Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	bishop_n	lord_n	thomas_n	4,086	5	8.4988	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78433	A sober ansvver, to a serious question. Propounded by Mr. G. Firmin minister of the church in Shalford in Essex. viz. Whether the ministers of England are bound, by the Word of God, to baptise the children of all such parents, which say, they believe in Jesus Christ: but are grosly ignorant, scandalous in their conversation, scoffers at godliness, and refuse to submit to church-discipline, the negative is not sufficiently defended. Which may serve also as an appendix to the diatribe with Mr. Hooker, lately published, concerning the baptisme of infants, of parents not confœderate. By Daniel Cavvdrey pastour of the church at Great Billing in Northampton-shire. Licensed, printed, and entred, according to order.	Cawdrey, Daniel, 1588-1664.	1652 (1652)	Wing C1636; Thomason E683_23; ESTC R206820	21,614	39

2. p. 104 109. c. But if people will be perverse and obstinate at their perill be it they can as easily cast off the cords of his Explicite Covenant as Sampson did his wythes yet pag. 17. he sayes How can this discipline be exercised without a free consent unto it being this Church-relation is not natural as father and child but free when to my apprehension he requires an Explicite Covenant to make or admit a member as Independents do The truth is as I conceive that relation of Christians one to another is not free but after a sort natural and flowes as natural from the Covenant of Christianity or Regeneration as that of father and child brother and brother from generation as is more fully discoursed and cleared in the Tract aforesaid Ibid pag. 125. 126. c. I shall not trouble his Epistle any further but make bold to make some Animadversions upon his book which may serve as an Appendix to the Diatribe there expressed There are lately Printed for Christopher Meredith at the Crane in Pauls Church-yard These Books MAster Elton on the ten Commandments and Lords Prayer formerly burnt by the Bishops Doctor Dons late Dean of Pauls Sermon at the Lady Danvers funeral with verses of Mr. George Herbert c. 12. Viccarsii Manuductio ad artem Rhetoricam 12. A Letter of Mr. Thomas Sheppards late of New England sent to R. Harlakenden of Essex Esquire removing four hindrances in Gods Worship First how one may be rid of an earthly carnal heart sold to the contentment of the Creature Secondly of a proud heart which is unwilling to seek after to wait upon or to stoop unto the Commands of God Thirdly of a self-seeking heart that eyes it self especially in the best duties Fourthly of a slighty heart of Gods hands in mercies and Judgements The state of the Saints departed Gods Cordial to Comfort the Saints remaining alive a Sermon Preached at the Funeral of Mistress Smithee Harlakenden wife of William Harlakenden Esquire by R. Josselin The Christian Centurions Observations advices and Resolutions concerning matters Divine and Moral by Philip Skippon Serjeant Major General c. Also two other books formerly published by the same Author viz. First A Collection of Promises Secondly A true Treasure or thirty holy vowes c. A learned and full answer to a Treatise entituled the Vanity of childish Baptisme c. by William Cook Minister of Moxall in Warwickshire Vindiciae Redemptionis in the Fannings and Siftings of Samuel Oates his exposition upon Matth. 13.44 by John Stalham Pastour of the Church at Terling in Essex The Sum of a conference at Terling in Essex concernning Infants Baptisme John Geeres Reply to Doctor Boughen touching the Coronation oath two books of his in defence of Infants Baptisme in answer to Mr. Tombs Objections A Sober ANSVVER TO A Serious Question Propounded and Published by G. F. Whether the Ministers of England are bound by the Word of God to Baptize the children of all such Parents which say they believe in Jesus Christ but are grosly Ignorant Scandalous in their conversations Scoffers at Godliness and refuse to submit to Church-Discipline The Negative is not sufficiently defended BEfore I fall upon the Discourse it self I shall take leave a little to consider the state of the question And I desire to be satisfied by the Reverend Authour whether he intend that all these qualifications in his question must meet joyntly in one man or he meaneth it separately and singly of any one of them as sufficient to debarr his children Baptisme If joyntly that all these must concur he will hardly or very rarely find all these together in one man For a man may be grosly ignorant and yet not of a scandalous conversation Or very Scandalous and yet very knowing or both those and yet no professed s●orner of Godliness Or none of all those yet not being convinced of the necessity of it refuse to submit to Church discipline If any one of these singly will strip him of that priviledge then the last alone will do it viz. Refusal to submit to Church-discipline be a man never so knowing and godly in conversation And then I pray what differs he from the Independents in their Explicite Church-covenant This is the Resolution of M. Hooker whom our Author follows in most of his discourse Survey part 3 p. 11. The pinch of the question lyes here whether persons Non-confoederate and so in our sence not members of the Church do entitle their children to the seal of Baptisme their parents though godly being yet unwilling to come into Church-fellowship And he resolves it Negatively as our Authour does upon his grounds partly and chiefly Inconsist of Independ way c. part 3. But in that special sence the Diatribe is ready to give him satisfaction as for the present question before us Mr. Hooker rejects it as out of question for thus he writes ibid. Its not then the question whether wicked members while they are tolerated sinfully in the Church they and their children may partake of the priviledges for this is beyond question nor do I know nor never heard it denyed by any of o●rs Had he lived till this time he might have known and heard of some of ours if not still theirs this question negatively resolved and earnestly though modestly defended And to say the truth this question springs from his and seems a reasonable consequence thereof for if one refusing onely to submit to Church-discipline loses this priviledge of Ordinances for himself and his be he never so knowing and godly it seems very reasonable that such as were grosly ignorant and scandalous in their conversation c. should much more justly be debarred the same If it is said these are Church-members though sinfully tolerated but so are not those that Refuse to come into Church-fellowship I answer 1. These are Church members also at least of the Catholike Church as more then professours onely true believers and godly and therefore are we think unjustly debarred the priviledg of Ordinances for themselves and theirs not being convinced of the necessity of their Church-government as is largely discoursed in the place aforesaid 2. We may suppose easily that some that were from their Infancy Church-members yet growing up are scrupled in the point of Church-discipline and so not willing to submit to it These also are yet tolerated I say not sinfully in the Church and so ought not to be debarred the former Priviledges by his own principles 3. Our Author that hath started a new question out of question with Mr. Hooker oftentimes professes as we shall hear anon that the worst of these tolerated sinfully while tolerated have right to Ordinances for themselves and theirs And so the controversie were at an end This principle answers and overthrows all his Arguments But because the former Diatribe with Mr. Hooker may receive light and strength from this Contest I shall take into