Selected quad for the lemma: grace_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
grace_n	child_n	covenant_n	seal_n	2,756	5	9.5397	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62859	An addition to the Apology for the two treatises concerning infant-baptisme, published December 15, 1645 in which the author is vindicated from 21 unjust criminations in the 92 page of the book of Mr. Robert Baille, minister of Glasgow, intituled Anabaptisme and sundry materiall points concerning the covenant, infants-interest in it, and baptisme by it, baptism by an unbaptized person, dipping, erastianism and church-government, are argued, in a letter, now enlarged, sent in September 1647, to him / by John Tombes . ..	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1652 (1652)	Wing T1794; ESTC R11324	36,211	48

in Mr. Edwards his Gangr●n● upon whose credit Honorius Reggius hath blazed them in a Latin writing and in Mr. Bayly's Disswasives have made many men undeservedly odious and such reports vented in pulpits upon their credit have been the bellowes that did blow the fire of warre which hath to the rejoicing of Malignants and grief of godly persons wasted your and our Countrey and Mr. Cotton of N. E. thought meet to print an Apology for himself and the Churches there to vindecate himself from Mr. Bayly's aspersions in one part of his disswasive I have thought it necessary to vindicate my self in this and have sent it to you being one that I conceive cordially affected with the breaches that are among the Godly studious of truth and peace that you may impart this as you may opportunely to some Synod in your Countrey and indeavour as conscience and Covenant I think bind you in the most prudent way you can to take of the injury of Mr Bayly and which is the chief thing I aim at and humbly desire that there may be some Course taken effectually to prevent such injurious misrepresentations of mens tenents and practises in pulpits and presses that so if the Lord shall vouchsafe such a mercy dissenters at last may in a calme and amicable way debate differences to the healing of our breaches which is the prayer and aime of Lemster in Herefordshire Decem. 4. 1651. Your Fellow-Servant and Brother in Christ JOHN TOMBES The Contents Sect. 1. OF the first Crimination That I spoile all infants of all interest in the Covenant of Grace Sect. 2. Of the second Crimination That I make Circumcision to the Jewes a seale only of earthly and temporall priviledges Sect. 3. Of the third Crimination That I 〈◊〉 the Jewish infants all right to the New Covenant 〈◊〉 they become ●●●tuall believers from whence occasion is taken to shew the insufficiency of Mr. Gerees shift in expounding the words of the Directory the promise is made to believers and their seed and the insufficiency of Mr. Marshals proof of Connexion between the seal and the Covenant from Gods institution and Mr. Bailies from the nature of the terms Sect. 4. Of the fourth Crimination That I give a power to unbaptized persons to baptize others Sect. 5. Of the fifth Crimination That I make Apologies for the worst of the Anabaptists Sect. 6. Of the sixth Crimination Inveighing against the first Reformers Sect. 7. Of the seventh Crimination Inveighing against the Assembly at Westminster Sect. 8. Of the eighth Crimination Inveighing against the Church of Scotland Sect. 9. Of the nineth Crimination Inveighing against Mr. Marshall Sect. 10. Of the tenth Crimination Of inveighing against Mr. Thomas Goodwin Sect. 11. Of the eleventh Crimination Of Invectives against others Sect. 12. Of the twelfth Crimination That I esteem baptisme an unnessary rite Sect. 13. Of the thirteenth Crimination That I am carel●sse of my own baptism Sect. 14. Of the fourteenth Crimination That I am unwilling to joine with any of the Anabaptists Churches and they unwilling to baptize non-members Sect. 15. Of the fifteenth Crimination My allowing frequent rebaptization Sect. 16. Of the sixteenth Crimination That I make it lawfull for persons unbaptized to partake of the Lords Supper Sect. 17. Of the seventeenth Crimination That I am a Compleat Erastian wherein reason is given of my doub● that in Scripture no such juridical Excommunication is appointed as is now contended for Sect. 18. Of the eighteenth Crimination That I avow no scand●-lous professor ought to be kept from the Lords Table Sect. 19. Of the nineteenth Crimination of me That I hold no censure of excommunication Sect. 20. Of the twentieth Crimination That I hold Christ hath not appointed any particular government for his Church Sect. 21. Of the one and twentieth Crimination That I hold that the Government of the Church belongs to the Magistrate only Sect. 22. Of my new way and boldnesse Sect. 23. Of my silence concerning DIPPING and of the novelty and insufficiency of SPRINKLING instead of BAPTIZING Sect. 24. The Conclusion requiring reparation of the wrong done to me by Mr. Bayly To the reverend and worthy Master ROBERT BAYLIE Minister at GLASGOW in SCOTLAND SIR IN your Book intituled ANABAPTISMI you charge me falsly in these following Accusations chap. 4. page 92. you say in these following things he flies as high as any civil and