Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	bear_v	kingdom_n	water_n	5,792	5	6.5658	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76816	A moderate ansvver to these two questions 1. Whether ther [sic] be sufficient ground in Scripture to warrant the conscience of a Christian to present his infants to the sacrament of baptism. 2. Whether it be not sinfull for a Christian to receiv [sic] the sacrament in a mixt assembly. Prepared for the resolution of a friend, and now presented to the publick view of all, for the satisfaction of them who desire to walk in the ancient and long-approved way of truth and holiness. By T.B. B.D.	Blake, Thomas, 1597?-1657.	1644 (1644)	Wing B3148; Thomason E19_6; ESTC R12103	35,052	36

none of these texts are so easie to be understood Consequently it is more than probable that even this Custome of Baptising Infants was instituted and ordained in the Churches by th'Apostles and that according to the commandement of Christ Add unto all that hath been sayd that of St. Ambrose Sicut nunc in ecclesià manet Constitutio salvatoris dicentis Nisi quis renatus sucrit Ita sacratissimè in lege suerat praecautum ut natus puer nisi die circumcideretur octavo exterminaretur anima ejas de populo suo Ambros Epist 33. Ad Demetriadem p. 132. who setts these two as paralell the law of God touching Circumcision The soul who is not circumcised shall be cut off from his people and the Sanction of our Saviour Except a man bee born again of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God That this text is to be understood of Baptism as a mean and cause of Regeneration Not so principall as the Spirit yet so instrumentall to the Spirit that wher it may be had wee have no ground of Faith to beleev that the Spirit will work without it This is I say the constant and consentient judgement of all the Ancients and most of our modern Divines Some few only excepted who to avoid the Popish Tenet touching the absolute necessity of B●ptism did fly to a Metaphor And it may be confirmed for Truth out of the Text it self if we note well To whom and upon what occasion the words were spoken viz. To Nicodemus upon occasion of his timerousnes A Disciple of Christ he was willing to be but loth to prosess it openly by being baptised To him is the commination directed and therfore the words must be understood of Baptism Now then consider well whether ther be any ground sufficient to keep of Infants from this Ordinance Any ground I say which may secure the conscience of not having sinned against the souls of our Infants if by our default they dy without this seal of the Covenant and so loos the Benefit ther-of Have not Infants need of Christ and the Application of his Blood for the washing their souls from sinn Is ther any Hope of Salvation without Christ Is ther any other way revealed by which any may have part in Christ but by his Ordinances Is ther any other Ordinance by which Infants may be made partakers of Christ and the Covenant of Grace except Baptism Is ther any text of Scripture that hath peremptorily barred their Admittance Or is ther any thing required of them that must be baptised the want wher-of may be a barr to Infants Thou doubtest because ther is no text that mentioneth either Precept or Pattern and with-out a text thou darest not venture 'T is well But when ther is such a fearfull sentence that runns in such generall terms as doth comprehend Infants also and the Danger of Omission is so great Why art thou not more cautelous on the safer side Why dost thou not as well call for a direct text to barr them or a direct Reason from Scripture which may be equivalent Is ther any text that saith None may be baptised that do not Beleev or that saith Infants for want of Actuall faith may not be baptised Doest thou not see Infants Circumcised yea by commandment Doest thou not hear the text that saith Children are Holy And are ther so many Probabilities that by th'Apostles themselves Infants were baptised And wilt thou rather hazard the soul of thy child than lay hold upon the Covenant for thy seed nay for thy self and that only upon a fear and a doubt of unlawfulnes yea such a doubt that hath no surer ground either in Scripture or Reason to countenance it than the contrary resolution Here is then the Case if these Grounds formerly mentioned prove good as ther is great probability Then thou presenting thine Infant to Baptism building upon these grounds thou hast saved thy self and thine Infant but forbearing and keeping him of thou sinnest against thine own soul and his also Again if those grounds should not prove good yet hast thou not wronged thine Infant nor thine own self Because upon such probabilities as are next door to an Evident Demonstration thou hast done that which is intended for the Glory of God and the Good of the Infant Thou hast not transgressed against any Precept no nor any light of Reason which might justly with-hold thee from seeking the Good of thine Infant at the Hands of Christ in this Ordinance I conclude therfore That ther is sufficient Ground in Scripture to warrant the Conscience of a Christian to bring his Infants to this