Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
conscience_n blood_n soul_n sprinkle_v 1,209 5 10.9438 5 false
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
A41009 Kātabaptistai kataptüstoi The dippers dipt, or, The anabaptists duck'd and plung'd over head and eares, at a disputation in Southwark : together with a large and full discourse of their 1. Original. 2. Severall sorts. 3. Peculiar errours. 4. High attempts against the state. 5. Capitall punishments, with an application to these times / by Daniel Featley ... Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645. 1645 (1645) Wing F586; ESTC R212388 182,961 216

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

thing or spirituall act or grace signified by Baptisme may be sufficiently expressed without Dipping then is not Dipping necessary in Baptisme for the whole use of the signe in Baptisme in all other Sacraments is but to represent the thing signified and inwardly wrought upon the soul by the means of that ordinance of God But the thing signified to wit the cleansing of the soul from the guilt and filth of sin may be sufficiently expressed by washing or rubbing with water and so putting away the filth of the flesh 1 Pet. 3. 21. without any plunging or Dipping of the whole body or any part thereof Ergo Dipping is not necessary in Baptisme ARGUMENT IIII. Sprinkling may be done and is usually without any Dipping at all But the outward act of Baptisme representing the inward Ablution of the soul is expressed in holy Scripture by sprinkling Hebr. 9. 13. The blood of bulls and goats sprinkling the unclean sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh Heb. 10. 22. Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water 1 Pet. 1. 2. Through the sanctification of the spirit and sprinkling of the blood of Iesus Christ. Ergo The outward act of Baptisme may be rightly performed without any Dipping at all ARGUMENT V. Baptisme is a Sacrament though not of absolute necessity yet of very great as all confesse and it falleth out often that it ought to be administred to sick and infirm persons even sometimes lying upon their death bed they making profession of their Faith and earnestly desiring it But in such case these infirm persons cannot after the manner of the Anabaptists be carried to rivers or wells and there be Dipt and plunged in them without evident and apparent danger yet may they safely be Baptised by sprinkling or gentle rubbing with water Ergo Sprinkling or rubbing the flesh with water in the Name of the Trinity by those who have authority and commission from Christ is sufficient without any Dipping at all ARGUMENT VI. All the Sacraments of the church may and ought to be administred without giving any just scandall But the resort of great multitudes of men and women together in the evening and going naked into rivers there to be plunged and Dipt cannot be done without scandall especially where the State giveth no allowance to any such practise nor appointeth any order to prevent such fowl abuses as are like at such disorderly meetings to be committed Ergo The Sacrament of Baptisme ought not to be administred with such plunging or Dipping The Objections of the Anabaptists answered Now let us hear what they can say for their Dipping and with what weak bulrushes they fight against the truth Fist they object that the word Baptize is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to Dip or Die therefore say they washing or sprinkling with water is not Baptizing but plunging the body or the head at least in water But we answer First out of Aquinas and the schoolmen in verbis non tam spectandum ex quo quam ad quid sumantur in words we are not so much to respect from whence they are derived as how they are used as we see the branches of trees spread much further then the roots so the derivative words are often of a larger extent of signification then their primitives for instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifieth originally and properly Catechizing or such a kinde of Teaching wherein the principles of Religion or of any Art or Science are often inculcated and by continuall sounding and resounding beat into the ears of children or novies but yet it is taken in holy Scripture in a larger sense not onely for catchizing of children but instructing men of riper yeers in the doctrine of salvation as Luke 1. 4. That thou mightest know the certainty of those things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherein thou hast been instructed and Acts 1825. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord and Acts 21. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whereof they informed concerning thee and Rom. 14. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Follow the things wherewith one may edifie another and Gal. 6. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let him that as taught in the word communicate to him that teacheth him In like manner The word prophecie is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth originally and properly to foretell things future yet it is taken in the new Testament especially in a larger sense for all such as reveale the will of God and declare his promises aswell past and already fulfilled as to be fulfilled hereafter as namely 1 Cor. 11. 4. every man praying or prophecying having his head covered dishonoureth his head 1 Cor. 14. 1. Desire spirituall gifts but rather that ye may prophesie and verse 3. He that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification to exhortation to comfort verse 31. Ye may all prophes●e one by one verse 32. The spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets So the word Baptize though it be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tingo to Dip or Plunge into the water and signifieth primarily such a kinde of washing as is used in bucks where linnen is Plunged and Dipt yet it is taken more largely for any kinde of washing rinsing or cleansing even where there is no Dipping at all as Matth. 3. 11. 20. 22. Mark 7. 4. 10. 38. Luke 3. 16. Acts 1. 5. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 10. 2. Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from whence Baptize is derived signifieth as well to Die as to Dip and it may be the holy Ghost in the word Baptize hath some reference to that signification because by Baptisme we change our hiew for as Varro reporteth of a river in Baeotia that the water thereof turneth sheep of a dark or dun colour into white so the sheep of Christ which are washed in the Font of Baptisme by vertue of Christs promise though before they were of never so dark sad or dirtie colour yet in their souls become white and pure and are as it were new died therefore admitting that in the word Baptize there were something of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tingo to Dip or Die yet it will not follow That it necessarily signifieth Dipping for it may aswell imply this spirituall Die to which no Dipping is necessary Secondly they argue from the example of Christ and Iohn and of Philip and the Eunuch Iesus say they and Iohn went both into Iordan and there Iohn Baptized Iesus and likewise Philip and the Eunuch went both down into the water and there Philip Baptized the Eunuch therefore say they sprinkling or washing with water will not suffice but the parties that are to be baptized ought to go into the water and there be Dipt over head and ears But we answer First an example of Christ or his