discreet Anabaptist I have met with 1. In spoyling Christian infants not only of Baptisme but of all interest in the Covenant of Grace And in the margine and Table in the end of your book you say He spoyles all infants of all interest in the Covenant of Grace 2. In making Circumcision a seal to the Jews onely of earthly and temporal priviledges 3. In denying to Jewish infants all right to the new Covenant till in their riper years they become actuall believers SECT I. Of the first Crimination that I spoile all Infants of all interest in the Covenant of Grace To prove these accusations which you so expresly charge me with and tend to make your adversary odious which it seems you made your businesse and not to clear truth you referre the Reader to the letters A A page 110. where you cite one passage of my Apology page 64. which doeth directly deny the first accusation and where the passage of Mr. Marshall you alledge for proof of it a most unreasonable way to prove a mans position by his Antagonists conceit of it as that Calvin made God the author of sin because Bellarmin accused him of it is sufficiently answered yea in my Post script to Mr. Blake in the end of my Apology Sect. 22. I charge Master Blake of unjust crimination of me in this and challenge Mr. Marshall Mr. Vines Mr. Calamy and now your self to make good that charge if you can And yet you are not asham●d to say pag. 113. All our adversaries deny to all infants all right in God all interests in his promises and Covenant as much as they do to Turks and Pagans And chap. 4. page 89 90. after you had charged this accusation on others in the close you say This makes them uncertain what to say of infants dying before conversion Some save them all which is contrary to what you say page 133 others incline to the damnation of them all others professe the uncertainty of the thing whether infants before their conversion be within the Kingdome of Satan or that of God And for proof of this last you referre the Reader to the letter K and there you alledge my words in my Apology page 64 66. which speak not at all of the uncertainty of the thing you were speaking of to wit the salvation or damnation of infants dying before conversion but the contrary saying expresly That every infant is either in the visible Kingdome of God or of Satan that is elect or reprobate And for the certainty of the subject I conceive neither you nor I

nor any on earth are certain what child of a Believer is elect or reprobate Sure I am Mr. Marshall in his Sermon page 48 saith Charity is not tyed to conclude certainly of any of them although in the beginning of his Sermon page 7. he would ground the salvation of all the infants of believers dying in their infancy on Gods promise to be the God of Believers and of their seed Besides my words in my Apology page 64 66. which you alledge speak onely of infants belonging visibly to the Kingdome of the Devil or God and I still deny that they belong to either visibly untill they make their profession according to the constitution of the visible Church of Christians which it behoved you to disprove and not to misreport my words as you do SECT. II. Of the second Crimination that I make Circumcision to the Jewes a Seal onely of earthly and temporall priviledges AS for your second accusation you bring onely Mr. Marshals words which onely declare his suspicion yet so unreasonable and groundless as one might wonder any man should have the face to draw me into a suspicion of that the contrary whereof is delivered in my Exercitation page 2. and very often in my Exercitation and Examen of his Sermon in which I still make the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. which Circumcision confirmed to be a mixt Covenant containing both spirituall and temporal promises And yet you expresly accuse me of the contrary against my plain words prove your charge onely by Master Marshals suspition expressed in this manner What your meaning is in this expression I cannot tell it hath an untoward look as if the meaning were c. which was unreasonable in him to raise such a jealousie of me for citing onely a passage in that so approved Treatise of Cameron that learned Scot de triplici foedere th. 78. which was also much approved at Heidelberg by the publisher of his works according to an order in a Synod of the French Churches as to be stiled in Cameron's Icon accurratissimae theses and they are now translated into English by Mr. Samuel Bolton and printed at the end of his treatise of the true bounds of Christian freedom with this commendation too precious to be any longer concealed or hid under the shell of an unknown tongue And yet these words were cited by me so warily page 4. of my Exercitation as that I say and if we may believe Mr. Cameron yet Mr. Marshall had so much ingenuity as to say of me in that place page 98. of his Defence It is too grosse a thing to imagine of God and so expresly contrary to the word that untill you own it I will not impute it to you which words you leave out in your allegation against me from Mr. Marshall whether needlesly or fraudulently I leave it to your own conscience to consider SECT. III. Of the third crimination