Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	aaron_n	appoint_v	child_n	26	3	5.6024	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67270	Baptismōn didachē, the doctrine of baptisms, or, A discourse of dipping and sprinkling wherein is shewed the lawfulness of other ways of baptization, besides that of a total immersion, and objections against it answered / by William Walker ...	Walker, William, 1623-1684.	1678 (1678)	Wing W417; ESTC R39415	264,191	320

signified by that word that was here intended Here 's one Baptism or washing then and yet not necessarily to be understood of dipping § 17. From the Priests let us go on to the Levites and see after what manner they were to be washed at their consecration to their office That we have set down in Num. 8.5 6 7. And the Lord spake unto Moses saying Take the Levites from among the Children of Israel and cleanse them And thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them sprinkle water of purifying upon them and let them shave all their flesh and let them wash their clothes and so make themselves clean See! not a word here of dipping them in order to their purification nor any other way of washing prescribed but that of sprinkling Thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them sprinkle water of purifying upon them And if it were not sufficiently apparent from hence that sprinkling and that of water was used for cleansing that of Ezek. 36.25 would make it appear where by way of promise of what God would do for Israel in after times he saith Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean Here 's another Baptism or washing yet not by dipping but even plainly by sprinkling § 18. From the Levites pass we on unto the People and for their purification after pollution is prescribed washing Maimonid in Mikvaoth c. 1. vid. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. in Matth. 6.3 pag. 47. Ainsworth on Levit. 15.5 11. But how by dipping so indeed if the Anabaptists will give us leave to believe them the Jewish Traditions say and that of the whole body hair and all and all at one dip and that so strictly that if but the tip of the little finger miss dipping he that is dipped is still in his uncleanness But does the Text say any such thing No such matter And they that strictly hold us to Text must press no more than Text upon us They must claim no benefit by Tradition to themselves that will not allow the benefit of it unto others Let them but allow us that and we shall have our Infants baptized presently And let it be by dipping with all my heart so no unlawfulness be affixed on the doing it otherwise § 19. In Levit. 14. we have the cleansing of a Leper prescribed And how is he to be cleansed By dipping That is not said How then Even by sprinkling For so 't is said in Ver. 7. And he i. e. the Priest shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the Leprosie seven times and shall pronounce him clean Sprinkling then again appears to be a way of washing and that for cleansing for after the Priest had so washed him by sprinkling he was to pronounce him clean But it is said v. 8. that he shall wash himself in water that he may be clean and again ver 9. he shall wash his flesh in water and he shall be clean True in order to his coming into the Camp and after that into his Tent. But still that washing is not said should be by dipping The original word is here also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lavit eluit abluit aquâ corpus faciem manus pedes vestes Leigh Crit. Sacr. and signifies only in general to wash and not specifically to dip or totally immerse as we have noted before And as the LXX here render it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall wash so lavo and abluo general words to wash or cleanse with washing are the only Latine expressions whereby the sentiments of other Interpreters Et lavabitur aquâ Vulg. Lat. Targum On●el Lavabitur in aqua Transl Lat. Septuag Se autem lavabit in aquis Text. Heb. Samarit abluet se aquá Syriac lavabit sese Arab. of what Language soever are conveyed to us § 20. In Levit. 15. is prescribed the cleansing of Men and Women in their Issues and of Persons defiled by touch of them That cleansing among other rites is to be made not necessarily by immersion there is no dipping mentioned in the case but by ablution by such a washing as is termed bathing He shall bath himself in water so 't is said v. 6 7 8 10 11 21 22 27. He shall bath his flesh in running water v. 13. Now bathing surely doth not necessarily import in its signification a total immersion Men do not use always to plunge themselves over head and ears into their Bath a going into the water and a partial mersation of some part of their bodies with an application of water to other parts of them with their hands and a frication added thereto I think takes in the whole of what is necessary to or usual in bathing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Sam. 11.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Susan v. 17. Nor can I discern any thing more to have been done either by Bathsheba or Susanna to themselves in that washing of themselves which is vulgarly called bathing In aquis se lavabit Pagn Interlin lavabitur aquâ LXX Transl lat aquis Targ. Onk. in aquis Samarit lavet se aquâ Arab. totus aquâ Vulg. Lat. Vid. Bib. Polyglot And the Hebrew word the same we have noted before signifies no such thing strictly and specifically nor is so rendered by any Interpreter that I yet meet with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and lavo in Latine and what comes of it being all the words that the Oriental Versions are rendred by So then no necessity of dipping in this case neither § 21. In Deut. 21. when uncertain murder was committed the Elders of the City next adjoining are appointed to wash their hands over a beheaded heifer v. 6. Here 's washing of the hands appointed but no dipping The Original word here also is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so doth not enforce to interpret it of immersion And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which does not signifie to dip is the word the LXX use to render it by so lavabunt and laverint which do not signifie it neither I mean strictly and specifically are the words whereby the Oriental Versions of that place are interpreted unto us So here is another washing yet not by a total immersion § 22. In Exod. 30.18 19 20. Moses is appointed to make a laver of brass to wash withal and to put water therein for Aaron and his sons to wash thereat and they are accordingly appointed upon pain of death to wash when they went into the tabernacle But still not a word of immersion spoken of all this while The word for washing here too is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose import we have often enough declared to be for ablution not for immersion And besides though Moses be appointed when he had placed the laver to put water therein they are not appointed to put their hands and feet

