L
More PROOFS .
INFANTS
Church-meAberftiip
AND Confequently their Right to
BAPTISM:
Or a Second Defence of
our Infant Rights and Mercies.
•-' • ■ ■ ■ t ^
In Three Parts.
The Fir ft is, The plain Proof of Gods^ute> or Covenant for Infants Church-merabcp^P fro™ th.e Creation, and the Continuance of \t/^ tne J11""."": on of Eaptifnv, with the Defence << that Proor ^ainIt the Frivolous Exceptions of W- Xomfjes* . „
And a Confutation of Mr. TjfJw hls Arguments againft Infants Church-memberuVp*
The Second is, A Confusion of the Strange Forgeries >of
' Mr. H. Datum agaip* the Antiquity of Infant-bap nfm. And of his rn^ny Calumnies againft my Self and Writings. /
With a Catal^ie of fifty fix New Commandments and Doctrines* which He, and the Sectaries who joyn with Kim in thofe Calumnies feem to own.
The Third Part is, Animadverfions on Mr. Dmvm% W> ply to Mr. irilles.
Extorted by their unquiet Importunity from anjjrnei! Vrfrcr of the Love and Peace of^all True Chi
-x-*~
By Richard Baxter
London^ Printed for N. Simmons at the J; Kolinfon at the Gol<kn-Ucv in St. Pauj
\\\\L /
The Preface^
Reader,
THefrfi year of my Miniftry I fell into a doubt about Infant -Ba- ftifm • arid I was Jo ignorant as not to unde'rftand the na- ture of that folcmn Covenant and Invefti- tare , and the Parents duty of entring the Child . into the Covenant with God > and what the Vow was which then was made : when time, and light had fatufied f»et I retained as charitable thoughts of the Anabaptifts, as of almojl any that I differ- ed from. About 16^6, 1647^ 1648. they made more ftir among his than before : Mr* Tombes living near me 5 we continue fytft peace, not talking of our differehcej/fFor J purpofely avoided it in publtckJtnd frt- A 3 viter
i ne Fretace.
vate, tmlefs any asked, my opinion. At laft his Converts came to me, and told me that if I would not anfwer him in writing, they mufl take it as an encouragement to them to be Baptized • and confeffed that he fent them, or that they came by his confent : To avoid long writings, one daycs dijpute vpas thought a fljorter way. That difpute with many additions 1 was ne- cefjitated to publtfh ; with fome returns to fome after arguings of Mr. T.V. He wrote what he thought meet on the other .fide. I thought I had done with that work for ever: But in 1655 he fent to me again 5 and drew from me the Letters here recited. Thefe without my confeut he publifhed with an anfwer in the midfi of a great Book : I left his anfwer thefe nine- teen years, or thereabouts, without any Re- ply ; as alfo the re [I of his books agamfi me, I thought it not lawful for me to wafle my precious time on things fo little neceffary: A man may find words at length to fay for almofl any cau.fe. I partly know what can be ' faiaagainjl thy, and every book that J have wrhten. And I know what I can Reply. And I partly foreknow what they can fay to that Reply y and what I can fur- ther fay in the defence of it ; and fo talk
on
The Preface.
on till we have wrangled away our Chari- ty and our Time : and mufl all this be printed, to enfnare poor readers ? But at laft Mr. Danvers bath laid a neceffity upon me : I had filently paft over all his vain Reafionings, and all his accusations of my writings, and all his falfifications of Authors, had he not called me fo loud to repent of fandering fome for being Baptized naked: And when I found it my duty to fpeak to that? I thought it ft to [ay fomewhat of the reji , paffwg by what Mr. Wills hath dene more fully in an answer to his book.
"there are two forts of men called Ana- baptifts among us : The one fort are fiber Godly chriftians y who when they are re- baptized to fatisfie their Confidences, live a?nong us in Chrifiian Love and peace • and I lb all be ajbamed if I Love not them as heartily , and own them not as peaceably, as any of them (hall do either me or better men than I that differ from them. The other fort hold it unlawful to hold Commu- nion with fuch as are not of their mind and way, and are fchifmatically trouble fome and unquiet , in labouring to increafe their Par- ty. Thefe are they that offend me, andother lovers of peace. And if God would per- fwade them but fierionfly to thivt of thefe A 4 * obvi~
/
The Preface.
civic us quefthits\ it might fomewhat flop them. Oj. i. How inconflderable a fart of the i fa I Church they hold communion
with :' And unchurch almofl all the chur- ches Earth? Qu. 2. whether they can po/f fe that ever the Church on Earth
win Unite upon their terms 7 of rejecting aU thctr Infants from the vifible Churchy and renouncing all our Infant Rights and Benefit f conferred by the Baptifmal Cove- nant of grace } Qu. 3. And whether if they continue to the worlds endy to fepar ate from almofl all the Churches and unchurch them^ their employment will not be flill to ferve the great enemy of Love and Concord^ a- gainft the Lord of Love ■ and Veace, and againfl the profperity of faith, and godlinefs^ and againfl the welfare of the church and fouls j and to the jcandal and hardening of the ungodly f
THE
§ r??f t ft? $??$
THE
CONTENTS
OF THE
First Part*
T
HE Preface. P*g' *
e^/% Tombew ^ ^"fr« £ |
K.^sAnfwrtoit. 1™*Z
Mr. TV* fecond Letter. P^
zJMr.l.'s third Letter. P* 1U
r. B.'i A/™:"* diivW hy*'-^"?^
llions : HisAnfrvers are confuted Sett. i> 2, 3, 4. The many Qaeftions to be handled, i^uett. 1.
Jiifc»fj wrt 0»^ Ch»Ych~mmher!' r r P; *£
Sed. <. Queft.2. J* w" nofnlytbe Infants ct
the C^regamn- of Ifrael ifc* w«* ^W-
members. . * t &**>!■ "«g»J
Church-members. V. •*
A 3
/
The Contents.
Se&. ii. The Ihzelites Infants were members of the Church Vniverfal. p. 26.
Sed. 12, to the 1 8. Infants were members of the Jews Church as well as Commonwealth, p. 28*
Sed. 18. Quell. 4. There wot a Law or Precept of God obliging Parents to enter their ChiU dren into Covenant with God^ by accepting his favour , and engaging and devoting them to God ^ and there was a promife of God , offer- ing them his -mercy , and, accepting them when devoted as afore faid, &c. p. 3 1
Sed. 19, &c. Vifible Church-memberfirip what it is ? And that it is a benefit, p. 3 2
Se&. 22. Legal-right to Infants Church- ft ate gi- ven by Gods Covenant : Mr. T.'s confuted and the cafe opened. p. 3 5
Sed. 23, 24. This Right is the effect of Gods Law or Covenant. p. 44, — 46
Se&. 25, 26. The proof of Parents obligation to £nter their Children into Covenant: what we mean by a Law ^ Mr. T. maketh nothing of Church-memberjhip. p. 46, 50
Sed. 27. Precepts oblige to duty, and the promt- fes give right to benefits. p. 54
S:&. 28. No Tranfeunt faB without Gods fta- tutey or moral donation, or covenant, made the Ifraelites Infants Church-members, proved , to Sed. 44. p. 56
Sed. 44, 45. Infants Church-member ftnp in ft it u- ted by God at mans creation and the conftitu- tvon of Gods Kingdom at the fir ft. P*72
Sed. 46. Infants Church-memberfijip continued or renewed by the fir ft Law of grace made to
Adam,
The Contents.
Adam, Gen.#3. 15. to Seft. 49. Chrifts being the Head in Infancy proveth what it is brought for , and forceth Mr. T. to grant the caufe.
Sed. 49. The fame proved by the expo fit ion of this Covenant in that made to Abraham vindi- cated againfi zJMr. T. who again forfaketh his caufe. p. 9j
Sed. 50. No proof that there was ever' one Church-member who in that ftate had an In- fant born to himy who was not alfo a Church- member, p. 104
Sed. 51, 52. How far the Law of Nature pro- veth what I ajjert. The Church-fiate of In- fants no difadvantage , but a great benefit :
f* wherein proved , to Sed. 59. p. 105
Sed. 60. More particular proofs , as of Cain , Abel, Seth, Noahs Sons, &c. p. 116
Se&. 70, to 79. Proving the point fully from the Covenant with Abraham. p. 124
Sed.79, to 86. The point proved by the promifes to the Ifraelites. A virtual caufe may be long in being before it be formally a caufe , and may caufe at lafl without any change in it felfy but in the recipient* p. 1 30
Sed. 86. The proof from thefecond Commandment vindicated, p. 135
Sed. 87, to 93 . Proofs from divers other texts.
P- 137 Sed. 93, to 96. The cafe of Infants in the womb*
i>;i4o
, Sed. 96, 97. Thefe ftattttes not repealed. tMr. TV* • conceit that Cods promt fe cannot ft repealed ,
Jr con-
/
The Contents.
confuted. ■ p. 1 4 1
Sed. 98, to 107. Divers Que ft ions offered to con-
ftderation, p. 145
Sed:. 107, ice. Ten humbling Qaeftions to Mr*
T. ( publified by himftlj again ft my will*)
The fuller proofs from the New Teftament only named as being before handled. p, 159
A Confutation of the many .(^Arguments by which Mr, T. would prove that Infants were not Church-members under Chrift, p. 161
The Contents of the Second Part,
THE Preface : Sed. 1. Of C out rover fie s ± how far g'jod or bad* with whom fnarp re- buke and tar m ft contending it a duty > and with whom not : And whofe duty it is. p. 1 85
%t6i. 2. Of the weight of the prefent font rover- fey that yve make it not greater or lefl than it is: And the ft ate of it in part. p. 1 98
Cbap. 1, The occafton of this Bool^, from Mr. Danvers. p. 211
CI*, a p. 2. More of my pre fen t judgement of the Anabaptifts and their can ft , with a motion to them for Communion and Peace. p. 2 16
Chap. 3. \A general view of A/r. Danvers £00^.
p.234 Chap. 4. aJMr. Danvers Witneffes againft Infant- baptifm. His fad forgery againft the Dona- tifts dttctlcd : His marvellous falftpcation of%
Auguftines
The Contents.
Auguftines third and fourth books again ft them de bapr. Th^e f aid books vindicated. They prove that the Donatifts confented to Infant ~bapttfm> and that the whole Church held it ^ and no Chri- stian thought it vain. His forgery again ft Vincentius Vi&or : His ftander of Crefconius. His /lander of all the Novatians. His ftander of the Ancient Brittains detetled. His reafons for the Brittains being again ft Infant -baptifm confuted: where many more untruths are de- ufted, of them and many others. His forge- ries or falfe ftorics of the MefTalians, called by
him^ Dadoes, Sabas, Adulphus, Simonis
His ftander of Fauftus Rhegienfis — His
deceit about Albanus. His grofs falff cation of Nicephorus and ftander of Peter of Apamea and Zooras. His falfe ftory of Adrian Biftwp of Corinth ^ and his falfe report of Gregories dealing with him, Hps fable of Egyptian Divines. His fitlion about one Bermius, and his falflfication of Beda concerning him. His for- gery about Hincmarus Laudunenfis , and of Hincmarus Rhemenfis charge again ft him. His ftander of the WMtnks^heretofore detetted^and further by Naucleru*. A reference to our former proofs of the antiquity of ' Infant -b apt i /w.Nazian- £ens judgement. His audacious abufe of Cy- prian and the Carthage Council. My revest- ed ajfertion of the novelty of Antipcdobaptifn:.
p.2?9
Chap. 5. Mr, D.'s great Calimnie of my f elf re-
futed, as if I had falfly reported, (bat fome at
that time were baptized naked, p. 281*
Chap,
ine concents.
Chap. 6. His abufivc Citations of my Writings as for his caufe. p. 285
Chap. 7. His many perfonal accufations of me ex- amined. Whence it is that fo many boldly fpeak^ evil of the things they know not. His reproach of [_ every one of my Non-conform- ing Brethren, that my Doctrines in the parti- culars accufed by him are heynous to every one of them, ~\ when I remember not any one of them that hath ever to me exprejfed his dif- fenty much lefs endeavoured to change my judge- ment-y but many that have prof effed their appro- bation. His vain talk^ of my being loft with my friends ^ by which he implyeth that they are Hypocrites in concealing it , and would make me one in feekjng the applaufe of man. His many fal(hoods in his accufations of felf-con- tradiition and mutability. I. Absut Epifco- pacy * 2. About Non-conformity : What he meaneth oy my fheltring my felf in their Tents in a ftorm , and with their indulgence coming forth of my hole. ] 3. Of my friendjlnp to Calvin and Arminius. 4. Of the Parliaments caufe^fke. 5. Of Tradition., 6- Of Popery. 7. Whether a Contr over fie may have difficult ob- jeclions again fi plain proofs. His Catalogue of my heynom errors : A ]uft demand from the Non-conformiftsy if there be any fuch} whom he doth not flander : and from himfelf p. 288
Chap. 8. The new Religion of my Backbiters : or a Catalogue of fome Dotlrincsof Mr. Danvers, and the reft that joyn in his accufations of my WritingSy if indeed they hold the contraries tj
that
The Contents.
that which they accufe, tu their ace u fat ions feem to fuppofe ^ viz. fifty fix New Command- ments and Doctrines. The good that thefe men do. ^ P- 31?
Chap. p. Mr. William Aliens vindication of hiw- fe If again fi Mr. D's mifreport ^ and my Tefti- mony concerning Mr. Allen and Mr. La nib.
P- 333 Conclufion , an Admonition to Mr. Danvers for
his Repentance. p. %ij
The Contents of the Third Part.
Chap, i.np HE frightful aftell of his Reply.
X / P-345
Chap. 2. His impenitent falfe allegation of Wit- neffes againfl Infant -hapt if m. Of Tenullian $ whether Cyprians Dotlrine was Antichrifiian. Wickliff vindicated at large, from his exprefs words. Berengarius vindicated. P- 349
Chap. 3. Mr. T>'s j unification of his flander of the Waldenfes confuted. His witneffes exa- mined, and his unfaithfnlnefs opened •, and the cafe of the Waldenfes more largely explicated.
1. ... * P-379
Chap. 4. His impenitence in Calumniating the
Donatifts and Novatians as again]} Infant- ba- ftifm, reprehended. p. 400
Chap. 5. His renewed Calumny of the Old Brit- tains reproved. p. 403
Chap, •
The Contents.
Chap. 6. His raft rt port of Bijhops Ufhers cen- [tire of me, Confidered. p. 404.
PofHcript. The Teftimony of Smaragdus/jiAly open-
. ed: And the reports of Peter Abbas Cluniacen- fls, and Bernard Abbas Clareyallenfis. Their weak^ difingenmus courfe of Printing my words as again fi my felf ( in a jheet called Mr. Bax- ters Arguments , &c. cry ed about the fireets ) as if the' necejfity of profeffed faith for our
• felveSy would prove that our profejfed faith and dedicating them to God, were not fitfficient for the baptifmal reception of qur Infants, p. 407
Readers,
MY pain and greater bufmefs deny me time .to collect 1 the Printers Errata, though I fee divers % and there- fare muft leave the difcerning of them to your felycs. And I again admonifti and intreat you, that the detection oftheextr aordmary falfhoods and blind temerarious auda- city of Mr. D. be not imputed to the whole Rebapthingp.ir- fy, ( to wliofe Practice Gregor. Magn. paralleleth Rmda?\ ing\ ; and that his crimes abate not your Chriftian Love ancftendernefs to others, there being truly Godly, wife, and peaceable perfons, worthy c: our Communion, and willing of it, of that party as well as of others. Hearken not tojjthem that would render the Party of Attapajfiifts odious or intolcrabteno more than ro thofc Anabaptifls who would perfwade thofe of their opinion to renounce Com- munion with all others as tmbaptized. It is againft this dividing fpiriton all fides that I-W rite and Preach.
The
CO
Part L
My private Letters to Mr. Tombes proving, the Church-member jhip of Infants in all ages y vindicated from his unfatu factory exceptions.
The Preface.
T
£* i. ^~" """SI HE occafion and time of thefe Letters is long ago publi/hed by Mr. Tombes himfelf in the third Part of his Anti-?<zdobaftifm , Page 353- and forward-, where be printeth the faid Letters without my confent : Had I found his Anfwers fatisfa&ory , I had changed my judgement and retraced that and other fuch writings long ago. But I thought fa much oiherwife of them that I judged it not ne- ceflary, nor worth my diverting from better em* ployment to write an anfwer to them*
£♦2* And whatever the Angular judgement of that
B learned
/
CO
learned and excellent Profeflbrof Theology men- tioned in his Preface , was or is concerning the arguments that I , and many before and fince have iifed for Infant Baptifm, and notwithftanding his opinion that it was introduced in the fecond Cen- tury, &c. yet fo many wifer and better men than I, think otherwife both of the caufe, and of Mr.T's writings, that I hope the modeft will allow me the honour of having very good company if I fhould prove miftaken.
f* h N° ^0Der Chriftian will deny but that Godly men of both opinions may be faved : And then I think no fuch Chriftian that is acquainted with the Hiftory of the Church, can choofe but think that there are now in Heaven many thou- sands, rf not hundred thoufands that were not againft Infant Baptifm , for one that was againft it : And while we differ de jure , yet without great ignorance of the ftate of the world ,' we rnuft needs agree that de fatto, the number in the Church of Chrift in all Nations and Ages that have been< againft Infant Baptifm hath been fo fmall y as that they make up but a very little part of the Church triumphant : which though I take for no proof of the truth of our opinion, yet I judge it a great reafon to make me and others very fear- &I of turning rafhly and without cogent proof to the other fide. I know the Churches have ftill had their blemifhes ; but that they fhould all univedally fo err in the fubjed of Baptifm and Chriftianity it felf, is not to be believed till it be i#ove&
f, 4. Though
O)
£.4. Though Chrift be not the Author of any fcf our errors, he is the healer of them,and he is the Effector as well as the Director of his Churches faiih and holinefs: And yet to fay that though thoufands or hundred thoufands are in Heaven that were for Infant Baptifra , for one that was againft it, yet Chrift was againft even fech a con- stitutive part of his Church ( as accounted J is not 10 be received without good proof.
f. 5. For my part I muft ftill fay, that after all that I have read for the Anabaptifts , and much more than fuch Catalogues as Mr. Denver s^ I do not at prefent remember that I have read of any one Chriftian that held the baptizing of Infancs unlawful, in many and many hundred years after Chrift . at leaft not any that denied not Original fin .• Though indeed the Pelagians themfelves Jhac did deny it much , yet denied not Infant tifra.
£. 6. But of this enough heretofore : 1 lay not my faith on the number of Confemers . but in a? doubtful cafe I think the way that alrnoft ail went that are in Heaven, and took it as the very entrance of the door of life, is fafer ceteris faribpu thart that which few ill Heaven did own : And though on earth I have more approvers than Mr. 7*; 1 think mans approbation fo poor a comfort , && that I am forry to read in his Preface and effe- where how much he layeth upon it. Alas, were it not more for the good of others than our felves^
how inconfiderable a matter were it, whether men l value and honour, or defpife us, and what we are thought or faid of by each other , when we are all on the borders of eternity, where the honour of this world is of no figniflcation ?
$. 7. In the anfwer which I mud give to Mr. TombeSy fhould I tranferibe all his words, and anfwer every impertinent paflage, I fhould need- fefly weary the Reader and my felf : I will there- fore fuppofe the Reader to have his Book at hand, and to take his words as he hath given him them ^ that I may not be blamed as concealing any of them. And I (hall anfwer to nothing, but what feemeth to me to need an anfwer : And for all the reft I am content that the impartial Reader fudge of them as he findeth them : For I write not for fuch as need an anfwer to every word that is written , how frivolous foever , againft plain truth.
Mr. Tombes
(5)
cj^r. Tombes hit fir jl Letter.
s I Ry
NrOt finding yet that Law or Ordinance of Infants vifible Church-member- fhip which you afTert in your book of Baftifm to be unrepealed, I do requeft you to fet down the particular Text or Texts of Holy Scripture where you conceive that Law or Ordinance is written, and to tranfmit it to me by this bearer, that your allegations may be confidered by him who is Yours as is meet ,
&4pril 3 . 1655. John Tombes*
Richard Baxters Anfwer.
Sir, / mean to fee more faid againfi what I have already written , before I will write any more about Infant Baftifm , without a more prejftng call than I yet difcern, I have difcharged my Conference, and fiall leave you and yours to take your courfe. And indeed 1 do not under fiand the fenfe of your Letter , becaufe you fo joyn two queflions in one , that I know not which of the two it is that you would have me anfwer to* Whe-
B 3 ther
(6)
ther there were any Ordinances or Law of Cod that Infants Jhould be Church-members ? is one cjueftion : Whether this be repealed f is another * you joy n both into one. For the fir ft ; that Infants Were Qourch-members, as you have not yet denied that I know of, fo Will I not be fo uncharitable as to imagine that you are now about it: And much Ufi that you Jhould have the leaft doubt whe- ther tt were by Cjods Ordination. 1 here are two things confiderable in the matter. Fi'ffl>> the be- nefit of Church-memberjhip , with aU the conse- quent privi ledges. It is thework^of a grant or promife to confer thefe y and not directly of a pre- cept* Secondly , the duty of devoting and dedica- ting the child to God, and entring it into the Co- venant which confers the benefit ; and this is the vcork^ of a Law or Precept to conftitute this duty. I am pafi doubt that you doubt not of either of thefe : For you cannot imagine , that any Infant had the bleffmg without a grant or promife, (that's impojfible ; ) nor that any Parents lay under a duty without an obliging law, (for that is as im- jpojjible. ) Takjng it therefore for granted that you are refolved in both thefe , and fo yield that, fuch a grant and precept there was , there re- mains no quefiion but whether it be repealed : which I have long expelled that you flwuld prove. For citing the particular iexts in which the or- dination is contained , though more may be faid than is faid, yet I frail thmk^it needlef, till I fee the ordination contained in thofe Texts which I tyave already mentioned to you, proved to be re- yerfed* Nor do I . know that it is of fo great ufe
to
to ft and to cite the particular Texts , -while ym confeft in general, that fuch a promise and precept there is, by vertue of which, Infants were tillChrifis time duly members of Chrifls Church (forChrifts Church tt was ) even his universal vifible Church* Still remember that I take the word £ law ~] not ftri&ly for a precept only , but largely , as com- prehending both promife and precept*, and I have Already jhewed you both, and fo have others.
So nmch of your endeavour as hath any tenden- €y to the advancement of holinefs, I am willing to fecond you in, viz. that at the age you defire people might folemnly profefs their acceptance of Chrifiy and their refolution to be his : But I hope Cod will find me better work, while I mufl ft ay heref than to fpendmy time to prove that no In- fants of believers are within Chrifts vifible Church, that is, are no Infant Difciples, Infant Chriftians , Infant Qourch- members. I know no glory it will bring to Chrift, nor comfort to man7 nor fee I now any appearance of truth in it. I hlefs the Lord for the benefits of the Baptifmal Co- venant that I enjoyed in infancy, and that I was dedicated fo foon to God, and not left wholly in the Kingdom and power of the Devil. They that dejpife this mercy, or account it none, or not worth the accepting, may go without it , and take that which they get by their ingratitude* And I once hoped, that much lefs than fuch an inundation of direful confequents as onr eyes have feen, would have done more for the bringing of you back. t9 flop the doleful breach that you have made. lam fain to fiend my time now to endeavour the re-
B 4 cover)
I o ) covery of fome of your Opinion who are lately turned Quakers , or at leafl the preventing of others Apoflafe : which is indeed to prevent the emptying of your Churches, Which I fuppofe will be a more acceptable worl^ with you, than again to write againfl rebaptiz^mg , or for Infant Bap- tifm. Siry I remain your imperfecl brother, know- ing but in fart , yet loving the truth ,
Rich. Baxter.
Mr, Tombes his fecond Letter,
Sir , I confefs Infants were by Gcds fad of taking the whole people of the Jews for his peo* pie, in that eftate of the Jewiih Pedagogy ( not by any promife or precept ) vifible Church-mem- bers, that is, of the Congregation of IfraeL I do not confefs that there was any Law or Ordinance determining it fhould be fo , but only a fad of God , which is a tranfeunt thing , and I think it were a foolifh undertaking for me to prove the repeal of a fad. Wherefore ftill I prefs you that you would (hew me where that Law, Ordinance, Statute or Decree of God is that is repealable , that is, which may in congruous fence be either by a later ad: faid to be repealed, or elfe to be cftablifhed as a law for ever. This I never found in your books, nor do I conceive that law is im- plied in any thing I grant • and therefore I yet pray you to fet me down the particular Text or Texts of Holy Scripture where that Law is. Which peed not hinder you from oppofing the Quakers
" ( in
( 9) ( in which I have not and hope (hall not be want- ing ) of whom I think that you are mifinformed that they are Anabaptifts, I think there are very ^ few of them that were ever baptifed , and have good evidence that they have been formerly Seek- ers, as you call them. And I think you do un- juftly impute the direful confequences you fpeak of to the denial of Infant Baptifm, and to the practice of adult Baptifm , and that as your felf are deceived fo you miflead others. I yet ex~ pe& your Texts, knowing none in any of your Books that mention that law of Infants vifible Church-memberfhip which you afTert either ex- plicitly or implicitly, and am yours as is meet,
Bewdly , Afrit 4. 1655. JohnTombes,
Richard Baxters fecond Letter,
Sir, If 'you will needs recall me to this ungrateful Works let me requefi you to tell me fully , exablly and flainly, what tranfient fall you mean^ which you conceive without law or fromife did make Church-members : that fo I may know where the comfetition lieth. When I know your meanings I intend, God willing^ to fend you a jfeedy anjwer to your lafl. Tour fcllow^fervanty
April 16. 1655, Rich. Baxter.
Mr. Tombes
\JMr. Tombes his third Letter,
Sir, The tranfeunt faft of God , whereby In- fants were vifible Church-members, was plainly cxpreft in my laft to you, to be the taking of the whole people of the Jews for his people, which is the expreflion of sJMofes, Dent. 4. 34. Exod. 6. 7. And by it I mean that which is exprelTed Levit. 20.24. 26. when God faid, / have [eve ~ red yon from other people , ihat yon jbould be mine. The fame thing is exprefTed iKings%.$i* Ifai. 43 . 1. This I term £ fad: ] as conceiving it moft comprehenfive of the many particular ads in many generations, whereby he did accomplifh it. Fol- lowing herein Stephen, Arts 7. 2. and Nehem. 9. 7. I conceive it began when he called Abraham out of Vr , Gen. 12. 1. to which fucceeded in their times the enlarging of his family , removing of Lot , Ijhmaely the fons of Keturah, Efan> diftin- ftion by Circumcifion, the birth of JJaac, Jacob ', his leading to Padan Aram , increafe there, re- moval to Canaan, to eAZgypt, placing, preferving there, and chiefly the bringing of them thence, to which principally the Scripture refers this faft , JExod. 19. 4. Lev it. 1 1. 45. Nehem. 1. 10. Hof. 11. 1. the bringing them into the bond of the Covenant at Mount Sinai, giving them laws, fet- tling their Priefthood, tabernacle, army, govern- ment, inheritance. By which faft the Infants of the Israelites were vifible Church-members as be. ing part of the Congregation of Jfrael , and in like manner though not with equal right ( for they
might
I "J
fnight be fold away ) were the bought fervams or captives, whether Infants or of age, though their Parents were profeiTed Idolaters. And this I faid was without promife or precept, meaning fuch promife or precep: as you in your Letter fay I confefs, and you defcribe, a promife conferring to Infants the benefit of Church -member finp with all the confequent priviledges, a precept conftitu- ting the duty of devoting and dedicating the child to God, ana entring into Covenant, which confer s the benefit. For though I grant the promifes to the natural pofterity of Aoraham, Gen. 17. 4,5, 6,7,8. and the Covenant made with lfrael at Mount Sinai, and Dent . 29. wherein lfrael avouch- ed God, and a precept of Circumcinon, and pre- cepts of God by zJWofes of calling the people , and requiring them to enter into Covenant , Exod. 19* and Dent. 29. Yet no fuch particular promife concerning Infants vifible Church-mem- berfhip, or precept for Parents or others , con- cerning the folemn admiflion of Infants as vifible Church-members, befides Circumcifion, as in your Book of Baptifm you afTert. Nor do I conceive that Infants of lfrael were made vifible Church- members by the promifes in the covenants or the precepts forenamed, but by Gods tranfeunt fad: which I have defcribed. Which I therefore terni [ tranfeunt ~\ becaufe done in time , and fo not eternal , and pad , and fo not in congruous fence repealable as a law, ordinance, flatute, decree, which determines fuch a thing fhall be for the fu- ture, though capable of continuance in the fame, or the like ads, or of interruption. Which con-
tinu-
(i2;
tinuance or interruption is known by narration of what Gud hath done, not by any legal revocation, or renewing, or continuance of a promife or pre- cept concerning that thing. Now as the Church- memberfhip of the Jfraelites began as I conceive with ^Abrahams call., and was compleated when they were brought cut of <ts£gypt to God, Exod. 19.4. fo I conceive it ceafed when upon their re- jection of Chrift as was fore-told Mattb. 21.43. they were broken off from being Gods people , which was compleated at the deftructicn of Jer$t~ falem, when the temple was deftroyed, as Chrift fore-told, Lukf 19. 43, 44. And inftead of the Jewifh people by the preaching of the Gofpel con- firmed by mighty figns, God gathered to himfelf a Church of another frame in a fpiritual way , according to the inftitution of Chrift, Matth. 28. 19,20. Mark*i6. 15, 16. in which he included not Infants, the Jews themfelves were no part of the Chriftian Church without repentance and faith in Chrift profefTed at leaft.
Having now fully, exactly, and plainly told you my meaning as you requeft, I do now expect your fpeedy anfwer to my laft, and therein to fulfil my requeft of fetting down the particular Texts of holy Scripture wherein that law largely taken comprehending promife and precept of Infants vi- fible Church- membership, which you affert to be unrepealed, is contained. If you fhall in your an- fwer kt down wherein the bl effing, benefit, and priviledges of Infants vifible Chuixh-memberfhip, which you affert unrepealed, did confift-, I may
better
U3)
better under/land you than I do : But I (hall prefs you no further than you (haU be willing in this thing. lam Yours as is meet,
Bewdleyy April zi* 1655. JohnTombes.
Richard Baxters third Letter being long, is di- vided by Mr. Tombes into feveral fe&ions , and his Anfwers accordingly divided; which order I muft therefore obferve in my reply. The words of the Letter are.
SECT. I.
R» B* CJ I R , A probability of doing or receiving O good, is to me a call to action* Seeing no fuch probability -, / told yon at flrji my purpo~ fes to forbear any further debates with you , till you, had better anfwered what is faid. In your next you feeme d to deal fo plainly, as if fomefmalt probability of good did yet appear : But in your third you fly off again and eat your own words , and jumble things in much confujion, fo that I now re~ turn again to my former thoughts. For you that exprejly fay and unfay, and contradict your felfy are not likely to be brought to a candid manage- ment or fair ijfue of the Difpute. You I fure thinks it no great matter to be driven to a felf" contradiction ( which with others U to lofe the" Caufe ) who fo eafily and exprefly run upon it your
"Mr.T's Anfwer, It was a call fuvEcient, &c.
Reply.
(14)
keply. 1 muft be the difcerner of my own Call or Reafons to write : time is precious : As for his offence at Mn M. and Mr. firmin for charging him with fophiftry, and at Mr. Ford for charging j him with railing, and Mr. Gataker for doubting ic is his difpoficion to braze his forehead •, and his own angry words hereupon, they concern not our pre- fent bufinefs*
SECT. II.-
R. B* XN your fecond you fay [ Icon/eft infants J. were by Gods fa A of taking the whole people of the Jews for his people , in that eftate of the Jewifh Paedagogy, not by any proniife or precept, then vifible Church-members, that is, of the Congregation of Ifrael •, I do not confefs, that there was any Law or Ordinance determining it fhould be fo, but only a fad of God, which is a tranfeunt thing , &c. ] In your third yon [ay , £ For though I grant the promifes to the natural pofterity of Abraham , Gen. 17.4,5,6,7,8. and the Covenants made with Ifrael at mount Sinai , and Dent . 29. wherein Ifrael avouched God, and a precept of Circumcifion, and precepts of God hy Mofesof calling the people^ and requiring of them to enter into Covenant, Exod. 1 9. & Dent, 29. yet no fuch particular promife concerning in- fants vifible Church-member/hip , or precept for Parents or others concerning the folemn admiflion of .Infants as vifible Church-members befides Cir- eumcifion, as in your book of Baftifm you affert]
Btftri
Before there was no [ Law or Ordinance deter- mining it (hould be fo , but only a fact j now there are Laws or precepts and promifes that it jhould befojbut [not fuch as I affert in my book. ] And if /Jhould Jhew yon never fo many, yon may reply , they are not fitch as I affert in my book^ and wafte the time in that trial^ when it is better for me to fee fir ft what yon Jay to that book,: For thfo is but to lead us about to trifling.
a Mr. Ts Anfwer. There is no fliadow of a *( contradiction, &c*
Reply. Let the impartial Reader jadge.
SECT. III.
R. B. *Tp 0 make any clear Work, upon the things X in queftion, we muft neceffarily Jpeal^ to the que ft ions diftintlly, many of which yon too much confound. The fir ft queftion in order fit to be refohedisy [ whether Infants before Chrifts in- carnation were Church -member s , or not? j yon grant they were: and therefore this is p aft difpute with us. The fecond queftion and the fir ft refol- ded , is [ what Church it is that Infants were members of f 3 This you give me occafion to take in the way, becaufe you twice explain your mean- ings when you confefs them Church-members , by An [i.e. of the congregation of Ifrael* ] By which you feem to imply two things : Firft , that none but the Infants of the Congreation of Ifrael were Church-members : Secondly ', that the infants ?/ Ifrael were members of m Church hut what is
ton*
Convertible with the congregation of Ifrael. ] Thi | third quefiion is, what it is that gives the Ifrae- \ lites that denomination of £ the Congregation of Jfrael 3 of which Infants were members 1 For yon jumble both together ', both caufes Civil, and Eccle- fiaftical, and of both thofe that make to the being and well-being. So that our enquiry mufi be , ychether the (Congregation and the Commonwealth be the fame thing in your fen fe .? ~\ and what confii- tuteth it formally ? For in this you fpeak in dark^ ambiguities. The fourth queftion is , T Whether there was any Law, Ordinance or Precept of Cod concerning mans duty herein, or obliging him to the Covenant acceptance and engagement, and fo to member flip -, and any promife, grant or Cove- nant, conferring the right of Church-memberfiip and the confequent friviledges to Infants ? 3 To this you fay both Tea and Nay , if I Can under- fiand you, or at'Heafi as to much of the quefiion concerning the being , and part of the effeel of the precept and promife. Yet you conclude, that you \_ do not conceive that Infants of Jfrael were made vijible Church-members by the promife s in the Covenants, or the precepts fore-named, but by Cods tranfeunt fall. ~] I will not fufpetl that you imagine any other promife doth it be fides that in the Covenant, becaufe your tying the effeel to the tran- feunt fail doth exclude 'them. Here we are cafi upon thefe queftions next. The fifth quefiion, £ Whether there be fuch precepts and promifes as you grant, {or as I fi)all prove ) which yet make not Infants Church-members ? \ The fixth quefii- on, [_ Whether there be any tranfeunt fail of God,
wh;cht
which without the efficiency of precept or fromife. did make the Infants of Ifrael Church-members ? 3 The ftventh queftion, [ Whether thofe which you have aligned be fnch fails .? ] 'the eighth queftion, £ Which are the Texts of Scripture that contain or -jjL ex prefi the faid laws, precepts, or grants which I maintain ? ~\ this you mfifvupon* The ninth que ft i- on-> C Whether fuch laws , preceps or grants as I frail prove, are capable of a repal or revocation ? ] The tenth que ft ion, [ Whether they are actually re- voked or repealed ? j
" Mr. T's Anfwer. 7 he eighth queftion is the il only queftion needful to be refolved , &c.
Reply. If I do too much it is but your palling it by, and it will not trouble you*
— —
SECT.IV.
R; B. TyEfore all thefe queftions are well hand* _D led, we jhculd eaply be convinced that it had been better either to have let all alone , of tlfe, if we mufl needs have the other bout, at leafi to have agreed on our terms, and the fating of the queftions better before we had begun. And I thinly that even that is not eafie to do. For when I dejired your plain , exaft and full explication , of one word £ tranfeunt fall: ~] and you tell me you have plainly, fully and exaclly told me your meaning : It falls out, either through the unhap- py darknef of my own under ft anding, or yours, that I know but little more of your mind than I did before 7 and that you feem to me to have raifed
G wore
(is;
wore doubts and darknefs than yon have refolved' and diftipated, Tct being thus far drawn in , / fhall briefly fay fomewhat to the feveral queftions, not following your defires to anfwer one alone: which cannot be done to any purpofe while the fore- going are unrefvlvcd , becaufe it is the clearing up of truth , and not the ferving of your pre fen t ends in your writings now in hand that I muft intend,
" Mr. Ts Anfwer. I affect no more bouts with
<c fhch a captious wrangler fo many doubts
" flem not to be from the darknefs of the un- *' derftanding, but either from the lightnefs of the "fancy, or the bent of the will, to find a way "to blunt the Readers attention, &c.
Reply. This is not the Controverlie : Is your judgement alike right of perfons as of Do&rines >
SECT. V.