That I deny to the Jewish infants all right to the new Covenant till they become actuall believers from whence occasion is taken to shew the insufficiency of Mr. Gerees shift in expounding the words of the Directory the promise is made to believers and their seed And the insufficiency of Mr. Marshals proof of Connexion between the seal and Covenant from God's institution and Mr. Baylies from the nature of the termes AS for the third accusatio● you bring not a word to prove it yet you often charge sometimes all your adversaries as in chap. 5. pag. 133. sometimes the principall of them among whom I assure my self you reckon me with it as when you say pag. 151. ch. 5. The ground of this reason is granted by the Principal of our adversaries who avow their exclusion of infants from baptisme upon this ground mainely that they believe they are excluded from the Covenant of Grace remission of sins the saving grace of the Spirit till in the years of d●scretion they be brought actually to believe which thing I do expresly deny in my Exercitation pa. 24. with obhorrency from it and Examen page 150. and page 109. I say it were a madnesse to go about to put them out of the Covenant of Grace You are often told in my Examen as page 29 38 110 154. and many more places that I avow exclusion of infants from baptism upon this ground mainly that there is no Institution of it gathered by precept or Apostolical example and therefore it is will-worship As for a command of Circumcision I conceive it is a brogated and so can be no rule now about Baptism and the maintaining that a command of Circumcision sti●l binds us as Mr. Marshall doth in his Sermon page 35 36 37. is the most manifest heresie of any as being condemned in the first Councel by the Apostles Acts 15. 28. 21. 25. Indeed to shew the weaknesse of Mr. Marshalls argument thus framed The infants of believing parents are within the Covenant of Grace therefore they are to partake of the seale of the Covenant which in Mr. Marshals language is all one with baptisme I did say that I did conceive the antecedent of his Enthymeme not true Examen Part 3. Sect. 1. page 39. conceiving that as your practise is so Mr. Marshall intended to defend this conclusion All the infants born of a believer by profession are to be baptized according to ordinary rule and so I expressed my selfe in my Examen Part 3. Sect. 15. Exercit. page 1. and elsewhere and then his antecedent must be thus All the infants born of a believer are within the Covenant of grace or else his argument is manifestly inconcludent if we would prove all infants of believers are to be baptized because some onely are in the Covenant of grace Now I know not how to conceive that Mr. Marshall meant any other then the Covenant of saving grace of which I have given reasons not yet answered by Mr. Marshall in my Examen page 45. and could adde more if it were needful and that the believers infants were in the covenant of saving grace in that God hath made that promise to them And in this sense I denied this proposition All the infants of a believer are within the Covenant of Grace and disproved it so fully in my Examen part 3. Sect. 4. that Mr. Marshall renounceth that proposition in that sense page 116. of his Defence and then betakes himself to this shift to understand it of the outward covenant as he calls it in which sense I have proved in my Apology Sect. 10. his first argument to be meer trifling and his speeches to be full of equivocation or ambiguity which I have also further proved in my Postscript in answer to Mr. Bl●ke Sect. 6. Mr. Geree being inforced to deny that proposition in that sense and being pressed by me with the words of the Directory that the promise is made to believers and their seed he shifted it off in his Vindiciae paedobaptismi page 13. by interpreting the

words of the Directory thus This is to be presumed by men out of charity till they discover the contrary that all the infants of believers have the inward graces of the Covenant which I proved could not be the sense of the words of the Directory in my Apol●gy Sect. 9. especially from the term made which imports Gods act not mans charitable presumption Now what doth Mr. Geree reply hereto In his Vindiciae Vindic●arum chap. 4. page 16. he alters the words of the Directory thus That the promise is to believers and their seed leaving out the word made upon which my argument rested and then page 18. tells me the quaery is in what sense and in what respect children of b●lievers are said to be in the Covenant of Grace whereas the quaery is in what sense the Directory meant these words the promise is made to believers and their seed not in what sense either in Gen. 17. 7. or Rom. 9. 4. or Acts 3. 