Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	body_n	bread_n	cup_n	14,611	5	9.8387	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47755	A religious conference between a minister and parishioner: concerning the practice of our orthodox Church of England in baptizing infants, and pouring water on their faces, or sprinkling them; and in confirming them by the bishop when they come of age to give an account of their faith. Proving all three lawful by the authority of the Holy Scriptures.	Leslie, Charles, 1650-1722.	1696 (1696)	Wing L1145; ESTC R213965	23,437	34

Days and Nights under Water to make the resemblance to Christ's Burial compleat and then they would have been Bury'd indeed 2. In Burying a Corps we are not wont to Dip them into the Earth which will not yield to them as Water does but to sprinkle Earth upon it 3. This Phrase must be taken Mystically as our Church expounds it that as Christ Died and Rose again for us so shou'd we who are Baptized Dye from Sin and Rise again unto Righteousness P. Have you any more places of Scripture to produce M. Yes Three more which you shall have in order Mat 19.14 where our Lord says of little Children whom St. Luke calls Infants Cap. 18.15 who were brought unto him for his Blessing and Prayers of such is the Kingdom of Heaven and then certainly we cannot deny Baptism to those Children to whom God will not deny Heaven P. But at this rate of arguing you must give them the Lord's Supper too as they did generally in the Church about a Thousand Years ago M. But there is not the same Reason for adminstring the one as there is the other Ordinance to Children 1. Because in that Command our Lord gives about Baptism John 3.5 the Word made use of to signifie the subjects thereof may be as well extended to Infants as to grown Persons 't is except one any one whether he be Man or Woman or Child be Born of Water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God but in the Command St. Paul gives about the Lord's Supper he says Let a Man examine himself and so let him Eat of that Bread and Drink of that Cup 1 Cor. 11.28 Let a Man c. the word signifies a Man of Understanding that can examine himself and discern the Lord's Body so that Infants may be baptiz'd pursuant to the former Command but they may not be permitted to Communicate pursuant to the latter P. But these Men will not understand that place of John to be spoken of our Christian Baptism M. They may understand things as they please and as their Interest leads them but it is plain the most Ancient and best Expositors have so understood the place and so it must be understood or else it will be hard for them to prove we must Baptize with Water there being no mention of Water in Christ's Commission or rather inlargement of it to his Disciples to Baptize all Nations Mat. 28.19 And therefore I wonder at the Confidence of * Mr. K. Gold refin'd p. 6. one of them who says this last is the only place where Water-baptism is mention'd when 't is certain it is not there mention'd at all the words are Go ye therefore and Teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost 't is not there said Baptize them with Water any more than it s said Baptize Infants and if Water had been expressed to what purpose does that Author muster up eight Arguments and spend so many Pages to prove Water must be impli'd and meant in Christ's Commission if it was mention'd there P. 'T is strange a Man shou'd take so much pains to prove Water must be intended in such a place of Scripture if it was there expressed M. 'T is no stranger than true but he is loath such a needful thing as Water shou'd be omitted in Christ's Comission to Baptize and be only imply'd lest on the same account the baptizing of Infants shou'd be also imply'd in it P. That may be the reason why he is so presumptuous to say Water-baptism is mention'd Mat. 28.18 tho' he tells an untruth in saying it but have you any other Reason why Children tho' they may be Baptiz'd may not receive the Lord's Supper M. Yes because Baptism is an Initiating Sacrament and so like Milk proper only for Babes in Christ but the Lord's Supper is a strengthening and confirming Sacrament and so like stronger Meat proper for such as are grown to be perfect Men in Christ Jesus P. But Christ does not say of these Children but of such as these is the Kingdom of Heaven M. But if Men shall enter into Heaven for being like Children Children who are set for Mens Pattern cannot be excluded from it and if Children have a Right to the Heavenly Inheritance they cannot in