Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	church_n	part_n	pastor_n	1,253	5	9.2889	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90658	A reply to a confutation of some grounds for infants baptisme: as also, concerning the form of a church, put forth against mee by one Thomas Lamb. Hereunto is added, a discourse of the verity and validity of infants baptisme, wherein I endeavour to clear it in it self: as also in the ministery administrating it, and the manner of administration, by sprinkling, and not dipping; with sundry other particulars handled herein. / By George Philips of Watertown in New England.	Phillips, George, 1593-1644.	1645 (1645)	Wing P2026; Thomason E287_4; ESTC R200088	141,673	168

more or lesse and therefore it is false for Rome to challenge the conversion of the English nation and no lesse absurd and injurious for us to draw and derive our succession from them As the Gospel was received there so it hath not been without fruit as also in other places but under the tyrannie of Ethnick Emperors and apostafie of Antichristian Bishops many there have witnessed unto the truth of Christ and suffered for the testimony of Jesus nor hath it been at any time nor is now ineffectuall there but the Lord hath been pleased to blesse those means of his notwithstanding persecution or corruptions with conversion of many thousand soules from Satan to himself yea hee hath not only reserved successively even in England unto himself thousands that have not bowed their knees unto Baal but amongst others some of the most famous lights that he vouchsafed to raise up in the time of that horrid darknesse overspreading the world have been of English Christians as Mr. Wickliffe Pastor of Lutterworth though corruptly called in part in Lincolnshire It cannot be denyed that as in all other places of the Western world wheresoever Christianity setled the whole world went after the Beast and all churches I know not one excepted with that apostafie were corrupted and the courts of the Temple were not measured and the holy city was given to be troden under foot of the Gentiles Antichristian 42. moneths yet all this time the holy city remains a holy city and after too unlesse God himself rejecteth her In the same condition amongst others were the churches in England corrupted as the rest with false doctrine Idolatry c. and usurped upon by Antichrist against which God even there also had his two witnesses some few prophesying in sackcloth At last it pleased God more fully to cleer up the light and caused his truth to prevail so as many thousands were redeemed from amongst men Antichristian and they were the first fruits unto God and the Lamb nor was the church-estate altered essentially all this time nor are these first fruites unto God new constituted churches but members of some churches cleering themselves from corruption and by reformation recovering themselves out of a desperate diseased condition into a more healthfull and sound estate In which course the Lord went on mightily in many places especially after Luthers time yea even in England something by Henry the 8th more by Edward the 6th and Queen Elizabeth who did not constitute new churches but reformed the churches as Geneva Scotland c. in a further degree deeply degenerated from the first constitution and the pure state thereof as they did the like in the state of Judah often sometimes better and more fully and sometimes not so fully in the dayes of Judges David Asa Jehosaphat Hezekiah Josiah Ezra and Nehemiah To conclude this as I believe firmly Christs visible Church hath continued in the world from his time to this day though not alwayes in one estate nor ever in like purity So I know not how it may be better cleared in the generall or any thing more be said for any other church or churches then I have here set down for the continuance of the visible church-estate in England in particular if any can I think they shall do well and that which is necessary especially in these times and therefore as I said afore unlesse they that deny true ministry in England can shew that there never was church-estate in England nor constituted churches or that God hath given them a bill of divorce I shall desire all that will not be satisfied herewith that they will be content not to disquiet themselves with disturbance to others I come now to propound some things about the ministry there in particular To this purpose wee know all that no man can have a lawfull Calling but of God and that in one of these two wayes Immediately by himself without concurrence of man or mediately by men using them as instruments other way of calling I know not any according to the Word accounting all callings or way of calling not set down in the Word to be humane and Idolatrous Concerning the way of calling by men for of the other I know not any but the Apostles that ever were or are to be called two things I desire to speak to First who hath the power of applying a calling to a man Secondly how it is applyed 1. Who hath the power of applying a ministeriall calling to a man some say the Pope some stand for in mediate revelation both which I conceive to be alike contrary to the Word some say the Christian Magistrate quà Magistrate at least approbation but I see no warrant for this neither some say the Church but by Chuch they understand a Presbyterie or Classis a company of Presbyters of severall churches or Councell but of these wee have no cleer evidence in Scriptures to evince such a church or such a practice For though there be mention of laying on of the hands of Presbyters yet that was not the actuall calling of a man but a ceremony of confirmation as I shall shew afterward By church therefore I judge is meant a company of Saints joyned together in profession and successively standing up in the same estate and this company hath power to apply the office to such a man as may be according to Gods Word Thus I judge partly from Scriptures partly from reason the Scriptures are these in the old Testament the Jewes chose their own officers Deut. 1.13 16.18 In the new Testament Act. 1.26 The word signifies hee was incorporated into the societie of the eleven by common suffrages In the context I note two things First the whole company did choose two from out of themselves and set them before the Lord because the applying of that kinde of calling depended only on God yet they bring it thus far as to single out two Secondly God having chosen one of the two they subscribe to it by joynt suffrages nor did any other thing concur in that mans calling no imposition of hands which if it had been necessary certainly should have been especially there being eleven Apostles present and inferiour persons in a case imposed hands on Paul and Barnabas Acts 13. Again Acts 6.3 5. The multitude that is the church and it seems without the assistance of the Apostles did look out by examination and triall and choose seven men amongst themselves and then set them before the Apostles who prayed and laid their hands on them Acts 14.23 They set no Elders in every church by lifting up of hands that is they assisted the churches in ordaining Elders who were chosen by peoples suffrages manifested by their lifting up their hands and 2 Cor. 8.19 he whose praise is in the Gospel was chosen by the churches testifying their suffrages by lifting up their hands from which Scriptures I judge that the power of choosing and setting apart a person for

