Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	faith_n	grace_n	lord_n	6,870	5	3.6136	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96995	The covenants plea for infants: or, The covenant of free grace, pleading the divine right of Christian infants unto the seale of holy baptisme. Against the rusticke sophistry, and wicked cavillations of sacrilegious Anabaptists: being the summe of certaine sermons had in the parish-church of Cranham, neere the city of Gloucester, in Gloucester-shire, with the exceptions of certaine Anabaptists against the foresaid sermons, and the authors answers thereunto. Very seasonable for weake consciences in these unsettled times of schisme and apostacie. By Thomas Wynell minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.	Wynell, Thomas, b. 1599 or 1600.	1642 (1642)	Wing W3778; Thomason E115_17; ESTC R8440	86,631	137

not because the argument is sensuall and groundlesse but because you cannot answer it Moreover I told you that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith and that this seale was imprinted on very Infants in their infancy And is this a groundlesse and sensuall argument not worth the answering Alas alas you cannot answer it And therefore for ought you have said or can say my doctrine must stand good and the gates of hell cannot prevaile against it View it over againe and consider it more punctually And then haply you will either be † Hodson an Ambaptist in the city of Glocester growne as light to the head since he was new baptized as he was light in the heart before Hodson-peevish or of another mind And now having made so manly an encounter let us see whether your valour will endure the brunt of the battell Let us heare your killing exceptions against my reasons that I had for paedo-baptisme Reason 1 The first reason for paedo baptisme Anabaptist Because you say that children are holy therefore they may be baptized 1 Cor. 7.14 Now we would know what holinesse you meane Answer I did not say that children are holy that 's too generall but that children of Christian parents are holy And wee therefore say so because the Apostle Paul the pen-man of the Holy Ghost speaks it And so when you aske me what I meane by holinesse in this discourse you demand withall what the Apostle meanes by it for I only relate his words The meaning then of the Apostle is the same as was the meaning of the Prophets when they said that the Iewish Infants were holy because borne under an holy Covenant Iewes by nature and not sinners under the Gentiles So the meaning of the Apostle is that the children of Christians are holy i. e. Christians by nature and birth not sinners of the Pagans unto which Pagans God hath not committed His Oracles nor put them under His seale But goe on and we will follow you Anabaptist If you say an inward holinesse then grace must come successively from parents And so by this rule wee shall make our parents the authors and conveighers of grace and so mightily wrong the Lord Jesus Christ For there is nothing doth make us truly holy but grace for by nature wee are all filthy and corrupt from top to toe and by this ground we draw grace from our parents loynes which to affirme is most grosse and false and no lesse then high blasphemy against the Spirit of God and the Lord Jesus Christ Answer What holinesse we meane you may see in our answer immediately going before But if we should say that it was inward holinesse How doth that inferre that grace must come successively from parents Seeing parents and children doe not derive inward holinesse and grace from one another but as joint-confederates they both derive and draw holinesse from the Covenant of Grace under which they both are For the expresse words of the Covenant are I will be thy God and the God of thy seed jointly as co-partners in the same Covenant And therefore you erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the nature of the Covenant The Sadduces endeavouring to overthrow the doctrine of the Resurrection drew an argument ab absurdo wherein there were more words then matter like the arguments of you and your brethren of the separation Matth. 22.23 28. thinking to puzzle their answerer with multitude of words seeing they wanted weight of argument So you use many words and sport your selves with your owne fancies But as Christ answered the Sadduces that they did erre because they neither knew the Scriptures nor the power of God So say I to you that you therefore erre not knowing the Scriptures nor the Nature of Gods Covenant of free Grace with His people And who wrongs Christ think you You or I You in making the grace of God of lesse extent by the comming of Christ in setting Moses above Christ For Moses allowed Infants of Gods Covenant people the initiall seale in their infancy but Christ denies it unto them if your Divinity will hold Or I in setting Christ above Moses both for clearenesse and extent of grace Now if Moses in his typicall ministration afford unto the Infants of Gods Covenant-people the initiall seale and Christ denies it in His Gospell-ministration then surely the shadow is to bee preferred before the substance And herein you shew your selfe to bee as stout an advocate for the obstinate Jewes agaist Christ as if from them you had received thirty peeces of silver to betray Him But what high blasphemy against the Spirit of God and the Lord Jesus Christ have you found out spray you Oh this namely that children shoul● draw grace from their parents loines● But who a ●irmes