Selected quad for the lemma: water_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
water_n	baptism_n	baptize_v	dip_v	4,728	5	11.0980	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52602	An account of Mr. Firmin's religion, and of the present state of the Unitarian controversy	Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.	1698 (1698)	Wing N1502; ESTC R4610	32,345	84

assembling to this solemn commemorative Sacrifice was more like to a Carousal than to a celebration of the Holy and Blessed memory of a dying Saviour These were the Disorders and Irregularities concerning which they were to examin themselves and thereby avoid an unworthy Communicating and the consequences thereof We do not say Baptism is an useless Rite or that the Baptism of Children is altogether vain What the Wisdom of God has appointed to all Nations is not to be esteemed useless tho' we our selves knew not the uses of it and it is use enough that this Sacrament is an initiating Rite Nor is it a good Exception against this Sacrament's being continued still that now people are Christians by Education Seeing there is the same reason for its continuance as for its institution namely a solemn public and formal Initiation into the Religion of Jesus And this may in some sense be done in Infancy by the intervention of Undertakers commonly called God-fathers and how it can be done without 'em I see not But it is without all reason that Parents should not be admitted to be Undertakers when others cannot or cannot easily be had It were well methinks if the Minister and Church-Wardens together with the Parents were obliged to be Undertakers ex Officio or ratione Officii by their Place and Office and it were yet better if the whole Church undertook for the Infants Moreover where Infant-Baptism is the custom of the Church Confirmation or the person 's taking upon himself the Covenant and Promises that were made in his name by his Undertakers ought to be as little neglected as Baptism nay the person cannot be said to be a compleat Christian or to be Christianly baptized till he is consumed that is has publickly taken upon himself his Baptismal Engagements Paedo-baptism or Infant-Baptism and sprinkling instead of dipping have occasioned an unnecessary Seism from the Church for neither of these are Doctrines of the Church or imposed on any The Church requires dipping except in case of Necessity or Danger The words of the Rubric in the Office of Baptism are these If they the Godfathers certify that the Child may well endure it He the Minister shall dip it dip the Child in the Water saying I baptize thee c. But if they certify that the Child is weak it shall suffice to pour Water upon it Neither of these is sprinkling they are both of them Baptism or Washing in the strictest sense of the word As to infant-Infant-Baptism it doth not certainly appear that it was not practised by the Apostles rather it seemeth that when the Parents were baptized so also were the Children for such was the custom of the Jews toward their Proselites from whom Baptism the Sacramental Supper and in a word all the antient Ecclesiastical Rites and Church-Discipline Hierarchy or Church-Government was taken by our Saviour and the Apostles Notwithstanding for satisfaction of such as do not approve Infant-Baptism the Church has an Office called in the Liturgy the Baptism of such as are of riper years That as I said the seism of the People and Churches that are vulgarly called Baptists or Anabaptists seems not well grounded Lastly as to that I believe there is no distinct Function or Office of Ministers and that the very Lord's Supper may be administred by a private Christian I answer for my self and most other if not all Unitarians There is a threefold distinction of Church-Officers by themselves modestly called Ministers namely Bishops Presbyters or Priests and Deacons The two former seem to be of Divine Right the other of Apostolical Institution only and that too as appears from Acts 6.3 4. not by any particular Inspiration but meerly on Motives of Prudence and Charity These three Orders Bishop Priest and Deacon are of that Antiquity and Universality that as soon as and wheresoever Christianity was professed the Churches were govern'd after this form A form received among all the Sects of Christians as well as by the sounder part of 'em called commonly the Church till Mr. Calvin in a case of Necessity introduced a new sort of Church-Administration These are they to whom only except in case of necessity such as the Reformation was it belongs to administer the Sacraments and to instruct and exhort publickly But what makes a case of necessity is a question by it self on which I do not here enter I wish the Church had not given or may never give cause to the Unitarians either by Exclusion or Persecution or unlawful or over-harsh Terms of ' Communion to have recourse to Mr. Calvin's Expedient XI As to moral Points I believe that officious Lies are lawful the motions of Concupiscence not vitious idle or obscene words Gluttony Drunkenness Riot Luxury and impure Desires and Lusts were not forbidden till Christ's time By officious Lies are meant those Falsities that do good to some without doing hurt to others as the Lie of the Hebrew Midwives to Pharaoh the Tale of Michal to her Father Saul when she suffer'd David to escape and Jonathan's feigned excuse for David when he hid David from his Father's Anger Exod. 1.19 1 Sam. 19.17 and 20.6 To officious Lies belong also Compliments very low Bowings and respectful Carriage towards Persons for whom we have not the kindness or regard of which we make flow by those external and false Significations I think it may excuse Volkelius whom Mr. Edwards cites for this part of his Charge that the officious Lies of the Midwives of Michal and of Jonathan are related in Scripture without blaming them they are not censured by the Inspired Writers they are told by the Prophets Moses and Samuel without the least signification that they were Sins Volkelius might infer from hence that the Texts which forbid lying and falseness are intended of such lying as is hurtful or prejudicial to others and that what dos no hurt can be the Subject of no forbidding Law To forbid what helps some even to the saving of Life or Goods without any hurt or wrong to another why should any Law-giver who respects at all the good of his People so enact Notwithstanding I think Mr. Edwards says well If once such Doctrine is commonly taught all Lies will be reckned some way or other officious and Truth and Sincerity will be banisht from the Earth The motions of Concupiscence are not vitious or sinful By Concupiscence is meant some unlawful Desire or Inclination arising in the mind but not consented to or put into practice Methinks so far forth as such Motions in the mind are involuntary they should rather be called Frailties than Sins and the disapproving and resisting them shall be rewarded by God Concerning obscene Words Riot Gluttony Drunkenness impure Desires not forbidden by the Law and not strictly unlawful till prohibited by the Gospel We are not much concerned in such a Dispute it being granted on all hands that they are forbid in the Writings of the New Testament Notwithstanding I wonder that