25. Children of Believers are said to be in the Covenant of grace And whereas Mr. Geree in the same book cha. 10. page 41. complains of my words in the Epistle Dedicatory of my Apology that the doctrine of the Directory is disavowed by two of my most eminent Antagonists meaning himself and Mr. Marshall I have and am further ready to justify that speech and if many of the Assembly have assured him in private that they intended the expressions questioned by me in no other sense then he expounded them I would have them know that either they must alter the words as Mr. Geree doth not reading them as they are printed and as Mr. Marshall in his Defence page 116. Mr. Geree Vindic. Paedobap page 13. reads them or else those Assembly men must make a new Dictionary for us to understand their language by afore any man that understands common English will understand them so And whereas he would have by this one Examination men iudge of all the rest I am contented with it provided that men by his superficial and shifting dealing in this judge of all the rest But to returne as I denyed the antecedent in Mr. Marshalls Enthymeme so I denied the consequence page 36. and did more then make some v●litatio● I proved by a just dispute that the proposition is not true All that are in the Covenant of Grace must be sealed and though Mr. Marshall page 92. of his Defence say somewhat to prove it from Gods will Gen. 17. 7 9 10 14. yet what is said there is only of circumcision nothing of baptisme and the word therefore upon which Mr. Marshalls proof rests is in the Hebrew {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} which may be and is translated otherwise as by the Tig●r●●es Et tu by Parreus Tu autem by Piscator Tu vere c. and the proposition is manifestly false in Mr. Marshalls sense yea he granted page 92 182. that the formal reason of their being circumcised was the command of God which I truely observed and proved in my Apology in the Epistle Dedicatory and in the Apology it self page 90. overthrows his argument from the Covenant to the seale which rests on this that such as received the initial seal received it because they were in the Covenant which are Mr. Marshalls words in his Defence page 92. you in your Anabaptisme chap. 5. page 132. say your proposition is grounded on the nature of the terms which you never go about to prove but dictate thus The Major Whoever have right to the chief promises of the New Testament they have right to the first Sacrament of the New Testament if the Lord have not put some impediment to their participation of that Sacrament is grounded on the nature of the terms of the preposition the chief promises of the New Testament and the first Sacrament this is the sign and seal that the thing signified The reason proceeds not from every thing signified to every sign but from the chief thing signified to the first signe Give me leave to tell you that I seldome meet with a passage that hath more absurdity then this of yours 1. You set not down right the terms of your own proposition which are not the chief promises of the New Testament and the First Sacrament but having right to the chief promises of the New Testament and having right to the First Sacrament if the Lord have not put some impediment to their participation of that Sacrament as if you had forgotten so soon or could not analyse your own proposition 2. You tell us this is the sign and seale that the thing signified as if this were the nature of the terms But what an illogical conceit is this Logicians call a reason from the nature of the terms when the terms are included the one in Conceptu quidditativo alterius so as that the one cannot be conceived without the other Now may not the chief promises of the New Testament be conceived without the first sign and seale Did not God make the chief promises of the New and Old Testament before ever any sign or seale was appointed much more before baptisme Did not God make the chief promise {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Tit. 1. 2. which we translate before the world began most rig●tly as I conceive Dr. ●wisse Vind● grat lib. 1. par 1. dig 2. cap. 5. referres to that in paradise Gen 3. 15. your own Mr. Dicksor either to that or to Gods promise to Christ afore the world was made all I meet with make it antecede any first signe or seal of the Old or New Testament Now how is there a connexion between terms from the nature of them whereof one may not only be conceived but be also existent both de facto and d●iure without the other If the terms were having the chief promises of the New Testament and having the First Sacrament yet there is no such connexion from the nature of the terms Innumerable may have and have the chief promises of the New Testament that have not the first Sacrament et vice versa Else you must hold worse positions then the Papists that none but baptized persons have or can have the chief promises of the New Testament and that every baptized person hath the chief promises of the New Testament There is lesse connexion from the nature of the terms between the having right to the chief promises of the New Testament having right to the First Sacrament of the New Testament For if you meane it of right before God thousands may have right in Gods election and covenant with Christ that are not in being that are in their mothers womb that are yet among infidels uncalled have these right to the First Sacrament If you mean it of right in facie Ecclesiae onely then I grant the proposition is true but your Minor hath clean another sense then your words and proofs import you conceived of it however this right comes