this you or ●● If ● then the Apostle affirmes it for ●d only said that children of Christian parents are holy and so saies the A●ostle An● is the Apostle an high blasphemer in saying so But goe on I pray I know you love not to be interrupted in so weighty a case of conscience as this is Anabaptist Againe if this be true then the unbelieving wife is made holy too and shee may be baptized as well as the children although shee be an infidell which is agaist your owne affirmation Answer T is true that children of Christian parents are holy if that be your meaning and upon this ground are to bee baptized as is said in my Sermon-notes But how doth it hence follow that the unbeleeving wife though holy to the beleeving husband is therefore as well to be baptized as the children of the beleeving parent For the Covenant is I will be thy God and the God of thy seed not I will be thy God and the God of thy wife though an infidell It 's one thing to be under an holy use another thing to be under an holy conditition The beleeving party is said to have a sanctified use of the infidell but the infidell is not said to be holy as the children are For such children are not said to bee sactified unto the parents but holy in themselves by reason of the holy Covenant under which they were borne as children of a parent in Covenant with God and joint-confederates In the originall the unbeleeving party is said to bee holy not to but in the beleeving party Not that one of them absolutely considered were sanctified in another for wee are sanctified only in the Lord Jesus Christ but as considered in the relation of husband and wife in lawfull matrimony so the infidell party is sanctified in the beleeving party for conjugall society and for raising up of an holy seed unto God And if you can but look into the originall and consider the scope of the place you cannot but suffrage with me But goe on Anabaptist But you say it is such an holinesse as hath the promises of the Kingdome of heaven If so then thus we affirme

shall then see that nothing else can be meant but a better Ministration or Liturgie for the text runs thus viz. But now hath he obtained a more excellent Liturgie or Ministry by how much also He is the Mediatour of a better Covenant which was established upon better promises Heb. 8.6 A better Covenant established on better promises Now shew what these better promises are and you have what the Apostle meanes by the better Covenant whereof Christ is now Mediatour Now these better are I will put my lawes into their mindes and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people And they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord for all shall know me from the least to the greatest for I will be mercifull to their unrighteousnesse and their sinnes and their iniquities will I remember no more Heb. 8.10 11 12. 1. The Old Covenant had the Law written in tables of stone but the New hath the Law written in the hearts of the worshippers i.e. Moses did minister the Law unto the Jewes written in tables of stone thus did the type but Christ the anti-type doth minister Gods Lawes unto Christians written in the fleshly tables of the heart Moses could minister the letter of Gods Law unto the people but Moses could not change the heart and renew the minde of his people but Christ by his Ministers can change the heart and renew the minde of his worshippers And it s Christs peculiar prerogative both under the Law and under the Gospell that whatsoever persons formerly under the Law have beene renewed by grace and what persons soever have beene renewed or shall be renewed under the Gospell have are and shall be renewed by Christ and in Christ This Epistle to the Hebrewes was written by the Apostle unto the Jewes and the end of the Apostle in writing this Epistle was to take off the Jewes from resting on the workes of the Law and Liturgie or Ministration of Moses for salvation and eternall life and to divert their mindes unto Jesus Christ the Prince of life and to the ministration of Christs bloud and spirit under the Gospell or New Testament or Covenant And that the difference betweene the old Covenant under Moses the type and the new Covenant under Christ the truth and anti-type lyes not in the thing ministred for mans eternall salvation but in the ministration of Christ to come and already come is cleare by that of Paul to the Corinthians 2 Cor. 3.2 18. Ye are our epistle written in our hearts knowne and read of all men Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministred by us written not with inke but with the spirit of the living God not in tables of stone but in fleshly tables of the heart And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward Not that we are sufficient of our selves to thinke any thing as of our selves but our sufficiency is of God Who also hath made us able Ministers not of the letter but of the spirit for the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life But if the ministration of death written and engraven in stones was glorious so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance which glory was to be done away How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious For if the ministration of condemnation be glory much more doth the ministration of righteousnesse exceed in glory For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect by reason of the glory that excelleth For if that which is done away was glorious much more that which remaineth is glorious Seeing then