K»B. 'Tp HE ftrft que ft ion being refolved that JL Infants were, once Church-members , to the refolving of the fecond queftion , / fhall prove thefe two Propoftions. I . That it was not only the "Infants of the Congregation of lfrael that were Church-members . 2. The Infants of lfrael were members of the univerfal vifible (fhurch, and not only of that particular Congregation. The fir ft I have proved already in my book. And \. Ifeac was a Church-member, yet ?ione of the Con- gregation of lfrael • it was not lfrael till Jacobs days. If you fay that by tlie £ Congregation of
lfrael ]}
ifrael"] you mean [the feed of Abraham which jad the promt fe of Canaan] Tet z. I fay , that Ifliimel and Abrahams feed by Keturah and Efau had none of the promife y and yet were Church- members in their infancy, [In IfaacjW/ thy feed '?e called ] that is, that feed which had the pro- mi fe of Canaan. And fo it was confined to Ja- :ob, who got the bkffmg and the birthright , which Efau lofl, and wot excluded, yet was of the Church from his infancy. "The Son of the bond* woman was not to be heir with the Son of the free-woman, yet was Ifhmael an Infant member. If you fay, that by [the Congregation of Ifrael ] yon mean aR the natural feed of Abraham: I addy 3. The children of his bond-men born in his fami- ly, or bonght with mony, were none of Abrahams natural feed , and yet were Church-members in their infancy. If yon go yet further , and fay y that by [ the Congregation of Ifrael } yon mean all that were at the abfolute dijpofe of Abraham or his [ucceffors, and fo were his own : I add, 4* The Infants of free Profelytes were none fitch , and yet were Church-members. If you yet gofur~ ther, and fay> that you mean by [ the Congrega- tion of Ifrael ~\ any that came under the govern- ment of Abraham or his fuccejfors : then I add y 5, That the Sichemkes, Gen. 34. were not to come under Jacobs government , but to be his allies and neighbours , being fo many more in number than Jacob, that they concluded rather that his cattle, and fubflance fhould be theirs 9 yet were they cir~ cumcifed every male , and fo were made member £ of the vifible prof effing Church. For it was not
C z tht
the bare external fign that Jacob or his fens would -per/wade them to , without the thing figmfed.: For the reproach that they mentioned of giving their daughter to the uncircumcifed , was not m the defeli of the external abfeiffion \for fo Mofes own fon , and all the Jfraelites in the wilder nefi Jhould have been under the fame reproach, and all the females continually : But it was in that they Were not in Covenant with the fame God , and did not profefi to worjhip the fame God in his true way of worfhip as they did. And therefore as Baptizing is not indeed and in Scripture fence Baptizing , if it be not ufed for engagement to- God, even into his name -5 fo Circumcifion is not indeed and in Scripture fence Circumcifion, unlefi it be ufed as an engaging fign, and they be cir- cumcifed to God.
" Mr. T's Anfwer. By [the Congregation of u Jfrael 3 I mean the lame with the Hebrew peo-
cc pie or houfe of Abraham by an anticipa-
*f tion, <^c.
Reply, i. That not only the Infants of Abra- hams houfe were Church-members fhall be pro- ved.
2. Here he is forced to take in the Children of Keturah, Jfiomael, and Efau7 into [ the Con- gregation of Ifrael ] • And fo to extend Infants ] Church-memberiliip further than the Jews Com- mon-wealth. For let the Reader judge, whether the pofterity of Ijhmael, Efau and Keturah were of that Republick, or Profelytes either, and not ttfu&lly enemies.
\. H«
(21)
J. He is forced to extend Infants Church- memberfhip to whole Cities that would be but their Allies, as the Sichemites were: For when he faith £ They were one people ] by confent , he could not fay that they were to be their fub- je&s and fo members of their Kepublick. And they may be [~ one people J by mixture arid con- federacy, without fubjedion. And there is no in- timation that the Sichemites were to part with their former Governours and be fubjed to J a- cob. And then if all the Kingdoms about would but have been accordingly 'Jacobs confederates, it feems Mr. T. muft yield that their Infants had been vifible Church-members.
SECT. VI.
R. B. Tf w as then the duty of all the Nations X round about ( if not of all the Nations en earthy that could have information of the Jew- ifh Religion ) to engage them f elves and their children lo God by fircumcifion* That all that would have any alliance and commerce with the Jews muft do it, is commonly confejfed: that it muft extend to Infants, the cafe of the Sichemites ( though deceitfully drawn to it by fome of Jacobs fins) doth foe w, and fo doth the Jewijh pratlice which they were to imitate : that the fame engage- ment to the fame God is the duty of all the world, is commonly acknowledged, though Divines we not agreed whether the diftant nations were I obliged to fife Circumcifon the Jewifofign. The
C 3 beft
(21)
fteft of the jews were zealous to make Vrofelytes, and no doubt but the very law of nature did teach them to do their befi for the falvation of others. To tbink^fuch charitable and holy worlds unlawful, is to think it evil to do the grcatcfl good. And if they muft perfwade the neigh- bour nations to come in to God by Covenant en- gagement > they muft perfwade them to bring their children with them , and to devote them to God as well as themfelves. For the Jews knew no other covenanting or engaging to God* As the Sichemites mufi do, fo other nations muft do : For what priviledge had the children of the Siche- mites above the reft of the world ?
" Mr. T's Anfwer. The argument in form " would be thus : If it were the duty of all the fc nations round about to engage themfelves an4 IC their children to God by circumcifion, then it ff was not only the Infants of the Congregation fc of Jfrael that were Church-members, cjre.
Reply, i. You flould have (aid [_ that would have been Church-members had they done that duty ]. But you can beft ferve your own turn. 2. One Supream Power maketh one Republick ( with the fubje&s ) j And many Soveraigns make many Republicks ( as all grant ) : Therefore if all the Nations about had engraffed themfelves into the Congregation oHfrael but as the Sichemites did, they had not made one Republick, as to humane Soveraignty : I prefume to tell you my thoughts of fuch a cafe ( and fo of the Sichemites ) : It was the glory of Jfrael to be a Theocracy : God Was their Soveragin • not only as he was of all
the
I «5V
the world ( de jure and by overruling their hu- mane Soveraign : ) but by fpecial Revelation doing the work a Soveraign himfelf : He made them Laws ( and not Mofes ) : He appointed them Cap- tains under him by Revelation : He decided cafes by Oracle : He gave them Judges that were Pro- phets, and acted by his extraordinary fpirit. Though aJMofes is called a King, he was but an Official Magiftrate , Captain and Prophet : [ A Prophet fhall the Lord your God raife up to you like unto me, &c. ~] faith he : which had imme- diate refped to the form of Government and man- ner of fucceffion, ( as differing from the way of Kings which the Jfraclites finfully preferred af- terward , cafting off this fpecial Theocracy ) though ultimately it intended Chriff. Now, this being fo, the Sichemites or any other nations who would have taken God for their Sovereign, and come under this fpecial prophetical Theocracy, (which Circumcifion engaged them to as refpe- ding the Laws to which it bound them,) had been fo far united to JfraeL But how far mighc this have extended ? To the reft that he faith I confent. If you will not hold to this you muft fay that the Sichemites were to be of the fame Communitie with Jfrael , and not of the fame Republick, which fignifieth either ungoverned Communities or various Republicks confede- rating.
C 4 \ S EC T«
I *f )
___ _
SECT. VII.
R. B. TN Hellers time many of the people be- X came Jews, Heft. 8. 17. ir/w jw were wot under their government. <^4nd to be Jews is to be of the 'jewijh frofejfion* And it is well known that this was to be circumcifed, they and their little ones ( as the Prpfelytes were ) and fo to keep the Law of Mofes.
cc Mr. T's Anfwer. They were incorpos-
*c raced into the Jewiih people, &c.
Reply. This needeth no reply but what is given to the former.
SECT. VIII.
R. B. HpH£ fcattered and captivated Jews 1 themselves were from under the Go- vernment of Abraham sfuccejfor sy and yet were to Circumcife their children as Church-members.
Cc Mr. T's Anfwtr is the fame, and the Reply ?c the fame.
— ^ ! — r~ — — —
SECT. IX.
Ro B. \T[T&en Jonas preached to Ninive, it
VV was all the race of man among
them, without exception, from the great eft to the
leafty that was to faji. <mA join in the humiliation I
Ergo*
Ergo, all, even Infants as well as others , were to far take of the remijfion. If you fay , the beafis were to fafl too : J anfwer, as they were capable in their kjnd of part of the curfe, fo were they of fart of the benefit, but their capacity was not as mans : They fajied to manifeft mans humilia- tion. And if by the humiliation of the aged the beafis Jped the better in their kind, no wonder if Infants Jped the better in theirs , and according to their capacities, and that was to have a remijfi- on fuitable to their fin. ,
" Mr. T's finfweu Neither aged nor infants " were vifible Church-members, &c.
Reply. This only proveth by parity of Reafon, their capacity of it , and that they would have been fuch , if they had truely turned to God : which yet I cannot fay that many of them did not according to the terms of the Common Co- venant of Grace made with Adam and Noe , though they came not under the Covenant of pe- culiarity : And if fo ( 2,$ Repentance is to be inter- preted in the beft fenfe till the contrary be pro- ved ) I leave it to the Reader , whether. Gods' laying on the Infants their fhare ( as capable ) in the humiliation , imply not fuch a fhare as they are capable of in the benefit ? And the cafe of the Jfraelites Infants ft eweth what they were capable of, Mr. T's denial is no difproof.
SECT,
\ "V /
SECT. X,
R.B. TT7//^ / have [aid of Sem and many VV others , and their poflerity already^ I foall not here again repeat : and more will be faid anon to the following que ft ions.
"Mr.T's Anfwer is none, and needs no Re-,
SECT. XL
R. B. ~TT* HE fecond propofltion to be proved JL is, that [ the Israelites children were members of the univerfal vifible fourch of Qorifl as well as of the Congregation of Ifraei] Bat this you did heretofore acknowledge y and therefore Jfuppofe will not now deny. I fuppofe it pafi can- trover fie between t&* i. That Chrifl had then a Church on earth. As Abraham faw Chrifts day and rejoycedj and Mofes fuffered the reproach of Chrifl y Heh 11.26. and the Prophets enquired of the falvation by Qhrifi , and fe arched diligently y and prophefied of the grace to come ^ and it was the fpirtt of Chrifl which was in thofe Prophets figntfying the time, and teftifying beforehand the fufferings of Chrifl, and the glory that fliould fol- low, 1 Per. 1. 10, 11. So were they part of the Church of Chrifl , and members of the body of Chrifl , and given for the edification of that body : Though it was revealed to them that the higher
{ri-
f 37J
priviledges cf the Church after the cowing of Chnfty were not for them but for *#, I Pec. 1.12, 2. 1 fitppofe it agreed on alio between m , that there was no true Church or Ecclefaftical wcrjhip- ping focicty appointed by God in all the world sc the f al^ but the Chmch of 'Chrift, and there- fore either Infants were members of Chnfts Church , or of no Church of Gods znftitution. Mofes Church and Chrifts Church according to Gods in ft it ut ion were not two , but one Church, For Mofes was Chrifts Vjber , and his ceremo- nies were an obfeurer Gojpel to lead men to Chrift.* And though the foolifi) jews by mi f- under ft an d- ing them made afeparation^ and -made Woks Di- fciples to be fcparate from Chrifts Difctphs^ and fo fct up the alone £ Jhadows cf things to cor/.e^ yet the body is all cf Chrift J Col. 2. 17. and by fo doing they violated Gods institution^ apd I'.i:- churchi the tr fives, 3. I fuppoje it agreed aifo^ that Chrifts Church is but one , and that even thofe of all ages that are not at once vifiblc, yet make up one body. 4. And that therefore who- ever is a member of any particular Church is a, member cf the univerfal. ( Though the Church Was more eminently called Catholic^ when the Wall of feparation was taken down.) But I remem- ber I have proved this in my Book^-, parr. 1. chap. 20. and therefore fv.all fay no more now,
cc Mr. T's Anfwer. The two firft are granted. " To the third, Though whoever is a member of ci any particular Church is a member of the uni- " verfal • yet it follows not, (which Mr, B. drives 6C at, and vainly talks of his proving) that every
u one
<c one who was a member of the univerfal Church, <cin that he was a member of the Jewi h Church- <c particular, was a vifible member of every parti- <c cular vifible Church of Chrift. 2. Nor that every <c one that was a member of the univerfal Church , c< in that he was a member of a vifible particular cc Church of Chrift, was a vifible member of the <c Jewifh particular Church, &c*
Reply, 1. None of this ever came into my thoughts which he untruly frith I drive at, &c. What fober man could imagine either of thefe afTertions ? What pittiful abufe of ignorant Rea- ders is this ? 2. And what a poor put off to the point in hand ? That which I faid is but that all particular vifible Churches and members, make up one vifible univerfal Church , and therefore every vifible member of any particular Church is a member cf the univerfal ? He durft not deny this, and yet a flander ferveth his turn.
SECT. XII.
R. B. (~yOnccmi'ng the matter of the third que- \^J ftion, I ajfert that £ it was not only of the Jews Common-Health that Infants were members , but of the Church diftinci from it* ] This is proved f efficiently in what is fatd before.
icMr.T'$u4/fwer. As yet I find it not proved u that the Jewifh Church was diftind from the iL Common-wealth , or that there was not any iC member of the Church who was not of the " Common-wealth.
Reply.
(29)
Reply, i. It is only a formal 2nd not a materi- al diftinftion that I medled with : The formal reafonof a Church-member and a O'vil-memtxr differ, at leaft after the choice of Kings i when ihe Republick was conftituted by a humane head : Of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Galufpic's Aarons Rod ; If the Jews Common-wealth be ipeciried as a Theocracy from God the Soveraign, the Sichemites were of it, and other nations might. 2. But many fay that fome were of the Common- wealth that were not of the Church, though not contrarily : And be they diftind: or not , it futfi- ceth me that Infants were of the Church,
SECT. XIH,XIV3XV,XVL
R. B. A JfOreover , 1. Infants were Church- 1 V JL members in Abrahams family before Circumcifion^ and after when it was no Common- Wealth. So they were in Ifaacs, Jacobs, &c»
2. The bawjhed, captivated , fcattered Jews 5 that ceafedtobe members of their Common-wealthy yet ceafed not to be of their Church.
3 . The people of the Land 7 that became Jews in Hefters time , joyned not themfdves to their Common-wealth : Nor the Sichemites.
4. sJMany Profelytes never joyned themfelves to their Common-wealth.
"Mr.T. affirmeth ihem all to have beenCom- *c mon-wealths.
Anfwer. The word being ambiguous may in a large fenfe be extended to a family, and to a
fcattered
(3°)
(tattered people that have no Soveraign ^ but is not fo ufuaily taken.
SECT. XVII.
■ R. Bknp HE Children of Abraham by Ketu- JL rah, when they were removed from his family were not unchurched j and yet were no mem- bers of the jews Common-wealth. But I Jhall take tip with what is faid for this already , underta- king more largely to manifefi it^ when I perceive it neceffary and ufcfid.
u Mr. T's Anfwer. Abrahams children by Ke- €C turah when out of the Common-wealth of the u Hebrews were unchurched . at leaft in refped " of the Church of the Hebrews.
Reply, i. What a wide gap doth that [at leaft \ make you, yet to fay, They were a Church or no Church, as you pleafe? 2* Reader, ufe Scripture but impartially, and in the fear of God, and I will leave it to thy Conference to judge whether it be credible, that when God had fore- told that Abraham would command his children and houfhold after him to keep the way of the Lord, Gen. 18. 19. and when Ijlrmael, Ketnrahs children , arid Efau , were circumcifed by Gods command, and God had yet promi fed the Poli- tical peculiarities fpecially to Ifaac , and Jacob , yet God would have all the grandchildren of Ifimael, Keturah, Efau to be uncircumcifed : and all their pofleruy to ceafe that ufage, as foon as they wrere out of Abrahams houfe : when yec
Hiftory
f 30
Hiftory affureth us that they long continued it : Or whether God would have them circumcifed and yet be no Church- members ? Believe as evi- dence conftraineth thee.
S E C T. X V 1 1 1.
R. B. TpO the fourth queftion I affert that [_ i. X There was a, Law or Precept of God ob- liging the Parents to enter their children into Cove- nant with God Joy accenting his favoured re-inga- ging and devoting them to God0andfo entring them jolemnly Church-members. ] And £ 2. there was a Covenant \ "promt fe or grant of God, by which he offered the Church-memberjhip of fome Infants and atlually conferred it , where his offer was ac- cepted. J / fliould have mentioned this firfl^ and therefore will begin with the -proof of this. By thefc terms C&ve?ianty promifey grant , or deed of gifty &c. we under fland that which is common to all thefe , viz* \_ A fign of Gods will conferring cr confirming a right to or in fome benefit J fucb as we commonly call a Civil all of Collation as di flinch from a mere Phyfical all of dijfofaL I call it [ a fign of Gods will de jure J because that is the general nature of all his legal moral alls : they are all fignal determinations de debito, of fome due. 2. 1 fay conferring or confirming right to fome benefit J to difference it from pre- cepts which only determine what Jhall be due from us to God , and from threatnings , which deter* mine what punijhment fiiall be due from God to us.
"Mr. 7;
" Mr. T. If we prove by another grant
"or deed of gift Phyfical or Moral which is not <ca promife , or by any Law which is not fuch a " precept, he contradicts not my fpeech, &c.
Reply. Your words are [_I do not confers that there was any Law or Ordinance determining that it fiwuld be fo ( that Infants fiionld be membcrf of the Jewifi Church ) but only * fail of God which is a t ran fount thing , and I thinks it were a foolijh undertaking to prove the repeal of a fail. J Perufe his words Reader.
SECT. XIX,XX;XXi.
R. B. T ~XAvin? thm explained the terms , / .LjL prove the propofuion* If Infants Church-memberjhip with the privilcdgcs' thereof were a benefit conferred, which fame had right to or in, then was there fome grant, covenant , or promife, by which this right was conferred : But the antecedent is mofi certain : Ergo , fo is the con fe quern* I fuppofe you will not deny that it was a benefit to be the covenanted people of God, to have the Lord engaged to be their God, and to take them for his people, to be brought fo near him , and to be feparated from the common and unclean , from the world, and from the firangers to the Covenant of promife s, that live as without God in the world, and without hope.
If it were asked what benefit had the Circum- cifion ? I fuppofe yon would fay , much every way.
If Infant Church-memberjhip were no benefit , ■hen they that had it> were not ( when they came o age or their Parent i in the mean time ) obli- ged to any thankfalnefs for it. But they were obliged to be thankful for it. Ergo, it was a be- uft.
c Mr. T. Denyeth not the benefit v but denyeih ;c [that this is to be Vifible members formally 'or.connexively, for they may have all this be- c nefit who are not .viable Church- members : c vise fome believing Saints that are dumb.
Reply. Mark Reader, what an iflue our Con- roverfies with thefe men come to ? [" Men may )e the covenanted people of God, and have the Lord engaged to be their God and to take them :or his people, and be feparated. from the com- non and unclean, from the world, from Grangers ;o the Covenant, &c. and yet be no vifible Church-members^ with them 1 Doth a. dumb man [ignifie his confent to the Covenant by any figns or not? If he do, that is vifible covenanting. If not, how is he one of rhefe covenanting and fe- parated people? And do you think that Mr. T. knew not that I talk, to him of vifible covenant- ing and feparation , and not only of a fecret un- exprefTed heart-confenr : What will make a Church-member then with fuch men ?
"He. next faith that [ To be the circumcifion is 11 not all one as to be vifible Church-members •, cc Comelim and his houfe were vifible Church- " members, yet not the circumcifion J.
Reply. Reader, doft thou not marvail to find him fo plead for me againfl himfelf, or fpeak no-
D thing
(34) thing to the cafe? To be circumcifed then, or baptized now , is not all one as to be vifible Cburvh-mtmbers : But fure all the Circumcifed were , and all the Baptized are, inverted in vifi- ble memberfhip ? Is it not fo ? And if Cornelius and more of the uncircumcifcd alio were mem- bers, you fee it was not infeparable from Cir- cumcilion. And whom is this againft, me or him ?
"Headdeth [nor were the benefits, Rom.$. " i, 2. ( the oracles of God, ere.) conferred to <c them as vifible Church-members : For then all 4C vifible Church-members had been partakers of " them ].
Reply. But it was to them as members of the Jewiih vifible Church: And if you plead for the extent of Lhe Church to others alfo, I thank you for it.
When I fay £ Infant Church-mtmberjlnp was a benefit ] " He faith [_ Vifible Church-member- cc fhip fimply notes only a ftate, by which was <c a benefir. ]
Reply. Only, k an exclufive term : Reader, by this thou maift perceive the myftery of making Church-members by a tranfeunt fall , without a Law or promife. It is no benefit with thefe men, but a ftate by which was a benefit. Either they or I then know not at all what Church-member- fhip is : And are not all our Volumes wifely written to trouble the world , about that Subjelb that we are not agreed what it is , and about a term which we agree not of the fenfeof? I take a vifible Church -member to be a vifible member of Chrill as Head of the Church and of his
Church
K5) J Church as vifible ? To be a zJMember is to be a Tart : It is therefore as the member of a Family, School, Kingdom , a related part ! And is it no benefit in it felf befides the confequents to be vifibly united and related to Chrift and his bo- dy ? to be relatively a member of the Houfliold oil God ? Sure were it but for the exclufion of the miferie of the contrary ftate , and for the Honour of it, fuch a Relation to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft > and the Church, is fome little benefit : ( and great to me. )
And whether he and Major Danvers and fuch others fhould make fuch a vehement itir about it as they do , if it be no benefit , let it be confi- dered.
SECT. XXII.
R, B. ^Tp HE next thing in the antecedent to X be proved isy that there was a right conferred to this benefit^ and fame had a right in it. And i . If any had the benefit •, then had they right to or in that benefit : But fome had the be- nefit, Ergo. The conference of the major is cer- tain. I. Becaufe the very nature of the benefit confifleth in a right to further benefits. 2. If any had the benefit of Church-member firip, Cove- nant-inter eft ^ &c. without right ; then they had it with Cjods confent and approbation or without it. Not with it : For he is juft^ and confenteth not that any have that which he hath- not fome right to or in : Not without it : for no man can
D 2 have
have a hem jit from God again fi his will, or with A o tit it. z. If no Infants had duly and right fiil-i ly received this benefit ^ God would have fo me -I where reprehended the ufnrpation and abufe of\ his ordinances or benefits. But that he doth not as to this cafe , Ergo. 3. God hath expreffed this right in many Texts of Scripture^ of which more afterward,
16 Mr. T. The Infants of the Jews were vifi- cc fible Church-members, not by a Legal right to " it> antecedent to their being fiichv'tf\b\z Church- "members which they or any for them might tl claim as due i Nor was it capable of being du- u ly and rightfully received or ufurped : For it ' €c was nothing but a flate of appearing to be part ** of that people, who were in appearance from " things fenfible, Gods people; and this they had u by Gods fad of making them to be a part of "that people vifibly, viz.* his forming them and "bringing them into the world, and placing
" them
Reply. More myfrery ftill ! 1. Was there no an- tecedent Law or Covenant of God, giving a jus focietatis a Right cf memberfhip to ^Abrahams feed as foon as they had a being initially, and commanding them to be devoted to God in Co- venant, and Circumcifed, that they by inveftiture might have a plenary Right? Was there no fuch thing ? O but [* this gave them not a right to it before they had it. \ Is the poor Church to be thus abufed , and holy things thus played with > They could not be membvrs before they hud a being • nor could lay claim to it : But could not
Gods
(37) Gods Law, Grant or Inftrumental Covenant be made before they were born ? And could it not be the Inftrument of conveying right to them as foon as they were born? that is, as foon as they were fubje&s capable ? And is not the caufe in order of nature , though not of time before the erTed ? Cannot the Law of the Land be the fun- damental caufe of the Right of Infants to Ho- nours and Eftates, though till they are in being they are not capable fubje&s ? Is not the Action nt agentis naturaU^antecedent to it as in yatiente ? Is it only Gods tranfeunt faEl of making them wen and thefe men, and placing them in England, which maketh Infants to be members of the En- glifh Nobility, or Gentry or Citizens or mem- bers of this Kingdom ? No -, but it is the Laws ' that do morally give the Jm dignitatis, vel fo- \ details, though their action be not terminated in any fubject till it exift. For every man born in England is not born a Lord, or Efquire, or Ci- tizen, no nor a free fubjecl, unlefs the Law fay it ftiall be fo. If Foreigners or Rebels fhould have children here, and the Law were that they fhall te Aliens, they would be no members of the Kingdom, If Mr. T. or Mr. 'JD's children have nothing but Generationy and being born in Eng- land to (hew for their Inheritance , their Title will not hold.
2. And might not right have been falily plead-
ded or ufurped by a counterfeit Jew ? Or the
children of fuch ? Or the children of Apcfhtes >
who yet were born of Abrahams- feed, andinthac
. Land? Whatfoever they wqrejthat hteh&KjaitvS^i
D z fie'vere-
feverely, I am fure Achans children, and the In- fants of the Cities that were to be confumed for Idolatry, loft their right to life and Church-mem- berfhip at once by their Parents Cm : And God might if he had pleafed, have continued the Life of Apoftates children , without continuing their Church-right ^ Or Apoftates might fand no doubt multitudes did ) efcape the juftice of the Law through the fault of Magiftrates or people, and yet have no true Legal Right to Church-member- fhip for themfelves or Infants ( born alter) : For he that, hath loft his right to \\ky hath loft his right ( or may do ) to the priviledges and benefits cf it.
Cc He addeth £ yet I grant, they had a right " in it, that is , that they had it by Gods dona- tion. J
Reply. And was it not a Moral Donation then, if it gave Right} You will be forced thustoccn* fute your felt.
" Mr. T. It feems to me not true, that the na- " ture of the benefit of Infants vilible member- lt fhip coniifteth in a right to further benefits.
Reply. Yet he givech not a word to tell us why he thinketh fo. If we are at this pafs about Re- lations and Right in general , no marvail if In- fant Baptifm go for Antichriftian : Doth not the Relative flate of a Citiz.cn, or of the mem- ber of any priviledged fociety, confift in his ftate of Right to the Benefits , Priviledges and Com- munion of the Society , and an obligation to the duties of a member, to the end he may have the benefits, and the Society the benefit of his mem,
berfhip
(39) berfhip and duty ? A conjunction of Right ( iZxriz ) and obligation conftituteth all fuch Re- lations. But what ihall we be agreed in that are ignorant and differ here ?
u Next Mr. T. denieth the confequence, £ For " a man may have a benefit without right. ]]
Reply, i. And yet juft now , Church-member- flup in Ifrael was a thing that none could ufurpy or have without right ? 2. But I faid [_ no man can have a benefit from God againft his will or without it : ] And therefore if God give fuch a thing as Church-raemberfhip which confifteth in
* Right to further benefits, he that hath it by Gods gift hath it rightfully : Natural effects fas a prey to a thief ) may be faid to be given of God im- properly, by Phyfical difpofal, to him that hath no right : But right it felf cannot be given to him :hat hath no right • nor any thing elfe, Relative ;>r Natural, by Gods Moral or Covenant dona- :ion.
u He [ conceiveth it to'be very erroneous [hat :< vifible Church-memberfhip is given out of di- ;t flribucive Juftice • for as Regeneration, fo alfo :c vifible memberfhip are of bounty by God as c Soveraign Lord, not of diftributive Juftice by c God as Judge. 2. That all that any man hath or' c God he hath of debt, contrary to Rom. 4.. 4.
• 3. That vifible Church-memberfhip is concei- c ved as a thing offered, and to be duly and right- c fully received
Reply. If Mr. T. and I (hall tire the Printer, md wait Paper, and trouble the world, wiih rel- ing them how many errors each of m hold, it will
D 4 be
C4°)
be an unfavory task, and I doubt it would be a much fhorter work for one of us, ( which ever it is) to enumerate the ufeful truths we hold. What I hold , be it right or wrong , I will tell | the Reader as to this matter. I hold that Gods Kingdom is to be confidered in its Conflitution and Adminifiration : The firft hath, i . The effi- cient, 2. The Constitutive, 3. The final Caufes : And in the large fenfe it containeth, 1 . Subjects on- ly by obligation^ ( fuch as Rebels are ) 2. Sub- jects by confent , ( or voluntary ). The Efficient caufe of the former is only Gods 1. Making them men , and Redeemed men quoad frtctum^ and commanding their fubjetlion or consent. To . the effecting of the fccond is beiides tbele required their Actual Confent ( Parents confenting for their Infants )} without which they are but Rebels, and have no right to the benefits of the Society.
God being a King de jure before his Govern- ment is Confented to , maketh a Law to man to command them to confent and be his voluntary fub- je&s: To thofe that confent (as the condition) he promifeth the intereft and blefiings of his Co- venant, viz. Ghrift and Life . andthreatneth the privation of thofe benefits, and forer punifhment to refining rebels : He is Lawgiver and will be Judge of Nan-confenters •, calkdyVnbelievcrs and fefufers of Chrift and Salvation: When men do confent they are under his further Adminiftring Laws. The faid efficient caufes are Gods Acti- ons, 1. As Omnipotent Owner, 2. As Bene- factor, 3. nAs Sapiential Rector. 7. According !o the firft, he giveih us our Being and prefer-
veth
C4t)
vtth it, and in him we Live, and Move, and Are, 2. As our Benefatlor antecedent to his Admi- - mflration, he gave the world a Redeemer abfo- lutely, and reprieved the world and us, and gi- veth us all common Antecedent Mercies. 3. As the Re&or de jure of men not yet confenting, he ma- keth the Law of Grace abfolutely and antecedent- ly to any condition ( of making it) on our part. This Law hath the preceptive part, commanding confent ( faith and repentance ). 2. The Donative or promt fory part, giving us Chrift in Relation , and right to his prefent benefits , if we confent ; which is the condition. 3 .And the penalty aforefaid.
The Adminiftration of the Kingdom de jure, is the efficient of the confent ing Kingdom-.The Admi- niftration (or A&ual Government j of the Con- fenting Kingdom , is by Legi flat ion , Judgement and Execution, And the Legiflation is , 1. For the conftitution of the particular members that fhall from time to time be added : 2. And the Governing of them all.
Now if God have made a Law that men fhall be received members of Chrift and his Church if they confent ( or Repent and BelieveJ and former- ly to the Jfraelites, if they be Confenters (or their feed, who confent by them ) then it is an ad of diflributive juftice of God as Judge , to givethefe benefits to Confenters: And to contra- diftinguifh an att of bounty unlefs he fay £ me er bounty ~\ is intolerable. For God governeth us Paternally , as a Regent -benefactor : He never gave reward to a Creature, Man or Angel, which was not a Gift as to the valne of the things and a Re- ward,
( 42;
ward only as to the or do confer endi & ratio rel cipiendi : It is madnefs to think that we can me.; rit from God commutatively. Arid it's little better to think, that bounty and difiributive juftice may not confift •, yea that there can be any right quoad ordinem diftribuendi from that juftice , which is not quoad rem donatam from bounty. It is fad therefore that the world muft fee, that looking all how to make good an efpoufed caufe, ihould tempt fo Ancient and Learned a Divine to fubvert the Gofpei and all Chriftianity ; For what doch he lefs ? If he talk only of members by obligation , every living man is a member : This he meaneth not. If he talk only of Confent ing voluntary Aiembers , to fay that God command- eth none to be fuchy is to fay that he command- eth none to be Chriftiansy to Repent, Believe or Confent : To (ay that he hath made no promife or Donative Aft in the Law of Grace, that if yon confent (repent and believe ) you foall have uni- on with Qjrift and his Church ( or be members ) is to deny the very fumm of all the Gofpei, and Baprifm it felf. To fay that God doth not as Judge execute his own Law and promife , gi- ving* this union to Confentcrsy and denying it to Refufers^ is to fay that he will not as a judge ab- folve Believers or condemn Unbelievers. O Rea- der , hate faction and partial difpures that can make men overthrow all Chriftianity, not know- ing what they do.
2. And his denying that vifible Churcl^mem- berfnp is a thing offered , and rightly to be ac- cepted, is the fame, even to deny that Chrift in-
v it eth
viteth any Infidel to become a Chriftian, or ever called or commanded Heathens to believe : or fent his Minifters to compel them to come in, that his houfe may be filled.
But his (lander that I fay all that man hath from God is of debt, is forged groundlefly. I fay God giveth fome benefits antecedently and abfo- lutely, and fome confecfuently on condition , by a Law : And none of them all are of debt as a workman deferveth his wages with commutative jufiice.
It is his grofs error that vifible Church-mem- berfhip of Infants among the Jews was not a thing offered on condition of Parents faith , and to be accented . or refufed -, but a flate refulting from Gods f aft. Hefeigneth a Church to be formal- ly quid Phyficum fure I He that would not con- fent to the Covenant was by Afa to be put to death : And was not Circumcifion a covenanting ad? And did they not thereby profefs to take God for their God } or would God elfe have taken them for his people ? And would not renouncing God have cut them off? And would their feed then have had any right for being theirs ? Indeed it is difputable how far fome Jnceftors, or other Proprietors might be a medium of right to fuch Apoftates feed : but <e* theirs, there is no difpute.
SECT.
(44 )
SECT. XXIII.
R. B. T Am next to prove the confequence ', that X [_ this right was conferred by fome grant , promife , er Covenant of God. 3 -<4W ?/?# /> ^f f^/?e 06 to prove that the world was made by Gods power and efficiency or will ^ or to prove that God is the owner of all things, and no man can receive them but by his gift, 1 . If there be no other way pojjible for right to be conveyed from God to tu, but only by his grant, promife, or Covenant, ( which we call donation , and is a moral civil atlion , ) then it is by this means that it is con- veyed. But there is no other pojfible way of fuch conveyance: Ergo, we have no right till God give us right, His will ftgnifed createth our right. No man can have right to that which is wholly and abfolutely another s, but by his confent or will. This will is no way known, but by fome figns of tt. The fe figns of fuch a will for conveyance of right to a benefit, arc a civil moral action, called a donation or gift fimply. Jf the fign be in wri- ting, we commonly call it a deed of gift. Jf it be by word of mouth, conferring a prefent right y we call it a verbal grant or gift. If it confer only a future right , we call it a promife , and fometimes a Covenant^ and fometimes the word Covenant fignifcth both , that act which gives a prefent right, and promifeth a continuance of it. Bight being a moral or civil thing , can be no way conveyed but by a morfd or civil action. A
^45 )
gift that was never given, is a contradiction. So that this fart of our controverfie is as eafic as whether two and two be four.
" Mr, T. Vifible Church-memberfhip is not a " Right , but a ftate of Being -, as to be ftrong, " healthy, rich , &c. which are not given by a u civil moral adion , but by Providence of God "ading Phyfically as the Soveraign difpofer of
" all. I deny therefore that there is fuch
"a promife -
Re-ply. Reader, it is not long of me that this Learned Ancient Divine knoweth not what a Church- member is, or elfe what is the difference between Erhicks, or Politicks, and Phyficks. But it is our fhame that a Preacher in England (hould be found fo ignorant. God as the Fountain of nature, and Omnipotent Lord of all, is indeed the firft Caufe of Being and Motion as fuch : As a free Benefactor-he is the firft Caufe of all our Good as fuch • And as a Sapiential Red: or, and Benefactor conjunctly ( that is , by Paternal go- vernment) he is the firft caufe of Right,
Being and Motion are the effeds of Phyfical efficiency : Jus vel Debitum is the very formal effect or object of Moral Efficiency by a Redor, and the formal objed of Ethicks. To be a Church- member , is to have a fated Relation , confift- ing in Right to the Benefits and obligation to the duty , as was faid before. He denieth-this to be any Right, and to have any fuch Civil-moral caufe as Right hath, but to be quid Fhyficum as Healthy flrength. Riches, #nd an anfwerable Thy- fcal Oiute. Let the fhame of this ignorance re- form
form the common error 01 ocnoois tnat teach not their children betimes the principles of Ethicks , Politicks, or Governing Order: It is a fhame that at 1 6. years old any fhould be fo ignorant as thefe words import. I muft fpeak it, or I com- ply with the powers of darknefs, that fo fhame- fully oppofe the truth.
SECT. XXIV.XXV.
R. B. 2. /""> O D hath exfrefly called that ail a vj Covenant or fromife by which he conveyeth this right : which we jhall more fully, mamfeft anon when we come to it.
The fecond Proportion to be proved , is , that T there was a Law or Precept of God obliging the Parents to enter their children into Covenant and Church-member firip, by accepting of his offer, and re-engaging them sto God. ~\ And this is as obvi- em and cafe as the former. But firfi I fiall in a word here alfo explain the terms. The word £ Law ] is fometimes taken more largely, and un- fitly, m comprehending the very immanent alls or the nature of God, confidered without any fign to reprefent it to the creature. So many call Gods na- ture or purpofes the Eternal Law : which indeed is no law, nor can be fitly fo called. 2. It is ta- ken properly for £ an authoritative determination de debito conftimendo vel confirmando. ] And fo it comprehendeth all that may fitly be called a law. Some define ity £ [inTum majeftatis obligans aut ad obediendam aut ad poenam.] But this leaves
out
( 47)
cut the premiant fart, and fome others : So that of Grocius doth, Eft regula actionum moralium ob- ligans ad id quod rectum eft. I acquiefce in the fir ft, or rather in this, which is more full and ex- at% -, [_ A law is a ftgn of the Retlors will confti- tuting or confirming right or duenefi. J That it be a ftgn of the Rettors wiU de debito conftituen- do vel confirmando, is the general nature of all laws. Some quarrel at the word \_fign ] becaufe it is logical and not political: As if Politicians jhould not jpeak^ logically as well as other men I There is a twofold due : I. What is due from us to God ( or any Rettor ; ) and this is ftgmfied in the pruept and prohibition, ( or in the precept de agendo & non agendo.) 2. What fiall be due torn-, and this is ftgnifiedby promifes, or the pre- miant part of the law, and by laws for distribu- tion and determination of proprieties, usill bene- fits are given w by God in a double relation, both as Reclor and Benefatlor : or as Benefactor Re- gens ^ or as Re&or benefaciens : though among men that ft and not in fuch a fubordination to one another as we do to God, they may be received from a meer benefactor without any regent inte- reft therein. The fir ft laws do ever conftitute the debitum or right : afterward there may be renew? ed laws and precepts to urge men to obey the for- mer , or to do the fame thing : and the end of thefe is either fu! Her to acquaint the fubjetl with the former, or to revive the memory of them , cr to excite to the obedience of them : Andthcfe do not properly conftitute duty, becaufe it was conftitu- ted before -5 but the nature and power of the ab~i
is
af j fta fame with that which doth conftitute it, and therefore doth confirm the conftitution, and again cblige us to what we were obliged to before, for obligations to one and the fame duty may be mul- tiplied, 3 . Some take the word £ law ~\ in fo re- trained a fence as to exclude verbal or particu- lar precepts , ejpecially diretled but to one • or a few men \ and will only call that a law which is written, or at leafl a well known cuftom obliging a whole fociety in a fiated way, Thefe be the mo ft eminent fort of laws : but to fay that the reft are no laws, is vain and groundlef , againft the true general definition of a Law-, and juftly reject- ed by the wiffi Politicians, That which we are now to enquire after, is a precept, or the command- ing part of a law, which is [_ afign of Gods will obliging us to duty, ] of which figns there are ma- terially fever al forts, as i, by a voice, that's evi- dently of God : 2, by writing : "$,by vifible works or effecls : 4. by fecret impreffes, as by infpiratt-' en, which is a law only to him that hath them,
" Mr.T. I afTert, 1. There is no fuch offer , u promife or Covenant : 2. That though there are <c precepts for Parents to pray for their Children, " to breed them up — yet they are not bound "to believe this, that upon their own faith God "will rake their Infant Children to be his, and u will be a God to them , nor to accept of this cc pretended offer. 3. That though Parents may
"enter into Covenant for their Children
<c as Deut. 29. 12. they do not by this make them *c partakers of the Covenant or promife that God " will be their God.