Sacrament of Baptism with a confident expectation to receiv Benefit by the same Nay more Ther is Ground enough to warrant the Accusation of Him that upon such uncertain Reasons shall forbear to present his Infant to this Sacrament of Initiation the Accusation I say of Him as one that sinneth against the Ordinance of God and trespasseth against the Soul of his Infant yea of Himself So much for the first Question THE SECOND QVESTION Quest Whether it be not sinfull for a Christian to receiv the Sacrament in a mixt Assembly A Mixt Assembly is that wherein good and badd are mingled together and make up one Congregation when the precious are not severed from the vile nor any difference put between the Holy and Prophane Now these good and badd these precious and vile are not to be reckoned in respect of their spirituall estate toward God i. e. as they are Elect or Reprobate Sincere or Hypocriticall but in respect of their Ecclesiasticall state in the ey and judgement of Men as they are in their courses and conversations in their Calling and Profession holy or profane These bad and vile are again to be considered A parte ante or A parte post viz. Either such as yet profess not themselves in Covenant with God by joining themselves to the Assembly of his servants Or such who having formerly had a standing in the Church do afterward run out into exorbitant courses to the scandall of Religion and so deserv to be separated from the Society of the Saints and by the Sentence of Excommunication cut of from the Assembly So that the Question is Whether if either of these be found in the Congregation and company of them that draw neer to the Table of the Lord to partake of those holy Mysteries either those who as yet have not been admitted or those that by the laws of Christ ought to be shutt out and sequestred whether their presence do make it unlawfull in point of conscience for a Christian to receiv the Sacrament among them so that if he do he is eo nomine therby desiled and become partaker of their sinn Where also for the better understanding of the Answer to this Question we are to note what is granted and what is questioned and demanded Things granted are these 1. Some are not to

A MODERATE ANSWER To these two QVESTIONS 1. Whether ther be sufficient Ground in Scripture to warrant the Conscience of a Christian to present his Infants to the Sacrament of Baptism 2. Whether it be not sinfull for a Christian to receiv the Sacrament in a mixt Assembly Prepared for the Resolution of a Friend And now Presented to the publick view of all for the satisfaction of them who desire to walk in the Ancient and long-approved way of Truth and Holiness By T.B. B.D. EPH. 4. VER 1.2.3 I therfore the Prisoner of the Lord beseech you that yee walk worthy of the Vocation wherwith ye are called with all LOWLINES and MEEKNES with long-suffering forbearing one another in LOVE endeavouring to keep the UNITY of the Spirit in the Bond of PEACE LONDON Printed by I.N. for Abel Roper at the signe of the Sunne over against S. Dunstans Church in Fleet-street 1645. YOu desire mine opinion touching these two Questions 1. Whether there be sufficient Ground in the Scripture to warrant the conscience of a Christian to present his Infants to the Sacrament of Baptism with an expectation of Benefit that may accrew unto them by it 2 Whether it be not sinfull for a Christian to receive the Sacrament in a mixt Assembly I shall endeavour to give Answer to them both for the satisfying of your conscience So that you turn not Conscience into Will and Iudgement into Affection The meek yea only the meek will the Lord guid in judgement and teach his w●y The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him he will shew them his Covenant Psal 25. The Answer to the first Question AS for the first I answer affirmatively There is sufficient Ground in that Scripture to warrant the conscience of a Christian to present his Infants to the Sacrament of Baptism with an expectation of Benefit that may accrew unto them by it wherein I observe two particulars 1. Whether the Parent so doing may be excused from sinning through an unwarrantable use and Application of Gods Ordinance 2. Whether he may in the use thereof expect any Benefit accrewing to the Infant These two are different in their own Nature and require either of them severall Grounds of Satisfaction For tho if it be sinfull for the Parent to bring his Infants to Baptism he can expect no good for them by it In as much as no man may expect good to come from what is evill yet tho it be not sinfull in the Parent it will not follow that Good may be expected by it But I hold the Affirmative part of Both to be the Truth of God The first Argument This I build upon the words of our blessed Saviour in Mat. 19.14 Suffer little children and forbid them not to come unto me Children The children here m●ntioned were Infants such as men do hold in their arms The text saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that He took them up in his arms c. Where we see that our Saviour was highly displeased with his Disciples who had rebuked the Parents for bringing their children to Christ Hence I argue Christs justification of what is done doth presuppose the lawfulnesse of the thing It was therfore lawfull for the Parents to bring their children to Christ to receiv his Blessing if lawfull for them so also for others for all Consequently even for us there is a sufficient warrant to present our Infants to Christ that they may receiv his blessing You will reply That tho it be lawfull to present Infants to Christ to receiv his blessing yet not therfore lawfull to present them to Baptism I admit your reply but rejoin thus If lawfull to present them to Christ for his blessing Then lawfull to present them to him in his Ordinances in which that blessing is to be expected This I suppose will stand good That whosoever might be welcom to Christ in his person were he here upon earth may be admitted to his Ordinances in which he is present by the power of his Spirit For who doubteth but that he hath set up his Ordinances in the Church for this end that in them he might meet those of his who desire to draw neer unto Him and by these Ordinances as by a Mean appointed for that end convey to them that Blessing and Grace which were he present with us in the flesh he would bestow upon them This being laid down for a Ground I build upon it thus but ther is none other of Christs Ordinances in which and by which a Christian can present his Infants to Christ with expectation of his Blessing excepting this of Baptism Consequently either by Baptism they may be presented to Christ for his blessing or not at all If not at all Either Christs presence in his Ordinances is not equivalent to his Corporall presence or some prohibition hath in a speciall maner put in a Barr to keep them off from his Ordinances which did not keep them of from him when here upon earth If any such there be let it be named if not Then is ther a sufficient ground to warrant the Parents bringing their children to Christ in his Ordinances and particularly in Baptism that ther-in they may expect the Benefit of Christs Benediction I know what hath been objected viz. That ther is a Barr to hinder Infants implyed in thes texts Math. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 Act. 8.36 from whence this Argument is framed without Faith none may be baptised Infants want Faith and therfore They may not be baptised And then To what purpose should they be presented to that Sacrament To which I answer That granting the Assumption to be true tho if a man deny it as some do Vide Greg. Decretal lib. 3. cap. 3. De Baptismo ejus effectu I see not how it can be proved But I say let it be granted that Infants have not Faith The Proposition is utterly fals viz. That without Faith none may be baptised For neither do the texts prove it and besides ther is good reason against it 1. The texts prove it not 1. Not Mat. 28.19 This indeed sheweth what the Ministery must do Not what the People The Ministery must teach all Nations But defineth nothing whether they may not be baptised before they have learned or before they do beleev much less doth it say None but beleevers may be baptized 2. Nor Mar. 16. This text sheweth what is the issue of Beleeving and b●ing Baptised viz. That such shall be saved and contrarily He that beleeveth not shall be damned But saith not That none may be baptised who beleeveth not Ob. But the Order of the Words doth inferr it Beleeving set before Baptising Sol. I reply That Doctrines collected from the order of words are not alway sound nor such Arguments conclusive Ex. gr Mat. 3.6 they were baptised confessing their sinns And Joh. 3.5 Born again of water and of the Spirit Here is Baptised before Confessing and Water before Spirit yet doubtless they did

confess their sins before they were baptised And who knoweth not that the Spirit doth sometime prevent the Water of Baptism 3. Nor yet Act. 8.36 This indeed proveth the affirmative viz. That He who beleeveth may be b●ptised But from thence to conclude the Negative That He who beleeveth not may not be baptised is against all Rules of reasoning which will yet more plainly appear by this Philip saith If thou believe with thy whole heart thou maist Will any man thence conclude That whoso beleeveth not with his whole heart may not be baptised And so take liberty to barre all such as presenting themselves and professing their faith may yet perhaps justly be suspected of Fiction and Dissimulation You see then the texts do not prove the Proposition Nay suppose that not by inference but in direct terms some of these texts should say He that beleeveth not shall not be baptised ought we not to understand it as true only in those persons of whom the text speaketh viz. Of them that have been taught and yet do frowardly refuse and profess a dislike and misbeleef of what hath been taught them And so it will be too weak an Argument to prove that universall Proposition and much less to draw on the desired conclusion Without faith none may be baptised None Ergo Not Infants ex gr That text of Mark saith He that beleeveth not shall be damned q. d. Without Faith none shall be saved Will any man understand this in that Universality as to include Infants Will he assume