been baptized not only by dipping them but also by pouring water from above upon them Notandum non solum mergendo sed etiam desuper fundendo multos baptizatos fuisse adhuc posse baptizari c. Hoc etiam solet evenire cùm provectiorum granditas corporum in minoribus vasis hominem tingi non patitur Walafrid Strabo de Rebus Eccles c. 26. p. 415. and that they may still be so baptized This also uses to come to pass when the greatness of the over-grown bodies suffers not a Man to be dipped in the lesser Vessels which is the present condition of most if not all the Fonts in England so that there can be no way of baptizing persons of ripe years in them but by affusion or a partial mersation I wish those that give such credit to this Author in other things would be impartial and give the like credit to him in this wherein he is so full and clear as nothing can be more both as to what hath been and what may be § 82. Yet further in this Century An. Chr. 858. Praeterea si tibi ad Baptismum Baptismi cupiditas propositumque sufficit atque idcirco corum qui purificâ aquâ perfusi sunt gloriam quaeris ad gloriam quoque tibi sufficiat sola gloriae cupiditas Nicet Not. 21. in Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. Col. 1062. Edit Paris 1611. flourished Nicetas Serronius who wrote Commentaries on several Orations of St. Greg. Nazianzen And in his Commentary on the Fortieth Oration of that Father which is of Baptism If saith he a desire and purpose to be baptized serves you for baptism and you therefore seek the glory of those qui purificâ aquâ perfusi sunt who have had the purifying water shed or poured upon them i. e. have been baptized let then the only desire of the glory serve you too for the glory This if the Author be rightly translated who I suppose wrote in Greek is a clear intimation of that Author 's having in his mind a notice of a baptizing by way of perfusion shedding or pouring on of water which made him paraphrase baptism so nay more that he supposed others had the same notice of it too and would understand what he writ or else he would not so have written it Commentaries being designed not to obsuscate the Authors commented on by words less usual and of greater obscurity but to illustrate them by words more known and of greater perspicuity than their own § 83. In the Tenth Century amongst other Ecclesiastical Constitutions of King Edgar Si infans infirmus absque baptismo obierit Ethnicus hoc ex culpâ Sacerdotis evenerit amittat ille ordinationis gradum sollicite componat Et si amicorum negligentiâ acciderit jejunent illi 3. annos unum sc pane aquâ per reliquos 3. dies in hebdomada id semper lugeant Can. dati sub Edgaro Rege apud Spelman Concil Anglic Tom. 1. pag. 467. Can. 44. about An. Chr. 967. there is one Canon deposing from at least one degree of Orders the Priest that through his default should suffer any weak Infant to die unbaptized and imposing the penance of a three Years Fast on the Infants friends if the fault were theirs Now surely he must either never have had or else have lost his understanding who imagines that the Infant in the case supposed by the Canon was necessarily to be dipped For that were to oblige both the Priest and Parents under so great penalties as neither would be willing to undergo to expose the Child to a manifest peril of death rather than let it go unbaptized But the Church then could not but know what had been the practice of the Church in former Ages in the like case which was to baptize by aspersion or a gentler affusion and therefore it is to be understood to mean that the Children so strictly ordered to be baptized should be baptized after such a way as was most agreeable unto the condition they then were in and that must be by sprinkling and not that they must be dipped come on 't what could come life or death by their dipping § 84. And much about the same time or a little after Infans omnis intra 9. noctes matarè baptizetur sub poena sex orarum Et si infans aliquis intra 9. noctes per negligentiam mortuus fucrit componatur apud Deum absque mulctâ seculari Sed si exactis 9. noctibus per negligentiam mortuus fuerit componatur utique apud Deum solvantur praeterea illi parochiae 12. orae quòd infans tam diu fuisset Ethnicus Leges Presbyter Northumbr ap Spelm. Concil Angl. Tom. 1. pag. 469. Can. 10. were composed the Laws of the Northumbrian Priests probably by Oswald Arch-Bishop of York Amongst which there is one that under a certain penalty orders all Children to be baptized within nine Nights But what if a Child were so sick as not to be able to endure dipping Must it rather than not be dipped be let dye without being baptized That was not the Law-makers meaning which was to prevent the Child's dying without baptism Must he be dipped then though that dipping should cost him his life That is too irrational to conceive to have ever been meant by any wise Law-giver the end of whose Laws is the preservation and not the destruction of lives What then 'T is plain nothing else could be meant but that as the Child was not to be suffered to dye unbaptized so it was to be baptized in such a way as would not endanger its death and that is by sprinkling or pouring water in a befitting quantity upon it according to the practice of former Ages on the like occasions § 85. In the Eleventh Century the Magdeburgensian Historians tell us that Infants if weak Cent. 11. c. 6. col 260. were baptized even presently after their birth And as I have noted in another place they instance from Schafnaburgensis in the Son of an Emperess baptized by reason of his weakness and fear of his death within three days after his birth They tell us also of a Son of the Queen of Moguntia who was baptized presently after his birth and dyed presently after his Baptism But now who is able to imagine that any ordinary Parent much less Persons of such high Nobility would ever endure that their tender Infants in that extremity of weakness and sickness should be put to endure the hardship of a three-fold or even but one single total immersion into cold water How could they expect any other but that the Font which should be the Mother of their Spiritual birth would become the causer of their natural death and that they should be realy as well as Sacramentally buried in Baptism But Reason inviting and long Custom of otherwise baptizing Persons in such condition authorizing thereunto no doubt is to be made but that they were baptized in a