Reply.
(49)
Reply. What a deal of the* Gofpel and the Churches mercys do thefe men deny ? i. The very nature of our own Holy Covenant is, that in it we giv e up to Cod our [elves and all that is ours accord- ing to the capacity of that alL And as our Riches are devoted hereby as capable utenfils j fo our In- fants as capable of Infant Relation , Obligation and Right. What is it that a J (anil i fed manuxuHi nor devote to God that is His ? If you except Li- berty, Health, Life, you are hypocrites : And can you except Children ? It's true ; this is but fo far as they are our own, and we fay no more : "when they have a will to choofe for themfelves , they muft do ir. 2. I have fully proved Scripture com- mands for Parents to offer their Children to God, and that fignifiech his will to accept what hecom- mandeth them to offer. And his promifes to fhew mercy to them as theirs are plain and many, which 12 muft not tire the Reader with repeating.
Mr. T. addeth, That if there were fuch a fro- mife and duty of accenting the pretended offer and re-engaging , yet this neither did then nor doth now make Infants vifible Church-members,
Reply, lender, are not the Anabaptifts duftile men where they like, as well as intra&able where they diflike, that they will follow fuch a Leader; as this? Promife and Duty of accepting and re-en- \gaging aggravareth the fin of Rebels that reject it • but if thefe performed, even vifible mutual co- I tenanting j make not Church-members vifible^ what doth > You fee what he hath brought the ancient and later Church-memberfhip , Circumcifion and Baptifm to ? I think to nothing : As formal Poii-
E tiEciari
f5o)
tifician Church^tyrants when they have mortified] fome ordinance , and turned it into an Image , make an engine of it to trouble the Church, and filencethe Preachers and ferious pra&ifers of the Gofpel with. Thcfe men make nothing of Church- memberfhip, and then reftlefly trouble the Church- about it.
SECT. XXVI.
ft. B. T T jiving thus opened the terms [_ Law XX and Precept, ] J prove the Proporti- on thus* I. If it was the duty of the Ifraelites to accept Cods offered mercy for their Children, , to engage and devote them to him in Covenant , then there was a Law or Precept which made this their duty, and obliged them to it. But if was a duty : Ergo , there was fuch 4 Law or Precept, for the antecedent, I . If it were not a duty> then it "was either a fin, or a neutral indifferent altion : But it was not a fin, (for, i . It was againfi no Law^ 2. It is not reprehended . ) nor was it indifferent^ for it was of a moral nature, and ergo , either good or evil) yea fin or duty : For properly permittere is no ab% of Law, (though many fay it is,) but a fujpenfion of an all : and fo licitum is not mo- raliter bonum, but only non malum ; and ergo is not properly within the verge of morality, z. If there be a penalty ( and a mo ft terrible penalty) annexed for the non-performance, then it was a duty : But fuch a penalty was annexed ( as frail Anon be farticnkrlj fhewed) even to be cut off from
hi?
(50
his people, to be put to death, &(\ If it oblige id poena m, it did fir ft oblige ad obediemiarti : For no Law obligeth ad poenam * but for dtfobe die nee , tvbicb prefuppofeth an obligation to obedience \\ 3. // it were not the Israelites duty to enter their Children into Gods Covenant and (fhurch, then it Would have been none of their fin to have omitted or refufedfo to do : But it would have been their great and hainom fin to have omitted or refufed it » Ergo. Now to the conference of the major* There is no duty but what is made by fome Law or Treccpt as its proper efficient caufe or foundation : Ergo, if it be a duty , ther^was certainly fome Law or Precept that made itf^ff, zAmong men we fay^ that a benefit obligeth to gratitude ^ though there were no Law .* But the meaning is, if there were no humane law, and that is becaufe the Law of God in nature requireth man to be jufl and, thankful. If there were no law of God natural Or pofitive that did confiitute it, or oblige w to it, there could be no duty* 1. There, is no duty but what is made fitch by Gods fignified will y ergo; no duty but what is made , finch by a Law or Pre- tept. for a Trecept is the fign of Gods will ob- liging to duty. 2,» Where there is no Law there is no tranfgrejfion, Rorn. 4. 15* ergo ^ where there u no law there is no duty •, for thefe are Contra- ries: it is, a duty not totranfgrefi the Law, and d irahjgrejfion not to perform the duty which it re- ijuireth of hs* There is no apparent ground of ex- cept ion j but in cafe of Covenants* Whether d mart, tnay not oblig e him f elf to a duty tneerly by his con- sent ? J mfwer^ i. He may oblige himfelf tb art
atf, which he mitft perform, or elfe prove unfaith- ful and dijhoneft : but his own obligation m*kss it not ftnllly a duty : ergo, when God makes a Co- venant With man, he is as it were obliged in point of fidelity, but not of duty. 2. He that obligeth bimfelf to an all by promife^ doth cccafion an ob- ligation to duty from God, becaufe God hath obli- ged men to keep their promt fes. 3 . So far as a man may be f aid to be his own Ruler, fo far may he be [aid to oblige himfelf to duty , ( that is .duty to himfelf, though the atb be for the benefit of ano- ther ^ ) but then he may at fitly be fad to make a Law to himfelf, or command himfelf : fo that ft ill the duty (fitch as it k ) hath an anfwerable com- mand. So that I may well conclude, that there is a law-, becaufe there is a duty, For nothing but a law could caufe that duty, nor make that omiffion cf it a fin. Where there is no law, fin is not im- fitted j Rom. 5. 13. But the omiffion of entring Infants into Covenant with- God before Chrifts in- carnation would have been a fin imputed ^ ergo , there was a law commanding it, 2, If it was a duty to dedicate Infants to Gody or enter them ir,- to Covenant with him, then either by Gods will, or without it: certainly not without it, J f by Gods will, then cither by his will revealed, or unrcveaU ed. His unrevealed will cannot oblige •, for there wants promulgation, which is neceffary to obliga- tion : And no man can be bound to know Gods un- revealed will, unlcfi remotely , as it may be long of himfelf that it is not to him revealed. If it be Gods revealed will that muft thus oblige, then there was fome ftgn by. which it was revealed. And
if
C53)
if there were a fign revealing Cods will obliging its to duty, then there was a law , for this ps the very nature of the preceptive part of a law , (■ which ts the principal part, ) jo that yon may m well [ay, that yon are a reafonable creature, but not a wan, as fay that men were obliged to duty by Gods revealed will, but yet not by a Law or Pre- cept. 3. We Jhall anon produce the Law or Pre- cept, and put it out of doubt that there was fnch a thing. In the mean time I mufi confefi, J do not remember that ever I was put to dijpute a point that carrieth more of its own evidence to Jhame the gain-fayer* And if you can gather Dfciples even among the godly , by pcrfwading tht m that there were duties without Precepts or L^ws, and benefits without donations , covenants or prcmife confirming them, then defpair of nothing for the time to come: Ton may perfwade them that there is a Son without a Father^ or any relation with- out its foundation, or effccl without its caufe, and never doubt but the fame men will believe you , while you have the fame interefl in them , and ufe the fame artifce in putting off your con- ceit!.
Mr. f. would firft perfwade the Reader that I mean r.othing but Circumcifior3
Reply, Long ago I told you thar, 1. The Fe- males were not circumcifed, 2, Nor the Males for forty years in the wildernefs : And yet were all Church-members by being Gods Covenanted peo- ple. And fe was //r^/ before Circumcifion.
His terms of £ the hiffmg of a Coofe, and the fnarling of a Cur ] and other fuch , I account
E 3 lighter
(54) _ _
his injuries to the j
I
lighter than the leafi of his injuries to the truth.
SECT. XX VI I.
R. B, rTp HE fifth Quefiion requireth me to lay X. down this afftrtion , that \_ there is ria Law or Precept of God which doth not oblige to duty • and no actual fromife or donation , which doth not confer the benefit. ~\ This I aver on oc- cafion of your lafl Letter , where in contradiction to the former, you confefi F the promifes to the na- tural pofterity of Abraham , Gen. in. and the Covenants made with Jfr'ael at Mount SiiaL and Dent. 29. and a precept of Circumciiion , and precepts of God by tftlofts, of calling the people, mid requiring them to enter into Covenant, Bxodl 19. Dent. 29, ] Tet yon [ do not conceive that the Irrfants of Ifrael were made viiibie Church-mem- bers by the promifes in the Covenants, or the pre- cepts forenamed. ] If fo , then either yon ima- gine that among all thofe precepts and promifes there was yet no promife or Covenant that gave them the benefit of £burch-memberfinp, or precept concerning- their entrance into that ficte • or elfe yon imagthe that fuch promifes were made., but did, not actually confer the benefit , and fuch precepts -were made , but did not atlaaily oblige. Tour words are fo ambiguous in this^ that they fgnifie nothing of your mind to any that Vjiows it not fumg other way. For when you fay £ there is no fuch particular promife concerning tofafcts viilblq
Church-
i
c 55;
Church-roemberfhip , or precept , &c. befides Circumcifion, as in my Book of Baptifm I afTcrc, 3 who knows whether that exception of \_ Circum- cifion J be a conceffion of fuch a precept or pro- nnfe in the cafe of Circumcifion? or if nctjvhat fenfe it hath f and what yon imagine that precept or promife to be which I affert ? and before the fenfe of your one fy liable \_fuch~] is difc erne dby trying it by a whole volume , / doubt yon will make what you lift of it. However if you fimdd mean, that fuch precepts there are as have for their fubjeB [_ the avouching God to be their God^ the entring f#t6 Covenant Circumcifion ~\ of Infants, but not heir Church-member fiip ; then, 1. I have proved the contrary to the negative before*^ 2. os4nd more jhall do anon ^ 3. And it's a palpable con~ tradiciion to the precedent affirmative. But if you mean that Church -memberfiip of Infants as well as others is the fubjeB or part of the fubjeB of thofe premifes or precepts, and yet that In- fants were not made or confirmed thereby • it is the contrary that 1 am ajferting , and 1 have no further need to prove^.than by jhswing the con- tradiction of your opinion to it felf. For an aBu- al Covenant or promife that doth not giv: right to the benefit promifed ( according te its tenor and terms , ) is like a caufe that hath no effeB , a Father that did never generate , and it is all ! one as to fay , a gift or Covenant which is no gift l or Covenant , feeing the name is denied , when the thing named and defined is granted. So a Precept or Law to enter Infants folemnly into Church-member fiif , which yet >.bligetb none fo to
E 4. tnuv
tnter them, is as grofi a contradiction as to fay, I the Sun hath not heat or light, and yet *j truly a Sun,
_ Mr. T. here confefcth , 2. That the Jews were Gods vifible Church not bauly by Gods promife to them to be their God, but by their prom if? to God : Gods call of them made them his Church, and their fromife to Gcdw'nh
other acts made them viftbly fo
Reply. Reader, is not all here unfaid again by this conceflion ? Unlets he will fay that ihjs Call,- and Covenant, and Promife made them all a viftble Church, and yet none of thefe, but their birth and flace made them members? As if any thing made j the Whole Church which made none of the Parts as fuch.
■I
SECT. XXVII J.
R. B. Y Come nex\ 1 to the fixth Q^eftion, Whether JL indeed there be any tranftunt fact, which. Without the c an fat ion of any promife or precept , did make the lfraclire> Infants Church-methbers. This you affirm ( if you would be under food • ) whether this your ground of Infant sChurch-mem- berfhip or mine be righter, I hope will be no hard matter for another man ( of common capacity) to difcem< By a |[ tranfeunt fall ] thus fet as con- tradiftincl to a law, precept or promife, either you mean the att of legiflation and promife making, or fame other meerly phypcal a&* If the former, it ts too ridiculms to be ufed in a feriosu bufinefi: For yen fhould not pnt things in competition ex- eluding the ene, where they both mufl neceffartly
concur x
concur j the one /landing in a fubordination to the other. Was there ever a Law or Covenant made in the world any other way than by a tranfeunt f.ilh f Sure all legiflxtion is by fame fignif cation of the Soveraigns will. And the waking of that fign is a tranfeunt fall. If it be by voice, ts Mt that tranfeunt ? If by writing, is not the aEb tranfeunt ? If by creation it flf, the all is tran- feunt though the effdb be permanent. And cer- tainly if legi flat ion cr fromifing be your tranfe- unt fact, you do very abfurdly put it in oppcfnwn. to a law (cr promt fe ) it being the making of fuch a law. And the legiflation doth no way oblige the fubjett, but by the law fo made : nor doth the making of a promt fe, grant or covenant , confer right to the bene ft which is the fubjet} of it , any otherwife than as it ts the making of that grant which jball fo confer it. As the making of a knife doth not cut, but the knife made : and fo of other tnfiruments, S& that if the law oblige not , or the grant confer not , certainly the legiflation or promtfe-mak^ng cannot do it, I cannot therefore imagine that this is your fenfe, without charging yon with too great abfurdrty. As if you fhould fay, It is not the will of the t eft at or, i. e. his te- fiament, that cntitlcth the legatary to the legacy , but it is the tranfeunt fall of the teflatcr in ma- king that will: or it is not the Soveraigns commif- fion that authorise th a Judge, fouldicr, &c. but it is the tranfeunt fatb of writing or making that committor?. It is not the fign that fignifieth , but the tranfeunt faW of making that fign. Were net this ft contemptible arguing t To charge yon with
this.
US)
this, were to make you tantum non unreasonable. And yet I know not what to fay to you, that is, hiw to under ft and you. For if you mean a n.eer fhyjical tranftunt fact, which is no fuch leg: flatt- en or promt fe-makjngy then it is far more abfurd than the former, Jcor if it be not afign of Gods will obliging to duty, or conferring benefit, then can it not fo oblige to" duty , nor confer benefits. It is no other tranftunt fall but legi flat ion that can oblige a fubjeel to duty, nor any other tran- ftunt fatl but promt fe , or other donation , that can convey right to a benefit y or oblige the promi- fer. A moral or civil effcel mufl be produced by a moral or civil attion , and not by a meer phy- fical acli&n • which is unfit to produce fuch an ali- en effeft, and can go no hightr than its own hind. What fen fe therefore I fimild put on your words, without makjng them appear unre a finable , even much below the rates of ordinary rational peoples difcourfe, I cannot tcK. For to fay, it is not a law but legi flat ion > is all one as to fay, it is not the fimdamenmm > but the laying of that founda- tion that calif eth the relation , or from which it doth refult. And to fay it is an alien phyfical #cl, which hath no fuch thing as right for its fubjetl or terminus , ts to confound phyficks and morals, and to (peak the groffefi abfurdities -, as to fay that the tranfeunt fatl of eating, drinking , going, buildings &c. do adoft fuch an one to be your heir* I ma ft needs thinl^therefore, till you have better cleared your f If, that you have here quit your f elf as til , and forfjken and deliver- c4 up your Caufe, as palpably as. ever I knew wan
do^
(59)
'do, without an exprefi ' confejfwn that it is naught, \Vhen men mufl be taught by this obtufe fubtilty to prove that Infants Qmrch-m ember flrip needed no revocation, forfooth £ becaufe their Church- memberjljip was not caufed by a la\y> precept, pro- mi fe oy covenant^ but by a tr an [cunt fact J than which as you leave it, the world hath fcarce heard a more incoherent dream, Hut I pray you remem- ber in your reply that you being the' affirm er of this, mu ft prove it. Which I (liall expect y when you can prove that you can generate a man byfpit- ing or blowing your nofe, or by plowing and /ow- ing can produce Kings and Emperors,
Mr. T. Here Mr. T. is at the old tranfeunt fad again : Let the Reader make his beft of it : I ac- count it not worth the reciting ; nor his title of Canine Scoptical Rhetorick^vegardabk.
SECT. XXIX, to XXXIX.
R. B. X N confideration of the feventh Queftion, 1 / Jhall confider the nature and effect of the tranfeunt fate which you here defcrtbe. And firfi of the reafon of that name. Tou fay that you call it £ tranfeunt "] [ becaufe done in time and fo not eternal, and pafi and fo not in congruous fenfe repealeable as a law, ordinance, ftatute, de- cree which determines fuch a thing fliall be for the future. ] Anl do you thinly this the common fenfe of the word ? or a fit reafon of your appli- cation of it to the thing in hand f
I thinly
(6o)
I thinks your intzlkVihn and vn lit ion are imwa~ pent alls, and yet not eternal.
We ttfe to contradiftinguifh tran faint acts from immjnenty and that becaufe iheydo traniire in fub- jedumextraneum.
But it feems you take them here as diftincl from permanent.
But ufe your fen fe as long as we under ft and it.
If it be only [_pa(l^\ actions which you call f tranfeunt ] it feems your long fall which was jo many hundred year's in doings was no tranfe- unt fair till the end of all thefe years ; and fo did not ( by your own dotlrine ) make any Church- members till the end of thofe years.
But , Sir j the Que ft ion is not-, whether it were a tranfeunt fait that laid the foundation by legi flatt- en or promife -making >y but whither the effect were tranfeunt, or the all as it is in pari en te : Whether thx Ltw were tranfeunt which was made by a tranfeunt faEl l and whether tl?e word all ion of that law were permanent or tranfeunt? it being mo ft certainly fuch a moral all that muft produce a title , or confli- tute a duty. Gods writing the ten (fommande- rnents in ftonc was a faci joon paft, but the law Was not foon pa ft, nor the moral ail of that law, viz. obligation. There are verbal laws, that have no real permanent fign : and yet the law may be permanent, and the obligation permanent, becaufc the fign may have a permanency in efle cognito , and fo the fignifying vertue may remain by the help of memory y though the word did vanifl) in the freaking.
When
(Cl)
When you come to point out this tranfeunt fall individually , yon Jay [_ it is Cods taking the whole people of the jews for his people \ ] which yon term Vfacl | as conceiving it mofl comprehcnfwe of the many particular alls in many generations whereby he did accompli jh it. } I . / did not well under fland before that [] a fall ] did fo vaftly differ from an [ Ail, ~\ as to contain the alls ( rather than the falls ) of many generations.
This is a long fall according to your we afar c9 even from Abrahams call out of Ur: but how long it feems yon are not well agreed with your falf. for in the firfi part of your Letter yon enumerate to the other alts that compofe this fait £ the bringing them into the bond of the (/oven ant at tJMcunt Sinai , giving them laws , Jet ling their Priefihood, Tabernacle, Army ^Governments Inhe- ritance : ] But before yon tnd y yon change your wind , and (ay [~ the Church -memberfirip of the Ifraelites began as 1 conceive with Abrahams c^//, and was compleated when they were brought out of jEgypt to God, Exod. 19. 4. 2 But fare that was long before the fetling their inheritance. Tour fall according to your lafi account was about 437. years in doing ; but according to your firfi opinio on, it was about 470. years long.
If it were one individual fall of about qrjo* years long that made Infants Church-members , then they could not be Church-members till that fall was paftj For the effell is not before the caufey or caufality of the efficient . the relation cannot be before the fundamenturn be laid: and it feems this long fall wa/ the laying of the fundamenturn :
But
iU)
But the confequent is certainly falfe ^ for Infant^ were Church-members before the end or compleating of your long fail : For they were Church-members ( you I grant ) when Ifhmael andlhzc were ctr- cumcifed. Ergo , it was not this long fail that made them Church-members.
If yuu mean that it was not the whole, but fome 'fart of this long faU that actually made Infants Church-members , then yon would have affigned that party when that was the thing defired, and which yon pretended exactly to perform ; or at Itafi you would not have told m it comprehended all the fe alls*
And if each particular all did make Infants Church-member sy or lay a fufjicient ground of it ;, then itfeems that it was done before the inflitntion ofCircumcifion. For Gods calling Abraham out of llr was before it. So that the Children born in his houfe mufl be Church-members upon that ; and a fujpeient ground laid for his own to have been fuchy if he had then had a natural iffue : And it feems then that Ifhmael was born a Church-mem- ber many years before Circumcifioni
If this be your meanings I pray you be fo jufl nnd impartial as to accept of the proof which I flail give you of Infants Church-m ember fliip before Abrahams days , if I wake it appear to be as firong as this call of Abraham from llr. » If you flwuld mean that fome one of thefe com- prehended alls flwuld of it felf make any Infants Church-members , then it mufl be any one ; for you 710 mote ajfign it to one of them than to another ', ( only fay £ chiefly the bringing them from JE^
gypt ? J
(63)
gypt : 2 But fitrely fome of thefe alls particularly cannot do it, as the leading to Fadan Aram, the re- moval to Canaan, to j£gypt, placing, preserving there, fetling their Army, &c* Did any one of thcfe make Infants to become Chirrch-members ?
Nay , fuppcfe yon mean that all thefe atls mufi concur to make them members, (and fo that they were no members till many hundred years after the in- fiitution of Circumafion, J yet cculd net your Do- Brine hold good : For fome of thefe atls are of an alien nature , and no more apt to caufe infant Church-memberfliip, than a Bull to generate a Bird. What aptitude hath the fetling of an Army to be any part of the caufation of Infants Church-mem* berfiup? None, I thinly-, at leafl if it be fuck an sArmy as ours : For furely the fetling of ourscau- fed no fuch thing, as you well know* What apti- tude hath the leading to Pad an Aram, or removal to i£gypt , to make Infants Church-members <* Nay, how ftrange is it , that the removing of Church-members > and fuch as had been In- fant Church-members, as lfhmael, Keturahs chil- dren, Efau , mufi caufe Infant Church-member- flrip ? Sure it was no caufe of their own. Ketu- rahs children were Church-members in infancy : I enquire of yon by what all they were made fuch ? Tou fay \_ by Gods fail of taking the whole people of the Jews for his people~\ whereof the all of removing Keturahs children was a part. Very good. It feems then that removing from the Congregation of Ifrael a people of the Jews, is a takwg of the removed to be of that people : or elfe it u not on- ly the taking that people , but alfo the removal
from
from that people that maketh Church-members , even the removed as well as the takfn, both which are alike abfurd*
And I pray you tell me yet a little better ; how an alb can wake a man a £hurch-member that was one long before that was done ? Ton cannot here fay ', that it was before in efft morali, and had a mo- ral caufation. How then could your chief eft atl, the bringing out of ./Egypt , make thofe Infants Church-members that were born in ^Egypt , and were Church-members before f Or how -could it be any part of the caufe? Did the bringing out of j£gypt concur to make Mofes a Church-member when he was in the basket on the waters f And when yon anfwer this , you may do well to go a little further, and tell me, how fnch an all: con- curreth to make him an Infant Church-member that was dead an hundred or two hundred years before that atl was d,ne. tor example, how did the fet ling of the IfraelitcS Army, or Inheritance, or the Covenant on Mount Sinai, make Ifhcnad , or Efau, or lfaac, or Jacob Church-members ?
I defire you alfo to tell me by the next , what be the nerves and ligaments that tie all theft n£ts 0/430. years at It aft together, fo as to make them one fall ? And whether I may nut as ground- edly make a fa% fufpeient for this purpojt of the alls of an hundred or two hundred years only? And whether you may not as well make all the alls from Abrahams call till Chrift to be onefaU^ and ajfign it to this office}
Tou fay thxt you call this fa& [ tranfeunt ] becanfe it's [ paft, J ( and fo till it's [ faft ] it
feems
■I
perns Ifaac and Jacob that were dead before ', are no Chruch -members ; ~] 1 would then jam know whether it be this fame tranfeunt fad, or fomt other , that makes Infants Church-members five hundred years after it is pafi ? If it be this fame , then how comes a meer tranfeunt lad to work^ ef- fectually fo many hundred years after it is pafi ? unlefi it made a Law or Covenant which doth the deed f If it be a new tranfeunt fad that mufi make Infants four ch -members after the compleat- ing of this ( the fetling their inheritances •, ) then I pray you let me know, whether it be one fad e x- ercifed on the whole nation in grofi, or mufl it be a fad upon every Infant member individually f If on the nation, remember t% tell us what it was j and do not only tell its the caufe of the member- jhip of former Infants; And feeing it mufl be fuch as the member fhip of every Infant tillChrifis time at leafi mufi be caufedby^ I pray you remem- ber to make your work^ fquare and full , and be fure to affign ns no other kind of fad, than what you will prove to have been fo frequently repeat- ed in every age, and fo fully extenfive to every Infant among the Jews, as that it have no gaps, bup may make all members that werefo in each age. And remember, that it is no law, precept , promife or covenant that you mufi affign for the caufe •, for that is it you are engaged againfi : but a confiantjuc- cejfion of tranfeunt fads extending to each indi- vidual member, O what work, have you made yourfelf? and what a fort of new political Do- Urine fhall we have from you, when thefe things are accompli find according to the frame you have
F begun %
__ ( 66 )
begun? Such as I believe the Sun never J aw , nor the wife ft Lawyer in England ever read he~ fore ? Which makes me the left marvel that fo ma- ny of your opinion are fo much again ft the Lawyers j for I dare fay they will be but few of them for you, if thefe be your grounds, or at leaft not for thefe your grounds*
Re fly. To all this I find nothing (aid by Mr. T. that I think worttiy the Readers trouble to reply to : Let him read it and fee. . His charge of l^foolijh exclamations , canity, &c] I pafs by.
SECT. XXXIX, to XLIV.
R. B. "D^* aU this yet is but a light velitation s JD The principal thing that I would en- quire into, is, what your great comprehenfve fafi v in the true nature of it, which you call \_ Gods taking the whole people of the Jews to be his peo- ple. J Doth the word [^ taking^ fgnifie a meer fhyfwal taking orfatt ; or a moral, fuch as among men we call, a civil aBion ? If it be a meer phy- fical taking, then, i. It cannot produce a moral ejfetly fuch as that in que ft ion is. 2. And then it muft have an anfwerable ebjett, which muft be individual exiftent per [on s. 3 . And then you can- not call it one fatv, but many thoufand: even as n: any as there were perfons taken into the Jews in above four hundred years. 4. And then what was the phyftcalall which is called Gods taking t was it fuch a taking as the Angel ufed to Lot, tint carried him cut of Sodom. -, or as the Apo-
cry~
'(67)
cryphai Author mentions of Habakkuk , that ifcdk taken by the hair of the head, and carried by the Angel into another Country , to bring Daniel a mefi of Pottage ? Jf God mufl by a phyficalappre- hen fun take hold of them that he makes Church- members j we jhall be at a lof for our proof of their Church-memberjhip. But I cannot imagine that this is your fenfe. But what is it then I Is it a phyftcal atlion though a moral caufation of fame phyfical effeil ? That it cannot be : For it is a political or moral cjfeB that "we enquire af- ter* It necejfarily remains therefore that this be a political moral taking that you here Jpeak of* And if fo, then the tranfeunt faEl you jpeak °f muft needs * be a civil or political action* And what that can be, which is no Law , Promife or Covenant in this cafe , / pray you be flow fome more diligence to inform us, and not put us off with the raw name of a tranfeunt fall oppofed to thefe. Certainly, if it be a civil or legal aftion^ the produll or effett of it is jus or debitum , fome due or right : And that is either, I . A ducnefs of fomewhat from us, ( which is either fomewhat to be done, or fomewhat to be given • ) 2. Or a duenefs of fomething to us, which is either of good or evil : If good, it is either by contrali or dona- tion ( whether by a Tefiament pr&miant Law, or the like : ) if evil , it is either by fome pnenal Law , or voluntary agreement ' Now which of theje is it that your tranfeunt fad: produceth $ To he a member of the Church, is to be a member of a fociety taking God in Chrifl to be their God^ and taken by him for his fpecial people* The aft
F z which
which maizes each member ; is cf they fame nature with that which makes the focuty. The relation then e ffenti ally com aineth, I. Aright to the great benefits of Gods foveraignty over men , C hnfts headjhip ? and that favour , protection , provifiun and other blejfmgs , which are due from fitch a powerful and gracious Soveraign to fuch Subjecls, and from fuch a Head to his tJMembers t As al- fo a right to my flation in the Body, and to the infeparMe benefits thereof. 2. It contameth my debt of obedience to God in Chrifi, acknowledged and promifed atlually or virtually, really or repu- tatively. Now for the firfi, how can God be re- lated unto me as my God, or Chrift as my Savi- viour, and I to him as one that have fuch right to him and his bltffings , by any other way than his own free gift ? This gift mufl be fame fig- nification of his will: For his fecret will is not a gift, but a purpofe of giving. This way of gi- ving therefore is by a civil or moral atlion , which is a fignifyivg of the Donors Will ; and can be by no way , but either pure donation^ con- trait , ttfianent , or law. In our cafe it muft needs partake of the nature of all thefe. It is rot from one in any equality, nor capable of any obliging compenfition or retribution from us. Be- ing therefore from an abfolute dif-engaged Bene- fattor^ it mufl needs be by pure donation ,. or it cannot be ours. Tit as he is p leafed as it were to (blige him f elf by promife, or by his word, and alfo to call m tt a voluntary acceptance, and en- fakement to certain fidelity, gratitude and dutyy t fid [& is {he fiipulator^ and we the promtfers in
the
the latter part of the action : it is therefore jufily c-allcd a contrail er Covenant , though indeed the Word f Covenant ~\ frequently fignifieth Gods oven promife alone. As it proceedeth from the death of the tefiator ( in natural woraUreputativc be- ing, ) fo it is called a tcftament. And as it is an ad of a ruling Benefattor, giving this bene ft t$ the governed, to promote the ends of govern- ment , and obliging to duty thereby , fo it par- taketh of (he nature of a law. The co?nmonefb Scripture name for this aft, is Gods Covenant or Promife, and fome times his gift • which all figni- fie the fame thing here. It follows therefore ? that either by Gods [ taking lfrael to be his peo- ple ~\ you mean fome civil political aliion , as a Covenant, Promife , or the like collation of the benefit, ( and then you affert the thing whkh yon deny , ) or elfe you know not what you mean , nor can make another know it , without the dif- covery of the groffeft abfurdity* And at for the ot^er thing which is contained in Church-mem- b-erfiripj the prof e fed duty of man to God, it is mofl certain, I. That Gods Law obligeth us to that duty: 2. And obligeth all according to their capacities to confent to the obligation > and fo to re -engage them fe Ives : 3. That this atlttal con- fent profeffed doth therefore double the obligation. And thus by a mutual tontraft, Covenant or con- fent ( whereef our part is fir ft required by a law j ) it the relation of Church-memberfhip con- tracted. Now to lay by and deny all this , and , give us the general naked name of £ taking for Gods people , j is meerly delufory, feeing that
F 3 Z**ki»gl
£_ taking 3 means this which you exclude , or it weans nothing that is true and reafonable. And therefore tell m better what it means*
^As for the Texts yon cite , Deut. 4. 34.^7- Lwit. 20. 24, 26. 1 King. 8. 53. Ifai. 43. 1. In Deut. 4. ;\j mentioned not the moral att of God by which he made them his people , or took^ them for his own , and founded the relation : bat the natural action s%whereby he refcued them from the jt'gyptian bondage and took^ them to himfelf or for his life-, fervice, and honour out of that land. But I thwk^fure they were his people, and all their Infants were Church -members before that taking by vcrtuc of a former Covenant-taking,
u4s to Levir. 20. God did perform a twofold Work, of fc par at ion for Ifrael.* 1, By his Cove- nant and their entring Covenant with him. 2. By local fcparation of their bodies from others. It was t\}e firfi that made them his people , and- Church-members , and not the lafl : the lafi was wily a favourable dealing with them as his be- loved* Th,e fame I fay to the other two Texts. Sure you cannot thinly*, that corporal feparaiion makes a Church-member, What if an <^£gypti- a 1 that had no part in the Covenant had pafl out with the Ifraelies, and got with% them through the Red Sea , do' y^u thinks he had been therefore a Church-member ? Suppofe God had made no pro- mife or covenant with Abraham or his feed, but only taken them out of ' Chaldea into Canaan, and thence into jEgypt, and thence intj the Wil- der nef , and thence into Canaan again : Do yon thinks this much had made them Chitrch-mem-
hers $
^ Z1 J bers ? Then if the Turks conquer Greece , or the Tartarians conquer China , they are become Church-members , becaufe this feems as great a temporal profperity at leafi. And I think it is f J>afi doubt, that Lot wot a Church-member m the midfl of Sodom, and the Israelites in ^Egyptfo- fore they were brought out , as truly as after.
As to Gen. 12. j. Ads 7. 2. Nehem. 9. 7, which you alfo cite , ajs there is not one of them that gives the leafi intimation that Infants Qourch-memberfiip then began, fo I fin all further enquire anon^ whether they contain any Covenant or promife.
So Exod. 19. 4, 5. hath no word that gives the leafi intimation that God by that aU of taking them out of jEgypt , did make Ifrael a Church 9 or the Infants or any others, members of it : But* only that by fulfilling a former promt fe in the delive- rance of a people formerly his own, he layethfur~ ther obligations to duty on them by redoubling his mercies. The fame I fay of Levic. 11. 45. Neh# it iq. / will not believe yet, but that you believe your felf, that the Ifraelites and their Infants were as truly Church -members before, as after their deliverance out of vEgypt. And me-thinhj the Texts you cite might put it out of doubt. What if God fay, Ho£ 11. 1. \_ When Ifrael was a child I loved him , and called my Son out of iEgypt. 3 Is it eafie hence to prove that calling him out of -/Egypt did make him his Son that was none before : or to prove that Ifrael was Gods Son before he called him out of ./Egypt ? If ym Jhould maintain the former * I might txptli that
£ * >*1
172 )
you fhould fay the like of Chrifl himfelf, to whom the Evangel: fl applieth this text •, and fo you may prove as fairly , that Chrifl was none of Gods Son till he was called out of j£gypt, but was wade his Son by that call. Certainly the Text termeth him tjods Son that was called, as being fo before that calh By this time I am well content that any waking man do compare your dotlrine ant mine , and try whether it be a tranfeunt fatt, or a Law nnd Covenant , that made Infants and all others (faff ch -members : and if they do not admire that ever a learned man Jljould harbour fetch a conceit as yours, and that ever a godly man fliould build fuch a weight on it , and go fo far on fuch a ground, yea and that ever ordinary godly people fhould be fo blinded with fuch palpable nonfenfs or abfurditieSy then let them fill follow yon in the darkj^ for- 1 expeil not that reafo'n fhould recover them.
Reply. To all this I find nothing faid that needethany further reply.
SECT. XLIV, XLV.
R.B. T Come now to the eiqhth Queftion, that is 1 tojpeak^ to the point which you propound- ed. To ft urge me to cite to you the particular Texts that contain this Law, Ordinance^ Precept or Covenant. To which lanfwer thw. I .There Are two forts of Laws y one which fir ft make * duty \ the other, which, fHpp°fi *t fo made , and.
do
f73) ; .
do only call for obedience^ and excite thereto , or frefcribe fornewhat as a means in order thereunto* If I could flrtw you no written lavo or promife as firfl confirming the duty, or granting the pri- viledge of Church-member jhip , it were not the leafl difparagement to my caufe7 as long as 1 cmt fiiew you thofe following Laws which prefuppofe this* Tou know the Church of God did live about 2000. years without any written law that we know of : Where then was Gods will manife fleet ahout fuch things as this , but in tradition and nature ? If Mofes then at the end of this 2C00. years did find this tradition , and find all the In- fants of Church-members in poffeffion cf this be- nefit ^ then^what need he make a new Law about it t Or why fljould God promife it as a new thing .? / confefi if 1 jhould find by any new law or promife that it did begin but in Mofes days , I Jhould thinks it fome abatement of the ftrength of my caufe ( though yet I think, there would, enough remain* ) 2. There are (yet higher ) two forts of laws : the one for the con fit ut ion of the £omm*n-wealth it felf , the other for the admt- nifiration or government of it when it is fo con- firmed* The formjer are called by fome, Funda- mental Laws, as laying the frame and form of the Common-wealth j and the quality of the mate- rials, &c. / thinks indeed, that as conftitutive of the form of the Common-wealth , thefe are fcarce properly called Laws ^ though as they look^ for- Vpardj obliging to duty, and prohibiting alterati- on, they may. But if they be not laws, they are fornewhat higher , and lay the ground of all laws
and
V.74) and obedience, and fo are laws eminenter & vir* rualtLtr, though not ail natty and formally :■ And in our cafe , as this conjlitution did fubjell us to Cody making it our duty ever after to obey him ; fo doth it oblige us to acknowledge that fubjetli-
». . And the very conjlitution of the Church is all of high beneficence y and performed by the fundamental grant or Covenant. Now if this Co- venant and conjlitution could not exprejly be fhew- ed in writing, it were no diminution of the au- thority of it , feeing among men Fundamentals are feldom written -5 and when they are , it is only as Laws obliging the fubjeci to maintain and, adhere to the firjl conjlitution. As long there- fore as we can prove that it is Gods will that fuccejjlvely Infants fwuld be Church-member sy it no whit invalidates the caufe' if -we could not fliew the original conjlitution in writing. Tet fomewhat we Jliall attempt. 3. We have full proof of Infants Church-member flnp by Laws and Co- venants concerning it , ever ftnee the time that there was a written word of God : and that is fufficient , if we could fetch it no higher. Ha- ving premifed thts , / come nearer to the Que- ftion.
