Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	faith_n	good_a	word_n	4,442	5	4.3854	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90803	A relation of a dispute of baptisme of infants of Christians at Holgate in the county of Salop, Maii. 30. 1650. betwixt P. Panter, Dr. in Divinitie, rector of the place, and Mr. Brown, preacher to the Anabaptists in that circuit.	Panter, P.; Brown, Mr.	1650 (1650)	Wing P274A; ESTC R43711	11,586	16

Doctor Neverthelesse it will follow that as to the Jewes albeit as yet the Parents were onely called the Promises were made both to them and to their Children so to the Gentiles of whom we are albeit the Parents be first called yet the Promise is made to their Children also if they be baptized for onely upon the receiving of Baptisme the Promise was to be effectuall Hence he fell a questioning Whether Children were capable of remission of sinnes and of the gift of the Holy-Ghost who is called the Promise of the Father Acts 1. 4. especially by Baptisme At which he and his company mocked saying Naamanlike Can a little sprinkling of water doe it Albeit it be the expression of the Holy-Ghost himselfe by S. Paul Tit. 3. 5. calling Baptisme the washing of new birth and renewing of the Holy-Ghost Which gave occasion to the third proofe following to wit ●●ird proofe ●●… 5. 26. That Infants of beleevers being a part of the Church Christs Spouse are sanctified by the washing of water in the Word the Argument was thus The Church is sanctified by the washing of water in the Word But Infants are a part of the Church Therefore must be sanctified by the washing of water in the Word Mr. Browne answered first to the Conclusion ●●ainst the ●●● of Lo●●● denying their sanctifying to be by Baptisme but by the bloud of Christ To which the Dr. replyed That prima causa non tollit secundam nor the principall tooke away the effect of the instrument Christs death though it have vertue enough yet it must be applyed by some meane and Baptisme to be one of these meanes appeareth not onely by this place but also by Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 3. 12. Whosoever are baptized unto Christ are baptized into his death we are buried with him by Baptisme into his death After he begun to cavill about the Proposition called major That the sanctifying of the Church here is expressed not onely by Washing but by the Word To which the Argumentator did grant That to the Church in adultis it was but the Question was of that part of the Church which as yet were not capable of the Word wherewith else then with Baptisme are they sanctisied either so or not at all to speake in the way of Gods ordinarie dealing not of his absolute power Beside that the Word there may be understood of the Sacramentall Word which comming to the element of Water maketh it a Sacrament and giveth the vertue and blessing For unde est saith Austin that aqua corpus tangens animam abluat est a verbo Hence he fell to the denying of the minor That Infants were not a part of the Church using the distinction of visible and invisible that they were not of the visible Church which is as much as not to be of the Church Militant at all for beside that the Church and the Profession and Sacraments thereof are visible and so compared to a Citie on a Mountaine none are of the invisible ●●tth 5. 14. Church but such as are of the visible it being but a part of the whole qualified in certain respects so as she is not discernable to man but to God who alone knoweth the hearts of the children of men neither can there be any Church but that which is called either by Word or Sacraments as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Companie of the Called doth prove beside the children of the Israelites were of the visible Church Fourth pro●●●… 1. Pet. 3. 21 Hence the Dr. argumented from the similitude of Baptisme and the Arke of Noah which for the exactnesse of it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Beza rendreth it correspondens exemplar others expressa forma such as in Wax or Coyne whence he argued thus by a double Argument first The Arke of Noah is like Baptisme caetera But without the Arke by Gods appointment none were saved Therefore without Baptisme none saved ordinarily and so the Infants salvation by you hazarded secondly Baptisme saveth as the Arke But the Arke saved Noah and his household Heb. 11. 7. Therefore Baptisme by Gen. 7. 1. the Law of example saveth us and our house-hold To the first he answered with an upbraiding of Poperie which the Argumenter said he had no reason to challenge who complyed so much with them in other things but the Question was not What the Papists but what the Scriptures said whom he made his Judge To the second he answered That no young ones were in the household of Noah against which it was insisted by the Disputer That if they had been they had not been excluded the reason for their safetie in the Arke being the same in young ones and elder Children because they did belong to Noah who had found favour with God Neither was Gen. 6. 8. it the personall Faith of Cham that made him be received into the Arke last of all he fell to crosse the first words of S. Peter by his following words Not the laying away of the filthenesse of the flesh but the asking of a good Conscience towards God through the resurrection of Iesus Christ. Whereupon the Dr. began to cleare these words shewing that nothing was intended in them derogatorie to Christian Baptism for then he should give with the one hand and take from it with the other which if it were why did he mention Baptisme and not a good Conscience alone But what he speaketh against the putting away of the filth of the body is against their washings and purification for to the Jewes dispersed he writeth which also the Apostle to the Hebrewes almost in the Heb. 9. 10 13. same expressions doth calling them Ordinances or justifications of the flesh and purifyings as touching the cleannesse of The words of S. Peter containe non oppositionem to Baptisme but Appositionem the flesh like to which Baptisme doth not save us as not being a putting off the silth of the flesh but the asking of the Conscience or that which maketh the Conscience ask God and cry Abba Father for it is a Metonymie effectus pro causa it s the asking of the Conscience towards God that is the meane or cause instrumentall of our approach to God it being the Laver or washing of new birth and so making us the Children of God Here the Answerer startled What saith he Are we made Gods Children by Baptisme Whereupon some present not evill affected would have mitigated or denyed the assertion but the Arguer not moved askt Mr. Browne Whether that were so strange an expression to him who had so often uttered it both Child and Minister Had he forgotten the words of the English Catechisme Answer to the very second Question To which he replyed That he had indeed sometime taught so but he was otherwayes illightned now so that he accounted it Blasphemie Then said the Arguer the Apostle blasphemeth calling it the washing of new birth Tit. 3.