Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	cup_n	drink_v	eat_v	8,062	5	7.8137	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A58206	Anabaptism routed: or, a survey of the controverted points: Concerning [brace] 1. Infant-Baptisme. 2. Pretended necessity of dipping. 3. The dangerous practise of re-baptising. Together, with a particular answer to all that is alledged in favour of the Anabaptists, by Dr. Jer. Taylor, in his book, called, the liberty of Prophesying. / By John Reading, B.D. and sometimes student of Magdalen-Hall in Oxford.	Reading, John, 1588-1667.	1655 (1655)	Wing R443; ESTC R207312	185,080	220

and Gentiles The Lords Supper doth no less signifie the blood of Christ for our Salvation then doth the water of Baptism nor less represent his death then doth baptism in which we are implanted into the similitude of his death and resurrection But the Lords Supper is often to be administred and received and therefore so is Baptism We answer 1● There is in Scripture express command for often administring and receiving of the Lords Supper I Cor. II. 24. This do in remembrance of me As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye do shew the Lords death till he come shew us any one such warrant for rebaptizing and this controversie is at an end 2. The Lords Supper proposeth not any new Covenant with God but confirmeth that to us which he made with us in our baptism But baptism is the Initiatory Seal of our entring into Covenant with God as it was in circumcision which Covenant is but one 3. The vertue and efficacy of baptism in the elect extendeth it self to the whole life of the regenerate and is as it were a fountain of living waters perpetually running to cleanse away the pollutions of sin so that there need not new or more baptisms but a daily renewing of our repentance to which we were in our covenanting with God at first baptized As Ambrose saith after baptism there remaineth no remedy but true repentance Cyprian and the Councel of Carthage held that those who were baptized by hereticks upon their return to the Church ought to be rebaptized We answer 1. The question being proposed in the first Councel of Carthage Whether those who were once baptized might be rebaptized all the Bishops answered God forbid God forbid we resolve and determine that all re-baptizings are unlawful and far from sinc●re faith and catholick discipline The business which troubled the Churches in Cyprians time was Whether baptism administred according to the lawful form of the Catholick Church that is with water in the name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost though by an Heretical Minister were invalid and therefore to be iterated Cyprian with other Eastern Bishops affirmed that there is but one Baptism which is not to be found out of the Catholick Church The other orthodox Bishops determined that baptism which an heretical Minister administred according to the form prescribed by Christ and practised by the Church was valid and not to be iterated So that indeed neither Cyprian nor the rest of that Councel did maintain rebaptizing but held that there could be no true or valid baptism out of the Catholick Church or that it was not baptism which Hereticks administred Against rebaptizing Cyprian speaks clearly L. I. Ep. 12. on that John 4. 14 applying it to baptism Which saith he is once received and not again iterated And in the Canons of the Apostles there is a severe caution against rebaptizing If any Bishop or Elder shall again baptize him who had truly received baptism let him be deposed 2. We must distinguish between Hereticks as hath been said whereof some are such as that though they err in some fundamental point or points yet they hold the true form of baptism Some so erre concerning the holy Trinity as that in such errour they cannot have with them the true form and essence of baptism Now there may be true baptism administred by the first sort and such as are baptized by them returning to the true Church must repent but not to be rebaptized But those who were pretended to be baptized by the second sort as Arians denying the Deity of Christ or those Pneumatomachi Eunomius and others blasphemous against the holy Ghost in case they came to the true Church they were to be baptized because there can be no true baptism where the essentials thereof are wanting as the element and the word constituting the Sacrament to wit In the Name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost Baptizing such as have not so been baptized is no rebaptizing seeing the first pretended was truly none Otherwise the ancient Church did not rebaptize a repenting Apostate though he had fallen into the errours of Arrians Eunomians or the like after that he had been baptized by the true Church and the reason thereof was that which Chemnitius well observed as on Gods part the Covenant which he made with the circumcised Israelites remained firm and ratified unto which after their falling into sin they returned by repentance so the Corinthians and Galathians having fallen were recalled by S. Paul and remitted to the promise and consolation of their baptism formerly received Therefore as Circumcision was not so ought not baptism to be iterated CHAP. VII Protestants arguments against the dangerous practice of Rebaptizing 1. BAptism is the Sacrament of Regeneration by our implantation into Christ. But we cannot be twice regenerate for regeneration presupposeth a precedent natural birth which can be but one nor can we be more often regenerate or born a new then born naturally therefore we ought not to be twice baptized The major is evident Tit. 3. 5. The minor is also evident in reason Add hereto that whereas we are by nature children of wrath Ephes. 2. 3. enemies to God Rom 5. 10. and so without a new birth aliens from the Kingdom of God John 3. 5. but being implanted into Christ by baptism we become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a new creature 2 Cor. 5. 17. Gal. 6. 15. Now as one and the same creature can be but once created except that either the created essence of a man is destroyed by sin which the sin of the Devil cannot do or that a man may have pluralities of essences by several creations of one and the same person which no reason can suppose of neither can we have any more then one regeneration Therefore we ought to be but once baptized 2. Gods faithfulness in his Covenant sealed cannot become void by mans infidelity neither is his Covenant of peace momentany but perpetual which is sealed in baptism so that still we may return unto it by true repentance See Isa. 54. 10. and so they who sinned after baptism though notoriously and scandalou●● were not rebaptized by the ancient Church but upon their repentance received again into holy communion and it is truly observed by some that baptism being once received confirmeth and assureth the penitent of their sins remission and that the efficacy and vertue thereof extendeth it self to all our life and therefore neither ought it to be iterated nor deferred unto the end of our lives as if it so only cleansed men from their sins upon condition that they never fall into any sin after their baptism received which cannot be in this frail state of flesh and blood subject to so many temptations and innate infirmities Therefore after the Apostle had shewed us how being implanted into the similitude of Christs death and resurrection we ought

