Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
christian_n body_n church_n union_n 1,510 5 9.6741 5 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
B23662 The controversie about infants church-membership and baptism, epitomized in two treatises the first, shewing the certainty of the salvation of all dying infants, against the doctrine of the Pædo-baptists, who deny salvation to all infants that die unbaptized, either directly, or by the natural consequence of their arguments : the second, being a plain confutation of Mr. J.B. his second book of more than 60 queries, about infants church-membership and baptism, by a proportionable number of antiqueries : being an essay towards a more Christian accomodation between the Pædo-baptists, and the baptized believers, published for that happy end / by Thomas Grantham. Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692.; Grantham, Thomas, 1634-1692. Querist examined. 1680 (1680) Wing G1529 50,899 65

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

broken off be understood to suppose that some yet did stand by God's Appointment in the former Church Or is it not evident that Mens eagerness to stand in the Old Church which now was ceased de jure was the cause why they were rejected Again Is it not said of the believing Gentiles That they were grafted in among the Branches to wit the Jews sure this is not meant of the Jews that stood in the House of Moses or the Old Church-state but of the Church or House which was builded by Christ for Old things were passed away all things became New Wherefore now consider seeing the believing Jews themselves did not stand by virtue of their Old Church-Membership that being now Repealed Matth. 3. 9. Rom. 7. 4 5 6. whether it be rational to imagin that the Infant Church-Membership which was of the same Law should yet remain And wherefore do you so boldly say the believing Parents do remain in the same Church But further Is it safe by the good Olive Rom. 11. to understand the Jewish Church Was not Paul willingly broke off from that Church Phil. 3. that he might be in Christ Is it not more safe to understand the place of Abraham not as a Natural Father for so the Gentiles could no more be grafted into him than into the Jewish Church But as a Spiritual Father into whom as such the Faithful were grafted or rather into his Seed in whom all Nations should be blessed even Christ the true Vine and the Faithful both Jew and Gentile are the Branches united to him J. B. 2. Is it not evident from Rom. 11. 20. That none of the Jews were broken off but for unbelief T. G. And is there any thing more clears the Point that this breaking off was not from the Jewish Church for their unbelief caused them to stand in that Church And seeing these two things are both evident that the breaking off here meant was by unbelief and the standing here meant is by Faith is it not thence very evident that the poor Infants are not concern'd either in this kind of breaking off or this kind of standing in the Olive Tree Alas poor Souls what have they done Have not Infants a more sure interest in Christ than to be jetted into or out of him by the Faith or Unbelief of Parents What wise Man will think so And what need have we or any Body else to talk of the Invisible Church it being a thing unknown to Man And suppose this Olive Tree be meant of the Visible Church Christian walking in all the Commands and Ordinances of Christ blameless yet seeing no Natural Branches as such do stand in this Olive Tree but must be grafted in by Faith before they can stand there Is it not evident even hence that no Infant meerly as the Seed of a Believer is concern'd in the Duties of this Church seeing the very Natural Branches of Abraham himself have not that priviledg on that account J. B. 3. If it be into their own Olive Tree which they were broke off from and of which they were Natural Branches that the Jews shall be engrafted at their recovery as Rom. 11. 24. then how is God's Ordinance for Infant Church-Membership Repealed c. though they be not restored to the Mosaical Law or Covenant of Peculiarity but taken into the Catholick Church T. G. Though it be never so true that the Jews upon their return shall be grafted into their own Olive viz. Abraham as a Spiritual Father and into Christ the Promised Seed in whom all Nations are blessed yet do you not here fairly grant that they shall not be grafted into the Covenant of Peculiarity or Mosaical Law And then whether their bringing Infants to the Mysteries of Religion which was one main thing which was peculiar to the Jewish state is not consequently granted by you to be now Repealed unless you can prove that the Catholick Church hath Command from Christ to bring their Infants to the Mysteries of Religion And who exyour selves did ever exclude the Jews Infants from the Catholick Church viz. the Assembly that are written in Heaven But how will you prove that the Infants of the Jews or any dying Infants are cast out of that Church Or are not all those of the Catholick Church who are of the Kingdom of God And does not Christ state Infants there without excepting any J. B. 4. Is it not the same Olive or Church which the Jews were broken off from that we Gentiles are grafted into as Rom. 11. 17 19 24 And if theirs admitted Infants must not ours admit of Infant-Members also c. T. G. Whether the Church was not the same Church in all Ages and yet whether she did not differ in her external order by God's Appointment and whether this difference was not in the case of Infants being brought to or left unconcern'd in the Rituals of Religion as much as in any thing And seeing you here say She was taken down as to accidental Ceremonies whether this will not justifie us in not Baptizing Infants as well as you in not Communicating them seeing God hath not commanded the one any more than the other J. B. 5. Would not Christ have gathered Jerusalem And is it likely that he would have unchurched all their Infants when he would have gathered to him whole Jerusalem or the whole Nation Matth. 25. 37 38 39. T. G. Whether it be not evident we unchurch no Infants in respect of their relation to Salvation by Christ but only say they ought not to be brought to the Services of Gospel-Ordinances And do not you your self say the same that we do except your pretended Baptism And suppose Christ had gathered all Jerusalem would not he have gathered them after the same manner Would he not have gathered them by Preaching by Repentance and by Faith and Baptism which were capable of these things But how should their Infants be thus gathered Could he not have gathered their Infants in the sende of this Text without Preaching to them without Faith or Repentance required of them And could and would he not have gathered them without Baptism as well as without these And should not the Infants in Jerusalem and Judea have escaped the destruction which came upon them by the Romans if the Adult had but received the Gospel and can you think that though the Infants suffered in that Desolation of Jerusalem that therefore they were damned with the unbelieving Jews And if not were they not still of the Catholick Church though their Parents were rejected J. B. 6. Can you suppose the believing Jews Children and so the Parents in point of Comfort to be in a worse condition since Christ than they were before c. T. G. Was not Enoch Seth and Noah when Infants as happy though not Circumcised or brought to any Ritual in the Church as Isaac Jacob c. were in their Infancy though Circumcised And have we not as much ground
THE CONTROVERSIE ABOUT Infants Church-Membership and BAPTISM Epitomized In two TREATISES The First Shewing the certainty of the Salvation of all Dying Infants against the Doctrine of the Paedo-Baptists who deny Salvation to all Infants that die Unbaptized either directly or by the natural Consequence of their Arguments The Second Being a plain Confutation of Mr. J. B. his second Book of more than 60 Queries about Infants Church-Membership and Baptism by a proportionable number of Antiqueries Being an Essay towards a more Christian Accommodation between the Paedo-Baptists and the Baptized Believers Published for that happy end By THOMAS GRANTHAM Author of The Querist Examined wherein Fifty Queries gathered and propounded by the said J. B. are Redargued Mr. Baxter tells us in his Saints Rest p. 179. 3 d Edit That in the Primitive Times none were Baptized without an express Covenanting wherein they renounced the World the Flesh and the Devil and engaged themselves to Christ and promised to obey Him LONDON Printed in the Year 1680. To Mr. J. B. Collector of the Queries c. SIR I Shall here requite your Thanks you gave me in your last by returning Thanks to you for your endeavours for Peace among differing Christians and particularly for the terms propounded for an Accommodation and I find the same delivered lately by Mr. Baxter himself for which I return him thanks also For methinks there wants but a little more than is offered towards the obtaining so much Union between the Baptists and Paedo-Baptists as might make them a great Blessing one to another But Sir now give me leave to blame you and Mr. Baxter also for misrepresenting your Friends the Baptized Churches Whilst you in your Epistle and he in his Books do represent us to the World as a People who exclude Infants from Gospel Grace deny them to be capable of Pardon by a gracious Covenant as if we left all Infants in the Kingdom of the Devil took away all Comfort from Parents concerning their dying Infants When yet it is most certain all these things are utterly untrue and it is also certain