Justice be deny'd Baptism which is as it were God's Signing and Sealing the Deed by which it is convey'd P. This seems unreasonable but what is your other Proof M. It is 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your Children unclean but now are they holy Where the Apostle in all likelihood intends a real or foederal and not a Matrimonial Holiness i. e. only a Legitimacy to be in Believers Children otherwise there cou'd be no Lawful Marriages among Heathens nor their Children lawfully begotten contrary to Heb. 13.4 Marriage is honourable in all c. and this reason of our Exposition the Opposers thereof do well to omit because I doubt they are not able to Answer it P. But if foederal Holiness be here meant then the Unbelieving Wife may lay a claim to Baptism as well as the Children on the account of her Husband's Faith M. No there is a double difference in the Case 1. Because there is not the same reason a Believer's Unbelieving Wife shou'd be Covenantly Holy as that his Children shou'd be so Almighty God having ingag'd himself in Covenant to such Children which he has not done to such a Wife the Tenor of which Covenant runs thus Gen. 17.7 I will establish my Covenant between me and thee and thy Seed after thee in their Generations for an everlasting Covenant to be a God to thee and to thy Seed after thee And this Covenant which God made with Abraham is still in Force and made with the Believing Gentiles and their Children by Virtue of which a Covenant relation redounds to the Children of a Believing Father but not of the Unbelieving Mother the Covenant is establish'd with Believers and their Seed and not with their Wives that are Idolaters and so St. Peter expounds this Covenant Acts 2.39 The promise is to you and to your Children there is no mention in either place of Unbelieving Wives neither are they included in the Covenant of Grace as their Believing Husbands and Children are as for instance when Solomon Marry'd Pharaoh's Daughter she continuing a Heathen still had no benefit of the Abrahamical Covenant as her Husband and Children if he begat any by her had they were both within the Covenant tho' she was out of it In like manner is it with a Believing Christian Husband he and his Children are Covenantly Holy when his Unbelieving Wife is not so but only Civilly Holy 2. The Wife is able and therefore ought to make Profession of her Faith before she is Baptiz'd the Children are not able to Profess their Faith and therefore may be Baptiz'd without it And this distinction they must allow because they have made

Man wou'd Lend a considerable Sum of Money but he would have one or more Sureties to be bound with the Principal for the surer Payment of the Debt And truly what is the Consequence of despising the Faith of God-fathers and God-mothers Why Men come next to despise the Parents Faith and will not Baptize the Child till he has actual Faith of his own and does publickly Profess it and from that they come to despise the very Ordinance of Baptism and to say if we have Faith there is no need of being Baptiz'd and so from Contemning the Orders of our Church they proceed at last so far as to justle the Ordinance it self out of Door P. I see there is no stop when Men forsake our Church and therefore I shall stick close to it only I wish that what our God-fathers and God-mothers thus Charitably undertake they wou'd be careful according to their Power Conscientiously to perform But I hasten to my second Query Whether Baptism Administred by Sprinkling or Pouring Water on the Face be a good Baptism P. Yes certainly it is and that for these Four Reasons 1. Not only because the Word Baptize is used in Scripture for Sprinkling and Washing some part of the Body as well as for Dipping the whole in Water as I have already prov'd But 2. Because the Vertue of the Ordinance of Baptism does not depend upon the quantity of Water any more than that of the Lords Supper depends upon the quantity of Bread and Wine receiv'd in it a little of each Element makes either Ordinance as valid as a great deal 3. Because if Baptism by Sprinkling or which the Opposers of it count all one by Dipping in Infancy be no Baptism then are not any of them Baptiz'd since they receiv'd their Baptism at first from some one of us that was either Sprinkled or Dipp'd in Infancy and therefore they shou'd take heed how they make void our Baptism lest thereby they destroy their own and prove themselves to be no Christians as they uncharitably esteem us 4. Because they themselves do not put the whole Body of the Baptiz'd