the Anabaptists in this section And therefore I come briefly to examine his second assertion or rather aspersion of the whole Christian world in these words in the frontis-peece of his book Against the anti-christian faction of pope Innocentius the third and all his favourites that enacted by a decree that the baptisme of the infants of beleevers should su●ceed circumcision These words vertually contain this proposition that the christening children is the practise of an Anti-christian faction which was brought first into the church by the decree of Pope Innocentius the third Of which enunciation I may say as Tertullian doth of the Chameleon quot colores tot dolores or rather quot dicta tot maledicta so many words as there are so many grosse errors and scandalous reproaches For the baptizing infants is not the practise of a faction nor a part but of the whole not Anti-christian but truely Christian church Neither was it introduced by Innocentius the third but is of far more ancient date and was derived even from the times of the Apostles themselvs First it is well known that the Greek and Latine churches or the Eastern or Western were the membra dividentia of the whole church and that the christening of infants was approved of and practised by the Greek church is evident by the testimonies of Gregorie Nazianzen orat 40. in bap Origen hom 8. upon Leviticus and 14. of Luke and that it was likewise approved and practised in the Latine church is clearly collected from Ambrose lib. de Abrahamo Patriarcha Ieron cont Pelag. l. 3. Augustin l. 10. de Gen. ad lit c. 23. Cyp. ep 59. ad Fidum Now if the Greek and Latine churches were Anti-christian where were there any Christians in the world Secondly Pope Innocentius the third as it is well known to all the learned lived in the twelfth age of the Church and flourished about the year 1215 in which year he called the great Councell at Lateran Before him Gregorie the great whom M. Cornwell himself alledgeth page 11. out of M. Fox in his book of Martyrs about the year of our Lord 599. above six hundred yeares before Innocentius the third resolved Austine the Monk that in case of necessitie infants might be baptized as soon as they were born and two hundred yeares before Gregorie S. Austine wrote a treatise de baptismo parvulorum and for the lawfulnesse thereof in his 28 epistle and in his third book de pec mer. remiss and by occasion elsewhere also alledgeth a testimonie out of S. Cyprian to that purpose who wrote in the year of our Lord 250. nay which is most considerable Origen in his Comment upon the epistle to the Romans c. 6. l. 5. quoted by M. Cornwell himself p. 10. affirmeth in expresse tearms that the church from the Apostles received a tradition to baptize children whence I thus frame my argument All Christians ought to hold the traditions which have been taught them by the Apostles either by word or epistle 2 Thess. 2. 15. But the baptizing of children is a tradition received from the Apostles as Origen affirmeth loc sup cit Austine l. 10. de Gen. ad lit c. 23. de bap cont Donatis l. 4. Ergo the baptizing of children ought to be retained in the Christian church Thus M. Cornwell hath spun a fair thred of which a strong cord may be made to strangle his own assertion Yea but M. Cornwell chargeth all ministers deeply to answer this his negative demonstration saying O that the learned English ministerie would informe me lest my bloud like Abels crie aloud from heaven for vengeance for not satisfying a troubled conscience how shall I admit or consent to the admittance of the infant of a beleever to be made a visible member of a particular congregation of Christs body and baptized before it be able to make confession of its faith and repentance lest I consent to separate what God hath joyned together That which God hath joyned together no man ought to separate But faith and baptisme God hath joyned together Mar. 16. 16. Acts 8. 37 38. 16. 33 34. Gal. 3. 27. Ephes. 4. 5. Ergo faith and baptisme no man ought to separate ANSWER This argument is so far from a demonstration that it is not so much as a topicall syllogism but meerly sophisticall therin any who hath ever saluted the University and hath bin initiated in Logick may observe a double fallacy The first is fallacia homonymiae in the premises The second is ignoratio elenchi in the conclusion First the homonymia or ambiguity is in the tearm joyned together for the meaning may be either that faith and baptism are joyned together in praecepto in Christs precept and that no man denieth all that are commanded to be baptized are required to believe and all that believe to be baptized or joyned together in subjecto that is to say all who are baptized have true faith and that none have true faith but such as are baptized in this sense it is apparantly false and none of the texts alledged prove it for the thiefe on the crosse had faith yet not the baptism we speak of as also the Emperour whom S. Ambrose so highly extolleth in his funerall and many thousands besides again Iulian the Apostata and all other who after they came to years renounced their baptisme and Christian profession had baptisme yet no true faith which as M. Cornwell himself will confesse cannot be lost totally or finally Secondly in the former syllogisme there is ignorantio elenchi he concludes not the point in question they who most stand for the baptizing of children will not have faith and baptisme severed for they baptize children into their fathers faith and take sureties that when they come to yeares of discretion they shall make good the profession of the Christian faith which was made by others at the font in their name and for them nay so farre are they from excluding faith from infants that are baptized that they beleeve that all the children of the faithfull who are comprised in the covenant with their fathers and are ordained to eternall life at the very time of their baptisme receive some hidden grace of the Spirit and the seeds of faith and holinesse which afterwards beare fruit in some sooner in some later Neither is this any paradox or new opinion for S. Ierome advers Lucifer and Austin ep 57. ad Dard. and Zanchius de tribus Elohim affirm that the holy Spirit moveth upon the waters of baptisme and that as the Spirit in Genesis 1. 2. rested upon the waters incubabat aquis that he might cherish and prepare them for the producing of living creatures so the holy Ghost resteth upon the waters of baptisme and sits as is were abroad upon them and blesseth them and thereby doth cherish the regenerate and animate the elect S. Leo speaketh most elegantly and fully to this point in his sermons of the birth of