The firfl inflltution of Infants Church-mem- ber foip de jure upon fippofition of their ex i fence y was in Gods fir ft conjlitution of the Re pub lick of the worldy when he became mans Governour, and determined of his fubjeils , and members of the Common-wealth : Which Republic!^ being facred , and devoted to Gods worfhip and fervice , was truly a (fhnrch of which God w<u head* This
wad
(75)
W>u performed by the firft Law and Covenant made either in or upon wans creation. That fitch a Covenant or prormfe of felicity was made by God to innocent man, almpfl all Divines tgree : But becaufe it is rather implied than exprefjed in Mofes brief Htftory, fume few cavillers do there- fore contradict in. But , i. The threatmng of death for fin, feews to imply a promife of life if he finned not, 2. zAnd the New Teftament af- fordeth m divers' pajf ages that yet plainlier prove it, which to you 1 nee A not recite, 'But whether thus promife of life were natural ( as the threat- ning of death was , ) or only pofitive and more arbitrary , Divines are net agreed among them* felves, Thofe that fay it was free and pofitive ; give this reafon, That God could not naturally be ob- liged to blefi or felicitate the mo'fl innocent cr perftel' creature , nor any creature merit of God, Thofe that think, it natural as the threatning was, fay, it's true that God could not be properly ob- liged, becaufe he is under no Law , no more is he obliged to pump, but only man obliged tofitf- fer if he infiifl it : "And its true that mm can- not fir icily merit of God, But yet, fay they, as man may have a natural aptitude for fuch feli- city, fo God hath a natural prcpenfuy to do good according to the capacity of the fubjctl , and his works do oblige him (improperly) in point of fi- delity and immutability as well as his word. So that their reafons are thefe following, j. Becaufe God is as naturally prone to do good to the good, us to do evil to the evil, that is, to reward as to funijlmeut 7 as his name proclaimed to Mofes ,
Excd
C?0
Exod. 34. Jbews, 2, Becaufe £od makjng man capable of a higher felicity, and principltng him with inclinations thereto, and giving him defires, love, and other affections for that bleffed end, even the everlaftmg fruition of God, therefore they fay, God did in this frame of his nature give him ground ta expect fuch a felicity -9 if he finned not. For elfe all thefe inclinations and affetlions fioouid have beta- in vain : But God made not fo noble a crea- ture with vain inclinations and affetlions to aft fallacioufly and falfly, Alfo Gods works Would not be harmonic al: So that as Gods prom ife is but a figfi of his will obliging him improperly in point of fidelity and immut ability y fo^ fay they, the na- ture of man was a fign of Gods will fo far enga* ging him : So that as he could not let fin go un- p unified without fome breach in the harmony of his fapiential frame of adminiftratim , no more could he deny to per fell: man the objctl of thofe de- fires which he formed in him. So that although he might have made man fuch a creature as fiituld not neceffarily be- punifiied for evil , or re- warded for good, that is, he* might have made him not a man •, yet having fo made him, it is necef- fary that he be governed as a man in regard of felicity as well as penalty, 3. Our Philofophcrs and Divines do commonly prove the immortality of the foul from its natural inclinations to God and eternal felicity. And if the immortality may be fo proved from its nature , then alfo its felicity in cafe of righteoufnefi, 1 interpofe not my J elf as a Judge in this controverfie of Divines, but 1 have mentioned it to the end vphich Jjhall now ex-
F'P*
(11)
frtfs. i. It is mo ft certain, whether the reward or promt fe be natural or pofttivey that fuch a ft ate of Jeliaty man was either in or in the way to , or in fart and the way to more. And it is mo ft cer- tain, that man was made holy , devoted to Cod y and ft for his fervice, and that in this eftate ac- cording to the Law of his creation, he was to increafe and multiply : It is mo ft certain therqjte> that according to the fir ft law of nature, Infant* jhould have bun Church-members. 2. But if their opinion hold, that make the reward grounded on the law of nature , and not on a meer poptive law, ( and you fee the reafons are not contempti- ble, ) then the argument would be yet more ad- vantagious. 3. But however it be of the title to glory or eternity , it is mo ft certain, that accord- ing to the very law of nature Infants were to have been Church-members if man had flood. The fir ft Text therefore that I cite for Infants Church- member fhip, as expr effing its original de jure, is Gen. 1.26, 27,28. [ So God created man in his
own Image ■ — And God blefled them , and
God faid unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and t replenifh the eanh. ] Here you fee by the law of ^nature Infants were to have been born in Cjods Image and in innvcency , and fo Church-mem- bers. And note , that the firft bleffing that Cod pronounceth on mankind, is , that they propagate Children in their own eftate y to be as the Pa- rents were, even in Gods Image.
Mr. T. 1. It ch i 5 prove their Church-mcmberftiip , ic proves not their viuble Cluirch-mcmbcnhip..
Reply*
Reply. Mark Reader, that Gods Law zndblef- fing for the propagation of Adams feed in his Image, would not have made them when born to be vifible Church-members , though members ? What not fo notorious a La\vy and Covenant, and BenediBion ( No wonder if all Chriftians Infants mud be fhut out , if Innocent Adams muft have Uajfhut out?
^Kdds, [_ 2. if it prove a Law or Ordinance, yet not fuck a Law or Ordinance as is in qveflion •-, vMch is not a Lxw or Ordinance de jure, but dc eventu, ti\tt fo it [hall-
be they bwA to. be actually vijible Church-members be-
fori admiffioii according to Mr. Y>s dictates. \
Reply. Alas, poor Readers, that muft be thus wearied 1 I know nothing that this Law or Cove- nant giveth but a* Right to real benefits that muft have anfwerable caufes ; I know no Right given but it is eventually given , nor received but it's eventually received. Aimiffion is an ambiguous word : ,My dictates as he cajls them, are i . That Gods Law obligeth perfons to devote themselves and their Infants to God, by confenting to his. Co- venant, for themfelves and them: 2. And to do this if they have opportunity in the folemn Ba- ptifmai Covenanting Ordinance: 3. And in his Covenant or Law of Grace he promifeth to accept them, and fignifieth his confent to trie mutual Co- venant : which is antecedently to their confent , but a conditional confent or Covenant, but confe- ejuently allual. 4. That accordingly natural in- tereft only is not the Reafon why a Believers Child is a Church-member , meerly becaufe he is his : Bat God having given him power and obligation alfo to dijpofe of his own Child for the ends of his
Creation .
Creation and Redemption, he is a Church-member initially upon heart -confent^ and by Inveftiture upon Sacramental confent : which I think you mean by Admiffion.
3. Saith Mr. f. J/7f did prove fuck a Law or Ordinance, yet it proves it not fucb a promife and precept as Mr. B. af. fneth.
Reply. Muft fuch dealing as this go for an an- fwer? What's the difference?
Mr. T. taddeth, 4. if it did: , yet it only proveth it of the Church by nature, —
Reply. You are hard put to it. I do by this firft inftance /hew you where and when the Or- dinance, Law or Grant of Infant Church-member- flip was firfi made* And I leave it to any impar- tial Chriftian whether I prove knot certain, that ' God in Nature making man in his own Image with an \_Increafe and Multiply^ fignifie not that Infants (hould have been Holy to him , if Adam had not finned: and fo have been mem- hers of the Innocent (hurch or Kingdom of God. Alas, many go fo much further , as to a/Tert as truth, that had Adam flood ( nay but in that one temptation • yea fay fome, had he but once -loved God ) all his pofterity had not been only born Holy, but confirmed as the Angels: I cannot prove that : but I can prove that they had been born ho- ly had not Adam finned, and fo had been vifible members* And if fo that God did' found In- fant memberfhip in Nature, let awakened reafon think, whether Parents yet have not as much in- terefi in children, and children in Parents, and then whether God have ever reverfl this natural
order ?
Mer ? Tea whether he hath not all along con* firmed it f It feemeth out of doubt to me.
I know that Parents and Children now are corrupt : but withal upon the promife of a Re- deemer , [] an univerfal conditional pardon and gift of life in a Covenant of Grace took, place ] Let them deny it that can, and dare. And it in- timateth no change of Gods will as to Infants conjunct intereft with their Parents.
He faith that [ the Church by Grace is only by Election and Calling , not birth. ~\ I would defire him if he can, to tell me, whether both Cain and zslbel were not vifible Qiurch-members in Adams family ? And whether none but the Eletl are vi- fible members t And whether God call not them that are vifible members to that fiate .?
He faith f // this Law be in force all are born without fin.~\
Reply. The Covenant of Innocency is not in force -, but yet I may tell you what it was while it was in force ; and that Infants vifible Church- memberfhip was founded in Nature and that Law at firft : And therefore though our Innocency be loft, Parents are Parents liill • And if God change not his order therein , are as capable of conferr- ing to Grace for their Children, as they were of being innocent for them-
SECT;
r Si )
SECT.XL VI,
tit B* f~T*He next Inftitution of Infants Church- X member jhip, was at the ftr ft proclama- tion of grace to fallen man , or in the fir ft pro- tntfe of redemption to /inner $ y in Gem 3. 15* j~ And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy feed and her k^d i k fhail bruife thy head > and thou fhalc bruife his heel. ] / will prove that this fundamental Cove- nant of grace or promife doth declare it to be the Will of God that Infants jhoiild he Church-mem- bers 1 ^yind to this end, let us fir ft confider what the words exprejly contain, and then what light nay be fetcht from other Texts to illuftrate themi It btmg a known rule, that an Expojitor muft not turn umverfals into fingulars or particulars, not reftrain and limit the Scripture generals , where the word it felf or the nature of the fubjetl doth not limit them, I may well conclude that thefe things following are comprehended in this funda^ mental promife. I* That the Devil having plat- ed the enemy to mankind , and brought them in- to this fin and mi fry, God would not leave them remedilefs , nor to that total voluntary fubjeBiort to him as he might ha e done : But in grace or undeferved mercy would engage them in a war again ft bimy in which they that conquered Jhouid bruife his head* 2* That in this war the Lord Jefm Chrift, the principal feed^ is promifed to be 9ur General j whofe perfect nature jhouUl contain,
($2)
and his perfett life exprefi a per fell enmity again ft Satan , and who fiiould make a perfect conqucft over him. 3. The Lord Jefits is promifed to do this work^ as the womans feed, ancifo as conceived of her j and born by her, and fo as an Infant fir ft, before he comes to ripe ne ft of age. So that here an Infant of the woman is promifed to be the Gene- ral of this Army, and Head of the Church. This is mo ft evident : By which God doth fanthfie the humane birth, and the Infant ft ate, and ufture m that he doth not exclude now that age from the redeemed Church , which ht admitted into the Church by the laws of creation. For the fir ft promife is of an Infant born of the woman to be the Head of the Church, and growing up to maturi' ty, to do the works vfa Head. Had God excluded the Infant ft ate from the viftble Church he would not have made the Head fir ft an Infant. Where note, 1. That Chrift is the great exemplar of his Church 'j. and in things which he was capable of ' , he did that fir ft in his own body, which he would after do in theirs. 2. That the Head is a Mem- ber, even the principal ^JM ember, one of the two -parts which conftitutethe wMe. As the parsim- perans and pars fubdita do con ft it ute each Com- mon-wealth. So that if an Infant mufl be a mem- ber eminently fo called , then Infants are not excluded from member Jhip , but are hereby clearly warranted to be members of a lower na- ture ,~x If an Infant may be Soveraign, ne doubt he may be a Sub;ett. If an Infant may be the chief Prophet of the Church , then no doubt but Infants may be .Difciples. If yon ftill harp on the old
firing,
\ °> J
firing, and fay ', They are no Difc if les that learn not -, yon may m well fay, tie is no Prcphet that teacheth not. And if yon will openly deny Chnftin Infancy to have been the Prophet of the fourch, I will undertake to prove the faljlood and vilentfi of thAt opinion , at foon & I kj'ow yon own %U The promife then of an Infant Head, doth de- clare Gods mind that he will have Infants mem*~ btrs, beiaufcthe head is the principal member*
Mr. T. The thing to be proved is a Law cr Ordinance of God unrepealed,
Reply. Tbe thing I am to do , is to £hew you when and how God inftituted Infants Chttrch (late •, Arid than he never had a Church on earth that excluded them : And particularly to (hew you that they are included in the firfl edition of the Covenant of Grace made to Adam, which is perfe&ed in a fecond edition , but not repealed a This I think I have done.
Mr. T. addeth that It will nor hold from Chnfts Head- fhip in Infancy, &:. i. It is not declared in. Scripture;, and (6 a meer pliancy : 2. Then an Infant in the womb ■Quid be a vifible member, becaiifethen Chrift wa§ Head Of the Church : 3. Then an old man mould not be a mem- ber ; for Chrift was not an old man.
Reply. 1 . Irenxm thought it would hold who gi~ veth this reafon of it ; And I leave the Reader to confider whether the words cited prove it not* Sure I am, it greatly fatisfieth my judgement, that God hereby declared his will to include In- fants in his Church vifibly* For the Head is a Member, even the nobleft : Therefore one Infant is confeffed by you to be a vifible member of the Church ; And if me, it will be incumbent on you
G a w
to prove the reft uncapable or excluded. When I read that Chrift came not into the world at the ftature that Adam did, but chofe to be an Infant, and to be perfecuted in Infancy^ and to have In- fants murdered for his fakj frft , and to invite and nfe them as he did, it is not the rowlingover of your wearifom dry denials and confident abfur- dities, that will perfwade me that Chrift fluittcth out all Infants. And I am fure that the lnftance confuteth your common exceptions agiinft Infants -9 As that they are not Difaples becaufe they learn not, which yet they may be in the fame fenfe as Chrift was their *J7M after in infancy when he Taught not: And that their Infancy did not inca- pacitate them to be in Covenant with God, to be Chriftians , to be Church-members , &c. Chriit fhewed, in that in Infancy he bore all the Counter- relations , and was in the Covenant of God as Me- diator : and that ( as far as we can judge ) only by a virtual and not actual confent ( in his Infancy and humane narure ) to the Covenant of media- tion.
Mr. r. faith, [ Then an infant in the irombmay be a Church* fnembtr ]
Reply. Yes, in the fame fenfe as Chrift in the womb was the Churches head : not by the folemn Inveftiture of Baptifm, but by Confent : For be- lieving Parents do dedicate their children to God intentionally when they are in the womb : But a man would think that you your felf fhould ac- knowledge thar this dedication and fo the viabi- lity of memberihip, hath its gradations to per- fection : Are not yottrprofelytesvffile members in
em
CS5)
one degree^ when they openly profcfs Chrifl Unity fas Conflantine did ) and in a further degree when baptifed ? The intereft of your opinion puts frivo- lous reafons into your mind which a child might fee through.
Mr. T, addeth, [ Thin an old man fJjould not be c* mem* ber. ")
Reply. Could you think now that you did not cheat your poor Reader, if partiality had not {hut one of your eyes ? It will follow, from iht a$rma~ trie, that fucha ftate of life which Chrift under- took is lawful, fuch words which he fpoke, fuch deeds which he did are lawful, becaufe he rf*<sftheiri ( being not proper to the Mediator : ) Eur will it thence follow from the negative^ that no calling, no thoughts , no words, no deeds are lawful which Chrift ufed not ? A Tingle man that hath no Wife or Children may be proved capable of Church- memberfhip, becaufe Chrift that was fuch was the chief Church-member,that is, the head : But will it follow that a married man therefore may be none ? Chrifts example will prove that a child of God may feem forfaken, may be crucified as a Male- factor : but not that no other are Gods chil- dren.
1 Mr. T. I deny 1tot that Chrift in infancy vj.rshiad of the Chitrehj nor that be was the prophet of the church in infnncy^ mdirftanding it of lus being the Prophet habitually and by de- finition, nor that he in fome refp'ecl, to wit, of Rule and pro- te.Ho>!> was the head of the vifeble church, even of that part which k not eleil : yet I deny that in refpecl of that union which ma\>es any members of his body, in the Scripture ac- Oftions which is by his fpirit, he is the head of that part tf (hi vipbti Church which is not elecl.
G 3 Rifiy.
(86)
Reply, i. And will not the Reader be fatisfTed with tjiefe conceflions ? Mark Reader, that he granteth that Chrift an Infant was the Churchesf head, and thus Jar as he mentioneth of the Church' vifible, and tha:he was the Prophet of the Church, becaufe he was [o habitually and by deftgnation : Why, even fo it is that we liv an Infant may be a Alember, a Difciple, a Chrift ian habitually and by deftgnation, ( though I would uk a fitter word here than habitually: ) If this much be a reafon for the denomination in one, why not in the other ? Yield Sir, or be not angry with Mr.~Gat*k*rm
2. And then what brought in your denial of fpintaal iremberfnp to the non-deft f Would you have made your Reader belitve that it was any thing to the queftion > And when will you prove that neither i Crr. 12. nor any other Scripture calleth thofe members that have but fuch com- mon gifts of the fpirit, as tongues, miracles, pro- phecies &c. rejected Matth. 7. 23. And that Chrift never talkt in John 15, of branches- in him riot bearing f nut , and font cut off%from him and withered* I am Pure it was a whole Church vitible that had carnal contentious wrang- lers again ft: the Apoftles in it, and men that were drunk at- the Lords fupper , &c, of whom PmhI faith iCor. 12. 15, 18, 20, 22,23, 26, 27. that they were the Body of 'Chrift and members in par- ticudar, and common gifts are mentioned as their Character.
Mr. T. Tuattbi hfrmaw birth and btfM fhttt /> facii- fod ( by Chiifts) >: not true: -lor tbto'it wowid hi holy to *"> — —
t *7 ;
Reply. I deny your confequence. There are
federal caufes concur to the fame f and: i fie at ion : Chrifts Birth and Infancy are but a remote pre- faratory caufe, of powerful falsification, which is ever to wdizidual perfons ; as alJ things are pure to the pure , and when they are capable Tub- jeds , by natural exiftence and Parents confent , then from all the caufes together remits the holinefs of that ftate : As Chrifls death ?nd merits fandi- fie us, but not immediately nor alone. Eut Di- vines ufe to take this word [ fanttifying~] in an initial preparatory fenfe, as it fignifieth the making of fuch a thing or fate fit for holy ufe : As Tem- ples aitd llcenfils are faid to be fandified , when dtflgned to be ufed ho lily ( before the ufe. J But muft they therefore be fo ufed by all ? No, but by the Priefls and Worjhippers ? So they ufe to fay, that Death and the Grave are fanciified by Chrifi \: How ? Not to all, or any of the ungodly : But the curfe is taken off \ and they are hallowed for the holy advantage of the faithful. So is it as to his 'Bjrth and Infancy.
Mr. T. Nor do \ conceive any truth but grofi feljhood in that fpeech [ Had God excluded the Infant ftate from the vi- able Church, he would not have made the Head fir ft art Infant ] For this doth fuppofe this the only end or ' 'chief end and more in Gcds eye than the fxving of fin-
vers
• Reply. I prove that grof falftood to be true , thus:
^That fate or age which God vifibly included
and attu ally .made the chief vifibleChurch-member
in, he did not exclude from the viftble Church :
But the Infant ftate God vifibly included , and
G 4 attua&y
(88)
actually m$de the chief vifwle Church -member in-t Therefore the Infant flate God did not exclude from the vtfible Qwrch.
The reafon of the Major is becaufe to include and exclude are contraries. The Minor he con- felTeth. If he fay that it may be included and ex- cluded in feveral perfons, I anfwer, I here fpoke but of the State or Age of Infancy as fuch , to prove that qua talis an Infant is not excluded: For if qua talis , then it will hold ad omnes uni- verfally, and then (fhrifl had been excluded : And therefore the Age is not excluded as fuch} if in- fluded in one : For it mufl be a total exclusion * And therefore if he will prove our Infants exclu- ded^ it muft not be qua talcs as Infants , but for fome other reafon, (when he c n rind it ^) and fo the Age or fiate is not excluded.
2. But what man elfe could have gathered, thaf then this mufl be the only or chief end , and more in Gods eye than the failing of a firmer ? Is there any more included in the aflerrion flian barely that [] God would not have m^de an Infant the chief rnember if h'e would have excluded Infants as In- fant* ?~] Who culd hence have found out that' God hath various degrees of intention ? And we muft difput^ which Is chiefly in his eye ; and that this was only or chiefly in his eye more than faving finners. Let them difpute what is chiefly in Gods eye, that can better diftinguifh of thofe volitions which are all but his flmple effence^ buc Jet them do \t on better reafons than thefe.
Mr. T. I &en)y that cfoty as m» in ifjyiry w.v th». Tre- foil cf iK5 Church vij;bl^J and in actli cxercito : Lcr Mr. v.
yphcn hi will affault, there will appear in his contradiction vilenefl and manifold frisboods.
Reply, That one little [and~\ was cunningly put in to bring you ofr\ by taking vifibility and exercife conjunctly : But are your followers fo cri- tical as to difcern the knack? i. Neither do we fay that Infants are learners in atlu exercito - and fo what is this to the matter ? 2. But Reader J can prove to thee if thou be impartial , though not to Mr. T. that it is neither vile nor falfe that Cbrifl in Infancy was the Prophet of his Church viftbly, ( though not in atlu exercito : )
That which was declared by Angels from Hea- ven , and by revelation to ^l/Iary , Zacch.iry , Anna, Symeon^nd by Prophecie by them to others, is to be called vtfiblc : But that Chrift was the "Head and Prophet of the Church , ( habitually and by defignationz$M.r.T, calls it) was thus de- clared Ergo - —
Mr. T. And fir his inference , if an Infant may be the chief prophet of the Church, then no doubt but Infants n?ay
Difzifks, 1 grant both: a»d yet deny tha* chri'l TVOiv^. i.-Jio'y, in a$u exercito, in his infancy in bis humane Mae the Propl^t of his churth, or that any infants are atlu- afij htfctples vifibly, till they hear the m Go] pel and prof efi the faith: yror am I ahamed to aver that he is no Prophet that "prcpheftith net, that they are no D/fciples that leant not.
Reply. Reader thou art not the perfon that I write for , if thou perceive not here his caufeno- torioufly given up, and yet a noife of words ufed fhamefully to hide what he is forced to confefs.
I. He granteth both that an Infant may be ( and was ) the chief Prophet of the Church , and Infavts may be Difciples, 2, This is it that we
difjwtc
(9o)
^Jpute for which he exprefly granteth. 3. He denyeth the faid Relation titles as in a'du cxerci- to^ and fo do we -, that is, thai Chrift then pro- phefied , and Infants learn or believe. 4. He talks confidently in this denial , as if he would have fools believe that this were the difference, and we held the contrary. 5. But he is fain to jug- gle in the word [ audibly 'J joyned to [_vifibly2 for a paltry fubterfuge, that if we prove Chrift vifibly the Prophet, we may not prove him audi- bly fo. 6. Yet it is fuch a [ wfibility J as £ maketb one known ~] that he had in hand 5 and before denied the [_vi fib ility : 3 as here -9 but it you prove that Chrift was vtfibly the Prophet , lie can fay [_ but not audibly^ If you prove that he was audibly f?, in that Angels and Prophets ait- dtbly declared it, he can fay £ but not in attu e\cr- cito 3 and by his own Vrophefyin? -5 which none denieth. 7. And yet in the end he exprefly with- out diftinciion denieth him to be any Prophet that Prophefieth not , or them any Difciples that learn not, when he had in terminis granted the contra- ry before , and muft needs therefore grant and deny by diftinftion. In fumm, our caufe is ex- preily granted us (and exprefly denied ) we plead for no other kind of rnemberfhip to Infants, but fuch as Chrift had, nor for any other fort of vifibility, than the vifibility of their being the feed of per- fons confenting to Gods Covenant, and Gods ex- preffed will in his word, that they ftiould be of- fered to him by confenting Parents, and that he will accept them, and did conditionally fir ft con-
ftnt.
SECT.
(91)
SECT. XLVII, XLVIIJ.
R. B. A 5 the war is here proclaimed , and the X\. General or chief (fomn.ander conflt- tutedy fo next here u a natural enmity put into the whole feed of the won. an , or humane race , again jl the whole feed of the Strpent that then wot, or the Diabolic al nature,- This is plain both mthe Text, and in the experience of the fulfilling of it. As in the inftrumental ferpent, it is the whole ferpent me nature, that hath an enmity to the hu- mane nature, and the whole humane nature to the ferpentine nature •, they being vtnemevu to us, and we abhorring them as v enema us , and as fuch as cur lives are in danger of : fo is it the whole hu- mane nature that u at enmity to the Diabolical nature. Vide Mufcul. Calvin. Luther, in locum. All men have naturally as great an abhorrence of the Devil , as of a ferpent , they apprehend him to be their enemy, they abhor the very name and remembrance of him : Jf they do but dream of him, it tern few them, they are afraid of feeing him in any apparition. Jf they know any temptation to be from him, f& far they dijlike it and abhor it , though for the thing prefented they may che- rijh it. This is not (fecial favtng grace, but this is a great advantage to the work of fpecial grace, and to our more effectual re fifing of temptations y and entertaining the help that is offered us again fl them, when our very natures have an enmity to the diabolical nature : we now look^ on him as hd-
vino-
ving the power of death, as Gods executioner and onr de fir oyer and malicious adversary. ^And if there be any Witch or other wicked perfon that hath contracted fitch familiarity and amity with him, as that thus natural enmity vs thereby over- come y that proveth not that it was not naturally there , but that they by greater wickedneft are grown fo far .unnatural. 5. As this enmity is eft obliged in the nature of mankind again ft the di- abolical nature , fo is there a further enmity le- gally proclaimed againft the diabolical pravity , malignity and works* Vide Paraeum in locum. God will put an enmity by his laws ( both natu- ral and pofitive ) making it the duty of mankind to take Satan for their enemy ; to refift , and, ufe him as an enemy ', and fight againft him and abhor his workj-> andfo to lift them f elves under the Gene- ral that fight eth againft him, to take his colours, and to be of his Army : And this being fpoken of the common world of mankind, and net only of the eleU {for it is- not they only that are obliged to this hoftility and warfare ) btlongeth to each one according to their capacities : and therefore Infants being at the Parents dijpofe , it is they that are to lift them in this Army againft the ene- wy of mankind y of which more anon. 6. A third and higher enmity is yet here comprehended , and that is an habitual or dijpofitive enmity againft the diabolical malignity , pravity and works, which may be called £ natural 3 a* it is the bent or by 04 of our new nature. This God giveth on- ly to his choferfy and not to all. And tt contain- ed not only their confent to lift thwfclvcs in his
army
(93)
rtrwy again ft Satan , but jpecially and properly * hatred to him as the Frince of imrighttoufnefs , and a cordial refolution to fight againft him and his works untverfally, to the death , with a com* placency in Cod and his fervice and fouldiers. Here take a ftmt profpelt #f the myfterioits bleffed Trinity, As God is one in three , and in his enti- ty hath unity , verity and goodneftk, and in his bleffed nature hath pofTe, fcire, velle, power, wif- dam and love, fo as frem thefe is he related both to his created and redeemed rational creatures, as abfolute proprietary^ as foveraign ruler , and a* moft gracious benefactor : As Lord of our nature he hath put the forefaid enmity between the hu* mane nature and the Diabolical : As foveraign Ruler , he hath by legifUtion impofed on us a fur* ther enmity as our duty , that we fhould be lifted in his army , profefs open hoftility againft Sa- tan , and fight againft him to the death. As Be- nefailor^ he giveth jpecial grace to do thisy to his chofen. As he is Lord ofalLfo the fir ft is done on the natures of all: Ashe is Rctlor of all, but not by the fame Laws ( as to pofuives ) fo he obligeth all to this hoftility, but not all as he doth thofe that hear the Gojpel : zs4s he. is Benefactor' he doth with his own as he lift , and makes a difference. If any fay that it is the fame enmity that is here faid to be put in all , and therefore the fame perfons in which it is put. I anfwer , i . There is no proof of either. A general command or promife to a community, may ftgnifie a difference of duties or gifts to that community , though that difference be m% exprejjed; For the nature of the fubjetT: may
prove
(94;
prove it, And^ 2. Experience of the fulfilling of this promt flc or covenant 3 proves the difference before mentioned. ' And it is wetlkriown, i.That Mofes u fo concife in the Hifiory of thefe mat- ters, 2, And that the myftcrie of grace was to be opened by degrees , and fo but darkly at the firfi , that it u no wonder if we find the whole flumm of the- Cojptl hire coucht up in fo narrow a room, and if each particular be not largely laid open before our eyes. 7. That we may certainly know that this promt fe fieaks not only of the en- mity that Chrifl him felf fiuuld have to Satan , and doth not engage a General without an army, God doth here ex pre fly mention the woman her felf, faymg [~ I will put enmity between thee and the woman 3 fo that as fie flood in athreefoldre- Jpetl ; fine is here her felf pofitffed with this three- fold enmity. 1. As flu is the root of humane nature, fromwhence all mankind muft fprtng, fie is poffeft with the natural enmity to the diabolical nature , and this to he naturally conveyed or pro- pagated, 2, As foe was the rojrt of the great Republick^of the world, or that rational fociety which God as Relior would fapi em tally govern , and her felf with her husband ( who no doubt was alfo included in the promt fe ) were the whole then exiflent race of mankind, fo did Jhe receive a le- gal enmity of obligation, which Jhe was traditio- - nally to deliver down to all her po fieri ty , being her felf hereby obliged to lift her felf and all her Infant progeny in the Redeemers army, again ft the proclaimed enemy , and to teach her pfifterity to do the likj : For thus obligatory precepts mxft
be
C55J
ie fraught down. 3." As fie was one of the cbs*
J\n favourites of God j (he received the habitual en- mity of fantltfication : And this u not in her powrr to propagate^ though fie may ufe fome means that arc appointed thereto } and whether a promifc of any fuch thing be made to her feed an the ufe of fuck means , I will not now ft and to difcuf. 8. It is not all that are pofftffed with the natu- ral enmity again]} the Devil him J elf that are the Church of Corf} : for this is but a common pre- parative which is in all : Nor ts it all that Are obliged to the further c. Kiiy apainfi the works of Satan : But all that on that obligation are duely lifted in Chrtfts army againfi Satan ( by the obli- ged per fan ) are vifble members : and all that are by f anil 1 feat ion at an hearty enmity ( habitual or atlual ) with the Kingdom of Satan , are mem- bers of the Church called myftical or invifiblt. This J put as granted. 9. Thofethat violate this fundamental obligation, and to their natural pra- vtty fltall add a fighting again/} Chrifi and his Kingdom for Satan and his Kingdom, are be- come themfelves the feed of the Serpent. And though they had the natural enmity with the reft ef mankind in general againfi Satan , yet have they therewithal the 'habitual enmity againfi Chrifi. This much I fuppofe as out of controver- fie. But whether alfo the fir ft original corrupted nature it felf ( before any fin again ft recovering grace ) did contain an habitual enmity againfi the Kingdom of the Redeemer f Or whether the fins of later Parents may propagate this as an ad- ditional corruption in our nature, I will not now
ftand
(96)
ftand to difcuft. Only as to our prtfent bufinefl * it is certain that the general natural enmity to Satan, may conftfl With an habitual friendship to his ways and caufe» And though at men they may have the firfi common advantage of nature , and as fubjetls de jure may be under the common obligation , yea , and as lifted in Chrifts army may have many of its priviledges^ yet for the enmity of di(pofuion to Chrift, they may be under a greater curfe, 10. As it is certain, that it is not only Chrift himfelf that is here made the objetb of this promife , and is here called [ the feed of the woman,] (as is before proved, and may be more, and is commonly granted-, ) fo it is to be noted, that thofe others in whom this enmi- ty is put , are called here [_ the feed of the wo- man, ] and not the feed of Chrift ( though the chief of them are his feed* ) And fo though the fromife is made to none but the womans jeed , And no exception put in again ft Infants , or any age of all her feed; TiU you can prove that In- fants are none of her feed , we muft take this fundamental promife to extend to Infants , and that very plainly, without ufmg any violence with the Text.
1 1. Some learned men- do ufe no contemptible ar- guments to prove further, That the fanttifying en- mity is here promifad to the feed of the woman as her feed ( I mean thofe ' that go the way of J>r. Ward , aJMr. Bedford , &c. ) that is , that as the two former forts of enmity are put into all the feed of the woman ( as is explain- ed J fo the jpiritual holy enmity promifed to her*
feed
(97)
fttd as fhe is a believer. 12. And fome learned men do accordingly conclude , that the impiety of Parents may do much to hinder their children from that bleffwg more than by original fin they were hindred , and therefore thetr faith may further them. Of which though much may be faid , / flsaU fay no more , beeaufe I will not (land on things fo n uch que f toned,
M.T. This tedious difcourfe of Mr. B. is indeed fer- pentive
Reply. They that need a -Reply to any thing here {aid, fhall have none from me.
SECT. XLIX.
R. B. T Come next to frove from other parts of X Scripture , That the fundamental pro- mi fe of Grace is thus to be interpreted as inclu- ding Infants, i. If the fame Covenant of grace when it is more fully and clearly opened , do ex- frejly comprehend Infants as to be Church-mem- bers^ then is this fundamental promife fo to be un- der food {or then doth this alfo comprehend them. ) But the antecedent is certain , therefore fo is the confequent. The antecedent I prove from the Covenant of grace made to Abraham the Father of the faithful , which comprehended Infants for Church -member s : The Covenant made with Abra- ham comprehending Infants , was the fame with tlris in Gen. 3. but in fome things clear lier open- ed. Which is proved thus : Both thefe were the Covenant of grace and free juftification by faith
H in
in the Redeemer, therefore they were the fame for there is but one fach. If Abraham hud fome jpecial promifes additional to the mam Covenant y that makes not the Covenant of free juftification by faith to be divers. That this in Gen. 3. is the promife or Covenant of grace and free jufii feat ion is not denied , that I know of. That the fromife to Abraham was the fame , is evident from Rom. 4. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. 1. It is there exprejly manifeft, that the Covenant whereof Cir- cumcifion was to Abraham the feal, was the Cove- nant of free jnftifi cation by faith •, Circumcifion it ft if being a feat of the righteoufnefi of faith which Abraham had , yet being uncircitmcifed , that he might be the father of believers , &c 2. Tea the fromife that he [Jwuld be heir of the world was not made to Abraham or to his feed through the Lawy but through the rightcoufnefs of faith. Now it is certain that this Covenant feal ed by Circumcifion and made to Abraham and his feed, did comprehend Infants. The confequence of the major then is evident, that the fame promife exprcjfed more concifely, is to be expounded by the fame exprejfed more jully ; And it is acknowledged that the Gofpcl light aicd grace was to be mamfefi by certain degrees,
Mr. T. That the fundamental IYomife of Grace, Gw.^. j«. dutli include Infants, was never denied by me , and therefore" Mr. ;;. doth but wafte paper and abufe me and his Readers by going about to prove it.
Reply, If we be really of one mind, it is pitty we fhould make men think we differ: Mark this concrjfion Reader, £ The fundamental promife of
(J race
(99)
Grace doth include Infants. 1 The Grace of that promife is our Vnion Relative to Chrift and his Church , and the benefits internal and external belonging to Chrifts members. Do you believe that our union with the vifible Church as fuch , and participation in its priviledges, is none of that Grace ?
Mr. T. This I deny, that it includes all Infants^ or all In- fants of Believers j and. that any infant is made a vifible church-member by that promife as the next caufe or fole effi- cient. ]
'Reply* It will come to fomething anon: i. That all Infants are made Church-members by it , did any of us ever affirm ? Though if the Parents dif- fent had nothindred, and their confent had made them and their Infants capable Recipients, it would have been all.
2. The Covenant or Law of Grace giveth vi~ fible Church-membership conditionally to all that hear it. Deny this, and you know not what you do. I firft ask you, Doth not the Law of Grace ( or Promife ) give both myftical and vifible Church-memberfhip to all that hear it that are at age and have the ufe of Reafon ? ( I fpeak not of memberfhip in a particular Church which fome may want opportunity to enjoy, but in the uni- verfal. ) Deny this, and you deny Chrifts Go- fpel. Doth he not fay , He that helieveth and is baptized fhall be faved: whoever helieveth fliall
not perish whoever will, let him take the
water of life freely : He that cometh to me I Will in no wife cafl oat : Go into the high -ways and hedges^ ajnd compel them to come in, dec. Ie
H z Gcds
( ico)
Gods Law, Covenant, Promife or Donation (^ call it which you had rather) do contain a con- ditional Gift of Chrift, pardon and life to all the adult, ( which it befeemeth none but an Infide^ to deny , J ask thy Conference, Reader, whether this bltflcd Covenant give no fuch conditional right to any Infant in the world ? Are they all excluded ? And why ? Are they worfe than their Pa- rents? If it give any Right to Infants conditionally zs it doth to Parents^ muft be on a condition to be per- formed by the Parents ,or fuch as are fo far entmftcd. Mr. TVs talking of £ the next canfe, and the fole Efficient ] feem to me the words of a man that knew not what to fav, but was refolved that he would not yield : Sir, do yoti grant that the pro- mife maketh Infants vifible Church-members , as any caitfe, next or remote^ fole or cooperating f If not, why cheat you your fimple followers by this talk ? If you do^ we are agreed, and why con- tend you ? If Logical notions are our difference, fay fo ; I titink as it is a Beneficial Relation^ the Parents conftnt a ttion, and the childs being
Theirs, are the djjpofitio r/;attrU, called by fome
fa Receftiva vel difpofitiva : and that Gods donation is the fole efficient in which his dona- tive word ( call it what you will J is the Instru- ment : This is plain Logick. But you that pro- fefs that your Church-memberfhip is it felf no benefit (and fo owe God no thanks for it, and yet make fuch a ftir about it ) cannot indeed hold, that Gods love or mercy, or Chrifts me- rit?, or the Covenant or Promife are givers of
i young or old : I:or they give nothing bur
benefits,.
Cioi)
benefits. Be not angry to have your abfurdities openedjbut before you die be fober and reform them.
He addeth f I grant that the Covenant to Abraham was the Covenant of Evangelical Grace , though mixt, and that it did include infants-, and that they were Church-members, to •
wit, of the hviftble Church of the Elecl And tk.it
Abrahams Infants in his houfe were vifible Church-member s> but not by virtue of the Covenant barely as Evangelical, but by the tranfemit fact : and if in any rejpett by virtue of the ■antj it was by it as containing hau-hold or civil promifes, rather than Evangelical.
Reply. About 23 and 24 years of age I was my felf in doubt of Infant Buxifm : But had I read fuch a Writer as this againfi it, I think he would have eafily refolved me for it. 1. The Covenant to Abrahams family was a Covenant of Evangelical Grace y he faith, ( And furely fo was that to zs4dam, and Noe before. ) And it inclu- ded Infants , but only as. Elect In the Church in- vifible. But the conditional Promife or Cove- nant is confeft to include the Non-elec! at age: And ,what ! None of them in Infancy ? Reader , How can this be called a Covenant, for God only to fay \_I will fave all fr.ch Infants as I elccl J and yet offer Salvation to none of them in tie world on any condition, nor give a title to any perfon that can be known by themfelves or others ? They confound the Decree of Gcd with his Co- venant. If God had made no other Law, Pro- iiife or Covenant, with the adult, But V I will rave whom I will five ~] who would have taken :his for a Law or Covenant? And what right bv hope doth this give to Chriftians for their Chi!- Ircn more than' Pagans ?
H 3 And
( 102)
And, Reader, if God have given no condition or character antecedent, as a differencing reafon or qualification of thofe that he will fave from thofe that he will not , but only told us that he will fave whom he lift, this maketh Infants no fub- jeils of his Kingdom, under no Law , and fo lia- ble to no judgement, nor to ftand in judgement with the reft of the world , but only to be ufed as beafts or (tones, by E)ivine natural motion as he will. And then , how can you fay that any Infants fhall be damned, or not faved ? Or that it (hall be one of a million at leaft that fhall not ? For if there be no Law that giveth Right to Pardon and Salvation to any one Infant in the world, and yet many are fved, it will follow, I. That God is fas the prophane fay ) better than his word , and will fave many to whom he never gave right to it by promife. 2. And will not the ungodly put in for the like hopes ? If be- fides thofe that Gods Laws condemn or juftifie , God will fave many in a neutral (late, why may he not, faith the ungodly, fave me alfo ? for In- fants once deferved punifhment by original fin: And if God pardon them without any reafon in themfelves, he may do fo by me. 3. Or at leaft he may fave all- the Infants in the world for ought you know, that die in Infancy.
