Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	infant_n	kingdom_n	visible_a	3,042	5	9.7675	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62859	An addition to the Apology for the two treatises concerning infant-baptisme, published December 15, 1645 in which the author is vindicated from 21 unjust criminations in the 92 page of the book of Mr. Robert Baille, minister of Glasgow, intituled Anabaptisme and sundry materiall points concerning the covenant, infants-interest in it, and baptisme by it, baptism by an unbaptized person, dipping, erastianism and church-government, are argued, in a letter, now enlarged, sent in September 1647, to him / by John Tombes . ..	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1652 (1652)	Wing T1794; ESTC R11324	36,211	48

nor any on earth are certain what child of a Believer is elect or reprobate Sure I am Mr. Marshall in his Sermon page 48 saith Charity is not tyed to conclude certainly of any of them although in the beginning of his Sermon page 7. he would ground the salvation of all the infants of believers dying in their infancy on Gods promise to be the God of Believers and of their seed Besides my words in my Apology page 64 66. which you alledge speak onely of infants belonging visibly to the Kingdome of the Devil or God and I still deny that they belong to either visibly untill they make their profession according to the constitution of the visible Church of Christians which it behoved you to disprove and not to misreport my words as you do SECT. II. Of the second Crimination that I make Circumcision to the Jewes a Seal onely of earthly and temporall priviledges AS for your second accusation you bring onely Mr. Marshals words which onely declare his suspicion yet so unreasonable and groundless as one might wonder any man should have the face to draw me into a suspicion of that the contrary whereof is delivered in my Exercitation page 2. and very often in my Exercitation and Examen of his Sermon in which I still make the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. which Circumcision confirmed to be a mixt Covenant containing both spirituall and temporal promises And yet you expresly accuse me of the contrary against my plain words prove your charge onely by Master Marshals suspition expressed in this manner What your meaning is in this expression I cannot tell it hath an untoward look as if the meaning were c. which was unreasonable in him to raise such a jealousie of me for citing onely a passage in that so approved Treatise of Cameron that learned Scot de triplici foedere th. 78. which was also much approved at Heidelberg by the publisher of his works according to an order in a Synod of the French Churches as to be stiled in Cameron's Icon accurratissimae theses and they are now translated into English by Mr. Samuel Bolton and printed at the end of his treatise of the true bounds of Christian freedom with this commendation too precious to be any longer concealed or hid under the shell of an unknown tongue And yet these words were cited by me so warily page 4. of my Exercitation as that I say and if we may believe Mr. Cameron yet Mr. Marshall had so much ingenuity as to say of me in that place page 98. of his Defence It is too grosse a thing to imagine of God and so expresly contrary to the word that untill you own it I will not impute it to you which words you leave out in your allegation against me from Mr. Marshall whether needlesly or fraudulently I leave it to your own conscience to consider SECT. III. Of the third crimination That I deny to the Jewish infants all right to the new Covenant till they become actuall believers from whence occasion is taken to shew the insufficiency of Mr. Gerees shift in expounding the words of the Directory the promise is made to believers and their seed And the insufficiency of Mr. Marshals proof of Connexion between the seal and Covenant from God's institution and Mr. Baylies from the nature of the termes AS for the third accusatio● you bring not a word to prove it yet you often charge sometimes all your adversaries as in chap. 5. pag. 133. sometimes the principall of them among whom I assure my self you reckon me with it as when you say pag. 151. ch. 5. The ground of this reason is granted by the Principal of our adversaries who avow their exclusion of infants from baptisme upon this ground mainely that they believe they are excluded from the Covenant of Grace remission of sins the saving grace of the Spirit till in the years of d●scretion they be brought actually to believe which thing I do expresly deny in my Exercitation pa. 24. with obhorrency from it and Examen page 150. and page 109. I say it were a madnesse to go about to put them out of the Covenant of Grace You are often told in my Examen as page 29 38 110 154. and many more places that I avow exclusion of infants from baptism upon this ground mainly that there is no Institution of it gathered by precept or Apostolical example and therefore it is will-worship As for a command of Circumcision I conceive it is a brogated and so can be no rule now about Baptism and the maintaining that a command of Circumcision sti●l binds us as Mr. Marshall doth in his Sermon page 35 36 37. is the most manifest heresie of any as being condemned in the first Councel by the Apostles Acts 15. 28. 21. 25. Indeed to shew the weaknesse of Mr. Marshalls argument thus framed The infants of believing parents are within the Covenant of Grace therefore they are to partake of the seale of the Covenant which in Mr. Marshals language is all one with baptisme I did say that I did conceive the antecedent of his Enthymeme not true Examen Part 3. Sect. 1. page 39. conceiving that as your practise is so Mr. Marshall intended to defend this conclusion All the infants born of a believer by profession are to be baptized according to ordinary rule and so I expressed my selfe in my Examen Part 3. Sect. 15. Exercit. page 1. and elsewhere and then his antecedent must be thus All the infants born of a believer are within the Covenant of grace or else his argument is manifestly inconcludent if we would prove all infants of believers are to be baptized because some onely are in the Covenant of grace Now I know not how to conceive that Mr. Marshall meant any other then the Covenant of saving grace of which I have given reasons not yet answered by Mr. Marshall in my Examen page 45. and could adde more if it were needful and that the believers infants were in the covenant of saving grace in that God hath made that promise to them And in this sense I denied this proposition All the infants of a believer are within the Covenant of Grace and disproved it so fully in my Examen part 3. Sect. 4. that Mr. Marshall renounceth that proposition in that sense page 116. of his Defence and then betakes himself to this shift to understand it of the outward covenant as he calls it in which sense I have proved in my Apology Sect. 10. his first argument to be meer trifling and his speeches to be full of equivocation or ambiguity which I have also further proved in my Postscript in answer to Mr. Bl●ke Sect. 6. Mr. Geree being inforced to deny that proposition in that sense and being pressed by me with the words of the Directory that the promise is made to believers and their seed he shifted it off in his Vindiciae paedobaptismi page 13. by interpreting the