Person under Water but he himself puts the one half at least under Water by wading into it and the Dipper puts the other and if their Baptism be Administred by casting the upper part of the Body under the Water Why may not we Administer Baptism by Pouring Water on the Face or Sprinkling it And why may not our Baptism thus Administred be as good as theirs P. I see no Reason but it is and much better But I proceed to my Third and last Query Whether Believers Children that are Baptiz'd in Infancy ought to be Baptiz'd again because we have some among us that are fallen into Scruples about it M. Let the Doubters be never so many this must not be done by no means For as there is but one Lord and one Faith so there is but one Baptism Eph. 4.5 And having receiv'd that one Baptism 't is dangerous for you to mock God in the repeating of it this is in effect to Condemn the Generation of God's Children to declare your selves to have been hitherto meer Heathens and to deny that Faith into which ye have been Baptiz'd Nevertheless the Foundation of God standeth sure having this Seal which ought not to be set twice to the same Covenant but yet this Baptism when they come of Age to give an Account of their Faith they may and ought to Ratify by Episcopal Confirmation and so by taking their Baptismal Vow upon themselves your Children at last shou'd make it their own Act and Deed And this is no Superstitious Ceremony but grounded on the Apostles Practice and plain Testimony of Scripture as Acts 8.14 15 16 17. where we find that after the whole Country of Samaria was Conver●ed by the Preaching of Philip and had received Baptism at his Hands the Apostles sent St. Peter and John thither to Confirm them which they needed not to have done if Philip who was one of the Seven Deacons mention'd Acts 6.5 cou'd have Confirm'd as well as he had Baptiz'd them but that being a Work peculiar to the Apostles and their Successors the Bishops of the Church two of that Sacred Order were Delegated on purpose for the doing of it and a Work 't is that is needful to be done not only to ratifie our Baptism and make it our own voluntary Fact but also to receive a greater degree of the ordinary and Saving Graces of the Holy Ghost now that the extraordinary and Miraculous Gifts are long since ceased for which reason the Author to the Hebrews reckons Confirmation among the Principles of the Doctrin of Christ and places it next to Baptism as a thing which in the course of the Gospel Dispensation ought next to follow it Heb. 6.2 where in the Foundation of the Christian Religion the Apostle sets Baptism and after that laying on of Hands which is Confirmation and * Calvins Instit lib. 4. cap. 19. Sect. 4. 13. de Confir Mr. Calvin himself was so far from Condemning the right use of this Ceremony as Superstitious that he wishes it were Restored and Practised in all Churches as it was in the Primitive Times and then I am sure the Practise of it cannot be condemned in our Church And he proves at large the Reasonableness and Benefits thereof by way of Preparation for the Lord's Supper and to Mr. Calvin's wish I shall add mine That Confirmation were as duly and conscientiously perform'd by all Bishops in ours as it was by the Apostles in their Days and that we Ministers wou'd every one of us prepare the Youth of our respective Parishes by Catechistical Instruction and that all our People wou'd take care to present them to the Bishop for this Apostolical Benediction P. I am glad to find this prov'd by Scripture and shall not slight Episcopal Confirmation any more but if I had never so many Children wou'd bring them all assoon as they are capable to be Confirm'd by the Bishop to receive the benefit of his Blessing and Prayers M. I wish all other Parents were of your mind and from Confirmation would bring their Sons and Daughters to the Lord's Supper and by their good Example and Perswasions prevail with them to continue the constant and devout use of that Holy Sacrament as often as they have an opportunity of receiving it and then I dare say there wou'd not be so much Division and Wickedness as there is in the World P. I cannot tell what others will do but Joshua's Resolution shall be mine As for me and my house we will serve the Lord Jos 24.15 M. 'T is bravely resolv'd and I pray God to give you the Grace to keep your good Resolution that it may not vanish as the Morning Dew or as the Cloud that passeth away P. Amen But these People have more Objections to make and more Answers to return to ours which I cannot think of and Ignorant