And do all thepromifes to the feed of the faith- ful, in the fecond Commandment, and Exod. 34, 7. and many another Text, mean no fuch thing as they fpeak, as if to be the kcd of the faithful were; no condition^ but only [ / will five ny cktt ? J
And
0°3) " And why might not this Covenant ["_ J vpillfave my Elelh J be made with £**», or Cham, or Ju- das 7 as well as with Abraham ?
2. He forth , Abrahams Infants were vifible church-mem-. hers, but not by the Covenant barely as Evangelical. ]
Reply, What a bare put off is that 5 of a man that muft fay fomething ? Is it at all by the Cove- nant as Evangelical ? If yea, we have our defire. If not, what meaneth [barely~\ but the nakednefe of your ill cairfe ?
3. Then corntth next [ And if in any refpeci by vir- tue of the Covenant ( which it feemeth he yet knoweth not after all this talk, or will not know 3 it was by it as containing houfiolcl or civil pomifs , rather than Evangeli- cal. ~\
Reply. See, Reader, fome more of the myfterie : Infants were Church-members in Abrahams houfe, but Church-memberfhip fignified but hou- jhold and civil promifes : Do you now perceive what the Jews Infant Church-memberfhip was ? The Socinians perhaps will fay the like of the Jews Covenant to the adult.
But we may yet miftake him , For £ rather ] is not a negative : It is [_ Rather than Evangeli- cal J which is but a preference^ not a denial, O for plain honefty in things divine I
H 4 SECT.
(ic4)
SECT. L.
R. B. 2. ""T"* Hat the fir ft fundamental promife is JL thus to be interpreted^ 1 further prove by Gods con ft ant admmiftration in the performance of it. Concerning which I do, make this challenge to yon ( with modefty and fubmijfi- on,) to prove if you, cany that there was ever one Church -member that had Infants born to him while he wm in that eft ate, from the beginning of the world to this day, whofe Infants aifo were not Church-members .? Except only the Anaba- ftifts, who refufe or deny the mercy , and fo re- fufe to dedicate their Infants in Baptifm unto Chrift, And whether their Infants be Church- member s, / will not determine affirmatively or ne- gatively at this time. I do again urge you to it, that you may not forget it • to prove to me, that ever there was one Infant of a Church-member in the world, fince the creation to this day , that Was not a Church-member, ( except the Anaba-* ptifts that refufe the mercy or deny it.)
Reply, Mr* TV's Anfweris a refuting to anfwer, fave a crofs challenge ( oft anfwered) and the inftance of Timothy : To which 1 lay, that if Ti- mothy's Father being a Greek countermanded his communion with the Jews , he could not be 3 member of their policie or particular Church. ( Though if he only delayed as zJlfofes did to circumcife his Son, that Son might be a member as the children in the wildernefs were.) But his
Mothers
Mothers right alone might make him a perfon in Covenant with God as a vifible member of the Church-univerfa!.
S E C T. L I.
R, D. YYEfore I proceed to any more Texts of JD Scripture , / will a little enquire in- to the Ugh or Law of Nature it [elf ', and fee what that faith to the point in hand. And firft we jhall confider of the duty of dedicating Infants to God in Chrift , and next of Cods acceptance of them , and entertaining them into that eft ate. And the fr ft is mo ft evidently contained m the Law of nature it felf ( at leaft upon fuppofmon that there be any hopes of Gods entertaining them ; ) which I prove thvu. I. The law of Na- ture btndeth as to give to every one his own due : But Infants are Gods own due -3 Ergo , the law of Nature bindeth Parents to give them up to God. &y £ giving ~\ here I mean not an aliena- tion of propriety, to make that to he Gods that was not fo before ^ but an acknowledgement of his right, with a free refignation and dedication of t> e Infant to God, at his own -, for his ufe andfer- vicerwhen he is capable thereof \ If you fay, In- fants being not capable of doing fervice , jhould not be devoted to it till they can do it ^ I an- fwer , they are capable at prefent of a legal obli- gation to future duty , and alfo of the relation which follow eth that obligation, together with the honour of a Church-membtr(a4 the child of a Noble
man
■o°o
wan is of his Honours and title to his Inherit tance ) and many other mercies of the Covenant, And though Qorift according to his humanity was not capable of doing the work of a tJWedt- ator or head of the Church in his Infancy^ yet for all that he muft be head of the Church theny and not ( according to this arguing ) flay till he were capable of doing thofe works* Andfois it with his members.
Reply. Here is fo little faid that needs but this remarke, that Mr. T. knoweih not how tbjdeny the duty of dedication handfomly , which being Ac- cepted of God is to Church-memberfhip as pri- vate Marriage to publick, where publication is wanting : But he denieth that Parents may dedi- cate them by TSapttfm : But if they may and muft do it privately by heart confent , it will follow that they muft do it publickly in the inftituted way. As for my bold attempt in proving fo much by the Law of Nature, if he cannot confute it, let him not ftrive and fin againft nature.
S E C T. L 1 1.
R. B. 2."TP He law of nature bindeth all Parents JL to do their be ft to fecure Gods right > and their Childrens good, and to prevent their fin and mifcry : But to engage them betimes to God by fuch a dedication , doth tend to fecure Gods right, and their Childrens goody and Po pre- vent their fin and mifery : For they are under a double obligation , whtch they may be minded of be-
times,
f id?)
timSy and which may hold them the more fir on g^ ly to their duty , and difadvantage the tempter that would draw them off from God.
Mr. T. Really Infant Eaptifm is a difadvantage, i. In that it is the cccafion whereby they take themfclves to be Chriflians afore they know what Chriftianity is, and fo are kept in preemption, &c. 2. They are kept from the true baptifm, &c.
Reply. This nearly concerneth our caufe : I once inclined to thefe thoughts my felf : But I am fatisfied, 1. That Infant Covenanting and Baptifm is no hindrance in Nature or Reafon from per- fonal feriom Covenanting with God at age. We tell our Children and all the adult, that their In- fant Covenanting by Parents, will ferve them but till they have Reafon and Will of their own to choofe for themfelves ; And t-hat without as fe- rious a faith and confent of their own then as if they had never been baptized, they cannot be fa- ved : What hurt then as to this doth their In- fant intereft do them ?
2. Yea doubtlefs it is a great help: For, 1. To be in the way of Gods Ordinance and Benediction is much. 2. And ( knowing you deny that ) I add , to be confeious of an early engagement y may do much to awe the minds of Children ; yea and to caufe them to love that Chrift which hath received them , and that Society to which rhey belong,
3. If Children till Baptized have any thoughts of dying, according to you, they muft have little hopes of mercy : And God accounteth not the fpirit of bondage beft , no not for Children. They cannon well be educated in the Love of
God,
God, who muft believe that they are damned if they die, and that God hath not given them any promife of life.
4. Experience of many Moors ( fervants ) among us and in our Plantations, ( befides ancient hiftory) aflureth us, that delaying Baptifm till age rendeth to make people delay repentance, and think I am but as I was, and if I fin longer all will be pardoned at baptifm, and I muft after live ftri&lier, and therefore ( as Conftantine and many more ) they will be baptized Chriftians when there it no remedy.
5. And experience aflfureth us that it were the way to work out Chriftianity and reftore Infide- lity in any Nation : For had not Chrift early po/Teftion , and were not Nations difcipled and baptized, Chriftians were like to bealmoft as thin as Puritans now : and the multitude being Infidels from a crofs intereft ( fuch as divifions caufe ) would be ready on all occafions (as they did in Japan and Momcongo ) to root them our.
I take this to be a very concerning confidera- tion, whether in reaion Infant Baptifm be like to do more good or harm. The not calling men tofe- rious Covenanting at age doth unfpeakableharm : To have a few good words about Confirmation in the Liturgie, and fuch as Do&.- Hammonds wri- tings of it, will not fave ignorant ungodly fouls, nor the fouls of the Paftors that betray them : I have faid my thoughts of this long ago in a Trea- tife of Confirmation.
But I muft profefs that it feemeth to me, that if Chrift had left it to our wills, it is much liker
to
flop )
to tend to the good of fouls , and the propaga- ting Chriftianity, and the ftrength of the Church, for to have both the obligation and comfort of our Infant Covenant and Church (late, and at ferious a Covenanting alfo at age, when we pafs into the Church fiate of the Adult, than to be without the former , and left to the expectation of adult ba- prifm alone.
SECT. LIII, toLVIIL
R. B. 'Tp/Zf law of nature bindeth Parents in JL love to their children to enter them into the wofi honourable and profitable fociety, if they have but leave fo to do: But here Parents have leave to enter them into the Church , which is the mofi honourable and profitable fociety. Er- go. That they have leave, is proved, I. Godne* ver forbad any man in the world to do this fin- cerely, ( the wicked and unbelievers cannot do it fine ere ly ; ) and a not forbidding is to be interpre- ted as leave in cafe of fuch participation of be- nefits : As all laws of men in doubtful cafes are to be interpreted rjf ZheiKvcur, in the mofi favou- rable fenfe. So hath Chrifi taught us to inter- pret hisi own : When they fpeak of duty to God , they mufi be interpreted in the flritlefi fenfe: When they Jpeak^of benefits to man, they mufi be interpreted in the* mofi favourable fenfe that they will bear,
2. It is the more evident , that a not forbid- ding in. fuch cafes is to be taken for leave , be-
, caufs
caufe God hath put the principle of felj "-pre few a- tion, and defiring our oven welfare, and the wel- fare of our Children fo deeply in humane nature s that he can no more lay it by than he can ceafe to be a reafonable creature. And therefore he may lawfully aliuate or exercife this natural ne- cejjliry principle of feeking his own or childrens real happinefi , where-ever God doth not reftrain or prohibit him. We need no pofitive command to feek, cur own or childrens happinefi, but what is in the law of nature it felf \ and to ufe this where God forbiddeth not, if good be then to be found, cannot be unlawful.
3. It is evident from what is f aid before (and elfewhere ) that it is more than a filcnt leave cf Infants Church-memberfirip that God hath vouchfafed ns. For in the forementioned funda- mental promife , explained more fully in after times, God fignified his will that fo it Jhould be* It cannot be denied, but there is fome hope at leafi given to them in the fir ft promife , and that in the general promife to the feed of the woman they are not excluded, there be no excluding term. Upon fo much encouragement and hope then it is the duty of Parents by the law of nature to enter their Infants into the Covenant, and into that So- ciety that partake of thefe hopes , and to lift them into the Army of Chrift.
4. It is the duty of Parents by the Law of Na~ ture , to accept of any allowed or offered benefit for their children. But the relation of a member of Chrifis Church or Army , is an allowed or of- fered benefit to thvm} Ergo, &c. For the Major,
thefe
fill)
thefe principles iri the law of nature do contain it.
1. That the Infant is not fui juris, but is at his Parents dijpofe in all things that are for his good. That the Parents have power to oblige their chil- dren to any future duty or fuffering , that is cer- tainly to their own good : and fo may enter them tnto Covenants accordingly : And fo far the will of the Father is as it were the will of the child.
2. That it is unnaturally finful for a Parent to refufe to do fuch a things when it is to the great benefit of his own child* As if a Prince would offer Honour s> and Lordjhips , and Immunities to him and his heirs : if he will not accept this for his heirs, but only for him f elf, it is unnatural. Teay if he will not oblige his heirs to fome fmall and reafonablc conditions for the enjoying fuch benefits. For the Minor, that this relation is an allowed or offered benefit to Infants is manifefted already, and more fljall be.
And this leads me up to the fecond point , which I propounded to confider of ^ whether by the light or law of nature we can prove that Infants jJwuld have the benefit of being Church-members, fuppofmg itjirfl known by fnper natural revelati- on, that Parents are of that fociety, and how ge- neral the promife is , and how gracious God is. And i. It is certain to m by nature that Infants are capable of this benefit , if Cjod deny it not , but will give it them as well its the aged. 2. It is certain that they are aftually members ef all the Common-wealths in the world (perfedre fed im- perfecta membra ) being fecured from violence by the laws, and capable of honours and right to in- heritances..
heritances, and of being real fubjetts under obli- gations to future duties 7 if they furvive. jind this jhews that they are alfo capable of being Church-members > and that nature revealeth to m, that the Infants cafe much followeth the cafe of the Parents, tfpecially in benefits. 3. Nature hath atlually taught mojt people on earth , fo far as I can tear*; to repute their Infants in the fame Re- ligious fociety with themfelves, a* well as in the fame civil Jjciety. 4. Vnder the Covenant of workj ( commonly fo called) or the per fell rigo- rous law that God made with man in his pure nature -, the Infants fhould have been in the Church, and a people holy to God , if the Parents had fo continued themfelves. And confider , I. That holme f and rightcoufnef were then the fame things as now^ and that in the eflabltflnng of the way of propagation, God was no more obli- ged to order it fo, that the children of righteous Parents fhould have been born with all the pcr- fetlions of their Parents and enjoyed the fame privdedges , than he was obliged in making the Covenant of Grace to grant that Infants jhould be of the fame fociety with their Parents , and have theHmmunities of that fociety. 2. We have no reafon when the defign of redemption is the magnifying of love and grace , to thinly that love and grace are fo much lef under the Go/pel to the members of Chrifi , than under the Law to the members or feed of Adam , as that then all the feed fl)ould have partaked with the fame bleffings with the righteous Parents, and now they jhall all be turned out of the fociety , whereof the Parents were
mem*
Members. $. God gives us himfelf the rcafons of his gracious dealing with the children of the jufl from his gracious nature , proclaiming even par- doning mercy to flow thence, Exod. 34. and in the ftcond Commandment. 6. God doth yet flew us that in many great and weighty rejpetls he dealeth well or ill with children for their Parents fakes: 'as many Texts- of Scripture Jhew (and I have lately proved at large in one of our private difputes j thut the fins of nearer parents are im- puted as part of our original or natural guilt* ) So much of that,
. Reply. Mr. T. f^ith nothing to all, that I think the Reader needeih a reply tc.
SECT. LVIII.
R. B. "\TEt before I cite any more particular X Texts , / will add this one argument from the tenour of the Covenant of grace, as ex- prefjed in many Texts of Scripture, According to the tenour of the Covenant of grace, <God 'Will not refufe to be their God ani take them for his people, that are ( in a natural or law fenfe ) wil- ling to be his people , and to take him for their God. But the Infants of believing Parents are \thus willing, Ergo. Ttoe Major is unqaeftionabls. The Minor isprovedfrow the very law of nature be- fore expreffed. Infants cannot be atlually witling themfelves in natural fenfe, Ergo, the reafen and Will of another mufl be theirs in law fenfe, and that is of the Parents, who have the full dijfofe of t\.
I and
\ * A °t J
and are warranted by the law of nature to choofe for them (for their good ) till they come to nfc of reafon themfelvcs. The Parents therefore by the light and law of nature chovfing the better fart for their children-, and offering and devoting them to God) by the obligation of his own natu- ral law , he cannot in confifiency with the free grace revealed in the G off el, refufe thofe that are Jo offered. And thofe that thus come to him in the way that nature it felf prefcribeth , he Will in no wife caff out, Joh. . . And he will be offended with thofe that would keep them from hir,?y that are offered by thofe that have the power to do it 7 though they cannot offer themfclves. For legally this act' is taken for their own. Thin I have fljewed you fome of the fundamental title that Infants of Believers have to Church-mem- berflup, and our obligation to dedicate them to God, Reply. Mr. T. Faith [~ that fome alts of the Pa- rents are legally taken for the childs is not deni- ed,'] But here he denieth it, and I leave his de- nial with my copious proof in my Treaiifeof In- fant-baptifm to the Reader*.
SECT. LIX.
R, B. *^rOu muff now in reafon expect, that in- X fants Chuich-memberjlnp being thru eftablifoed, partly m the Uw of nature, and part- ly in the fundamental promifc, what is after this fpffken of it fmlld not be any new eflablijhment y but confirmations and intimations of what was be-
H
fbre done, rather giving m the ffodf that fuch & law and promife there is that did Jo eftabltjh *>3 than being fuch firft eftablijhing laws or promifes themfelves. <s4nd from hence I may well add this further argument. If there be certain proof 'in Scripture of Infants Church- memberjhip , but none except this before alledged that makes any mention of the beginning of it , but all ffeaking of it 04 no new thing , then we have great reafoti upon the forementioncd evidence, to affign this be- ginning which from Gen. 3. we have expreft, But the former is true, ergo, the later* Ton con- fefi that Infants were Church-members once. Ton only conceive it began when Abraham was called out of Ur. Tour conceit hath not a word to fup- port it in the Text, The right to fuch a blef- fing was then new to Abrahams feed, when Abra- ham firft believed : But when it began to belong to Infants of Believers in general, no Text ex- cept this before cited- doth mention. Nor doth that promife to Abraham intimate any inception then as to the Church -member $rip of Infants, but only an application of a priviledge to hyn that in the general was no new thing.
Reply. To this Mr. T. ftilf aflfirmeth that Infants Church-memberfhip was proper to the Hebrews only. Reader, though they had their peculiari- ties, is it credible that the Infants of that one fmall country only fhould be fo differently dealt with by C7od, from all the world e!fe, even He- noch's, Noe's , Sem's and all from 'Adam to the end of the world , that thefe Infants only fhould bt Church-members and no others? what un-
\z Jtikdy
( no )
likely things (yea againft evidence) can fomc believe ?
SECT. LX,LXI, LXII.
R. B. TVT O IV for the Texts that further inti- _L\I male fuch a foregoing eftablijhmenti I. There feems to be feme believing intimation of this in Adams naming his wife the mother of the living : For it is to be noted what Bijhop "Cliher faith i Annal. vol. i. p. 2. Unde turn priraum ( poft femenpromifliim^ mulieri Evas nomenama- rico eft impofirum , Gen. 3 . 20. quod mater efTet omnium viventium non naturalem tantum vitam, fed illud quoque quod eft per fidem in femen ip- fius, Mefiiam promiflum : quomodo & poft earn Sara fidelium mater eft habita. iPct.^6. Gal. 4. 3 1 . J He put this name on her after the promife, becaufe fie was u> be the mother of all the living, not only that live the life of nature , but that which is by faith in the sJWcffiah her feed. So that as fie was the root of pur nature , we are her natural feed • and as fie was a believer , and we the feed of her a believer , fo is fie the mo- ther of a holy feed, and we that are her feed are holy, as a people vifibly dedicated to God.
2. When Cain was bom, his mother .called him f p{fe!florl 1 bscaufe (lie had obtained a man of the Lord, that is, faith Ainfvvorth, !_ with his fa- vour, md of his good will, J and fo a Son of pro* wife, and of the Church. And therefore it is to be noted , that when Cain had finned by killing
his
C"7)
his brother, God did curfe him , and cafl him oiu of his prefence, Gen. 4. 14, 16. So that he was excommunicate and feparated from the Church of God, faith Ainfivorth, \_that is, from the pla.ce of Gods word and worfiup which in likelihood was held by Adam the father , who being a Prophet , bad taught his children how to facrifice andferve the Lord, So on the contrary, to come into Gods prefence or before him, 1 Chron. 16. 29. is ex- plained in Pfal. 96. 8. to' be the cowing into his Courts. ~\ Very many learned men give the fame ixpofxtion of it. Now if Cain were now excom- municate , then was he before of the Church : nay . 't is certain by his Sacrificing , and other proof , however this Text be interpreted : But no man :an give the leaf; reafon from Scripture to make t fo probable that he entred into the Church at any nher time7 as we give of his entrance at his nat- ivity.
When Eve bare Seth, fl)'e fo named him as a Son f mercy in faith , at appointed her by the Lord 0 be in Abels room, faithful as Abel , and the ?ather of our Lord after the flefii , as Ainfwonh n Gen. 4. 25. And is there no intimation in this hat Seth was an Infant member of the vifible church I I confefi he that jJjall excommunicate this ippointed feed or faith , that Seth was without he Church in his infancy, doth jpeak^ in my ears 0 improbably^ and fo unlike the Scripture , that r am very confident I fimll never believe him*
Mr.7Vs Anfwer to all, is a denial : faith he, [Then is 0 intimation that Seth was an infant member of ike vi fi- le church ', from which Ifhmael was not excluded : In
I 3 ytYiOfi
(nS)
• though I place not Seth, I h not tbfrehj exccttv,. cite him, or faj that he wits without thi Church in bis in-
Reply. But you fay He was without the vifible Church : ( or elfe within and without are confident with you. ) And whether JJhmael was within, and Setht and Henoch , and Sem without , I will no more difpute with you.
SECT. LXIII, to LXX.
R. B. TV T Ote aifo , that as God had thus cafi l_\l out Cain, and fuelled Abels room by Seth, and had given each of them pofierity ^ Jo we find him in a jpccial manner re gi firing the fucceffors of the righteous, and putting two titles on thefe two difiinlt generations, calling fome the fons of Cody and others the daughters of men y Gen. 6. 2. Suppofing that you rejetl the old con- ceits that thefe fons of God were Angels that fell in love with women, the current ordinary expo- fit ion I thfnk^ will ft and, that thefe were the pro- geny of Seth , and other members of the Church , who are called the Sons of God ^ and that it was the progeny of Cain, and other wielded ones ^ that are called the daughters of men* Where note that they are not them f elves denominated wielded, but the children of men, ai being a generation ft pa- rated from the Church from the birth. And the other are not themfelves affirmed to be truly god- /' ones, l:ic fons if God , a* being the feed of the ::t, b.:t members of the Churchy or
the
the forts of tbofe who were devoted to God, and fo devoted to him them ft Ives : a feparated gene- ration belonging to God as his vifible Church. Where note, that thcfe that are called the fons of God, even the line of Seth and, other godly pa- rents, were yet fo wicked that God -repented that he made them, and deftroyed them in the food, (paring only Noah and his family. So that it was not their own godlinef, that made them ai- led the fons of God, but their relation, Church fate and vifiblc feparation from open unchurched Idolaters, (fompare this phrafe with the like, D:ur. 14. I. 2 Cor. 6. 18. In the former it is f aid [ ye are the children of the Lord your God, ye ihall not cut your felves, cf-c. ~] where the whole people^ Infants and. all, are called Gods children, as being a people feparatcd to him from the Ido- latrous world •, and fo in the next verf. called a holy people unto God, peculiar to him, eye. And 2 Cor. 6. 8. Come out from among them , and be yt feparate, cfrc. and I will be a fa.her to you, and you fhail be my fons and daughters , faith the "Lord Almighry. ~] So that. Gcds f??s and daughters are that fociety that are feparatcd from Idolaters unto the workup of God as the vi- fible Church is. And then it appears that the ge- neration of the righteous, even from the womb, were enumerated to the refi, in that they are not mentioned as a people called o>:t here and there , a*d initiated at tine (there is rto;xc;i- ttonof any fuch thing : ) but as a ftock, or gene- ration oppjfed to the daughters of men, cr of the unchurched, who were fuch from their infancy
1 4
U2°; as all will grant. For it was not the fame me?t that were the Parents of thofe here called the daughters of men and the fons of God ( though fome of the later might be ex communicate when they fell : ) But it plainly intimates , that it was another fort of me?i that thefe were the daughters of j than thofe that were Parents to the fons of God. So Ainfworth in loc. [The forts of God, i.e. the meri of the Church of God, for to fuch Mofcs faith , Dcur. 14. i, dec. 1 John 3. i« Daughters of men , meaning of Cains po ferity that were out of Gods Church , Gen. 4. 14. \ So our Annotations^ and many more.
An intimation of this priviledge, and that they were fons of mercy and of the promife , appear eth in the very names of many of the children of the righteous, both before and after the flood, which I will not (land on particularly.
And when all the world had fo defied them- felves , that God was refolved to cut them off^ he /pared Noah and his family or fons. .Though Cham was to be cur fed, yet was he of the Church which w or flipped the true God , and (pared as a fon of Noah , and one of that fociety. And if God fo far fpared him then for his Fathers fake as to hoitfe him in the Ai\ ( the type of the Church ) he fure took, him to be of the fame fo- ciety in his infancy, and then bare him the fame favour on the fame account.
As foon as Noah came out of the Ark^ God bleffed himfelf in his ijfkcy as he did Adam, with an [~ incrcafe and multiply ~\ and made a Cove- nant with him and his feed after him. , Which
Cwe*
(121)
fivenant though the expreffed part of it be that the earth Jhould be drowned no more , and fo it was made with the wickedfi of Noahs feed, and even with the beafis of the field, yet doth it im- port 4 fpecial favour to Noah ^W his feed, as one whom God would fhew a more fpecial refpett to , as he had done in his deliverance, and upon this fpecial favour to him the creatures fare the bet- ter. For though the word £ Covenant ] be the fame to man and be aft , yet the diver fity of the fromijfary and his capacity may put a different fenfe on the fame word, as applied to each. nAnd in- deed it Jhould feem but a fad blefftng to Noah to hear an [_ increase and multiply ] // all his In- fant poflerity mufi be cafi or left out of the vifi- ble Church, and fo left as common or unclean. This were to encreafe and multiply the Kingdom of the Devil. Jf he that was fo mercifully hou- fed in the Ark, with all his children , mufi now be fo blefi as to have all their iffue to be out of the Church, it were afirange change- in God, and a firange blefftng on Noah ! Ane[ an uncomfortable fiabh firing of a (fovcnant with his feed , if all that feed mufi be fo thrufi from God and dealt With as the feed of cur fed Cain.
Moreover it is certain that Noah did prophe- tically , or at leafi truly pronounce the blefftng on Shem and Japher. And in Shems bltffimg he blcffeth the Lord his God, jhewing that God was his God and fo in Covenant with hi???. And it is plain that it is not only the perfons , but the pofterities of his three fons that Noah hereintend- ed. It was not Cham himfelf fo much as Canaan
and
and his fucceeding pofterity that were to be fer- vantsto Shem and Japhet, that is, to their pofte- rity. And the bleffmg muft be to the ijfue of Shem, as well as the curfe to the iffue a/7 Cham. And indeed a Hebrew Doctor would take tt til at that Expositor or Divine whatfoever that Jhould pre fume' to exclude the Infant feed of them ont of Gods (jiurch. And well they may , if in the bkfiing God be pronounced to be their God, Saith Ainfworth in Ioc. [_ under this Shem affo himfelf receiveth a blefftng : for blejfed is the peo- ple , whofe God Jehovah is, Pfal. 144. 15. and eternal life is implied herein , for God hath pre- prepared for them a City of whom he is not aftm- med to be called their God, Heb. 11. 16. and Shem is the firft man in Scripture that hath ex- prefly this honour, f)
cJWoreover in Gen. 9. 27. in Japhets bleffing there is much, though in few words, to this pur- pofe intimated. Fir ft , note that the Jewijh Church is called [ the tents of Shem. ] From whence it appeared), that the Church priviledgcs of that people begun not with or from Abraham , but were before : And that it is the fame Church that was of Shem and of Abraham, and after all the additional promifes to Abraham , the Jewijh Church is fit 11 denominated \ 'the tents of Shem : ] now they were the tents of Shem before Abrahams days. And therefore it .is clear, that it being the fame Church , muft be fuppofed to have the fame fort of members or materials : and there- fore Infants muft be n embers before Abrahams days as well as after. That Church which
was
iv** Sheras fe»^ had Infant Church-members (for the Jews Church is fo called , ftff<? which Japhec was to pafi: ) But the Church both before and af- ter Abraham was Shems tents. Ergo,
Tet further let it here be noted, that it is into Shems tent s that Japhec mufl pafi. I fuppofethat the evidence is better here for that expofttion that applyeth the word [ dwell J to Japhet than to God, and fo that this is jpoken of the converftsn of the Gentiles, as many Expofitor shave cleared at large* And fo, as Ainfworih faith, the fcnfe is that Ja- phet jhaH be £ untied with the Churches of the Jews, the pofierity of Shcm , which was fulfilled when the Gentiles became joynt-heirs, and of the fame body, and joy nt -partakers of Gods promife in Chrifl, the flop of the partition-wall being broken down, &c. Ephef. 3.6. &2. 14, 19. Although it may further imply the grafting 0/Japhets children, into the ftock^of the (fhurch, when Shems pofleri- :y jhuld be cut ojf,fkc.~\ vid. ulr. Now tf it be Shems tents even the fame Church that Japhets children mufl dwell in , then as Shems Infants were Church-members , fo mufl Japhets, and not all his Infant feed be cafl cr left out. So that here is a promife of Infant Church-memberflrip unto the Gentiles in thefe words.
Reply. To all this the fumm of Mr, TVs an- fwers are, 1. A denial of the fenfes gi^n of fome Texts, which I leave to the Readers exa- mination, being refolved not to tire him with a tedious Reply. 2. He grants that their perfons were blcflcd , God their God, and their feed in the Church : As if Gods open Covenant and
pro-
promife made them not vifible members but invi- fible.
SECT, LXX, to LXXIX.
R.B. TX7^ come next t0 the Vromife made VV to Abraham, which I jhall fay the left to } becaufe you confef it. But again note , that whereas your felf make the beginning of Gods taking the Jews to be his -people , and fo of Infants to be members of the Church , to be at Abrahams call from Ur ^ i. There is no one word of that in the Text. 2. Lot came out ofWx with Abraham, yea, and from Haran, and lived with him : were not Lot and his Infants Church-mem- hers then?
3 • The chief note I intend is this, that there is no more faid then to prove Infants Church -mem' hers, than what we have (l)ewed was faid long before, and is faid after of the Gentiles Infants, no nor fo much. If therefore the parage of Abra- ham out of Ur, yea , or the promife made to him in Haran , Gen. 12. 2, 3. will prove Infants Church-member ^iip , then have we as good proof of it to the Gentile Church as to the Jews.
And here I note further , that in the begin- ning iff ore the command for Circumcifion , yon plainly yield that Infants Church-membtrjloip is a thing fc parable from Circumcifion, and begun not With it , but before. And indeed I have evinced that to you in my Book of Baptifm. Abraham him felf was not made a member by Circumcifion ,
but
but circumcifed becaufe a member of Chrifls Church by faith. Ifhmael was a Member before , and fo was Ifaac, and the Infants born in Abra- hams hoafe.
Whether there were any promt fe or precept of this ( but a meer tfanfeunt fat} ) let the Text lafi mentioned, and the following bear witnej?. Gen* 12. 2, 3. In thee (hall all families of the earth be bleffed, and, Gen. 17.7,9,10. And I will eflablifh my Covenant between me and thee and
thy kzd after thee—- and I will be their
God. And God faid to Abraham, Thou (hale keep my Covenant therefore , thou and thy feed after thee in their generations. This is my Co- venant which you (hall keep between me and you, &c. to verf. 15. In all this let thefe things be noted , 1. That here is an exprefi promt fe or Covenant to Abraham and his feed af- ter him* 2. That it is not only de praefenti, but for the future , called an everlafting Cove- nant. 3 . That this promt fe or Covenant doth ma- nifeftly imply and include Infants Church-mem- ber firip ( as you confeft. ) 4. That yet here is not the leafl word that intimates an inftitution of it de novo, but rather the contrary plainly intima- ted. The promifes before Gen. 17. are mainly about the multiplication of Abrahams feed. What is that to (hurch— member fhip ? ( except what in- timates the promifed feed \ of which anon* ) Ha- gar hath a promife alfo of the multiplication of Khmaels feed. And the very precept of Circum- cifion is only one part of the Infant member x,viz. the males , and therefore it cannot be foundation
of
( 1**6 )
rf their Church-memberjhip , which leaves out half the members. 5. Note that the promife that Cod will be their Cod , doth exprefly contain the Church-membership of the feed. 6. Note that this is more than a tranfeunt fatly Ergo, being an ever lading Covenant. Had h been a natu- ral tranfennt faEi, that had left no permanent ti- tle behind it in the obligation of the Covenant , the?t it had been null and void as joon as /poke* ' then the word ofCjodts but a bare found and of no further force. 7. Note that the Apoflle ( as is faid) Rom. 4. 10, 11, 12, 13. doth fully manifest to w, that this promife was made to Abraham as a believer , and that Circnmcifon was a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith which he had, yet be- ing uncircumcifed : and therefore that the chief fart of the Covenant of having God for our God, and his taking us as his peculiar people , belongs to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews. 8. And he oft Jheweth that the faithful are Abrahams feed, and therefore the chief blejfwgs of the pro- wife belong to all the faithful. But one of the blefflngs was, that their Infants flwuld be compre- hended in the fame Church and Covenant, Ergo, the Infants of the faithful who are the heirs of the fame promife , muft be comprehended in it too.
9. / thinks it is not to be made light of as to this matter , that in the great promife, Gen. I2#3. the blejfmg from Abraham in Chrift is promifed to all the families or tribes on earth, all the fami- lies of the earth (hall be bleffed, as the Heb. Sa- mar. Arabic, or all the kindreds as the vulgar lat. and ChaUL paraph, or all the tribes as the
Septc
( **7 ;
Sept. mm tit Qvhctl* And doultlefs it is byChrifi that this bleffing is promifed, and fo a Gofpel blcffing ( Ergo, the Syrian adds and in thy feed, and the Arab, hath by thee. ) And the Apoftle fully tefitfieth that. So that as trtbes y kindreds, families, do mo ft certainly comprehend the Infant si and as it was to fuch families that the promife was made before Chriji as to the Jewiffi Church , fo is it exprejly to fitch families or trtbes that the promife is mads as to the Gentiles fence Chrift.
10. Note that as Infant Church-member jhip is here clearly implied in Infant Circumcifion , fo the) are two diftintl things-, and as the fegn is here commanded de novo , fo the thing fignified (I mean the duty of engaging and devoting to God as their God in Covenant ) is commanded with it, though not de novo, as a thing now be* ginning as the fign did, So that here ts in Civ cumcifion not only a command to do the circum- cifing outward att, but alfo to do it as a fign of the Covenant , and fo withal for the Parents to engage their children to God in Covenant as their God, and devote them to him as his feparated pe- culiar people. So that here are two diftintl du- ties concurrent. The one external newly infti- tuted , the other internal not newly in ft it u- ted. And therefore the former may ceafe , and yet the later ftand : and it is no proof that the Inter ( Covenant engagement of Infants to God ) is ceafedy becaufe the fign of Cir cumcifion is ctafed , no more than it proves that fuch Cove- nant engagement did then begin when Circum- cifion did begin $ or that women were not Church- members
(128)-
fnembcrs feparateh, engaged, dedicated to Ged tit Infancy, becaufe they were ?wt circumcised. And no more than yen can prove that all Ifrael was unchurched in the wildernefs when they were nn- ctrcumcifed for 40 years. So that here you have a command for entrvng Infants as Chmch-mem- bers. And fo yon fee both promt fe and precept in Gen. 12. 3. & Gen. 17c
And when I confidcr the Parents, breeding and manners of Rebekah , / think it far more proba- ble that fhe was a Church-member from her In- fancy, than that fhe was entred afterwards at .age, or that fhe was a heathen or infidel when Iiaac married her.
And as here are before mentioned ft anding Co- venants, fo it is to be noted how God intimateth the extent of the main bleffing of them to be fur- ther than to Abrahams natural feed , not only in the exprefs promt fe of the bleffing to all the nati- ons or families on earth ( of which before ) but in the ajfigned reafon of the bleffing which is com- mon to Abraham with other true believers. For Gen. 22. 16, 17, 18. it is thus alledged [becaufe thou haft done this thing , &c. And in thy feed (kail all the nations of the earth be bleffed, becaufe thou haft obeyed my voice. ] And Gen. 26. 3, 4, 5. the Covenant is renewed with Ifaac, and the fame reafon aligned, £ becaufe that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my flatutes and my lawse j How mans obedience^ is faid to be a caufe of Cods bleffing, I am not de- termining ; but taking the words as J find them in general y I may conclude , that they are here
given
( ^9)
given as a caufe or reafon of it fome way or otherl And though a Jpectal mercy may be given on a common ground or reafon , yet where there is no apparent proof of the reftriclion, vpe are to judge the bleffing common where the reafon u common : At leaft , tf a fecial blcffmg be fuperadded to Abrahams feed ( upon the freenef of Gods grace, or the eminency of Abrahams obedience , ) yet there goes with it a mercy common to all where the reafon of the mercy is found. It being therefore the cafe of every true believer to be faithful and obedient , yea, to prefer that before his own hfey and not a fon only , it may be hence gathered , that Cod who bltffed Abrahams feed on that ac- count y will blefi theirs on the fame , with the fame bleffings in the main ( as to his favour and ac- ceptance of them J though not with the fame in\ the variable fuperadditionals or overplus of exter- nal things*
In Exod. 12. 48. there is a law for the circ urn- tifing of all the males of ftrangers that fojourn in the land, that will keep the pajfover : which com- frehendeth their (,hurch-memberfl)ip, as is flewed*
Reply. To all this neither do I find any new thing calling for any anfwer, but what the con- fidering Reader can eafily make : His repeated fayings, that if [Admijfionbe by Baptifm I mufi make Parents Mmifters to baptize 3 a child may well anfwer. There are more Parties that a& in baptifm than one : God by his Lftfimfters expref- feth his Covenant-Gift and Confent, and deliver- cth it fealed to the Receiver by the inftituted in- yefting fymbol: The party receiving expreflah
K his
( 130)
bis confent, and this the Parent hath power and truft to do for the child , as you may take a Leafefor your Child: Cannot the Parent do this, and fo be a Caufe of Reception without being a Minister ?
SECT. LXXIX, toLXXXVI.