we have such hope we use great plainnesse of speech And not as Moses which put a vayle over his face that the children of Israel could not stedfastly looke to the end of that which is abolished But their mindes are blinded for untill this day remaineth the same vayle untaken away in the reading of the Old Testament which vayle is done away in Christ But even unto this day when Moses is read the vayle is upon their heart Neverthelesse when it i.e. their heart shall turne to the Lord the vayle shall be taken away Now the Lord is that Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty But we all with open face beholding as in a glasse the glory of the Lord are changed into the same image from glory to glory even as by the Spirit of the Lord. And then Chap. 4.1 he comes with this inference viz Therefore seeing we have this Ministry c. So then the difference lyes in the ministration and not in the substance of the Covenant Gods Covenant of grace with man is nothing but Christ for salvation Christ in type and Christ in person Christ in type before His Incarnation and Christ in person since Here Christ is said to be the Mediatour of a better Covenant And in the former chapter Heb. 7.22 He is said to be made a Surety of a better Testament This better Covenant comming in place did disanull the former Heb. 7.18 Now what did it disanull Surely nothing but the Typicall and Mosaicall Liturgie or Ministration And what did disanull this typicall ministration Surely nothing but the body of Christ offered up unto God once for all Heb. 10.1 10. Reade the 9. chap. of Heb. In a word the whole redounds to this much the Sacrifices which they offered up yeare by yeare continually under the Law could not make the commers thereunto perfect as pertaining to the Conscience Heb. 10.1 2. Nay could not so much as make him that did the service perfect Heb. 9.9 But the sacrifice of Christs body once for all makes the commers thereunto perfect as pertaining to the conscience Heb. 9.14 And therefore Christ is the Mediatour of ● better Covenant than Moses was But the people to whom Paul writes this Epistle and the end wherefore he wrote it are alwayes to be remembred and that will give a great deale of light unto what is herein written Ob. If this be the meaning of the text then here is nothing in peculiar attributed to this ministration under the Gospell for under the Law the Elect were converted and had their hearts changed and renewed by Christ and in Christ Sol. Right They had so Grant but this and grant my conclusion and so establish the contradictory of your owne For if Christ made the ordinances of Grace effectuall to the conversion of Gods Elect under the Law and doth the same under the Gospell then that and this is the same Covenant of Grace for substance and so the difference must needs lye in the administration onely But Pauls controversie lay with the Jewes and mine lyes with the Anabaptists both adversaries to Christ and his Gospell The conversion of the Jews under the Law is

Ergo Children of baptized parents are baptizable in their infancies The consequence is sound the antecedent may be thus evinced viz. Such children in their infancie are oftentimes regenerated Ergo Such children in their infancie are regenerable Now let us compact what you say and what we say touching this point together and contrive both into one entire Syllogisme and so meet as friends in the same conclusion thus viz. Such as goe to heaven and are saved are regenerated say we But elect Infants that die unbaptized goe to heaven and are saved say you Ergo You as well as we must say that elect Infants which die unbaptized are saved and regenerated And this confutes your owne conclusion for regeneration is the ordinary meanes of salvation and elect Infants that die unbaptized are saved by regeneration And hence thus I inferre the contradictory of your conclusion viz. Regeneration is the ordinary meanes of salvation But elect Infants that die unbaptized are saved by regeneration Ergo Elect Infants that die unbaptized are saved by the ordinary meanes of salvation And this refutes you and like a rod of iron dashes in peeces the earthen vessell of your chamption A. R. page 2.7 wherein in he seems to scoffe at our thanksgiving for baptismall regeneration of Infants whereas wee may without blushing give God thanks for the regeneration of an Infant-christian after baptisme as for the regeneration of an alien after Baptisme that comes in upon the testimony of his faith For charity is the ground of our thanksgiving here and there And for his exception drawne from the calling of our Ministers that was needlesse for if Infants are not capable of Baptisme then let the Ministers calling bee never so right their baptizing of infants must be a nullity and they should sinne in baptizing of them And so his discourse concerning dipping and sprinkling is also needlesse for if children were dipped in their infancie yet their Baptisme must needs be invalide because Infants And so the Asse might have saved a great deale of labour and kept to the point of paedo-baptisme for the Anabaptists doe simply oppose paedo-baptisme not as ministred by such persons nor as administred in such a manner for they hold paedo-baptisme to be simply unlawfull in it selfe As for the controversie of the calling of Ministers you may read Bradshaw against Johnson and the Authour of the book entituled the unreasonablenesse of the separation a very precious book wherein Bradshaw deceased is vindicated against