infants have right to the holy Cōmunion as they have to strong meat but not a capacity as such or while they are infants and God hath in express terms restrained the Lords supper to those who can actually apprehend remember declare forth Christs death 1 Cor. 11 26. which because infants cannot do we give them not the Communion Secondly God hath denounced a grievous curse or punishment against any that shall presume without due examination of himself to eat of that bread drink of that cup but not so concerning Baptism it being the seal of our new-birth and reception into the visible Church and Covenant which hath no such condition annexed as may justly exclude Infants in respect of any present non-performance thereof But the Lords Supper is the Seal of our gro●●h in grace and spirituall strength instituted for the confirmation of our admittance into and our continuance in the Church of Christ whose death and passion for our redemption we thereby shew forth and commemorate for our spirituall perfection nourishment and strengthening in faith and other graces of his Spirit for our assurance that God having once received us into his favour will continue his mercy to us in Christ By these disparities the invalidity of the Pleaders Argument may appear And if it were true which he further saith that the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the sanction c. yet the wisdom of God is able and hath declared this difference in holy Scripture and the same can shew more then the wit of man can discern and hath shewed more then the learned Pleader doth or will understand who I conceive doth not yet know all that the wit of man or all the world can inform him of but is it not better even for those who have been in the Mount with God to cast the veil of modest humility over those excellencies which they have received and with which they shine to others admiration then to ostent them to the contempt of others The Apostle of Christ was rap't up into the third Heaven and yet professed we know in part and we prophesie in part 1 Cor. 13. 9. But you further say Since the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion c. That which you said a little before They are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither to wit baptize infants or give them the Comunion as those that understood the Obligation to be Parallel we may very well believe and wish that either of them may prove honest hereafter But to that which you say That the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion I answer 1. with Tertullian That is of the Lord and true which was first delivered but that is extraneous and false which is afterward received in And with Cyprian We ought not to heed what some before us have thought was to be done but what Christ did who was before all for we ought not to follow the custom of men but the truth of God 2 Your own rule must binde you though it cannot others who consent not thereto they who reject tradition when 't is against them must not pretend it at all for them pag. 237. Numb 25 3 It is considerable in that custome of the church as some other incoveniences which Augustine saith It is saith he one thing which we teach and another which we endure one thing which we are enjoyned to command and another thing which we are commanded to amend and untill we amend we are compelled to endure it And again who is eaten with the zeal of Gods house why he that endeavoureth and desireth to amend all that he sees amisse he resteth not if he cannot amend it he endureth it he sigh's the grain is not tossed out of the floor it endures the chaff that it may enter into the granary when the chaff is winnowed out 4 We adhere not so to tradition that we universally receive all that which was done or said of old things delivered by some but not generally received by the Church we esteem but superstructions of particular men or superseminations which possibly may spread farre as many pernicious opinions have done yet no sober man ever took them for Apostolicall or so much as Ecclesiasticall traditions we neither reject any tradition which appeareth to be Apostolicall if not peculiar to their times or suited peculiarly to certain times places or persons nor do we rashly receive any tradition for such except we are certain that the Scripture determineth nothing against it or where strong consequence from thence justifieth it 5 We conceive Augustines rule herein to be good In those things saith he concerning which divine Scripture determineth nothing certainly the custome of Gods people or institution of our ancestors are to be held for a law otherwise endlesse contention will arise also we must beware that the calm of charity be not clouded by the storm of contention 6 We will not rashly dissent from reverend antiquity wherein it dissenteth not from the truth we love peace with all who hold that in fundamentalls at least and therefore will follow Augustin's advice in that he piously saith concerning his reader where saith he he knows his errour let him return to me where mine let him recall me our rule being that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11 1. be yee followers of me even as I also am of Christ more no good man will require nor render lesse to Ancestors 7 Lastly we say that the Scripture which you cite Joh. 6. 53. except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood you have no life in you is not spoken concerning a Sacramentall but a spirituall feeding and although * some of the Jesuites and other Papists contend against us herein yet ●● some of the most sober of them acknowledge that those words are not to be understood concerning eating or receiving the Lords super which ours generally maintain you might do your self right to joyn with us and not with the most eager Jesuites concerning the spirituall feeding of infants to eternall life by the merit of Christ applyed to them for their Union with him and salvation in and by him we willingly accord the manner of effecting by the secret power of the holy Ghost we enquire not after because it is not revealed but for the reasons alleaged we give them not the communion Next you say If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate infants which shall be equally disgracefull c That would be a rare invention indeed but if to call Anabaptists Anabaptists be just why find you fault with it if evill or unjust why consult you how to imitate it by way of revenge is it not a shame to be such as we are or may well be ashamed to be