R-B* HT*//<? premife to the whole people of If- X rael, Infants and all, that they (l)onld be f a peculiar people , a Kingdom of Trie ft s, and a hcly Nation, 3 Exod. 19. 5, 6. yon cannot de- ny* This is a promt fe , and not a tranfeunt fail which wade no promife. And the people are cal- led to keep Cods Covenant ■, that they might have this promife fulfilled to them. Tea , if yon had faid, that it was a meer tranfeunt Covenant or promife, reaching but to the perjons then exiftent, and dying with them, though you had jpoken more fexfe* yet nQ more truth than when you denied the law and premife, and fubftituted a tranfeunt fall* For , i* It is exprefly a promife de futuro to a Nation. 2. Tea , and the Apofile Peter giveth the fame titles to believers under the Gojpel, in- timating the fulfilling of the promife even to them, as the promife to Abraham was fo the faithful •who were his uncircumcifed feed. However, here is a Covenant granting by way of confirma- on the bltfting of Lhurch-memberfhip to Infants with the reft of Ifrael : For certainly, this pecu- liarity, and holinefs , and prie flood here mentio- ned, containtth their Church-memberftiip: It is
undeniable therefore , that fuch Church -member^ jhip is here granted by Promt fe or Covenant , not as a thing then beginning, but by way of confir* mat ion of the like former grants. And it is t& be noted, that though this promife is made to all Ifrael , yet not to be fulfilled to any of them , but on condition that they [" obey Gods voice , and keep his Covenant, ~] verf. 5 . on which conditions' alfo any other might have then enjoyed the fame bleffmg, and therefore fo may do now*
In Deut. 17. 1,2. The Infants with the reft are called the children of God, and a holy and pe- culiar people to the Lord their God*
And Deur. 26. 14,18. the Covenant is expref- fed [Thou haft avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and keep his ftatutes, and his commandments, and his judge- ments, and to hearken to his voice. And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promifed thee, &ei And that thou maift be an holy people, &c. Is hen no fromife, when the fromife is expreft f and is here no Covenant, where the mutual Covenant is de~ fcribed t And I think^you grant that Infants are included*
So Deut. 28.4, 9. Where the promife to the na~ tion is, that if .they hearken to Gods voice -and obferve his Commandments, they frail be bleffed in the fruit of their bodies, and the Lord will efta- blijh them a holy people to himfelf , as he had fworn unto them. ~\ Here is not only a Covenant and Promife for the future, but alfo an oath con- firming it7 at annexed to the fame before* Is
K z thh
030
this eflablifinng Covenant or Promlfe but a tran- feunt fait / or doth not this confirm tbetr right to the benefit promt fed^ which was received before by the fame means I
And Ezra 9. 2, They are called the holy feed* Of that in Deut. 29. / have formerly (poke enough. It is called a Covenant. iAll Ifrael With their little ones did enter the Covenant and the oath with Cod, and which he made to them* It was a Covenant , to eftablifh them for a people to himfelf, and that he may be to them a God, as he had before faid and fworn. It is a Cove- nant made even with them that flood not there , whether it he meant only of the fuceejftve Israelites { and then it is not a tranfeunt Covenant ) or of oR people whoever that will accept of the fame terms ( and then Us not proper to Ifrael. ) It is a Covenant not made to them as meer Ifrael ites : but as obedient to the Covenant terms , and Co- tenant breaking would cut them cjf, verf. 19, 20, 2 1 , 23 , 25, 26. Is not fi>urch~mcmberjhip contain- ed iny Gods being their God , and taking them for his people thus m Covenant ? Doth not the pro- mtfe give them an e ft ablijhed right in this bleffmg ? Is ail this then no promifey but a tranfeunt fall ?
Deik- 30.19. There is a law and promife , choofe life , that thou and thy feed may live. This is the fame Covenant which Khcaufed the people to enter , 2 Chron* 1 5 . and if there had been no law for it, there would have been no pe- nalty, and then he would not have made it death to withdraw*. It is the fame Covenant which Jo- Cnh caufed the people to enter , z Kings 23 . 2, 3^
Z Chron.
2-Chron. 34. 31, 32. Of Levir. 25.41,54, 55ns; / have (poken elfewhere , arid of jfome ether Texts.
Mr. r. For the file efficient caufi being atlualtf
•put C as the Covenant and the Parents believing are? Vent. 29. ) the ejfett muft be in aft : but it is not fi m tb? unborn : therefore the Covenant and Parents faith are not
the fole efficient fo that though the Covenant give
a Right to a bldfing, yet it doth not make actually vifi- ble Oimrch-members , without fome other tranfeunt fact
Reply. ( The reft let the Reader make his beft of. ) We are it feems by this time in a fair way •of agreement , and have almoft done our work. It feemeth by this time he could find in his heart to grant that the -Covenant is an efficient caufe^ chough not the fole efficient : well , we will not ftick on that : Gods love and revelation , and Chrifts merits (hall be antecedent chief efficients : And he feemeth now inftead of faying ftill that £ It is only by the Thyfical tranfeunt fall ] to be content if we will fay, it is not till or without that faEb y that is , that men are not members of the Church till they are men. We will not be Co fowre as to deny him that much,. And indeed is this all at the upfhot } But I will not grant hiai the logical notion too cafily, though we will not cjuarrel about it* I think a caufe materially may long exift before the effec~l7 though it be not for- maliter caufa till it effed : And I think that Gods conditional Qovenant or Vromife7 is but canfa vir- tual! s & aptitudinalis till it effect , and yet may be the fole proximate efficient of our Right of* isny^rd : I think the childs being bom did not
K 3 tfiSt
1 134; •
fffeft his Right to Church Relation, nor doth ii^r Faith now, nor the Parents faith or confent7 but only as a condition make men capable RecipU ents. And I think the efftEt may begin de novo without any change in the efficient, upon a change in the Recipient : And that the Sun unchanged is the proximate efficient of motion, light and heat, to the next exiffcent wight that received not his influx before it did exift : And the Covenant or Donative Inftrument of God which faith \_He that believeth fl?all be ji4ftified~\ may eiFed my Juftification when I believe and not before y though my faith effett it not at all, but dijpofe the recipient. But I deny that the Parents faith be- ing put, all the capacity of the recipient is put , even when he is born : For if it be pofiible for the Parent to confent for himfelf and not for his child , and to devote himfelf and not his child to God , part of the condition of reception is wanting.
As far as I perceive , could I but hope to be fo happy a difpufa.nt, as to convince Mr. T. that Church-memberfhip ( vifible ) is any benefit at all it felfj or was to the Ifraelites , he would grant me all that I plead for of the conveyance of it by Covenant. And if I cannot it is a hard cafe0
SECT,
(135)
SECT. LXXXVI.
R, B. pmJf^He fecond Commandment , Exod. 20w X 5, 6. Deur. 5. 9, 10. / thinks is * law9 and containeth a promife or premiant fart , wherein be promifeth to [hew mercy to the gene- rations or children of them that love him and keep his Commandments : of which I have alfo fpokgn elfewhere, to which I refer yon. J fee no reafon to doubt but here is a ftanding promt [e , and difcovery of Gods refolution y concerning the children of all that love him , whether Jews or Gentiles , to whom this Commandment belongs : nor to doubt whether this mercy imply Church* membership : And that this is fetcht from the ve- ry gr adopts nature of God^ I find in his proclaim- ing his Name to Mofes, Exod. 34.6, 7.
Mr. T. If this mercy here imply Church-member/Bi^ to the Infants of them that love him to a thoufmd Ge- nerations , then it implieth it to all the Infants in the world But there is nothing to prove that this mer- cy muft be Church-membermip, or that it mud: be to all the children of them that love God, or that it mull be
to them in Infancy I incline to conceive this a pro-
mife of temporal mercies, cliiefly to the ifraelltes
Reply* r. That it is not only of temporal mer- ciesy the words \_ Love and Hate ~\ as the qualifi- cation of the Parents , feem to prove ; and the joyning the children to the Parents in the retri- bution : And all the terms feem above fuch a fenfe : It is the revenge of ajealopu God on Ido- laterSj and mercy to his Lovers that isfpokenof :
K 4 And
And the joyning this Command to the firft which fefleiti our relation to God , with the Laws anr nexed in Dent, for the cutting off whole Cities ( Parents and Children ) that turn from God to Idols, fneweth that it reached to Church-Commu- nion and Life.
2. And that it was not only to the Ifraelites (whatever you chiefly mean,) is proved both in that it is in the Decalogue , and the proclaimed name of God, Exod. 34. 5, 6. and exemplified throughout the Scripture and in the Gofpel.
2. As to the extent, we can hardly exped that the world fliould endure a thoufand Generations: Therefore it can mean but that God who bound- eth the punifhment to the third and fourth gene- ration, will fet no bounds to the fucceiTion of his mercies while our capacity continueth. And what- ever the mercies be, the exposition of this conti- nuance concerneth you as much as we.
3. As to the conditions, I doubt notbutitfup- pofeth that the child at age imitate the Parents in their Love or Hatred , duty or fin : And that if on Repentance the Parent be forgiven, his fin may not be vifited. to the third and fourth. And if a child of Godly Parents turn wicked , the right is intercepted.
4. But the Commandment with the forefsyd expofiiion (hews, that God meaneth that his Retri- bu ion to Parents that Love or Hate him , (hall fxtend to their children as fuch •, unlefs they inter- rupt ic at age by their own ads: And if to their £ 'uldren qua talcs, then to Infants.
And it fpeaketh fuch a fiate of mercy as can- not
037)
pot in reafon be conceived to belong to tliem without, and can mean no lefs than Gods vifible &vour,by which the Church is differenced from the w, rid, when Lovers and Haters are diftinguifhed fides.
And when God hath Recorded this decreed granted diftinguifiied mercy to the children of the faithful asfuch in the Tables of flone , fure it is a vifible notification, which will make them vifi- ble favorites and Chnrch-members as foon as they vifibly exift.
And the quatenm feemeth to me to prove that it extendeth to all the children of the faithful , becaufe it is to them as finch. But itfolloweth not that it rouft extend to them all alike, as to equal mercies, nor yet that the fin of Parents after may make no kind of forfeiture. But of this I have faid more in my Chrifiian Directory.
SECT. LXXXVII, to XCIV.
R. B. XN Pfal. 102. 28. It is a general pro- X wife, the children of thy ftrvants fhall continue, and their feed fti all be eftablifhed before thee. It is ufual in the Old Tefiament to exprefi Gods favour by temporal blcjfings , more than in the Gojpel ♦, but yet ft ill they fee ure m of his fa- tpur. As, I will not fail thee, nor forfake thee, might fee ure Jofhua more than us of temporal fuc- cejjhy und yet not more of Gods never failing fa- vour*
There
{ *3*J
There is a ftable promife to all Gods people in general that have children^ Pfal. 103. 17. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlafting to ever- lafting upon them that fear him , and his righte- oufnefs unto childrens children. And to be fe- cured by promife of Gods mercy and righteoufnefi is the ftate of none without the Church,
And if they were all to be kept out of the Church , 7 fear ce thinks that Children would be called an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the womb his reward, Pfal. 127. 3. nor the man hap- py that hath his quiver full of them. Nor would the fuckjng children be called as part of the fo- lemn affembly to the humiliation 7 Joel 2. 1 6. 2 Chron. 20. 13.
There is a (landing promt fe to allthejuft, Prov. 20. 7. The juft man walketh in his integrity, his children are blefled after him. There is no fort of men without the Church that is pronounced bleffed in Scripture. A blefled people are Gods people , and thofe are the Church feparated from the cur fed world. One lower bleffmg will not de- nominate a man or fociety , a blejjed man or fo- ciety.
If it were a good argument then^ Deut.4.. 37, becaufe he loved thy fathers, therefore he chofe their feed after them, then it is good fill as to fa- vour in general. So Deut. 10. 15. Pfal. 69. 36. Prov. 1 1. 21. The feed of the righteous (hall be delivered. In Pfal. 37. 26. there is a general promife to, or declaration of the righteous^ thathli feed is blefled, and then they are Church-members,
In I fa. 61. 8, 9. it is prom i fed I thinly of Go-
fpd
( 139 J
ftel times, I will make an everlafting Covenant with them , and their feed (hall be known among the Gentiles, and their off-fpring among the peo- ple : all that fee them fhall acknowledge them, that they are the feed which the Lord hath blef- fed. And cap. 62. 12. They ihall call them the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord : and thou (halt be called, fought out , a city not forfaken. Gojpel promifes then extend to [ people and cities, ] whereof Infants are a part, lfa.6$. 23. they are the feed of the bleffed of the Lord, and their off-fpring with them. This is plain , and full , and durable.
What is necejfary to be faid in anfwer to the common objettions , as £ that experience tells us all the feed of the righteous are not bleffed ~\ with the like , I fuppofe already done in my book^ of Baptifm. AH the feed of the righteous are blef- fed , though not all with that blejfmg which can~ not be lofi and cafi away by themfelves when they come to age.
Mr. 77s Anfwers all contain the difficulty of difcerning the fulfilling of thefe promifes, andfo denying that they infer vifible Church-member- ihip: and he faith \That without the Church a\ per [on may be pronounced bleffed, is apparent from Ifhmaels blejfmg, Gen. 17. 20. when he was ex- cluded the Covenant and caft out. ]
Reply. He was excluded the Covenant of pecu- liarity, but not the common Covenant of" Grace made with mankind in Adam and Noe : And the 1 Church was larger than the Jfraelites Nation* 1 The reft I leave to the Reader.
SECT.
V **t~ )
SECT. XCIV, XCV.
%. B. TF you fay that the word \_feed^\ doth not JL nee ejjanlyincluae Infants, I anfwer, In- fants are fart of the feed of the righteous > yea afl their feed are fir ft Infants. If therefore God have made general promi fies at to age andperfon, who is he that dare limit it , without juft proof that in- deed God hath limited it f Doth God fay, that the feed of the righteous are not bleffed till they come to age f If he pronounce the feed blejfed, they muft be bleffed^ when they are fir ft fitch a feed : And if any one age might be more included than anom thery one would think^it muft be that wherein they are ft meerly the feed of fuch as that they ftand not on any diftinfl: account of their own allual faith cr unbelief for the feed of the righteous, as fuch, have a promified bleffing : But the feed of the right eons turning them fe Ives to unrighteouf- nefiy do turn f r-om -that blejfing , and become ac+ curfed.
I fuppofe I have already been more tedious than yon expelled: I will therefore add no more cf the fie parages of Scripture , having faid that which fit is fie th me formerly to the fame pur po fie , and having yet fen nothing that leaves me un~ fatisfied. And alfio bee ait fe one text either con- taining fuch a Law or Covenant as you call for \ or declaring to us that God did make fuch a Law or Covenant^ is as good as a thoufand in point of Authority.
Mr, 71
f*40
Nr.T. Mr. B. not holding children in the womb un- born to be viiible Church-members, all this may be retort- ed : They are part of the feed of the righteous.
Reply. The whole feed ( in the womb and born ) are taken into this relation to God which im- plyeth his bleffing on them as feparated from the wicked, according to their capacity : An Infant m the womb is vifibly feparated to God, if you de- nominate viftbility from the notoriety or viabili- ty of Gods promife that doth it : But the per [on is not vifible to you, though fenfible to the mo- ther. As Chrift was the Head in the womb, fo far Infants are members • the Parents then pri- vately devoting them to God : I told you before, the viftbility of pur ftate hath feveral gradations* To quibble thus on all Gods promifes to the chil- dren of the faithful by queftions and exceptions about embryo's, abortives, &c. is vanity.
SECT. XCVI, XCVII.
R. E. 'Hp HE next Quefiion that I jpouldfpeak. X to isy whether thefe Laws , or Cove- nant sy or Promifes , are capable of a revocation , or repeal ? and I Jliall take this for a qneflion that needs no further dsbate , among men that know what a Law or Promife is. Gods 'immu- tability an) perfection may make fome Laws un- repealable , while the fnb)e£h remains : but other- Wife the thing itfelf is capable of it. Only where a Promife or Law is but for a limited time , ypben the time is expired it ceafcth , and the cef-
fatio?2
C»40
fat ion is as to the nulling of it, equal to a revo-. I C at ion or abrogation, I put in this que ft ion , left )ox Jhould hereafter change your mind and fay , that indeed it is a law, or promife , or covenant , by which the right of Church-memberfliip is con- f erred , and Infants dedicated to God : bkt it is but a fanfeunt Law or Covenant.^ Anfw. If fo, then it is either immediately or prefently tranfeunt, or at a certain limited time only , when it will ceafe. The former is certainly falfe and intolerable. For, i . They are promifes and laws for the future^ and therefore ceafe not immediately. 2« That were to make God the moft unfaithful promifer and mutable Law-maker in the world, if his pro- mife and his laws ceafe as foon as they are made. Nay it makes them to be no laws or promifes* 3. It was one ftanding law and promife that be- hnged to the Nation of the Jews fucceffively. And God did not make his promife anew to every In- fant that was made a Church -member, nor renew his law to every Tare nt to enter their Children in- to his Covenant by the fign of Circumcifion, Were not the uncircumcifed Ifraelites in the Wildernefs made members by the efficacy of the former Cove- nant of God remaining in force. And did for- mer Laws oblige to Circumcifion till Chrift ? Elfe there were but few members, nor but few that cir- cumcifid warrantably, if the promife and precept did extend but to the perfon that it was fir ft deli- vered to, and every one elfe muft UktWife have a perfonal promife and precept. The Mother of Chrift cannot then be proved to have been a fourch- member in Infancy '. If it be faid thai
theft
tbefe fromifes were limited in the making of them ^ to a certain time when they were to ceafe, I fay when that is f roved we fiall believe it , which I have not yet feen done.
And it falls in with the lafl queftion, which is7 whether thefe fromifes be indeed revoked and cea- fedj and thefe laws repealed or ceafed. s/ind here it is that I have long expelled your folid proof together with the fatisfdiory anfwer to my arguments to the contrary. And fo I Jhall leave this task^ in your hands. Sure I am that Chrifi never came to cafi cut of the Churchy but to ga- ther more in : much lefs to caft out all the Infants^ even all of that age in which him f elf was head of that Church : But to gather together in one the children of God that were fcattered, Johnn. 52. And therefore he would oft have gathered all Je- rufalem and Judaea, even the National Church that then waSy unto himfelf as the true head, even as a Hen gather eth her Chickens under her wings, and they would not. It was not becaufe he would not ( as intending a new frame , where Infants could have no place ) but becaufe they would not , andfo caft out them fe Ives and their Infants. Certain- ly it is the joy of the formerly de folate Gentiles , that they jJ?all have many more children than Jhe that had an Husband , and not fewer , Gal. 4. 25 , 26 , 27. And we as Ifaaq are children of the promife , even that promife which extended to the Infants with the Varents. Gal. 4. 28.
Mr. 7*. I conceived a Promife not in congruous 'ferft
repealablt ; For although a promife be a Law to the FW
jnifer,
jnifer, yet I know not how congruoufly it flhould be r& pealed : 'Tis true , the act of promifing being tranieunt ccaieth •, but that cannot be repealed : that which is done cannot be inpBumy not done.
Reply* 1 perceive we muft difpute our firft principles, as well as our Baptifm. Reader, Gods promife in queftion is not a particular promife to tome one perfon only , but his Recorded Jnftru- went of Donation^ or ftablifhed written or conti- nued word , which is the fign of his will ; It is the fame thing which is called , the Vremiant or Donative part of his Law, in one refped:, and his Teftament in another, and his Donation or Gift in another, and his Covenant as Conditional in another, and his Promife in another. As \_ He that believeth flail be faved ~] is the Rewarding or Giving part of a Law, and it is a Teftamenr, a Covenant, a Promife, a Gift, all thefe. Mr.T. cannot fee how this promife can be repealed ; what, not an univerfal promifing Law, or Cove- nant or Inftrument ? The queftion is not whether it ever was repealed, but whether it be repealea- bley in congruous fenfe. Why may not the King make a Law that every one that killeth fuch and fuch hurtful creatures ( a Fox, &c. ) or that kil- leth an enemy in war, fliall have fuch a reward ; and repeale this Law or Promife when he feeth caufe ? I think the firft Covenant ceafed by mans fin, without repeal. But I cannot fay that no promife to the Ifraelites was repealed, upon their fin ! The non-performance of the condition depri- veth the party of the benefit while it is unrepeal- ed: but may not God thereupon repeal the Law
ex
(M5)
or Covenant, and nuU the very offer to poftenty ? Is it not fo as to the Jews policie and peculiar^ ty? What pains is taken in the Epiftle to the£fc- brews to prove the change of the Covenant as faulty in comparifon of that which had better pro- mifes ? But if you will call it ameer cejfation7z\l is one as to our queftion in hand.
SECT. X'CVIII.
R„ B. TJ Efore I end I flmll be bold to put twa JD or three Qucflions to you out of your lafi Letter. Queft. I . Whether the circumcifed fervants of Ifrael fold away to another nation , and fo feparated from the Civil flate of Ifrael , did eo nomine ceafe to be £hurch-me mbers, though they forfooh^ not God I And fo of the Infants if they were fold in Infancy? If you affirm it^ then prove it. If you deny it^ then Infants might be (fhurch -members that were not ef the Common^ wealth.
Mr. r. None was of right of the Jcwifli Church
who was not of the Common- w<h.
Reply. But my Queftion was, when without for- faking God, they are forcibly feparated from the Jewifh policy and fubjec'ted to others, are they not members of the Church-umverfalft\\\> though not of the Jews ? s
SECT,
d4*>
SECT. XCIX.
R.B. Queft.2. T F ( as you fay ) it was on the Jews A rejection of Chrift that they were broken off from bang Gods people, were thofe thou- fands of Jews that believed in Chrift fo broken °ff \ or not •> who continued fuccejfively a famous Church at Hierufalem, which came to be a Tatri- \ archal feat* Whether then were not the children J of the Difciples and all believing Jews Church- wembers in Infancy .? If no? then it wm fomewhat clfe than unbelief that broke them off.
Mr. T. They were broken off from the Jewifh Church, not by unbelief, but by faithin thrift.
Reply, This is too fhort an anfwer to fo great an evidence againft you. The Infants of the Chri- ftian Jews were the day before their Converfion members of the Jewifh Church and of Gods uni- verfal Church , of which the Jews were but a part : For as he that is a member of the City is a member of the Kingdom, and a part of a part is a part of the wfcole, fo every member of the Jews Church was a member of Gods univerfal Church. Now, iV The very Jews policy totally ceafed not tiil the deitru&ion of Jerufdem at kaff. 2. But if it had, I ask, was it no mercy to be a member both of the Jews Church and the univerfal? If not, the Jews loft nothing by being broken off? If yea, how did the Chriftians Chil- dren forfeit it ? Was it better to be of ho vifible Church;, than of the univerfal ? The J;ws were
broken
CM7J
broken Off by unbelief: you <av Chriftians In- fants were put out of that and the whole vifible Church by faith, or without unbelief.
SECt. C.
R. B. Queft. 3. XTTTHether it be credible that VV he who came not to cafi out Jews, but to bring in Gentiles, breaking down the partition-wall, ana making of two one Church, would have fitch a Lin fey Woolfey Church of par- ty colour sy or fever al forms : fo as that the Church at Hierufalem jhould have Infant member*, and the Church at Ronae ftwuld.have none! ? Jews In- fants Jhould be members jnd not Genties ?
Mr. T. fo anfwereth as before, and needethnc other Reply.
S E C T. C I.
R. B. Quelr. 4. TF unbelief brake them off , X will not repentance graff theni in ? And fo fwuld every repenting believing Jews Infants be Church-members f
Mr. T. Not their Infants
Reply. Then it would be but a part of the peo- ple that would be graffed in;
hz SECT
(i48)
SECT: CI I.
R. B. Queft. 5. TT7^ not Chrifts Church be- V V fore his incarnation Jpiri- tual^ and gathered in a jpiritnal way ?
Mr. r. The invisible was 5 the vifible Jewifh Nation \vas_ not.
Reply. Not in comparifoi of the times of matu- rity : but the vifible Jevvifli frame had the Father of fpirits for Soveraign, and commanded fpiritual duties, upon promifes of fpiritual bleffings , even life Eternal.
S E C T. C 1 1 T.
R. B. Quell. 6. T TOw prove yon that it was a
.E"X blemijh to the old frame ,
that Infants were members ? Or that Chrifts
Church then and now are of two frames in regard
of the fubjetts age f
Mr. f. It was a more imperfeft ftate in that and other regards.
Reply. I called for fome proof that the Infant- memberfhip was any part of the Church-imper- fection : If it be not a blemifh , why mufr. it be done away : what, was the Church the worfe for Infants Rights ?
a'
SECT.
Cmp)
S E C T. C I V.
R. B. Queft.7. TN what regard is the new JL frame bettered by cafiing out \ Infants which were in the old f
Mr. T. The Church is more fpiri ual <
Reply. What , doth Infants Relation detract from its fpirituality ? The adult have fouls and bodies, and fo have Infants ? The adult come in by the fame kind of confent for themfeives, as they make for their Infants > The adult blemifli the Church with more carnal fins than Infants do? The Kingdom would be never the more fpiritual nor excellent, if all Infants were disfranchifed : Na- ture teacheth all Kingdoms on earth to take them for members, though but Infant-members.
SECT. CV.
R. B. Queft. 8. \TT7Hether any Jew at age
VV was a tn ember of the old Church without fwfeffmg faith ( in the Articles necejfary to falvation ) repentance and obedience ? And wherein the fuppofed new call and frame doth in this differ from the old ^ fave only that a more full and exprefi revelation of Chrift , re qui- reth a more full exprefi faith ?
Mr. T. I know not what profeffion each Jew did maker, ©r was to make.
I 3 ##//«
Reply. I would you had been as cautelous and modeft throughout. It is evident, that they were to profcfs confent to Gods Covenant , which thofc that denied, Afa would put to death.
SECT. CVI.
R. B. '\7rOu may fee the words near the end of 1 your Letter that occafiun the [even lafl Queftions, and towards the middle that occa- foneth the firft. As for your motion . of my ful- ly defer ibing the priy Hedges of Church-member s, I fhall add no more at this time to what is aire a- dy elfe where faid of it.
Reply. Here Mr. T. chides me for wronging him by length ; and being afraid the Reader will dofotoolmakehafte.
SECT. C VII, CVI JI.
R. B. A Nd now 1 have gone thus far with JIX yoHy in an enquiry into the truth, I entreat you be not too much offended witn me, if I conclude with a few applicatory que ft ions to your f elf. Queft. I. Is it not an undertaking at ■palpably abfurd as mo ft ever any learned fober Divine in the world was guilty ofy to maintain that [ Infants were vifiblc Church-members not by any promife or precept , but by a tranftun% fatly and that there was no law or ordinance de- \erm\ning it jlwtld be fo? but only a fatl of God>
which
d5i)
ythich is a tranfeunt thing not repealable ? ] But either by this fali you mean Legislation and Covenant-making , or not : if yon do , what a [tying is it that Infants were made Church* members not by Covenant , but by a Covenant - makings not by a Law , but by a Law-making .? If not , either you mujl fay, that God makes du- ty without any law , and gives right to the bene- fit without any promife, or five 'riant -grant as the caufe ■ or elfe^ that it ps no benefit to have right to Church -member finp^ and no duty to e?iter into that relation, and to accept of that benefit, andto be devoted to God, Which ever of thefe ways you chufe ( and one you mufl chufe , or change your opinion) hath the world heard of any more unreasonable and ridiculon* ? or elfe more unbe- feeming a Divine y from a learned fober man of that prof ejfion? Pardon the high charge: Let the indifferent jndge.
Reply, To this I find no anfiyer worth the re- citing.
SECT. C IX.
R. B. Queft. 2. T5 it not a great dif grace to ^ X your followers ', that they will be led fo far into fuch ways of Schifmy and be /<? confident that they are righter and wifer than others, and that by fuch unreafonable arguing* and Jhifts as thefe , which one would thinly any man jhoiild laugh at that knows what a Jjaw , Promift, or Covenant is ? And do yen not jrove,
L 4
that it is not becaufe of the evidence of truth , bat by your nteer inter eft or confident words , thefe people are changed and held to your opinion ? Do they know what £ a tranfunt fall vs , that with- out haw or Covenant makes Church* members ? ~\ I fay i do they know this? which no man that ever breathed till now , nor ever man will know again f And do you not proclaim them men of diftempered consciences , that dare go on in fuch a Schifm , on the encouragement of fuch fancies as were hatcht fo long after their perverfion, and never waking man 1 think^did before fo folemnly maintain .?J
Reply. I have nothing to fay here, but Mr. I*, feems very angry at this.
SECT. CX.
R. B, Queft. 3. T5 it not a defperate nnderta- Jl king j and dare you adven . ture on it^ to juftifie all the world before Chrifts incarnation except the Jews , from the guilt of not dedicating their children to God^ to take him to be their God, and themfelvesto be his people? Ifya, to juftifie all Jews again ft this charge , that Jnould negleU or refufe to engage their children to (fod in Covenant as members of his Church ? And ldoth not he that faith there is no law , fay there is no tranfgreffion ?
Mr. r. He doth — Let him tremble at his defperate undertaking to uphold his Lie of Infant Church-mem- berfhip and Eaptifm by fuch Lies as thefe; and fear the are of Liers, Re-
eply. Charge not your felf , and I will not : propofe it to your confederation , whether the perfons that folemnly take God for their God according to Gods Covenant, and are by his vi- fible word of' Covenant, taken by God for his people, be not vifible members of the Church uni- versal ? And whether he that faith, There is no Law of God binding to do thus for his children do not infer that they fin not by not doing it >
S E C T. C X I.
R. B. Queft.4.Tnv^? you yet.jufiife alfo at JL/ the Bar cf God, all the world fmce Qirifts incarnation from the guilt of fin , in not dedicating their children to Chrifi , and entring them into his Covenant as members of his Church ? Dare you maintain that all the world is finlefs in this rejpetl ,?
Mr. T. I dare juftifie the Non-baptizing them
Reply. Here you makeamodeft flop. It feem- eth you dare not juftifie men for not folemnly dedicating them in Covenant to God, and vifi- bly engaging them to Chrift as members vifible of his Church,
SECT.
fi54j)
SECT. CXII.
R. B. Queft. 5, T'XAve yon well confidered of Jti the fruit of your ways ap~ parent in England and Ireland at this day * Or have yon not feen enough to make you fufpctt and fear whether i?jdeed Cod own your way or not ? Jind is it any wonder if foflerity be left in con- troverfie about the Hiftory of former times, when you can venture , even in thefe times when the ■perfons are living in our company, to tell me thap \^you thinly I am misinformed that they are Ana- baftifis , and you think^that there are very few of them that were ever baptized, ] when of many that we know , and multitudes that we hear of , there are fo few that were not before againfl In- fant JBaptifm, and the Seekers firfi fuch, and when the Quakers themfelves commonly cry down Infant Baptifm ; and it is one of the queftions that they fend to me, and others to anfwer, [_ how we can prove it by exprefs Scripture without con- fequences , or elfe confefs our felves falfe Pro- phets.
Reply. The anfwer to this I leave to the Rea- ders judgement.
SECT.
f*55')
SECT. CXIII.
Pv, B. Queft. 6. T TAve you felt the guilt which XjL we too ftrongly fear you have incurred , of the perverting of Jo many fouls y opening them fuch a gap to fchifm , contempt of the <sjfrfinifiry, and Apoftafie, deftroying a hopeful reformation that coft fo dear : or weakning our hands in the work,, and filling the adverfaries mouths with fccmy enticing the Jefuites and Fri- ars to feem your profelytts , and lift t hem fe Ives among you, as the hopeful party to tefriendtheir caufe, hardning thou funds both of the Papifts and profane y and fetling them again on their dregs , when many once began to jhake ! O what aChurch might we have had, and were likely to have had ? Had it not been for the Separatifts and you ? And what a lamentable confufion are we now brought into by thefe ? Have thtfe things toucht your heart f
Reply. Mr. T*. here is angry, and I wonder not^ one (tone he fnatcheth up from Dodr. Owens Appendix , and one from the Scotch Church , and Elders, and the Church at Kcderminfter, and the Worcefterjhire AfTociation , which few before him I think have faid much againft.
SECT.
U5«)
SECT. CXIV.
R. B. Queft. 7. TS £ 4 tranfeunt faU , making JL Infants Church -members with- cut Law, Vromife, or Covenant^ a fujpcient me- dium f<? encourage yon to venture on ail thefe hor- rid things , and run fuch hazards us you have done f Or is it pojfible that an humble fober man, and a tender conscience , durfi make all this ha- vock^y and fland out in it fo many years confi- derately as you have done, and this upon fuch a palpably unreasonable pretence ? When you jhould ■prove to us the revocation of Infants Church- memberjhip , to tell us that they had it only by a tranfeunt fall ? Is this a fafe ground to build fa great a weight on f Sir, my confcience witnejfcth, that it is not your reproach that is the end of (peaking thtfe unpleafmg words to you , but fome compajfwn on you ( do not [corn it ) and more on your poor followers ; and mofi on th; Church of God which you have fo much injured and troubled* Reply. Here Mr. T. is angry again, which is the fumm.
SECT.CXV.
R* B. Queil. 8. f^\An ym prove that ever there V^ was one age , or Church {particular ) on earth fmcc Adam till about 200 years ago^ that the Anabaptifis rofe, wherein In- fants
057.)
fonts were not de facto taken for members of the Church f If you can do it: Let m hear your p-oof Mr.T. I can ; and for proof look back to Scft. $0, 51. and befides Cot?Jlantine0 Augustine? Na\. Hierom
Reply. I can find no fuch thing there : what if the four men you name were baptized at age ( the fpecial reafons are told you elfewhere. ) Doth that prove that others were not baptized in Infancy ? Your 52 Sed. I think to examine in the end.
SECT. CXVL
R. B. Queft. 9. f~>An yon bring us poof of any V> one Infant of true (})urch- member s> that was not rightfully a Church-member himfelf from the creation tiU Chrifis days? or from the creation till this day ? except the Ana- baptifts,who reject the benefit ., whofe cafe (as If aid before ) I will not pre fume to determine ?
Mr. T. I can, look back to Seel:. 50, $i, 52, 57. .
Reply. I have done, and I find no fuch proof.
SECT. CXVII.
R. B. Queft. 10. QEeing that Infant shave been O de facTo Church-members from the creation to this day ( as far as any re- cords can lead us ) is it likely that the Lord , and head and a 11 -f efficient Governeur of his Charchp would have permitted his Church till now
!9
to be attually made up of fttch fubje&s, as in regard of age be difallowed ? And juffer his Church to be Wrong framed till now ? Or is it a reasonable y mode ft and lawful undertaking , to go about now in the end of the world to -make Cjod a new fra- med Church, as to the age of the fubjecls ? And is it not more mode ft and fafe, to live quietly in a Church of that frame as all the Saints in Hea- ven lived in , till the other day, as a few Ana- haptifts with vile and ftnfUt means , and mifera- blefucceft, did attempt an alteration ? . Mr. T. here denieth the fuppofitions : I leave the Reader to judge how truly.
SECT. C X V 1 1 1, C X I X.
R. B. CJ I R, pardon the weaknef, and bear with O the plainneft and freenefs of Tour faithful Brother (though not as is meet ) Rich. Baxter. May 14. 1655.
Sir, if you have any thing of moment to fay, in reply to thefe, which you have not yet in your Wtitings brought forth , / jhall be willing to wn- fider of it : But if you have not , / pray you tell me fo in two words , and [pare the reft of your pains ( as for me ) and trouble me no more with matters of this nature. For truly I have no fuf- ftcient vacancy from greater workj. Tea, I am conftrained to forbear much greater than thefe. R. B. After this he tells me , that whereas I preached a Sermon at Bewdley , in which I re- futed by mmy arguments Infants viftble Church-
memberjhip,
wewberflrip) 1 mufl be either mutable or hypderiii- cal, if I deny [neb a Law and Ordinance which 1 tgok^ on me then to refute , and de fires a Copy of that Sermon , that he may jhexv the fad miftakei and vanity of thofe my arguments.
Reply. Reader, to Mr. TVs anger at thefe ten Queftions I mufi: fay, i.That the dolefulnefs of the Churches cafe conftrained mi in grief of heart to deal plainly with him.
;2; But it Was in a private letter , extorted by his importunity , and publifhed to the world by himfelf and not by me -, who confefs that this plainnefswas too great for me to have ufed to him publickly : But fecret admonition difparageth him not to others. It hath new been by himfelf about nineteen years divulged to the world, and I did not fo much as trouble his patience by a" word of anfwer, and little thought ever to do it : But Major Danvers his loud invitation hath drawn me to give them this Farewell.
TH E Reader mud here take notice that I am not here called to prove Infants » Church- memberdip out of the New Teftament, but to fhew out of the Old that they were vifible Church- members before by a Grant or Covenant , which Chrift hath not repealed. The reft ( out of the New-Teftament ) I have done long ago in my Treatife of Infant Church-memberfhip and Ba- ptifm, which Mr. T. is fo much difpleafed at. And indeed I think that the proofs are plain, though many objsftions may be difficult to be anfwered,
efpe daily
efpecially by thofe who have not throughly corf- fidered the cafe. When I (a together Chrifts own Infant memberfhip, and his kind reception I of Infants, a^nd his chiding thofe that would have kept them off, and his offers of taking in all the Jewifli Nation into his Church , and that they were broken off by unbelief, and consequently the feed of Believers not broken off from the Church univerfal , and that whole houfholds are oft faid to be baptized, and that Paul pronounceth Belie- vers children holy , and that Chrift exprefly , sJWatth. 28. commandeth his Minifters as much as in them iiethto Difciple all Nations baptizing, and it's prophefied that the Kingdoms of the world fhall be made the Kingdoms of Chrift, and there is no Nation or Kingdom on earth that In- fants are not members of-5 All this and much more feemeth to me a plain revelation of Gods will, that as he never had a Church which ex- cluded Infants , fo he doth not now exclude them. Andit is expreily faid of the Jews that they were z\\ baptized unto Mofes in the cloud and in thefeay 1 Cor. 10. 2. where doubtlefs the Apoftle in the name hatl refped to our being baptized into Chrift , of which theirs was a typical Baptifm ^ And it is not faid in vain that they were [_ all ba* ptized'] including their Infants, but as part of the Analogie, as if he had faid [_ os4s we now are all baptised into Chrift. J
Thefe things feem to me a certain notificati- on of Gods will herein • which in the forefaid former Treatife I have tullier opened and im- proved. And thould I ftand to anfwer all the
words
(161}
words that Mr. Tombes hath faid againft it , i fliould needlcfly tire the Reader and my Self, and lofe that time which I cannot fpare.
A Confutation of Mr. Tombes'* Rtafons Seel. 520 by which he prctendeth to prove that Infants were not reckoned to the vifible Church-Ch'ri- fiian in the Primitive times, nor are now.
t.T. 1. T <^4rgue thus : If no Infants were I part of the vifible Church-Qjrifti- 4n in the Primitive times, then whatever OrdC nance there were of their vifible membership be- fore, mufi needs be repealed : But the antecedent is true, ergo, the confequent - — The Antece- dent I prove thus. If in all the days of Chrift on earth, and the Apo files, no Infant was a pari or member of the vifible Qourch Chrifiian , then not in the primitive times : Bat, &c. £rgo, &c«
The Mmor proved, 1 . All vifible members
cf the Church-Chri fiian were to be baptised: But xo Infants were to be baptised: Therefore no In- fants were vifible members of the Chrifiian Church.