therefore propound to consideration what I have observed intending not to say all nor to quote their sayings at large but to give some references only and in this order First I will set down the judgement of single learned men in their writings Secondly the consent of whole assemblies And Thirdly the practice of all churches in all ages First that Infants have been and ought to be baptized receives confirmation from testimony of all ancient Writers which I have been able to take notice of as appeares by these places Justin Mart. in quaestion Orthodox Tertul. lib. de baptismo cap. 18. pag. 225. See Junius notes also upon it pag. 157. Dionysius Areop quoted by Thom. 3. qu. 68. art 9. Origen affirming that the church had it from the Apostles hom 2. in Ps 38 in Levit. hom 8. in 6. ad Rom. Cyprian Epist lib. 3.8 Epist ad Fidum Item Epist in the first Tome of Councels pag. 240. Cyril upon Lev. 8. Syricius epist in first tome of Councels Capit. 1. pag. 493. Hieron lib. 4. in Ezek. 16. Idem lib. 3. contra Pelag. Idem Epist ad Laetam Aug. in Enchirid. cap. 42.43.51.65 In lib. de definit Orthodox fidei cap. 21. de fide ad Petrum cap. 24.27.38 Idem lib. 4. de baptismo contra Donatist cap. 14. and in many other places and against Donatists lib. 4. cap. 23. hee hath these words The baptisme of Infants was not derived from the authority of men nor of Councels but from the tradition and doctrine of the Apostles Greg. Nazian de sacro Lavacro orat 3. Ambros de Abraha lib. 2. cap. 11. Jeron Critobul contra Pelag. lib. 3. c. Secondly the attestation of whole assemblies declare as much not ordaining but bearing witnesse unto it upon speciall occasions as the day and time of the yeer c. when they should be baptized Apostol constitut lib. 6. cap. 15. sub finem pag. 92. Concil Melevitan cap. 2. p. 555. Concil African cap. 77. pap 584. Epist concilii Carthag contra Caelest Pelag. p. 542. Concil Carthag quint. cap. 6. pag. 520. Thirdly the practice of all churches consent hereto In the African churches they used to baptize Infants as Athanasius testifieth Quaest 124. The same was used in the Asian churches as Nazianzen affirmeth And the Magdeburgens in their Centuries observe that in the first hundred yeeres after Christ Infants were baptized nor was it taken notice of in that age that Infants were excluded from baptisme and so continued in all ages to this day and though the Eastern and Western churches separated and did hold severall opinions and rites differing one from another yet neither omitted the baptizing of Infants Among the Eastern and African Christians whereof there are some whole kingdomes and very many in severall kingdomes scattered here and there in companies and divided amongst themselves into eleven observable factions and fractions yet have they all successively holden do hold baptizing Infants with some difference I confesse some not baptizing males afore forty dayes nor females before eightie though they die before some not before except in case of necessity some sooner but none later that I have observed In like manner the Westerne churches have had and have some difference in some rites and ceremonies yet not at all in the point of baptizing Infants And as in the Eastern churches before and after separation from the rest and never yeelding subjection to the Pope of Rome So in the Western it is evident that it was every where and alwayes practised before the exaltation of that Antichrist upon which considerations I count it a defect of modesty and charity to call this practice Antichristian and humane invention and to wave such light of all ages in so weighty and plain a case agreeable to the evidence of former arguments For cloze of the Arguments I shal say this more The first that denied the baptism of Infants and opposed the practice of the churches in this case was one Auxentius an Arrian with his adherents who died about 380. yeers after Christ as Mr. Philpot the martyr of Jesus noteth in an Epistle of his written out of prison to a fellow-prisoner of his about the point so Mr. Fox relateth in his Book of Martyrs ad an 1555. Bullinger after affirmeth the same Tom. 3. serm 8. decad quint. After him the Pelagians and Donatists opposed it against whom Augustin besides others wrote and defended it The Pelagians denied it upon this ground that Infants had no originall sin And in Bernards time one Peter Abilaird amongst many other grosse opinions wherein he saith he was magis Arrius quam Arrius held this also that Infants were not to be baptized Epist 190 c. And it is not unworthy consideration that in the severall ages wherein this practice was gain-said it was by such who in other things were grosly erroneous as most Anabaptists at this day And thus far of my grounds for baptizing Infants I next come to speak of a few things to the manner of baptizing whether it ought to be with dipping and may not be with sprinkling only That dipping hath been in use in some ages and places is out of question and dipping thrice also stories relate but that it was instituted and so belong to the essentials of baptisme I am not convinced For as I would have no man to yeeld to humane apprehensions without Gods Word so unlesse it can be proved from Scriptures I desire I may have the same leave I give others to reserve my faith for divine authority to captivate my faith hereto I observe these things pressed First the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they say signifies to dip and therefore to baptize is to dip and not to sprinkle many places are brought to this purpose wherein the word is so translated and must be so taken To which I answer The word I grant is so translated and must be so taken in some place but it is not alwayes so translated nor can be so taken as Heb. 9.10 with divers baptismes some of these were with sprinkling Heb. 9.13 compared with Numb 19.11 17 c. 1 Cor. 10.2 They were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea it is not they were dived and dipped into them Mar. 1.8 I baptize you with water but hee shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire now this was not to be dipped with the holy Ghost and with fire but sprinkled as was fore-told And why may it not be translated I sprinkle you with water as well as it must be sprinkled with the holy Ghost powred on you Again Acts 1.5 10.16 in the last places of both clauses it must be understood sprinkling not dipping and why may it not be taken for sprinkled in the two former Howsoever the word is not alwayes to be translated dipped appears by these places but may and must be translated sprinkled and so the force of the word doth not