the calumnies of Can the Brownist Also two worthy treatises of famous Mr Ball deceased And lately Rutherford a famous and learned Scot and many moe which are not answered by any of the contrary partie And therefore for A. R. to speak at randome without refutation of these Authors argues his purpose rather to calumniate then to edisie and certifie conscience But to leave this senselesse monster either to repentance or to the judgement of the great day I return to you againe I tell you that all your redargutions are rather confirmations then refutations unto me And what misery is this All the ablest Ministers in the land are of my judgement about this point of paedo-baptisme that the Prophecie of Clem. Writer the Factour might be fulfilled saying that it's thought that Ministers should be the last men in the Church of England unto whom God would reveale this your light And his reason is a very materiall one because said he they know this light but doe hide it from the people and will not hold it forth unto them But to proceed A child say you is not capable of the ordinary meanes of salvation as the word and Sacraments I answer that a child indeed is not capable of Baptismall entrance into the Church by instruction but what Therefore not at all I deny that consequence for there is another way of baptismall entrance into the Church and that is by birth as a Christian-borne because borne of baptized parents and of this baptismall entrance a childe is capable Thus you seeme to argue viz. The Word and Sacraments are the onely ordinary meanes to salvation But elect infants are not capable of the Word and Sacraments Ergo Elect infants are not capable of the ordinary meanes of salvation This is your naturall sophistry and both propositions are unsound and liable to just exception But to the major we say that the Word and Sacraments are not the onely ordinary meanes of salvation for there is Christ and the Spirit of Grace which are ordinary meanes of salvation also And elect infants that die unbaptized are saved by Christ and the Spirit of Grace There are internall-ordinary means of salvation as well as externall-ordinary means of salvation And therefore though your Logicke hath made fooles of your selves yet it cannot make fooles of us Thus we argue against your Paralogisme and wicked fallacy and we challenge you to answer us viz. Christ and the Spirit of Grace are ordinary meanes of salvation But elect infants that die unbaptized are saved by Christ and the Spirit of Grace Ergo Elect infants that die unbaptized the saved by ordinary meanes of salvation Let elect infants die unbaptized yet they are saved by Christ and the Spirit of Grace and so by necessary consequence by ordinary meanes of salvation There is no fallacy nor sophistry in this Syllogisme and both propositions are undenyable and we need no such shifts to maintaine Gods truthes as you have to put a colour upon your heresies And this takes away your thicke covering whereby you went about to darken knowledge Againe you say that an elect infant can have no faith wrought by the ordinary means And this assertion is groundel too upon a false supposition for the outward ordinary meanes of faith are not the onely ordinary meanes of faith An elect infant may have faith by Christ the Author of faith and by the Spirit of Grace the Spirit of faith and Christ and the Spirit are ordinary meanes of faith And of availe too when the outward are wanting But the outward are of no availe where these are wanting And that an elect infant that dies unbaptized hath faith may thus be evinced You say That without faith we cannot please God then such as please God have faith Thus I argue then viz. Such as please God have faith But elect infants that die unbaptized do please God Ergò Elect infants that die unbaptized have faith The proposition I suppose you will not gain-say the assumption haply you require me to make good Thus then I prove it viz. Such as goe to heaven and are saved doe please God But elect infants say you that die unbaptized goe to Heaven and are saved Ergò Elect infants that die unbaptized say I do please God But haply you doe not so much deny their having of faith as their having of faith by ordinary meanes That then I thus evince viz. Christ and the Spirit of Grace are ordinary meanes of faith But elect

infants that die unbaptized have faith by Christ and the Spirit of Grace Ergò Elect infants that die unbaptized have faith by ordinary meanes of faith And thus you see that all is trash on your side and meere jugling and you can as well maintaine your cause as your title to the Crowne of England Anabaptist And thus we have runne over your chiefest arguments at briefe as we could We desire you would not take it offensively from us that we have beene so tedious in writing unto you for we could have beene larger in many things but that we were fearefull of tediousnesse And if there be any thing wherein we are mistaken we desire information and we desire to submit to the judgement of judicious and reasonable men whether your reasons be not answered If you can overthrow clearely by the Word of God these answers we will cry peccavi if you cannot we expect according to your former promises that you should cry peccavi Answer You have runne over my arguments indeed but you have not refuted any one of them They all stand unmoveable as Mount Zion and the glory of the Lord is upon them And as for your tediousnesse that 's not so offensive unto me as your absurd reasonings And