Anfw. 1. To the Major ; they were to be ba- ptifed after Chrifts baptifm was inftituted, Mat. 28. 19. but not before, when yet the Chriijian Church was exifterit in Chrifl and his Difciples : Therefore Chrifl: was not baptized in his Infancie.
2. To the Minor, If his bare affirmation would prove that Infants wece not to be baptized, wha& need he write his books ?
M Mr>T*
c^/r.T. 2* They were not vifible members of the Church-Chnftian who were not of the body of forift: But no Infant was of the <uij?ble body of Chrtft, proved from i Cor. 12.1$. AH that were of the body of Chrifl were made to drink^into one (pint in the Cup of the Lords Supper : But no In* fant was made to drink^into one (pirit -5 for none of them did drink that Cup, &c.
oAnfw. Denying the Minor, I anfvver to the proof : 1. To the Major ; 1. Mr. T. elfcwhere pleadeth that 1 Cor. 12. fpeaketh of the Church- invitible only , and yet now he maketh it to be the viiible. 2 [All J isofc put for the Generali- ty and not a proper univerfality : And it feemeth bard to prove that every vifible member hath the jpirit, which is exprefly there faid of all the mem- bers, though whether Baptifm and the Lords Sup- per be included, Mr.'T. elfewhere maketh difpu- table. But I grant that it is fpoken of the Church as viiible , and that all the members ordinarily having Spin tits Savramentum^ are in judgement of charity faid to have the Spirit. 3. But if Sa- craments be indeed here included as he afTert- eth, then Baptifm is fir ft included : and fo if we prove Infants Church-members , this Text will prove them to be baptizable, according to Mr. T. Remember that. 4. But that Mr. TVsexpofition is not true, that every member drinketh of the Cup in the Lords Supper, he may be turned about to confefs himfelf : For, 1. Doubt lefs he things that this Chapter fpeaketh of the Church not only as vifible ( if at all ) but as invilible alfo • and he oft faith that many real members of Chrifts bo-
dv
0*3) dy have not the Sacrament. 2. By this his ex- pofition, his adult Baptizing fhould not make or prove any to be vifible Church-members till they drink of the Cup ; though it were a year or ma- ny years. 3. And no one that liveth without the Lords Supper through fcruples ( about Church- orders, or their own fitnefs, wrlich are the cafes of multitudes ) fhould be vifible members : Nor thofe that live where they cannot have the Sacra- ment : Nor any Lay-man in all the Popifl* Church, where the Cup is denied the Laity*
2, To the Minor, Infants might be baptized in- to one fpirit by the initiating Sacrament, in order to the reft to be parraked of in due time : And as not every £hnrch-fpifpenfion, fo Natttral-fujpen- fion of further priviledges, nullifieth not mem- berfhip.
cJffr.T. 2. From 1 Cor. 10. 17. All that were one body and one bread did partake of that one %read which was broken : 'Bfit no Infant did far-' j take
Anfw. 1. Chrifl and his Difciples did not par- take of it before the inftitution : 2. No baptized perfons partake of it in the interfpace between the two Sacraments : which wiih fome is a long time : 3. A baptized perfon may die before he drink- eth that Cup ; or may live where it is not law- fully to be had. 4. Church-members may be fufpended from the Lords Table. Therefore *the text fpeaketh not of every member, but of the ordinary communion of capable perfons.
<zJMr. T. Eph.4. 5. The whole Church is one bodie, and hath one Lord, and one faith I But n* Infant hath wt faith ~] Ma Anfw*
Anfw. i. It is fpoken of the generality of the nobleft and capable members , denominating the Church : The Apoftle faith not that every mem- j ber hath all thefe, but £ There is one Lord, one faith j &c. ~} Chrift had not one Lord ( being Lord himfelf as here underflood ) and yet was a member : Chrift in the womb cannot be proved to have a&ually h d that one faith j and he vyas long the chief member before he was ba- ptized : And whether ever the twelve Apoflles were, is uncertain.
2. The Text feemeth chiefly to fpeak of the Dofflrine of faith , called objective faith ^ one Creed: And this the Church might have, and yet not each member actually believe. For, 3* The Parent in faith devoting himfelf and his Infant to God , his Faith and Confent is reputatively the Childs , who is ufed as a member of the Pa- rent.
<iJMr. T. 3. They were no members of the vi+\ fble Church , who were left out of the number of \ the whole Church, all the Believers, the multi- j tude of the Dtfcifles , &c But Infants are left mt of the number in all places in the New Tefta- menty Ergo :
Anfw. 1. Many texts fpeak of all that were ■prefent only • and many fpeak only of fuch as the prefent matter did concern : And it is moil ufual to denominate All or the Body from the No- blefl and Great eft part. If you were to defcribe a Kingdom, would you not fay that it is a Civil Society of rational creatures (*or men ) confent- ing to the mutual Relations of King and Subjects
and
/!*')
>nd the duties of each for the common welfare ? fou would fo define k as that Reafon, fconfent md Intention fhould be in the definition. Infants lave none of thefe in ad:, and yet who doubteth mt Infants are members of the Kingdom ( of eve- ry Kingdom under Heaven that I have read of? ) So you know that we take Infants to be members of :ur Churches new : And yet is it not ufu- al with us to fay ihar all the Church met to hear, -,r to do this or that ? When yet the Infants and nany others might be abfent.
The Texts Mr. T. alledgeth are, Ads i. 15. The number of the names together were about 120.
Anfw. Though I take not the Church then to be fo numerous as fome do, yet reafon is reafon : Can we think that when Chrift was feen after his rcfurreltion of more than 500 Brethren at once y that only 120 of them were Chrifiians ? Andean ive think that Nicodemm and Jojepti of Arima- \thea and many more, were not timerous faint- hearted Chrifiians ? It's like that the text mean- eth that this 120 was the number of thofe bold confirmed Chrifiians who fo quickly after Ghrifts death appeared in open profellion and conjundion with the Apoftles, and had opportunity to affem- | tic at that time and place.
The next is Ad. 2. 1. They were all with one accord in one place.
Anfw. This neeefcth no other anfwer than as
before. The other texts, Aft. 2. 41, 44. & 4. 4,
23,24. & 5.11,13, 14. &6. 1,2,7. & 8. 1.
'& ij. 22. i Cor. 14.23. need no other anfwer:
M 3 His
His cxpofition would fometimes exclude women , and fometimes many of the men ; Doih he believe no man or woman was a member of the Church, Aft. 15.22. who did not fend men of their own company ? Nor any man or woman a member of the Church at Jerufalem, that did not being feat- tered go about Preaching, Aft. 8. i, &c. 1 Cor, 14. it is faid, Ton may all fro f \ht fie , and yet wo- men are forbidden.
Mr. T« 4. They were no fart of the Chriftian Church vi fib le to whom the things afcribed to the •whole Church did not agree : But the things afcri- bed to the whole Chrijiian Church vifible did not agree to Infants ; Ergo ■
Anfw. This is fully anfwered already. It is moft-ufual to afcribe that to a Church or other Society which is done only by the molt confide- rable part. As I faid before, when rational Con- fent, Contrad, Intention, are afcribed to a King- dom -, which is conftituted by the confent of King and Subje&s : an'd yet Infants are members who confent notj fave by their Parents. The Church meeteth to choofe a Paftor, when yet the women meet not : The Church admoniflieth a faulty member, when every wToman doth not admonifh him : Our Churches meet all to hear, when Chil- dren meet not, whom we take for members: Thefe are not fatisfa&ory allegations, being con- trary to common ufe of words , and to many texts of Scripture.
*JMr. T. The Minor is f roved , Matth. 16. 38. On this Rcc\will 1 faildmy ftttrch, viz. by T reaching*
A" fie*
\1 Anfw. When Preaching converted the Pa- rents, they devoted themfeives to Gody and all that were in their truft and power . and that Preaching. brought in by confluence the Infants that did not hear. I prove i: , i. Chrift com- ;:;. mandeth the difcipiing of Nations and baptizing V, them (that is, as much as in the Preacher iieth : ) But Infants are part of thofe Nations :. There- fore he cornmandeth the difcipiing and baptizing of Infants, (as much as in the Preacher lay, ) which could be done but by the fuccefsof preaclv ing on the Parents. 2. The Kingdoms of the world are made the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Chrift: But Infants are members of all thofe Kingdoms : But this is done at large elfe- where.
zJMr. T. 1 Cor. 1.2. called to be Saints • Aft. 2.41,47. & 5. 14* They that were added to the Church did hear and believe , &c.
Anfw. I will not weary the Reader with re- peating the fame enfwers to the like things.
Mr. T. 5. They who are not reckoned Chrifts Difciples were nor vifible Church-members : But Infants are no where reckoned at Chrifls Difci- ples: ergo.
Anfw. i« What is faid before to the other Texts anfwereth all thefe. The A&ions of adult Difciples only were in mention. 2. Infants are called Difciples, Acts 15. as I have elfewfjere proved, on .whofe neck the yoak of Circumcifi- on was laid • And in Matth. 28. 19. when Na- tions are to be difcipled. 3. Mr. T. himfelf confek feth that Chrift was habitually and by deftgnation a
M 4 ' ?TQ~
( t : 8 )
Prophet in Infancy , rf/zj that fo :r.ay Infants bs pies.
. T. 6. //" z;z ffo diftribution of the man- \?ers of the Church then ^ Infants are not corner e- then Infants were not vifiblc Chitrih- nkflibcrs - - But, &c.
ylfw. i. Here he inftanceth in i. The fex, Men andWom.n, 2. Jews and Gentiles , 5. Cir~ cumciiion and uncircumcifion, mentioned, but not Infants. But if Infants be of neither fex, male nor female, nor of jews or Gentiles, nor circum- cifion nor uncircumcifion, I plead not for them.
2. If thoie Texts cited by you mention not In- fants others do, as I have elfewhere proved: Our children are called Holy, and a blefTed feed, and received by Chriit, and of fuch is the King- dom of Gtd, crc. And you confefs it of Chrift hlnifelf lti his Infancie, and yen now forget it, or contradict your felf.
Jidr. T. 2. / argue from the common received rcfmtions of the vi fib I e Churchy A&S 19. of the Church of England : A congregation of faithful
men dec.
Afw. And fo Kingdoms and all Societies that Infants are members of, are accordingly'defmed, as is albrefaid. You cannot deny it. And was ' not the Church before Chrifts incarnation a focie- ty of faithful men , when yet you' confefs that Infants were vifible parts of is ?
Air. T. 3. / argue , They are no vifible members of the Chyifiian Church, to whom no -note where* by a vtfible Chriftian Church or Church-member- pip u difcernadc^ do\h agree ; j^'&c. ergo :
(XC9)
Aif\\\ When a man think* only what to fay for his caufe, and never thinks what can he faid againfl it, his judgement, is of little value, i. All that agrcetlj to Infants which was requifite to a vifible Infant member before Chrifis coming ^ And do you not confefs that they were members then among the Jews? 2. Did nothing in Chrift himfelf in Infancy agree with vifible mtmberfhip > Yes ; the open Revelations of Gcd as to a vifible perfon : Yo* confefs before as much as I need. 3. The elTentiating qualification of a- Church- member, is Covctiant'Coiftnty fuch as God ac- cording to the fenfe of his offered Covenant will accept as fuch: But Infants have this Covenant- confent, feeing they confent by their Parents who are entrufted to do it for them , as if they were parts of themfelves : As the Jews Infants did. Mutual confent of God and themfelves by their Pa- rents is it that makeththem members. I have oft wondered to read in orthodox Divines, that the- Word purely preached, Sacraments andDifcipline', are the marks of the true Church. No doubt but Hcart-confent to the Baptifmal Covenant of Grace makeih a fincere member of the true Church ( which the Infant doth by the Parent , ) and pro- feffed confent to the fame Covenant maketh a vi- fible member (which regularly muft be by Ba- ptifm for inveftiture.) Bur a true Church may long by perfecution be hindred from pubhek afTem- blies , Preaching , Sacraments and Difcipline ; And may have much corruption in all thefe.
Mr* T. maketh this mutual confent as two difimli pretended Notes , denying either of them to be true marhj* Anfxw
(170)
jinfw. Neither the Princes confent alone, nor the Subjects alone niaketh a Common- weafth : Nei- ther the Husbands confent alone , or the Wives maketh a marriage » but both conjunct : So here : Mutual confent maketh a Church-member : But fo , that -Gods Confent is the Donative efficient caufe , and rr.ans confent is the receptive caufe , which is conditio fine qua non. They that will not impartially think, of plain cafes cannot under- ftand them. Your unthankful denying that God hath made any fuch Promife, Covenant or Con- fent , is elfcwhere confuted : And if I (hall fay with Davenant and the Synod of Don that this Covenant being the fame that is made with Pa- rents themfelves , giveth the Children the fame Right to Pardon and Life eternal according to their capacity, fo that faithful Parents Jljculd not doubt of the Salvation of their Children dying in Infancy ( ut Synod. Don. Art. I.e. 17. ) I could better with them bear the confequence ( of the Jofs of Gratia Infantilis in fome at age ) than the confequents of your turning them all out of the vifible Church. The former I know noChri- ftian that ever oppofed for many and many hun- dred years after Chrift • and the latter the uni- verfal Church as long oppofed : And yet I will not fubferibe that [ It is certain by the word of God that baptized Infants dying before aQual finy are certainly favedf\ without excepting the In- fants of Heathens or Infidels , wrongfully bapti- zed.
Mr. T. 4. / argue i They who have not the form con flit uting and denominating a vifible
Qourch^
Church-member^ are not vifible Church-members* But, Ergo. Profejfion of faith is the form conftitu- ' ting, &C.
zAnfw. i. Covenant Confent is the form con- stituting f* /wf? Rccipientis, and this they have reputatively in their Parents , whofe will is as theirs.
2. The Jews Infants had the form conflitu- ting a vifible member as youconfefs. And that was not circurncifion • For the uncircumcifed fe- rrules 5 and males too in the wildernefs were vifible members : Nor was it to be born of Jews , For apoftate Jews forfeited it, and Profelytes of other Nations obtained it : But it was [by confent to Gods Covenant.
3. And Chrift was a vifible member by Divine Revelation. His argnings would make againft Chrifts Righteoufnefc Imputed to believers, and Adams or the Parents fins imputed to them.
Mr. T. 5. If Infants be vifible Ckrifiian Church-members jhen there may be /vifible Church- Chrifiian which eonfifis' only of Infants of belie- ■ vers — But this is bfinrd : Ergo.
An fin. Such quibbles feem fomething when the Will giveth them their force. 1. Infants, ate members of all Kingdoms under Heaven : And yet there neither is nor can be a Kingdom of In- fants only. 2. Members are Effential or Inte- gral. Bccaufe the exercife of the faculties of the Pars Imperans and Pars fubdita is the intended means to the Common Good, which is the End of Government, therefore there can be no Go- verned Society , Kingdom or other proper Poli- cy
cy of which men that' have the ufe of Reafon are not members : that there be fome fucfr to be the Adive part is EfTential to the SocieLy s But yet Infants that are yet but virtually fuch , are Integral members,
Mr. T. 6. / argue : If Infants he vifible Church-members , there is fome Caufe of it, : But there is no Caufe : £rgo
AnfvQ, The . Caufe efficient is Gods Revealed Donation and Covenant Confent : The Caufe Re- ceptive or the Condition of 'Reception, is That this be the Child of a Confenting believer,
Mr. T. To thps i. Mr. T. denycth any fuch Covenant of grace to the faithful and their feed ( which is foort faid. )
2. He faith the Conditional Covenant promifcth Jufiifcation , Salvation , on Condition of faith , and not vifible Qhurch-membcrftrip^ and fo belongs to all as Mr. B. &c,
Anfw, i. It giveth both Juftification and vi- fible memberfhip -5 that is , Right to both and many other Covenant benefits. 2. It belongeth Conditionally to all , and Conditionally gives union with Chrifl and his Church, and Pardon and life to all : But atlnally to none , till the condi- tion be performed •, which is a believing Tarents confent , and regularly his BapUfmal dedica- tion. (
Mr. T. If there t were a Covenant to the faith - ful and their fee d^ to be their Gody yet this would not prove their Infants Chrifiian vifible Church- member flip : As he is the God of Abraham, of Infants dying inthe wombs of believers at the hour of death** 1 Anfw*
r i73 >
, -Arifw. It's true, if they be not the Children *f vifible believers -y becaufe they are not vifibly capable fubjefts. But it being fuch that we fpeak of, your three inftances are abufive. i. Abra* ham is a vifible Church -memW of the Church Triumphant where he is. I will not believe you if you deny it. 2. Infants of vifible. Chriftians dying in the womb , are in that degree vifible Church-members as they are vifible perfons : that is, It is a known thing that they are the children of God according to their capacity. 3. One vi- sibly believing at the hour of death is a vifible Church-member : One not vifibly believing be- longeth not to our cafe.
Mr. T. If all the fe which Mr. B. makes the caufe or condition, may be in acl, and the ejfeB not be, then the caufe which Mr. B. afftgneth is not j Efficient. But &c. For they may all be be* fore the child is torn.
Anfvp. A meer quibble. 1. Before he is born I tell you as far as he is vifibly the child of a vifible Chriftian , fo far h«^ is a vifible unborn member : But as to that degree of vifible mem- berfhip which is proper ta born baptizable In- fants , two caufes are wanting to the unborn : i. Gods confent or donation : For though the Promife as a donative Inflrument was exigent a thoufand years before, it effeð not the gift till the fubjeft be Receptive or .capable :*God may promife a thoufand years before in diem ox fib conditione , which fignifyeth his confent that fo and then it fhall be due , and not otherwife or before. Thefe eafie things fhould not be thus
winked
(174) Winked ar. 2. The Parents confent is wanting • For though the Parent dedicate the child in the womb to God by promife, yet he doth not de- liver him up in the baptifmal Covenant as a via- ble perfon till he is born.
Mr. T. reciting my anfwer clfewhere faith £ It defervetb a [mile : For I mak* Cbirift by his Law. or Covenant -grant the only caufe efficient J The reft of his words are 1 . To tell us that J uni- fication Q"C. hath a further efficient after the Co- venant ; which caufctb Juftifcability^ but not altu- al Juftificntion without mans faith. 2. That I err in taking vifble member flip to be a Right, and moral effect.
Anfw. I take no: that for the picture of the wifeft man, whom the Painter drawerh laughing or fmiling. And I am now confirmed in that fancy. 1. A Teftament or Dt^d of Gift in di- em which faith At feven year send that landfliallbe yours^mzy be the only efficient Inftrumen:, long be- fore exiftent, and yet give ycu no right till the time . and then give it: Eecaufe it effeð but by fignification of the Doners will. Muft the Chriflendom of Kingdoms be impetuoufly que- ftioned by men that know not fuch rudiments as theie ? 2. That Juftification which is given us ar our believing, which is [_ our Right to Immuni- ty and Life ] is the Immediate effect of the Co- venant Donation ; and mans faith i< no efficient but a Recipient caufe of it ( As eve 1 thty confefa that call it a Receiving Instrument : ) And vet we have it not till we believe or confent. VJid would have thought that fuch am n as yc had
f'75) taken ycur oven faith to be an efficient caufe of your own at ion , and fo that you jufiifie
your fclf r And what if one give land to you and your heirs ? It is none of theirs till they are in tx'ing : And yet their birth is no efficient caufe, but only the caufe cf the fubje&s receptive capa- city. I am afhamedrhat you put me thus to cate- chize you.
Mr. T. 5.. If vifible Church-memberJJjip be antecedent to m? inter eft a perfon bath in the Covenant^ then the Covenant is not the caufe of tt. But&c. Ergo — -
Anfw Theword[Intereft]may fignifie thelnte.- reft that fallen mankind hath in the Covenant as conditional antecedent . to mans confent : And thus I fuppofe neither you nor I here fpeak of it. But if by my Interefc ycu mean, that I am the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth a pre- fent Right to its benefits, I anfwer, Some bene- fits follow long after : but when I confent, then V am. the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth a prefent Right to union withChrifi, in the firft in- ftant, and confequently with his Church or body in the fecond : fo ihat here is no fuch thing as your feigned memberfhip before Covenant in- tereft, that is, before a Right to that Relation by Gods donation. And as to your former dream that this is not a Right and moral #effed: but a yhyfical , it was your felf and not I that fubje&ed you to the fhame of fuch an afTertion,, which I will no more confute.
Mr. T. 6. If the Covenant &c. be the only efficient , then Infants bought Orphans of Turks,
**. ♦
cm)
wholly at our difpofe , are no vifible member:^ (fee.
Anfw. No friend of truth will run into the dark with a controverfie, and argue a minm not is* Many judicious Divines think that Gods Cove- nant with Abrahams Infants born in his hcufe , proveththat two things go to make up the capacity of an Infant for baptifm : i. That he be his own and at his dijpofe who ofFereth him to God. 2, That he be offered or dedicated by a finfenting Owner, Nov their reafon is becaufeif they be our own, we have the difpofe of them for their good, and our wills are theirs. But the cafe is mofc clear abovjt thofe that by Generation are our <?wv/,and darker about thofe that are by Adoption or purchafe our own. Now here you do nothing but deny the darker ( which you cannot difprove ) and thence the plainer which we have fully proved.
Mr. T. 7* If the Covenant o- Law with the .Parents aVvual faith without profejfion , wake not the Parent a vifible Church '-member 7 neither d&th it the child. But — Ergo.
Anjw. I grant both major and minor : He that is not known to have faith , is not a vifible adult member : And he that is not known to be the ( juftly reputed ) child of a profefTed belie- ver , is not an Infant Church-member. And what's this to our controverfie ? Heart confent. maketh a myftical or invifible Chriftlan and mem- ber, and Ptofeffed belief ( that is, Believing Confent ) maketh a vifible member of the pa- rent , and is neceflary to the vifible memberfhip of the child : If I may. call that Making them,
• ' which
077) which is but the Diffofition of the material Re- ecftive constitutive caufe. It's pitty we fhould have need to talk at this rate.
Mr. T. 8. If ferfons are vifible Church-mem- bers and not by the Qyvenant of Grace, then it is not true that Chrifi ly his Law or Covenant is the file efficient of vifible Church-memberjhip. The minor is f roved in Judas and hypocrites.
Anfw. i. They are not the file efficient ; Gods Love and mercy alfo is efficient.
2. You profefs your felf that the name [~ Chri- ftian and Church-member ] are equivocal as to the fincere and the hypocrites : If they be not the fame things, no wonder if they have not the fame caufes. That Donation or Covenant may be the fole neareft Inftrumental efficient of True membership, and yet not of Equivocal.
3. God who is our Paternal Beneficient Ru- ler doth give fome of his benefits by his Law or Covenant absolutely and antecedently to mans conditions , and fome confequently as Rewards : And Gods Laws having hrft a Preceptive part, as 4well as a Donative or Premiant , a Right may accrue in foro ecclefu to an hypocrite from that precept : As e. g. God antecedently doth by his Covenant give the world an Impunity as to the punifhment of Drowning it ;. And fo by his com- mon Law of Grace he giveth the world many common mercies by a Redeemer , and perhaps many by that you call a phyfical ad: , immedi- ately. And by his Law he ( having given a con- ditional pardon and life to all ) commandeth his Minifters to offer it, and All men to Accept ic,
N and
(178) and his Minifters to judge by mens profefiion, and to ufe profeflfed Accepters as real . becaufe we cannot fee the heart. This being fo , when the hypocrite profefleth his confent, the Law obligeth the Mini fter and Church to receive it, by which in faro ecclefu he hath aright to his Church Ma- rion. And Chrift himfelf called Judas , and fent him out to Preach , and his mandates were as Laws. So that the Right that an hypocrite ha'h, he hath by theLaw which obligeth theChurch to ufe him as a true believer , upon his profeffing to be fuch. None of this can be denyed. But Judas was called immediately by Chrift himfelf • and his [follow me ] was a precept which gave him a Right to his Relation.
Mr. T. 9. If Infants are vipble members by the Covenant on Condition that the Parents &c then either the next Parents or in any generati- on precedent &x.
Anfw. The next Parents that are Owners of the child, and have the truft and power ofdif- pofing of him or covenanting for him : And the Reafon is, becaufe they have 1. Thox Propriety y and 2. That truft and power.
Mr, T. 10. If an Infants vipble Church-mem- "berjhif be by the Covenant on the Parents atlnal believing , and not a bare profeffton> then it is a, thing that cannot be known , &x.
Anfw. I pitty Readers that muftbe troubled with fuch kind of talk. 1. The Right of the child is upon [_ the Believing Parents dedication of that child to God by confenting that he fee in the mutual Covenant. ^
2. Heart
(*79)
2. Heart content known only to God givetfr no Right coram ecclefia> known to men, but only to fuch mercy as God who only knoweth it, giveth without the Churches judgement.
3. Believing and profeliion qualiiie for Right n the Judgement both of God and of the Church.
4. Profeffion without confenting faith, quali- leth for Right, in the Churches judgement accord- ng to Gods Command, who bidcteth them fo judge md do : Wrangle not againft plain truth.
Mr. T. 11. If other Chriftian priviledgesbe lot conveyed by aCovenant upon the Parents faith , vithont the perfons own ali and confent, then teither this. But &c. Not to be a Believer , a
itfciple, a zJWinifter, a Son of God There is
he like reafonfor them as for this,
*s4nfw. Priviledges are 1. Proper to the adulr, ' thofe concern not our cafe, as to be Mmifters) >r common to them with Infants : 2. Priviled- ;es confift either in Thyfical qualities or other °hyfcal accidents ( and thefe are given by fhyfical dcliotty and fuch is Knowledge, Beliefs Love , lifts of utterance, health, &c.) Or in Right \nd Moral Relation, ( Jw Dcbitnm, obligatio ) rhefe are given by Mural means , that is by fig- life at ion of the Donors will, by precept ( obit- ling,,) promife or fignal Donation, which is the> nftrument of conveyance by that fignification
As a Teftament, Deed of Gift, A& of pardon nd oblivion, &c. are among men. ) Now do v u hink that the rctfon of Phyfical Qtt.lities zn&Mo? al Rights ^Relations and duties ;-s the lame ?.
N 2 2. As
fiSoJ
2. As a Difciple , or believer, fignifieth one i that is Relatively fuch jure Relatione, and as I' ' a Son of God fignifieth an Adopted heir of heaven^ !| loved of God as a reconciled Father in Chrifi J fo Infants are fuch : You fay (after,) thai Chrifi vpas i habitually and by defignation the Head and Prophet jJj of the Qhurch in Infancy , and fo mihgt Infants H be difciples : And will you now deny it? Again! I will fay though it offend you, that there is no ! trufling to that mans judgement that looketh all j] ( or partially ) on one fide , and ftudieth fo ea- garly what will ferve his. caufe, as that he can- | not mind what may be (aid againft ir. See here what two abhominations you thruft on your pit- tiful followers ( which yet I know you hold not j your felf , but the heat of your fpirit in defirei of vi&ory draweth you to fay you mind not j what) You conclude that none is [ A Son of God ] without his own confent : And fo i . All i Infants ase certainly fhut out of Heaven : for j they are no Sons of God without their confent ( neither by Election, Chrifts interceffion, Co-j venant or Gift : ) And I think you will not fay that they confent : And if no fons^ no heirs -y For the Inheritance is only of children : And if no fans , then are they not Regenerate ^ which is but to be made fons of God by anew Generati- on, and renewed to his Image. And do you; damn all Infants ?
2. And confider whether you deny not Chrift in. Infancy to have been the Son of God accord- ing to his humane nature ? For you can never prove that in that nature he actually ' conftnted
in
(Mi)
in the womb or in his Infancy. But partiality is rafhand blind.
Mr. T. 12. If there be no Law or ordinance of Cjod unrepealed by which either this Infant vifible Church-member Jhip is granted^ or the lift- ing of Infants or entring into the vifible Church Chriflian is made a duty ? then it is not a caufe of Infants vifible Church-mcmberflup which Mr« B. affignss&c.
Anfw. I have here proved to you fuch a Law and Covenant before Chrifts Incarnation , and formerly at large proved it to be continued and renewed by fpecial fignification of Chrifts will fince his Incarnation in the Gofpel* Review now your pittifui Reafans againft it.
N 3
i
The Second Tart'. A
CONFUTATION
O F THE
Strange Forgeries
Againft the
ANTIQUITY
O F
Infant Baptism ;
And of his many Calumnies againft my Self and my Writings, with a Cata- logue of 5 6 New Commandments and Doctrines, which he and the Secta- ries who joyn with hitrvin thofe Calumnies feem to own.
By Richard (Baxter.
tL O N DO N , Printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Robwfdn, 1675.
(i85)
I
The Preface.
SECT. I.
I. Of Controversies : z. Of the freight of this Controverfie.
I
$. i. TTT is a thing that all arenotduely in- formed bf,Howfar Controverfial Wri- tings and Dijputes are to be prafti- fed by pious and peaceable men? And here ( as in almoft all things elfe ) men are hardly cured of one extream but by another.
I. No doubt but the extream which hath far moft injured the Church of Chrift, hath been the exeefi of Diluting \ and given juft occafion to Sr. H. W.'s motto, (_ The Itch of Diluting wakes the Scab of the Church , 1 which is eafily dif- cernable, both in the Caufe and the Ejfetts.
$• 2. i. In the caufe it is too notorious, that ordinarily it proceedeth from the depravation of the three faculties of the foul , Voteftative , In- ttllettive , Kotttive , in the tjjree great Prin- ciples
fi80
cipies of iniquity, Pride , Ignorance 'and wrath.
0. 3, 1. Did not Pride caufc meri much to overvalue their own farts and worthy Controver- fie would have fhrunk into a narrower compafs before this day : Men would have come to one another as friends to be informed of what they know not, by enquiry and gentle conferences, if not as children to School, to learn : And if grace by hard ftudies had given one man more infight ■into any matters than another, humility would rea- dily have acknowledged Gods gifts, antl defired to have the benefit of a friendly communication ? and whereever God had fct up a light, the Chil- dren" of his family would have been ready to work by it : It would not have been fo hard as now it is for an Ignorant man to kyow his Igno- rance■, nor to difcern when another knoweth more than he.
$.• 4. But now , alas , a multitude that under- hand not half their Catechifm hear their Teachers as Mailers hear their Scholars , to know whether they fay their leflbn wel] or not : And the Preacher that faith as they would have him, may pafs for orthodox ar leaft, if not for a very wife man, becaufe he is, fa far, as wile as they: But if he will prefume to teach them more than they know, they fufpeft him of herefie, and the repetition of his Sermon which they make, is to mangle fome fentences which they had not wit enough to underftand, and thence to proclaim ( or whifper abroad at leaft ) that the Preacher hath fome dangerous errors, ( and doth not know fo much as they \ ) unlefs it be fome lufcious un-
whole:
f IS7)
Whole fom notions that he ofFereth them, or be a militant wrangler and would lift them under ham as his troop , to ferve him in fome new raifed war, and then corrupt nature can magnifie novel- ties as if they were new revelations from Hea- ven,
jj. 5. And O that the Teachers wanted not the fenfe of their intellectual imperfections , as well as the people I But too many think that when they are all ordained into the fame office, the ho- nour of the fame office is equally due to them all, and confequently all that honour of Knowledge, Tarts and Piety, without which the honour of the office cannot be well kept up. And fo when they all walk in the fame robes and are called by the fame titles, matters which they never underftood, mud pafs according to the major vote , or at leaft, they muft not be contradicted , nor their igno* ranee made known : And therefore when they have owned or uttered a Dodxine or Sentence , their honour is engaged to make it good ^ And they find a fareafierway to make orientation of the Knowledge which they have not , by robes , titles and big words, than to macerate their bo- dies by imploying their minds in ferious long un- wearied ftudies, till they have received into their minds the well digefted frame of facred truths.
$.6. And if this tribe can keep the major vote ( as it muft be a ftrangely happy country where they do not ) whoever will be wifer than they , fliall be a heretick. But if it fall out better, and they be the weaker fart, they will make up their honour by the way of fmgularity among fo many as
they
cm)
ftiey can get to believe, that they are matters of fome excellent truths which almoft all the Chri- ftian world is unacquainted with.
f. 7. And even in men osherwife truly pious, there is fo much remaining pride as is greatly gratified by Singularity : Selfiflmefi and the Old man are but One . And an opinion that is peculi- arly their otvn, is as lovely to them, as their own Children in companion of others : If they can fay, ego frinttii invent , it is fweeteft : If not, yet to be one of a lingular Society, that is fuppofed wi- fer, and better and more excellent in their way of worfhip than all others , is very comfortable to them, that by taking the eled: to be fewer than they are, do judge it a good mark to hold what few hold, and do as few do.
£. 8. And there may be a conjunllion of good and evil in the caufe of thefe effedta
And from hence we now live among many that fall into various kinds of Se&s , and every one hopeth for the comforts of fmguUrity in their way. Many turn Quakers, becaufe they wzfwgular in their aufterities : And many Congregations will not endure the finging of Gods Praife in Pfalms, at lead in Davids Pfalms • and fome will not have the Scriptures read , and fome are againft hu- mane learning and ftudies, and fome againft Preaching upon a Text, and Praying before and after Sermon, and fome againft ordinary Family- worfhip, and many ftartle if they hear the Creed, the Lords-Prayer and Commandments ; and hence alfo the Doctrine of denying all Chriftians In- fants Church-memberfhip hath profpered.
$. 9. And
<. 9. And too many honeft perfons in oppo- sition to ungodlinefs , are difaffe&ed to lawful and laudable things in the wonlap of God meerly becaufe the Vngodiy ufe them : When as expe- rience telleth all the world , that they that have no Religion in fmcerity , will ufually joyn with the Religion that is uppermost ; And fo if good Rulers and Teachers fet up that which is beft, the beft will be outwardly the way of the ungod- ly h and if we muft needs be lingular .'rom;h.m we muft take the worft , and leave them the beft : to their feif deceit and our fhame.
# 10. I have thought by this weaknefs offome Angular people , that, if God friouid but let us have a King and other Rulers that were Anti- nomians , and againft Infant Baptifm, and againft ringing Pfalms, and againft the ufe of the Creed and Lords Prayer, and fuch other things, and withal were themfelves of wicked lives, and would make Laws for their own way, and impofe it on the people , fo that the ungodly multitude did fall into this way, it would prefentiy cure moft that are now for fuch opinions : And though the Godly and the wicked muft be greatly dif- ferenced in the Church , yet before we are aware , our fecret Pride fets in with this defire of difcipline, and maketh us much defire to feem eminently Good, by a more notable and confpi- cuous difference from the common fortofChri- ftians than God in Scripture or reafon doth al- low. 2. And how much Ignorance hath to do in all
our
our comroverfies , would foon be acknowledg- ed if the queft;on concerned not our felves : For every difputer accufeth his adverfary of Ig- norance : If they be of ten minds ( inconfitient,) nine of them muft needs he erroneous , and there- fore Ignorant , and yet every one charge th it on the reft, and thinks that he alone is free. Alas, that mans foul, which here muft a& m fuch a puddle of brains , and in fo frail a receptive en- gine as it here meth, fhould have fuch high and confident thoughts of its own untryed and un- digefted conceptions that will nor let Ignorance be acknowledged or cured / Molt certainly we are all fo dark and weak, that it is but a/>n? Great neceffary things, or fuch as are very plain , which we have caufe to be confident of , without all fufpicion of miftake. Moft certainly natural dttlnefs, or fhort and fuperiicial ftudies , through floth or diverfions, or want of right teachers, or an ear- ly reception of wrong methods or opinions, lead- ing unto more, and many fuchcaufes, doth and will keep not only moft Chriftians , but moft Teachers of the Church in fo low a meafure of Knowledge , as unficteth them to * mafter and manage very difficult controverfies ; And yet fad experience telleth us, that he that is leaft able to fpeak,is oft leaft able to bold his tongue >9 And it's too rare to find a man that is not Ignorant of his Igno- rance,and that chargeth no: him with Pride that will prefume to contradict him. What wonder then ifdifputes beendlefe?
p. 12. ;. And that wrath is in the caufe needs no proof but experience, while we fee men come
forth
fi90 forth with militant difpofitions, and animoilty h their valour, and how to make their adverfaries feem contemptible or odious is their work.
tf. 13. 2. And if I /hould but open to you the Deputing evil, in the effetts as I have done in the Canfes, what a woful tragedy, of 1500^ years duration , ihould|I prefent you with ? Bur I (hall put off that part of the work, fuppofing that fight and experience do inform you more effectually than words can do.
p. 14. On all thefe accounts I ftill fay as Paul, The fervant of the Lord muft not ( need- lefly ) ftrive, nor meddle with thofe wranglings which mimfler Que ft ions rather than godly edifying which ism faith : For the end of the Commandment is Love out of a pure hearty and a good Confcience and faith unfeigned : And the high pretenders are too often \_ frond , know- ing nothings but doting about queftions and ftrifes of words, whereof cometh envy, ftrife , ratling , evil furmifmgy perverfe difputings of men of cor- rupt minds and deftitute of the truth.
i. 15. II. But yet for all this, as Politici- ans ufe to tell Tyrants , that if God and man did but fecurethem from all refiftance, men would fiie from them as from Tigers or Crocodiles, and fuppofe their boundlefs uncontrouled'pride and cruelty would be infatiable -, fo I fay of B'ereti- tical and truly Schifmatical Contenders, that If they were once fecured that whatever folly , he- teiie, or ungodly mifchievous conceits they vend, and that with the greater! induftry and turbulen-
<7
(191)
cy to deceive the people, no man yet mufi; contradict them, nor open their folly that it may be known to all, and go no further, for fear of being taken for a man of difputation, controver- fie and ftrife , this would fo embolden them to attempt the fedu&ion of all forts of people, that no place would be fafe or quiet.
£. 1 6. It is a foolifh pretence of peacea- blenefs and quietnefs, to ftand by in lilence for fear of our own or others trouble , and fee Well-meaning people feduced , Chrift and his truth and name abufed , and God difhonoured , and his Churches fhaken , and made a fcorn and fcandal to the world , and all for fear of being accounted contentious. If it be lukewarm ( as they fay themfelves ) to hear dayly fwea- rers , curfers, fcorners , and fuch other prophane finners , and not give them a clofe reproof or admonition, fo much more is it to fee or hear hurtful falfboods publifhed as the precious truths of God, and not to contradict it, nor endeavour to fave mens fouls from the iniection. li Sa- tans work rauft be done without refiftance as ofc as a miftaken well-meaning man will do it, there will be little fafety tor the flocks.