Infants beleeve not have no faith therfore They shall not be saved God forbid The Proposition hath it's latitude of Truth beyond which it may not be extended So then these texts do shew what is required of the Apostles and their successors What of the Nations and Heads of the Families in the Nations persons that are Sui juris not under the command of another But determineth nothing of inferiours and much less concludeth against Infants Baptism 2. Good reason against it For why First a profession of Faith is enough to entitle men to Baptism Tho there be no soundness and sincerity in the heart at all Witness the admission of Simon Magus True indeed except there be soundnes in the heart God may justly deny man the Benefit which otherwise he might expect But if he make profession to b●leeve in Christ who shall dare to d●ny him the Sacrament 2. That which is presupposed to assert the necessitie of Fait● understanding it of the grace it self is doubtful viz. That without Faith no man hath wher●with-all to r●ceiv the Benefit of Baptism This I say may well be doubted if not denyed especially if we intend to comprehend Infants and little child●en They have a passive capacity which is enough to receive that Gr●ce and Benefit which we conceiv is reached forth to them in that Sacrament And what is that Not s ch a fulness of Grace or the Habits ther-of as may be expected by them who have formerly been prepared by the Discipline and information of the Word But rather initiall and seminall Grace that seed of God wher-of the Scripture speaketh Pet. 1.23 1 Joh. 3.9 The which doth not presuppose Grace in the Heart but is it self the seed and root of Faith and all other actuall Graces whatsoever To men and women converted by the Word and then coming to Baptism viz. To Crispus Cornelius Lydia c. we beleev that Baptism doth as to Abraham Circumcision did convey a super-addition of further Grace to what they had formerly received in and by the Word But to their children Baptism conveyeth as did Circumcision to Jsaac the beginning and first seeds of Grace And consequently calleth for no previous dispositions and preparations in the Recipient only a passive capacity not cross-barred with obstinacy and infidelity It is the property of preventing Grace to be the first mover in the Heart and to make way for it's own Reception Is this acknowledged to be done in the ministry of the Word upon the Parents as it is said of Cornelius and Lydia and shall it seem unreasonable to grant it to be done by this first Sacrament in their children For why Did we conceiv the Spirit who is the chief Agent and efficient working in and by the ministry of the Word and Sacraments and with-out whose operation and assistance they are but as empty vess●ls and edgless tools the Spirit I say did we conceiv him working only as a morall Agent to stand at the door and knock as only ready and willing to enter if the door be opened to proffer Grace if man will receiv it Then were it reason indeed to require Faith in Children no less than in their Parents But it is not so We conceiv him in the Baptising of Infants working as a Naturall or rather as a super-naturall Agent viz. opening the door and entring putting Grace in the Heart and working it in the Will conferring upon them such a Grace as for the present they are capable of viz. initiall and seminall as before was said Add this also That in the Baptising of Infants ther is not Baptism altogether without Faith Ther is presupposed the Faith of the Parent And this sufficeth to qualify the Infant for Baptism yea for the Grace and Benefit of that Sacrament What is the Benefit of Baptism Is it not Remission of sin and spirituall Regeneration To the obtaining of which why may not the Faith of the Parent suffice In the child as yet corruption of Nature which he brought into the world is not active it hath produced neither thoughts words nor deeds against the law and therfore calleth for no personall Act of Grace to remove the Guilt ther-of Guilty he is and polluted but guilty only by i●putation and polluted not by any consent of his own but by the act of another viz. of his Parents * Quantò magis prohiberi non d●het infàns qui recens natus nihil peccavit nisi quòd s●cundum Adam carnaliter natus qui adr●m●ssam peccatorum accipiendam hoc ipso saciliis acced t quòd illi remittuntur non propria sid aliena peccata Cyprian Epla 59. Is it any wonder that the imputation of anothers faith should procure for him Remission and removall of that which cometh by the imputation of anothers act That as he sinned in another so he may be said to beleev in another Here is then the equity of Gods proceedings that what Malady and mischief was contracted without his will shall be cured and remedyed without him and any act of his It is by the ordinance and institution of God that the guilt of Adams transgression is imputed to the Infant and the Corruption of Nature propagated And it is by the Ordinance of God that the Guilt of that sin is remitted and a Remedy against that Native disease provided and both these are done in and upon the Infant without any concurrence of his own will And as by the