that our Doctrine concerning dying Infants is far more comfortable than yours as I am persuaded will appear to such as read the ensuing Treatises And I am also persuaded could there be once a free and friendly Debate between the Baptists and Pedo Baptists about Infants interest in the Covenant of Grace and the certainty of their Salvation by Christ without incumbring that Discourse with Baptism it were easie to compose their Difference in that Point Which done it 's hoped might be no impossible thing to accommodate their difference in the case of Baptism it self But whilst these two things are confounded Disputes are Perplexed in so much as that a right understanding can hardly be attained on either side Nor do many Readers understand what Mr. B. means when he would have Infants admitted Members of the Visible Church by the Law of Infants Church-Membership unrepealed any more than they know what is intended on Mr. T 's part by their being taken to be Members by a Transient Fact both passages being too occult for every Reader Sir let me say this farther Could but the Reformed Christians once get over this stumbling-block of Paedo-Rantism and resolve upon the way of Believers Baptism which is so perspicuous in the Scripture and in the mean time take the most solemn way which might be warrantable to dedicate their Infants to God in the Name of Christ It would certainly prove the best Expedient to bring down the Papal Confidence for as they know and acknowledg that usage to stand upon the authority of Tradition and not upon the Scripture Warrant so they glory over the Protestant for his Inconstancy in denying unwritten Tradition and yet their very Baptism hath no other Foundation But were the Doctrine of Baptism purged from this Leven and restored to its Primitive Purity it would find all the Universities of the Papists as much business to defend their Infant Sprinkling as ever they were at to defend their Transubstantiation What you write concerning my Querist Examined I shall take little Notice of especially for that I find it attended with overmuch Levity and at the most is but a kind of Carping at Words rather than a solid Answer and there seems to me an unwillingness in you to understand what you flirt at about the Messenger's Office and about Imposition of Hands which being no Scriptureless Matters as your Paedo-Rantism is requires your more serious thoughts whether you understand or like my Sentiments there or not I am your Real Friend THO. GRANTHAM The Controversie of Infants Church-Membership and Baptism Epitomized The first Treatise shewing the certainty of the Salvation of all Dying Infants SECTION I. IT is evident by the Writings of many Paedo-Baptists both Papists Prelatists and Presbyterians that they do all either hold absolutely that no Unbaptized Infant can be saved or at least that their Salvation is very doubtful And among these Mr. Baxter and from him Mr. J. B. hath not a little amused the Minds of Men about this Matter Only they have used a more subtle way coupling the Church-Membership of Infants with Baptism confounding thereby the Readers and themselves too they not being able to say which hath the Precedency for if Infants be Church-Members without or before they be Baptized let them say so and let them prove it well I shall be glad to see it done But then let them never say as Mr. J. B. doth in his Epistle and Mr. Baxter in his Books That Infants are not so much as seemingly in a state of Salvation that Parents can have no comfort of their dying Children Making Baptism the soveraign Antidote against their Griefs and Fears when they are removed in Infancy As will appear more fully in the Examination of the Queries in the second Treatise Now this new art of pleading for Infant-Baptism by virtue of their Church-Membership and not from the Scriptures directly as others have assayed to do but could never perform the Task and therefore have been forced to take sanctuary with the Papists in unwritten Traditions and that with ill success I say considering this new Subtilty of Mr. Baxter I perceived the Controversie to rise very high and Questions thereupon to be greatly multiplied especially upon the Point of Infants Church-Membership Hereupon I thought it needful to consider this Matter for I perceived very good Men engaged on both sides and as I conceive much more straining in the Point than needed by which means the Reader shall sooner fill his Head with amazement than satisfaction in tracing the several windings of their Disputations Nor do I think my self wiser than they but having the advantage to stand and view whilst they engage I hope I have thereby been led to the consideration of a Medium which if duly considered and improved by better Pens than mine will I am much persuaded reconcile the difference about Infants visible