints comming out of their loines which is against Scripture and experience Fourthly they object By this our Divines lose their best Argument against Anabaptists namely that children of Christians by that same warrant are to be baptized that Infants under the Law were circumcised but none was circumcised but a member of the visible Church under the Law Now this ye gain-say who would have all cleane and uncleane baptized and so you leave your patterne Answ. We leave our patterne in no sort For all were circumcised that were borne of circumcised Parents within the Church of the Jewes so all are to be baptized that are borne of Christians and baptized Parents professing the faith But say they Drunkards Murtherers Sco●●ers Swearers and ignorant Atheists both Fathers and Mothers whose children you baptize doe not professe the ●aith for in works they deny and belye their profession Answ. Then you will have the children of none to be baptized but those whose parents are sound and sincere professors in the judgement of charity but so Joshuah failed who circumcised the children of all professing themselves to be Abrahams sonnes carnally howbeit Joshuah knew and was an eye-witnesse that their Fathers did deny and belye their profession And John baptized the ●eed of all Mat. 3. that professed the faith of the Messiah although he knew them to be a generation of vipers 2. They often require that one of the Parents be a beleever or else the childe cannot be cleane nor lawfully baptized and they repose on that place 1 Cor. 7. 14. For the unbeleeving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbeleeving wife is sanctified by the husband Else that is if both were unbeleevers were your children uncleane that is not within the covenant but now are they holy And they alleadge Beza and Pareus for this Answ. But they mistake the word unbeleeving for by unbeleeving in that place as the Professors of Leyden doe well observe is meant Infidell Gentiles that are without the Church and professe not Christ as is cleare from the Text For where the husband that beleeved was married on a Pagan-wife or a Jew hee thought being converted to the Christian faith he behooved to sunder with his Pagan-wife and the wife converted to the Christian faith married to a heathen and Pagan-husband thought she behoved to divorce and that the marriage could not be sanctified The Apostle answereth this case of conscience Suppose the Father be a Pagan if the Mother be a beleever that is a professour of Christianity for a Beleever is here opposed to a Pagan yet the children are holy by the Mothers or Fathers profession of Christianity Hence the Argument is strong for us Profession of Christianity opposed to Paganisme maketh the children cleane and holy before God by the holinesse of the Covenant therefore Infants borne of parents professing Christian Religion are to be baptized For that this troubled many converted that they were married to heathen and bondmen to them and in such and such callings as they thought inconsistible with Christian Religion is cleare from verse 14 15 16 20 21 22 23 24. And Beza on that place saith it was never heard in the ancient Church that every Infidell child was to be baptized And Pareus saith the children of Christian parents are holy before Baptisme by a Covenant and externall holinesse iure by Gods right being borne of Christian parents And after Baptisme they are holy de facto formally and actually So say Melancthon and Keckerman But I feare that these who will have none baptized