for your mistakes I have shewed them unto you for your information And if you will submit to judicious and reasonable men so will I And for this cause I have published this Treatise And whether I have dealt unfaithfully with Gods holy Word either in my Sermons or in this mine Answer to your Objections I leave to the censure of the godly learned And if you or any of your side can say any thing more that is materiall against the point of Paedo-baptisme I shall by Gods helpe give you such satisfaction whereby you through Gods blessing shall be able to see that they were from the Devill and not from Christ that led you into this way of re-baptizing Anabaptist And thus we desire the Lord to adde his blessing to our weake endeavours as to perswade your hearts to embrace every truth of Jesus Christ that as yet you oppose and so likewise for our selves And thus we commend all to the disposing of Almighty God in whom we rest Answer Your meaning is perhaps that I doe oppose the way of the Anabaptists and stand for Paedo-baptisme and that herein I oppose a truth of Christ Jesus If your meaning be this your prayer is impious and a taking of Gods Name in vaine And you pray unto God to blesse your wicked endeavours in going about to perswade my heart to embrace not a truth but a lye This proves evidently that God is patient and that the Devill is impudent And is this the good stuffe that you would have to be read before the whole Congregation at Cranham as you desire in your Postscript Your desire is more then granted you desired to have it as publike as Cranham and I have made it as publike as England It s now in a faire way to be read at London at Yorke at Exceter at Bristoll at Gloucester at Worcester and where not as God shall direct it And I hope my brethren will make it knowne to more Congregations than Cranham for the information of Gods people in the truth I hope that was your end in desiring leave to have it read to the whole Congregation at Cranham and not revenge on me for keeping wavering soules of that Congregation from running into Severne after you But now to your three Questions which you subjoyne as an appendix to your exceptions 1. You demand What expresse warrant we have in Scripture for the baptizing of Infants Unto this we say that the question savours more of curiosity than of conscience But seeing you may make bold as you say to propound this question unto me and desire me to answer you punctually by the Scripture or not at all I make bold to urge you with one argument and desire you to answer me either by Scripture or Right reason Thus I argue in expresse answer to your demand and quaere All persons knowne to be under the Covenant of Grace are to have the Covenant put under the initiall seale unto them by expresse warrant of Scripture But all infants of Christians are knowne to be under the Covenant of Grace Ergo All infants of Christians are to have the Covenant of Grace put under the initiall seale unto them by expresse warrant of Scripture Deny this Syllogisme or deny either proposition if you can The major I presume you will not deny The minor is as undenyable But if Lambes blasphemy must passe for orthodox with you that you will contradict Thus therefore I make it good If all Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace then all infants of Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace But all Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace Ergo All Infants of Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace Haply you will deny the sequell of the major proposition but therein you will but shew your ignorance and irrationall stupiditie For sequela ab indivisis est valida Thus then I make it good viz. If the Covenant of Grace joynes parents and children together as inseparable and immediate companions then if all Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace all Infants of Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace all Infants of Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace also But the Covenant of Grace joynes parents and children together as inseparable and immediate companions saying I will be thy God and the God of thy seed Ergo If all Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace then all infants of Christian parents are under the Covenant of Grace also And now answer or give over your fooleries nay sacrilegious practices and impious dissolution of Gods holy Covenant with his people and their seed A wickednesse haply not so well seene of you whom subtile heads seduce with good words and faire speeches the very method of the Devils agents Rom. 16.17 18. And thus we have shaken your triumphall argument with which you have mis-led many an honest heart the more is the pity And it may be just with God to scourge this Nation for our too much connivence at you High offences deserve sharper censures And to forbeare correction is to dishonour Gods image in Superiours and to throw downe Authority for Sedition to trample upon If your way must stand adieu Religion and let us all turne Atheists And so much for answer to your first quaere 2. Your second question is What Infants doe receive in Baptisme Which question as propounded by an Anabaptist implyes this blasphemy viz. That Infants receive no benefit by baptisme But unto this quaere we say that Infants of Christians by baptisme have the Covenant put under seale unto them as their native priviledge The Covenant under which they were borne makes them holy by birth And Baptisme under