women not only under the Law but now also have and ever will have for ought you can say the same incapacity of circumcision what makes this to conclude childrens incapacity of baptism this is to argue à genere ad genus though women had not a capacity of that signe they have a capacity of baptism infants had then a right to that whereof they had a capacity let them have so still and the controversie is ended You further say The gift of the holy Ghost was ordinarily given by imposition of hands and that after baptism By this it appears that your foregoing argument was fallacious you intending the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost which we pretend not to and what is this dispute to us now or to the present question seeing they are long since ceased But beware your lying too near a wind and mentioning crisme or confirmation and sanctifying the holy Apostles displease not your clyents and you be taken for an ambodexter But you say After all this lest these arguments should not ascertain their cause they fall on complaing against God c. Tell true and shame the devil where to whom when which of all the reformed Churches ever did so We clearly affirm that God is ever and alike to be believed whether by signes or by words which signifie his will we say not that God did more for the children of the Jews but that your peevishness denying children baptism would have it seem so Do we then complain against God when we complain of the Anabaptists abridging children of that which God hath allowed them How vain and ma●tious is this calumny of yours But you say He made a covenant of spiritual promises on his part and spiritual and reall services on ours What are these real services and whose if of children what can they as such perform but you say this pertains to children when they are capable but made with them assoon as they are alive that is in the mothers womb what this this covenant so the words seem to import nay but undeniably Gods covenant and spiritual promises on his part presently belong to them who shall be saved for many of them presently die or mean you by● this spiritual and real services on our part belong to children when they are capable Surely then they cannot have this covenant made with them as soon as they are born otherwise then by baptism because for the present they can perform nothing real If you mean spiritual and real services of parents in relation to their covenanted infants as such they cannot yet teach them they can only present them to the Church that the publick seal of Gods covenant being set to them they may according to their true interest in her external communion be thereby marked and known for parts and members of the same and this indeed pertaineth to children when they are capable that is as soon as they are born That which you infer to shew a disparity between Christian infants and the Jews babes is frivolous for thoug there appear some shew of difference in circumstance as the particular promise of the inheritance of Canaan c. yet for substance there is none there being as real a promise of blessings to Christians and their children in every kind for godliness hath the promise of this life and that which is to come and the present seal of faith marketh them for Gods peculiar people the effect whereof being wrought and perfected by the spirit of Jesus in their regeneration the work is done in them and no otherwise was it in the Jews children for he is not a Jew which is one outwardly neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh but circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit Rom. 2. 28 29. Col 2. 11 ●2 and the Jewish children were no otherwise sealed then into the same faith of Jesus nor otherwise saved then by faith in him neither less saved then we and our child●en This say you is the greatest vanity in the world What vanity you say to affirm that unless this mercy be consigned by baptism as good not at all in respect of us because we want the comfort of it This is the vanity well let it be so and let them own it that will I known not whom you mean I am sure there appears vanity enough in your following assertion and reason offered for proof Shall not say you this promise this word of God be of sufficient truth certainty and efficacy to cause comfort unless we tempts God and require a signe of him Yes Gods promise is of sufficient truth and certaine efficacy thereto therefore we baptize our children and it had been sufficient on Gods part and it must have been on ours had he not seen good further to confirm us by a seal set to his promise or had he not required more of us as our duty and a condition and seal of his covenant with us our children for as Augustine saith how much available even without the visible Sacrament of baptisme is that which the Apostle saith Rom. 10. 10. with the heart man believeth unto righteousnesse and with the mouth Confession is made unto salvation was declared in the penitent thiefe but then it is invisibly fulfilled when not any contempt of religion but a point or moment of necessity excludeth or preventeth baptisme for it might have seem'd much more superfluous in Cornelius and his friends to be baptized who had already received the gift of the holy Ghost then in the thiefe yet they were baptized and in that act the Apostolicall authority is extant as also the necessity of obeying God in his ordinance now how childish and perverse is that cavill unlesse we tempt God and require a signe of him Do you account obedience to God and his holy ordinances to be a tempting of God is bringing children to Christ which he commandeth and that by baptisme which you confesse is the ordinary inlet into the kingdome of heaven to require a signe of him or is it to receive a signe of him by his own appointment and what certainity of comfort could we concieve if on the contrary we should wilfully disobey neglect and contemn Gods ordinance as your clients do were it not rather to tempt God if as much as in us lies we should shut up the doore and inlet into his kingdome against infants man can do no more to shut them out then by denying them baptisme 't is true that God can and often doth save them without our ministry as when death preventeth our baptising them but to neglect the ordinary means of our own or others salvation and to put it on the extraordinary power of God is to tempt God if I should ask you why you eat or feed your infants seeing God can preserve you and them without food you would easily say to neglect the ordinary means were to tempt God so 't is here