£. 17. When Paul fore-told the Ephefians of two forts that would afTiult them, viz.. Grie- vous devouring wolves, and men arifing among themfelves that would (peak perverfe things to draw away dtfciples after them , his conclusion is [Therefore watch J .• And what that watching is he tells Timothy, The mouths of fuch deceivers rauft be flopped : not by fcrcry for that Timothy
had
had no power to do ; but by evident trnth* And Truth hath a power in its evidence , if it be but rightly opened and managed. And were it not that God in all ages had enabled fome of his fervants, faithfully and clearly to vindicate truth, and defend lound dodrine , and hold, faft the form of wholcfome words, and ftop the mouth of ignorant pride that wrangleth againft them, what had become of us long agoe ? And though ill difputes have done much mifchief, and too often difputing fuccedeth more according to the Parts, interefts or advantages of the Difputers , than according to the evidence of truth : Yet for all fuch abuics, Truth mud be defended, and it find- eth fomething even in nature (as bad as manis*^ to befriend it •, few love a piairi fa 1 mood, unlefs where intereft greatly bribeth them : And upon tryal Truth will at laft prevail , where fin doth not provoke God in judgement to leave men to the delufioris which they chufe,
£. 1 8.' If then the way be to Teach and Learn , and quietly open the evidence of trnthy and in meeknefs to inftrtiB thofe that eppofe tbem- felves , and to avoid contentions as we avoid wars , till other mens adults do make themi unavoidably neceflary •, and yet not to be cow- ardly betrayers of the Truth and Church of God, nor fuffer Satan to deceive men tanrefifted, but earneftly to contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints, It muft be confidered, I. To whom this earneft contending may be ufied, 1 1. And by whom.
$. 19. I. We muft not be ever jliarp or earneft, j. With thofe that are ytiftrangers to Religion , of whofe converfion there is hopey . and who are liker to be won by a gentler way, which more demonftrateth love and tendernefs, 2 Tim. 2.25, 26.
£. 20. 2. Nor with Godly Chrifiians who
fall into fuch (ins of infirmity as we are I y able
to , and whofe tendernefs maketh companionate
.tender dealing fitteit to their recovery, Gal. <5.
J, 2, 3.
£. 21. 3. Nor with humbled de'jetled Chri- stians who are apter than we to aggravate their o#n faults, and have need of comfort, to reftrain their forrows and keep them from defpair, 2 Cor. 2. 7.
£. 22. 4. Nor with finners that under con- verfion and repentance are humbling themfelves by confeffion to God and man, Luk* 15. Philem. 10, 16,17.
£. 23. 5. Nor with Ghriilians that differ from us in tolerable matters , and manage their differences but with tolerable infirmities , not ha- zarding the fafety. of the Church or mens fouls*:
24. But in thefe cafes we muft ufe flain- . nefs , .jharpnefs and eameftncfs. 1 . When in fecrlet ( where mens honour with Oihers is not concerned ) it is neceflary to mens convict on and repentance ; 1. Becaufe of the Greatnefs of the fin cr error , which will not be known if it be not truly opened and aggravated. 2. Or by
reafon
(*95)
reafon of the hard-lieartcdnefs or obftinacy of the (inner, that will not be convinced- or humbled by eafier means.
$• 25. 2. And when we. are called fo to ad- monifh a pulplick Tinner for his crimes or here- fies , which mud be opened as they arc, before he will be convinced and humbled openly before the Church.
£. 26. 3. And when the people or Chureti is in danger of being infe&ed by the fin or er- ror , if the evil of it be not fully and plainly opened, and thefinncr rebuked before all,that others may beware,
4 . 27. 4. When the offender or he- rerick* fheweth us by his obftinacy , that we have no caufe to exped his cure and convi&ion, but are only to defend Gods truth and mens fouls againft him , then he muft be ufed as Chriit did the Pharifees : and as Rulers execute malefactors not for their own good, but for the warning of others aad prefervation of the innocent \
$. 28. 5. And when our gentle fpeeches tend to fcandalize thofe without , and make them think that we prevaricate aad favour Chriitians in their fins.
£. 29. All thefe cafes you may fee proved
1. In Nathans dealing with David, andChrifts with Peter, Matth. 16, and Pauls, Gal. 2, &c
2. In Pauls dealing with the inceftuous m?n , 1 Cor. 5. and Peters with Ananias and his, wifje«i I Tim. 5. 20. Them that fin rebuke before all \ &c. 2 Tim. 4. z.Tit.i. 13. Rebuke them fiarply that they way be found in the faith ( cuttingly )
O % Sit,
Tit. 2. 15. Rebuke with all authority ; efpecialty when we deal with Inferiors who muft be hum- bled, Tit. 3. 10, 11. Mat. 23. throughout; And &H'i gentlenefs or remifnefs is ouf warn- ing.
f, jo. 1 1. And as to the pe rfons who rxtltft ufe this fiarpnefs and earmftnefs againft errors and finners in contending for the faith, 1. It is not thofe who overvalue their own conceptions, and grow fond of all that is peculiarly their own, and infoiemly take all men to be enemies to truth and faith and godlineis, who are adverfaries to their cdd opinions. 2. Nor muft inferiors rife up with infolency againft fuperiors, or the young againft their elders, and the ignorant againft the wife , on pretence of a zealous ftanding for the truth ; Though they may humbly and mo- deftly defend that which is truth indeed. 3. Nor fhould unftudyed Chriftians prefently think hardly of any party and backbite them, and in- veigh againft theaa > becnife their Leaders call them herecicks or reproach them as erroneous dangerous men : ( asalmoft all parties do againft each other. ) 4. Nor fhould thofe Alinifters who have not a through infight into a Contro- verfie , meddle much with it , nor be too for- ward to reprove and reproach where they do not "underftand, nor to undertake difptites which they cannot manage. 5. But as God doth in- dow men with various gifts, if each man were imployed according to his talent, all would have their honour and comfort, and the Church the be- nefit of them all f'i'l*
^. 31. We have notorioufly all thefe forts ©fMiniftcrs in the world. 1. Carnal, proud and worldly hypocrites , who are enemies to that which is againft their pride and worldly iiitereft : Thefe contend malignantly againft Godlinefs* 2. Ignorant, idle, flefhly droans , that eat and drink and mind the world, but meddle not much with controverfies. 3. Profeflbrs of Religious zeal , who efpoufe fome fingular dividing way , and turn all their ftudies to make good their mi- ftakes ^ who have laudable abilities perverted by prejudice, error and intereft. 4. Honeft Prea- chers that ferve God in practical preaching ^ but being but half ftudicd in fome controverfies, are yet as forward and bufie in difputing , cen- tring and reproving difTenrers , as if they knew as much as the caufe requireth. I would alhhefe would meddle with no controverfies , but what? great neceftity in plain and certam cafes calls them to. 5. We have many humble truly God- ry men, who as they are confcious that they are not well ftudied for comroverfie , fo they meddle not with it but lay out themfelves in preaching the truths that we all agree in, and do God and his Church much fervice in quiemefs and peace : Thefe are the men that the Church is moft beholden to. 6. Some are judicious and very fit for controverfie, but too cold in the practical part of Religion. 7. Some excellent holy men flike Augufline) have fo digefted the matter, as to be able to defend the truth againft all adverfaries and live accordingly. Onlv thefe two 1 aft fonsfhould be imploved infuchdifputes. O 3 ' SECT,
(19*)
SECT. II.
Of the weight and nature of the frefent contra- verfie.
$. i.T think it a matter in this diftrafted age, JL which you may be much concerned in , to know what weight is to be laid on the contro- verfie about Infant Baptifm that you may nei- ther come too fhort nor go too far. For my part , when the Chriftian Parent ( or owner ) to whom God in Nature and Scripture hath intru- ded the Infant , doth heartily dedicate him to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, and con- fent that he (land related according to the Bap- tifmal Covenant , I am none of thofe that be- lieve that God who is a Spirit, layeth fo much upon the application of the water , as to damn any fuch Infant meerly for the wane of it. And though I cannot fubferibe to as much more , as fome would have me ( who think fo much bet- ter of their own understandings than ever any evidence perfwaded me to do, as to judge them- selves worthy to be Creed-makers for all others, yea and to be called The Church it felf , ) yet I approve of the Seventeenth Canon of the Sy- nod of Dort Art. i. that \_ faithful Parents have Ho caufe tt? doubt of the fahation of their children 'dying in Infancy.^
6. 2. And I hope all the pious Anabay- tifis tlumfelves do virtually though not actual- ly
f 199)
ly devote their children to God, and content to their Covenant relation, while they vehement- ly plead againft it. For furely they have fo much natural affe&ion, that if they did think that God would be a God in fpecial Covenant with their children, and pardon their Original fin, and give them right to future life, upon the Parents dedication and confent, they would undoubtedly accept the gift, and be thankful ? And I believe moftof them would fay , [_ I would do all that God intmfleth and enabkth me to do, that my child may be a child of God^and 1 would give him up to God and accent any mercy for him a* far as God doth authorise me fo to do7\
fa 3. And if Parents and Owners will not confent that their children be in Covenant with God and be baptized, I am not yet fatisfied what remedy we have , nor who can do it for them to as good effed. Por if any one may do it , as fome plead , then all Heathens children may be fo ufed and faved ; And he that perfwadeth me that there is extant fuch a Covenant orpro- mife of God that he will fave every Heathens child that is but by any one brought to baptifm, 1. He muft fhew me that text where thispromife is, 2. And when he hath done , he will leave me perfwaded that God will fave all Heathens Infants whether baptized or not. i. Becaufe I and ten thouland more Chriftians would fir id our clofets and offer to God all the Infants in the world ^ that is, confent that he be their re- conciled God, and they h±s children and in1 Cove- nant with him : what good man would not d fire O 4 their
tlieir falvation? 2. And I fliould not eafily be- lieve that God will damn them all meerly for want of a ftrangers confent to fave them, were that wanting* 3. Much lefs chat when we do con- fent a thoufand or ten thoufand miles off , that all the children e. g, in China or Siana (hall be baptized and faved , that this ir all not hinder their damnation meerly becaufe the Infants and we are fo diftant that we cannot in fight and f re fence offer them to God : furely if my confent that a Ti^r^ child be baptized and faved will do it if he were with me, it may do it a mile off; and if fo, then ten thoufand miles off, 4. And if I be impowred to confent , I (hall never believe that the bare want of the water will damn him, who hath ail things elfe that God hath made ne- ceffary to his falvation fas I faid beforej I think they give too much to Baptifm , who fay that God will either fave any one by it , who want- eth other things necelTary to falvation, or that he will damn any for want of it( that is, of the wafhing of the body ) who want nothing elfe which is neceffary to falvation. And I doubt they that fayotherwife will prove difho- nourers of the Chriftian Religion, by feigning it to be too like to the Heathenifh fuperitition, laying mens falvation on a ceremony as of abfolute ne- ceffiiy : And I am confident it is contrary to ChriiTs redoubled leffon, Go learn what that meaneth, I will have' mercy and no* fiicrifice : And no men fhallunteach me this great and com- fortable leffon , which (Thrift hath \o indtiftri- oufly taught me? and which hath been long writ- tea
( 201 )
t*n fo deeply on my heart , as hath made all unmerciful ferfecutions and feparations, and ali- enations very difpleafing to me,
tf. 4. I have proved afterwards that even njduguftine himfelf doth as on great deliberation aflfert that where the Miniftry of baptifm is not defpifed, Heart coniierfion without it fufficeth to falvatipn in the adult : And no fcripture or rea- fon doth make it abfolutely nece(fary to Infants, if not to the adult.
$. 5. And if Heathens Infants are not dam- ned meerly for want of outward baptifm, nor yet for want of the confent of others (either becaufe that other rnens confent who are ftrangers to them is not neceflary to their falvation , or if it be neceflary they have it at a diftance ) then it will follow that all the Infants of Heathens are in a ftate of falvation, unlefs fomewhat elfe be yet pro- ved neceflary to it : And if they are all faved, then fo are all Chriftians Infants alfo, or elfe they are rnore miferable than Heathens. And if you can firfl believe that the Infants of all Infi- dels, Atheifts, and ungodly Chriftians fhypocritesj have a promife of falvation, you will next be in- clined to think better of their Parents ftate than God alloweth you : And where is this pro- mife?
£. 6. Some fay that the new Covenant#gi- veth grace and life to all that do not p onere obicew. But I muft have Gods Covenant in his own terms, that I may have it in his own fen fe, if I will be gfiur.e'd of the benefits. Non fonere obicem fig- rufiesh plainly no Attion or fofitive qualification
as
f202)
as neceflary, but only a negation of fome contrary a&ion : And it is certain that the terms of Gods Covenant to the adult are clean contrary i It is not he that neither Believeth nor oppofcth faith jhall be faved, or he that doth neither good nor harm , as a man in an apoplexy , or afleep : But [" he that believeth jhall be faved , and he that loelieveth not jhall be damned ^ And except ye repent ye jhall all perijh^ And without holi- nefs none jhall fee God:^\ But a meer negation is no holme fs.
tf. 7. And if any will feign another Cove- nant for Infants , let him fhew what and where it is •, for I know but one Covenant of grace, which taketh in the Infants with the Authorised Parents, whofe members or Own God taketh them to be, and reqnirtih a pofitive believing confent and dedication :o Cod. as the pofitive condition : which is more than a Negative ( nm ponere obi* cem , ) though performed by the Parent for the child : And fo the promifes throughout the Scri- pture run to the faithful and their feed.
jf. 8. I know that God promifeth to blefs children through many generations -for their faithful Anceftors fake : But that is on fuppofition that fi- delity continue in. the line, and that apoftafie make rio interciiion. Elfe all fhould be bleffed for the fake of Noe, even Cham s pofterity as well as Shem's,
j. 9. What then is the thing made necefla- ry ( and fufficient ) by the Covenant to their falvation , but. that they be the feed of the faith- ful devoted by them totGod, that is, that their
Pa-
(20?)
Parents natural , or at lead civil , whofe Own they are , and have the power of difpofing of them for their good , do enter them by con- fent into the Covenant with Chrift ? which it is fuppofed rhat Faithful Parents virtually did before, and will actually do when God doth call them to it.
tf. 10. As to them that fay , [tht thing further neceffary as the condition of the Infants acceptance and falvation is \_ A promife to edu- cate the Qhiid at a Chriftiati if he live 3 I an- fwer, i. That promife indeed is included in his dedication and confent -, 2. But who but the Owners of the child are capable of making fuch a promife? funlefs as feconds promifing that the Owners (hall do their duty ) : For only he that owneth him can educate him ( by himfelf or others) or difpofe of him for his education : who hath power to difpofe of another mans child, and educate him ? They that undertake as fure- ties to do it , in cafe the Parents apoflt^ize or die , do plainly imply, 1. That till then it is the Parent that is intruded to doit • and there- fore that the Parent muft confent to do it ; and therefore that the Parent muft enter his child in the Covenant of Chrift : 2. And that if the Parents apoflatize or die, they will take the chiM themfelves as their Own • or t\(c by what power can they educate him or difpofe of him ?
c. 11. They that fay, God did not fave one for the faith or confent of another • muft remember, 1. That we are all faved for the meritorious
Xgfc
(204)
Right eoufnefs of Chrifl, by the way of a free gift >, whofe condition is but fait able acceptance : And why may not a Parent accept a donation for his Child , who hath no will to accept it for himfelf ? Shall he be certainly ftut out unto dam- nation? Or fhall he have that gift abfolutelywhkh is conditional to all others f Or is he not concern- ed in the donation at all ? 2. And remember that we have guilt and mifery from our Parents •, and therefore though life and pardon be by Chrift on- ly, yet it is congruous that the meer condition of acceptance may be performed by the Parents. 1 £. 1%. Perhaps fome will lay all the right of Infants to the pardon of lin , and falvation, upon fecret election only •, as if all that we knew of Infants Salvation were that God will fave fome whom he fyath elected : but that there is no Promife of grace and falvation to any particular Infant in the world , as under any condition or qualification : And if this be fo, then, 1 . No In- fant hagh any Right to pardon, grace and falvati- on , given him by the Covenant of Grace •, No more than any eled perfon at age hath before faith and regeneration : Election gave Paul ( nor any wicked man ) no right to pardon or falvati- on : Elfe elect Pagans and Infidels are juftified -, if they have jus ad impttnitatem or Regnnm Cce- lorum. 2. And if this be fo , we have no afturance that God will fave ten or three Infants in all the world : For he hath not told us whether he hath ejected fo many. 3. And yet we cannot be fur e but that they may all or almoft all be faved ; while the number of the elect is unrevealed.
4. Nor
(-20?;
4; Nor can we know that any more of the Chil- dren of the Faithful are faved, than of the Hea- thens or Infidels -, of thofe that love God and keep his Commandments, than of thofe that hate him. 5. And, in a word , we have then no pro- per hope, upon Covenant right y that God will fave any oue individual Infant in the world : For we can hope ( in this proper fenfe ) of nothing but what we do believe , and we can believe nothing but what is promifed or revealed. And fo Pa- rents mull be thus far hopelefs.
f. 13. God who made man after his Image f teacheth him to govern according to thofe prin- ciples which are his Image : And all the King- doms in this world take Infants for Infant-mem- bers ; and the Laws give them Right to Ho- nours and Inheritances, the pofTeffion and ufe whereof they may have in the time and degrees that nature doth capacitate them. And can we then think that God who made a Conditional Gift of Pardon and Salvation to all the adult perfons in the world , did wholly leave out In- fants, and that his Covenant giveth them no rights at all , no not to be members of his vi- fible Church ?
£. 14. It feemeth to me a matter of doubtful confequence to afTert , that God will fave more ( yea fo great numbers as we will hope are fa- ved in Infancie ) than ever he promifed to fave, and gave any antecedent Right to Salvation to ? I doubt we tV.all open fuch a gap to the hopes of prefumptuous Heathens and Infidels this* way , as will crofs our common dodrine r If God may
fave
fave whole Kingdoms and millions of Heathens Infants to whom he never gave Right to Salva- tion by any gift or promife , meerly becaufe he ele&ed them •, fome will fay , why may he not dofo alfo.by the Parents ; at leaft renewing them all in tranfitu ?
$. 15. If you fay that He givcth them free- ly his fanUifying grace , and givcth them right to Salvation a* janciificd , though he tell m not who are fanclified, I anfwer , 1 . Take heed left you teach the prefamptuous to fay the fame of Infidels, Heathens ana almoft all, that God may in the pafTages when :hey are dying fan&ifie and fave them ail. 2. brill this giveth no pofitive hope of any particulars , nor more to Chriftians for their Children than they may have of the Children of Infidel? ^ nor any promife of the fpirit and specification, as Believers have.
£. 16. I take it therefore for the foundeft Do- ctrine that Gods taking the Children of the Faith- ful into Covenant with him, and becoming their God and taking them, for his own, doth figni- fie no Iefs than a ftate of Grace, and pardon and right to life eternal •, and that they are in this ftate upon their Parents Confent and Heart- devoting them to Cod in Chrifl, before baptifm, but baptifm is the (blemnizing and inveftiture, which openly coram Ecclefia delivereth themp/~ feffiori of their vifible Church-ftate with a fealed pardon and gift of \ik : For it is not another, but the fame promife and Covenant which is made to the faithful and their feed : And all Gods promifes 10 the many Generations, of them , in
the
the fecond Commandment and many other Texts, cannot mean any fuch little bleilings as confift with aftate of damnation and the pofieflion of the Devil, And all the ancient Churches in bapti- zing of Infants were of this mind ( whom I will not defpife. ) And Abrahams cafe perfwadeth me that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents ( truly their Owners ) have this right ( before they are baptized. ) But the former ( natural Parents) have plainer evidence than the later (which is a darker cafe. ) But as for them that think either that all Infants are faved, or all baptized Infants (jure vel injuria) I though no Parent or Owner confent or dedicate them ( heartily , or openly ) to God, or though they are hypocrites and truly confent not for themielves or theirs , let them prove it if they can ^ but I rau.ft fay it is paft my power.
£. 17. I know the grand difficulty is, that then this Infant-Grace is loft in many that live to ri- per age. I have faid fo much of this in my Chri- stian Directory that I will refer the considering Reader thither, only adding, 1. That far greater abfurdities will follow the contrary opinion , and the greater are not to be chofen. I am loth again to name them. 2. That the univerfal Church ( as far as by. any notice we can know ) did for many hundred years grant the conclufion and take it for no abfardity, but a certain truth ^ yea much more, Anfliu and his followers themfelves, thought more at age were truly juftified and fan- ctifiedthan were ele&ed and did perfevere : And Come hold, that not all that have the fanftifying
fpirit,
fplri£ but only certain confirmed Chriftians, hivk a certainty to perfevere : And others hold, thac as the jpirit of Chrift is promifed to Believers , though men believe riot without the fpirit, fo that meafure of Grace which caufcth men only to believe, as antecedent to that promifed Jpirtt ( of Power, Love and a found mind ) is but fuch as may be loft, as Adams was • and that it is the ftirit following it (as the rooted habit ) which cannot be loft: And others come yet lower, and fay that the Grace which giveth faith it felf can- not be loft ( becaufe fuch have the promife of the fpirit •, ) but yet the grace which only enabkth men to Repent and Believe ( called fufjicient ) may be loft before it produce the Ad j Accord- ingly fome think of Infant-Grace : The laft fort think that they have real pardon of original (irt and right to life, and have real Grace •, but being Infants, that grace is but fuch zsmll enable them to believe if they come to age , and not infal- libly caufe it , and that this may be loft : And fo I might run Over the opinions of the reft. And among all thefe the judgement of Davenant , Ward, &c. of the loj? of an Infant-ftate of Grace, as by them opened is not fo hard, as I think the contrary way will infer : And it feems by Art. i . c. 17. that the Synod of Don was of their mind.
<*; i8« Our darknefs about the f attire ftate of Infants Souls, hath occafioned fome diverfity of thoughts about their prefent ftate. Indeed they will neither in Heaven or Hell have any work for Confcience in the review of any former dlions ,
Sood
govd or evil: And it feemeth by NazAanteitk before cited ( Orat. 40. ) that fome Ancients thought as moft Papi(!s do , that unbaptized In- fants have neither the joys of Heaven , nor any punifhment but the lofs of thefe : But what ftate then to place them in they know not : To think that they fhall remain in a meer potentiality of underftanding, and fhall know no more than they did here, is to equal them with bruits, and to en- courage the Socinians who fay the like of the Se- parated fouls of the adult : And if they can allow underftanding to thofe that died baptized, why hot to the refit And if they under ftand, they mull have grief or fleafure : But who can know; more than God revealeth ?
$i 1$. In fum ; 1. That God would have Pa* rents devote their Children to him , and enter them according to their capacity in his Covenant (as I have el fe where proved) is a great truth., not to be forfaken. 2. And alfo that he accept- eth into his Covenant a?l that are faithfully thus? devoted to him, and is peculiarly their God, and fuch Children are holy. 3 . That they are cer- tainly members according to an Infant capacity of the vifible Church as they are of all Kingdoms under Heaven : Thefe are all clear and great truths. 4. And that there is far more hope of their falvation than of thofe withour. 5. And I think the Covenant maketh their Salvation cer- tain if they fo die. 6. And it feemeth to me that the inveftiture and folemni^ation of their Co- venant with Chrift, (hoiild be made in Infan- tie,- from i&fattb* 2&> ip, 20. and th« expofiti-
P ©TV
( 2IO)
on of the univerfal Church. 7. But if any (hould think with Tertullian and Naz.umz.ene that the time of invefliture and filemmzation is partly left to prudence , and may be delayed in cafe of health , yea or iliould think that Infants are not to be folemnly inverted by baptifm, but only the adult, fo they coniefo Infants relation to Gody hi* Covenant and Church •, I would differ from fuch men with love and peace , and mutual tole- ration and communion.
CHAT.
C H A P. I.
The Occajion of this Writing*
$i 7. A S I was. by great and long imponu- /l nicy unwillingly engaged at firft to meddle publickly in the Controverfie of Infant B.<ptifm with Mr.Towbes ^ fo I then refolved to meddle no more with it, unlefs I found that ne- ceflity made it an apparent duty.
£. 2. Accordingly when Mr. Tombes had print-
I ed the laft private papers which paft between him and me, without my confent , 1 never anfwered hib reply to this day • not ftritfing to have the laft word, and ftippofing that the ftudious impartial Reader, would find no need of a rejoynder : For to me his Reply feemed fo empty and next no- thing,that I thought it unneceflary to fay any more* 0. 3. But it is now grown the cuftom among Papifts and Sectaries and almoft all the wrangler? that trouble the world, to fcribble fomewhat fenfe
' or nonienfe againft that truth which they have not wit, or will, or humility enough to learn, and then fay tothofe that would make them wifer, yon are anfwered^ and itgoeth for a *id:ory to any foolery, if they can but fay, fuch a one that hath written againft yon is unanfvpcred : As if we dealt orj fuch- terms with the world in writing, as that he that fpeaketh laft, (that is, that liveth longell: ) mud be fuppofed to be in the right. Or as if we knew not when we write againft the groffeft
F % herefie
herefie or error, that as many words may be faid or written for it as againft it I
£. 4. And O what pity is it that with the vul- gar fort of well- meaning people , number goeth for weight, and he feemeth to be in the right to them, who is nearefi them and hath befl op- portunity to talk to them a few fmooth deceitful words for his opinion , and to belie and vilifie thofe that are againft him I Not but that there are great fundamental Truths which manifed them- felves , which I hope thefe honeft fouls would not be drawn from by an Angel from Heaven : But verily no true Charity can be fo blind as to deny it , that in lower controverted points , the knowledge of the vulgar Religious people is fo low, that he that is lower than an Angel, or than a well-ftudied Divine, or thau a man of fo- ber folid reafon, may deceive them ( having firft been himfelf deceived ) if he can but fpeak z.ea- lonflyy and refroach others impudently ^ by the fpi- rit defcribed and e xorc ife d in Jam. 5. at large.
tf. 5. And I crave thy pity, Reader, to my felf and fuch as I , that our Time and Employ- ment is fo much at the will and mercy of fuch a fort of wrangling men. That if I have it in my defire to do Gods Church fervice upon fome greater and more needful fubjed:, yet it is in the power of the Devil to ftir up the corruption of honeft well-meaning Chriftians, to put a neceffity on me to do fome poor inconfiderable works, and leave undone the greater and more excellent.
9. 6. For circumftances may make it a mans duty to do that as frefently ncccjfary7 which with-
id
( 2r3.) in a few years will be of no fignification, but die with the interefts and quarrels of the age.
p. 7. It hath pleafed the Lord , who did let loofe the Serpent upon Adam in Paradife, to ex- ercife his Church in almofl all ages with tempta- tions from two forts that feem much contrary, but are nearer in difpofition and principles than they well underftand themfelves , I mean Church-Ty- rants and Qnurch-Dividers ^ And though I ( and mofl others of my quality ) have fuffered incom- parably more by the former, yet it is not a little that I have fuffered by the later : And efpecially that by their flanderous and clamorous unquiet importunity, they will not give me leave to live by them in peace , nor to go on in better work while I meddle not with them. I could not ob- tain that leave from Mr. Tombs-, And now Mr. JD. hath been pleafed to open the mouths of fo many of his partakers againft me , as maketh wife men tell me that to be filent will be to be fcandaloufly guilty of their fin. And do we live upon thefe terms , that any Railer can call us off from our better fervices when ever He and Satan pleafe?
£. 8. But my purpofe is to meddle with them but this once : And if after this thefe crying Chil- dren will bawl and wrarrgle and foul the houfe, arid think that I am made for no better work than either to rock the Cradle or to make them clean, I will let them cry and take their courfe , and will no more believe that their humours are the mailers of my time.
P. 5 1, 9- By
£.. p. By three or four arguments ( of his ma- king ) it hath pleafed one Major Dunvers a Souldier to call me to this task. i. By heaping up a Catalogue of Accufations againft my Do- ctrine in my Chriftian Diredory. 2. By re- proaching me for not anfwering Mr. Tombes, 3. By proclaiming me to the world a flanderer who owe the Anabaptifts fatisfadion, for faying that many of them were Baptised naked. 4. By peryerfe citations of my later Writings as if they had been fervicea*ole to his caufe. 5, By his in- jury to poor fouls and the Churches peace , by his ignorant though confident opposition to the truth, and writing a Volume of he knoweth not what.
5*. iOo And to add to my invitation, it is be- come of late a common faying among the Ana- bapcifts, that I am turned to their opinion or ve- ry near it , but have not humility to retrad my former error, and openly acknowledge wtiat I hold. 1
£._ it. The occafiofi of this is, 1. Becaufe I have fo many years forborn toanfwerMr. Twbes his lair. 2. B:caufe I feek peace with them, and Jpeak for it upon all occalions, and feek to abate other mens over-great opposition ro them. 3. Be- caufe upon all cccafionsj prefs the consideration and improvement of our Baptifm , taking it for the fumm and Charader of our Chriftianicy, and the true defer iption of Converfion, and the effen- tial mark of Grace, and the qualification of Ca- tholick Church-members, and the bond of all our Ghriftiah duty : As if none but Anabaptifts could think thus? £, rz, Wheri
(215)
£. 12. When I firfl: read Major Denver s Boob I thought fuch a Fardle could not be fo regarded as to need an Anfwer •, But when his Book feller came to know of me what I had againft it , as -from him ; and when I heard how many thou- lands of them were Printed , I rather chofe to imitate him that had companion on a headlefs muU titude, than him that {aid, fi populus vult decifiy decipiatur. And they thar will not let me reft , muft< bear fome of the fruits of my difquiet- ment.
P4 CHAP.
(216)
CHAP. II.
oJWore of my Judgement of the Anabaytifts and their Canfe, with a motion to them for peace,
£. i. T Confefs that in my Book againft Mr. X Tombes I wrote feveral pages enigmati- cally of the oifenfive fcandals of the Anabaptifts : And they that now' read them' when the occafion is forgotten or unknown , will either not under- ftand them, or think them too fharp. But in" all military Controverts, no man is fo meet a Judge as he that is on the ground.
$. 2. I am almoft ready to condemn my felf for that and many other things paft when I forget the occafion of them and the ftate that we were in : But f will not deny that at that time my heart felt more than I expreft , 1. When I heard Ana- fcaptiftry obtruded on the religious people , as a great and needful part of their integrity : 2. And when they that abhorred to hear of old fcandals were bufify making more and greater : 3. When 1 faw what was done againft the Parliament, by them that profefled to be their fervants, and that the Anabaptifts and their Aflbciates were the for- warded in the work : 4. And what was done againft the King, when they had thruft out the Parliament-, 5. And what was done in the wars againft Scotland •, 6. And what orders paft for fe- queftring all fuch as my felf that were not for their Engagement or Keefing their days of faft-
**£
(217) .
ing and thanksgiving in caufes of blood ;
7. Anq when I faw thefe executed on many ex- cellent men that were Mafters of Colkdges in the tlniverfities, and ufeful Minrfters in the Country :
8. And when I faw what that called the Little Parliament was and did, and how it was put to the Vote whether all the Parifh Minifters of En* gtand ' fhould be put out at once ? and carried againft them but by a few : And that the Anar- baptifts were of the forwardeft in all this work : o. And after when I faw how many of them turned Ranters, and read my felf fome of their Letters , full of horrid Oathes and Blafphemies ; All thefe things made me think that tbey were not friends to the Churches welfare, and this was not the way of holinefs or peace.
$. 3 . All this while I defired to have lived by them in peace and quietnefs, but I could not ob- tain it : Mr. Tombes thought that I flood in the way of his fuccefles, even when I medled not with them. And therefore I muft be either converted to them or conquered , that the triumph might promote their ends. And when that quarrel was over I was glad , and purpofed to meddle with them no more.
£. 4. One of the greateft things that offended me, was that ( even in the Parifh es where there were the ableft faithful laborious Minifters , ) they laboured to gather feparated Churches, up- on the account of their opinion -5 And when they had gathered them, they were militant Churches : Prefently that Town was in a war ^ and the meet- ings employed for the extolling of their opinions,
and
and vilifying the Minifters and Churches that were againft them , and making them odious or contemptible to their followers : which could not be the work of God.
$. 5. I dare challenge any man to make it good, that ever I fought to perfecute any Anabaptifts , or ftirred up others to perfecute them for their judgements : I know not that ever I did any of them any harm, except by not being of their minds, or contradicting them.
But though my fufferings by them were no- thing , ( that honour being afTumed* by another party ) yet they have not carried it fo to me : But have convinced me that were they uppermoft they would then have had too little tendernefs for thofe that hindred their fuccelTes : Even fome of Mr. Tombes his flock, my neighbours and familiar friends, I think, fought my life or ruine when I meddled not with them. When Sir George Booth had done what was done in Chejhire, I wrote a Letter to Major Beak^ at Coventry , and the Mef- fenger telling them at Bewdley that he had a Let- ter from me, iome of them made themfelves Soul- diers, and in arms way-laid the meflenger, affault- ed him , and took his letters , and though they found not what I fuppofe they expected, yet find- ing in it but a great mans name, who then much' ruled publick affairs, they fent it up to the Coun- cil to Jrim, who fummoned Major Beak^ to Lon- don to anfwer it, who had never feen it and knew nothing of it : And though he fo fcaped, I was loudly threatned \ but General Monks approach out of Scotland flayed the execution of their dif-
pleafure.
( 219)
pleafure. Thus did my familiar Friends unprovo- ked ( fome of them yet alive J.
$. 6. Indeed my judgement was and is, that the point of Infant Baptifm hath its confiderable difficulties, which may occafion wife and good men to doubt, or to be miftaken in it. And ma- ny of the Roman party have taken it to be proveable only by the tradition and judgement of the Church : And Mr, Tombes hath publickly intimated as if one of our moft Learned and En- tire puhlick ProfefTors of Theologie in' one of our Univerfities , had declared himfelf of the fame mind, viz.* that it is not to be proved by Scripture, (Mr. JDanvers hath alfo made advantage of this teftimony ) , ( Though of late Scripture certain f roof is found ('in the new Rubrick of the LiturgieJ for a great deal more. ) I am not of that mind, that it is not proveable by Scripture. I think I have proved it ; but notby evidence fo clear, as every good man can perceive.
£. 7. Therefore I never took the point of it to have fuch weight, as that all that differed from me in ir, muft be denied either Love, Liberty or Com- wunion : If I know my own heart I do as hearti- ly love a fober godly man that is againft Infant baptifm , as I do fuch men that differ from me in other fuch Controverfies 5 and much better than one of my own judgement, who hath lefs piety and fcbriery. And I make no doubt but there are among us very many fuch , even fober and religious men, as there be among other parties.
0, 8. Nor do I think that there is forcuch ma- lignity
lignity in the bare opinion which denieth Infant Baptiim, as that all the Anabaptifts mifcarriages fhould arife from the nature of that opinion. But I am pad doubt that they arife from the dif- eafed minds of many that hold it. When injudi- cious perfons lay hold upon an opinion which is not common , their Angularity kindleth a proud felfidi zeal , and they take that opinion as more peculiarly their own, than the common Articles which all Chriftians hold : And therefore they grow fond of it, and are pufc up thereby with a conceit of their extraordinary knowledge : And then they feem to themfelves more religious than others, and greater friends to the tru:h : And fo Fride and Ignorance engage them in Angularity and fefaratton : And thus they would do, were it any other opinion, which they thought as high- ly of as this : So that it is not an Anabaptift as fuch, but the frond Church-divider , or Separa- ted that I am moft offended at.
£. 9.tl know that in the Ancient Churches men were lefc at liberty , both when they would be baptized themfelves, and when their Children fhould be baptized : And though Infant- baptifm was without any known original, fince the Apo- ftles, yet it was not a forced thing. •
$. 10. And were it in my power it fhould be fo ftilh I would not deny Chriftian Love, nor Church-Communion, nor publick encouragements, to any pious peaceable man for being an Anaba- ptift:'If he would not feparate for it from the Churches, if he would live peaceably with me, I would live peaceably with him, and fhould be
loth
(221 ;
loth to be behind with him in love and peace;
£. 1 1. it is not ( 1 fay ) Anabaptiftry,Indepen- dency, nor any fuch opinion which I impute our calamities to dire&ly : But it is (next to Church Tyranny J the fpirkof feparation ± I mean, when men cannot fo far differ in judgement from others, but a pcrverfe zeal for their opinion as fome ex- cellent truth of God, doth inftigate them to run away from thofethat are.againft it, as if they were the enemies of the truth and God, and unworthy of the Communion of fuch as they : which is no- thing but a conjunction of Pride , Ignorance and Vncharitablenefi ( or JUalice. )
£.12. I have told thefe men that when they have fpoken never fo lliarpiy againft Perfecutors, it is ap- parent that there is much of the fame fpirit in them- felves : One faith, of DiiTenters, Away with fuch unworthy ferfons out of the Mmifiry or out of the Country: and the other faith. Away with fuch unwor- thy ferfons from your Communion'. And both contra- ry to Chrifts fheep-mark which is Love, and both tend to make their Brethren feem unlovely : And whom they ferve by this means , whether the Prince of Love, or the Prince of Malignity, it's pity but they knew • or at lead would confider of it, inftead of being angry with us when we tell them of it.
£. 13. I am not therefore half fo zealous to turn men from the opinion of Anabaptiftry , as I am to perfwade both them and others, that it is their duty to live together with mutual forbea- rance, in Love and Church-Communion notwith- standing fuch differences : For which they may
fee
C222) '
fee more reafons given by one that once was of their mind and way ( Mr. William Men in his
Retractation of Separation. * * Satan will not con- and Ris perfwajlve tQ Vni_ fcnt that you Ihould ••* J Jc ,
foberly read the fooks. 00 wan any or. them can
foundiy refel , though they may too ealily reject them.
p. 14. I am perfwaded that the formal Mini- fters , and people , who make little more life of Baptifm, than to give it to Infants, and to receive it in Infancy, have been the greateft occafion of Anabaptiftry among us : when the people fee that all being Baptized in Infancy > many afterwards live all their days, and never underftand what Ba- prifm is , and few ever folemnly and diftinftly own and renew that Covenant when they come to age, (unlefs coming to Church and receiving the Lords Supper with as little underftanding , be a renewing it , ) this tempteth ferious people that underftand not the matter well themfelves , to think that Infant-baptifm doth but pollute the Churches , by letting in thofe who know not what they do, and after prove prophaneor Infi- dels : And they think that it is the only way to re- formation to ftay till they are ready to devote themfelves underftandingly to God. But this is their miftake ; For, 1. If it were deferred til) ripe- nefs qf age, one part would negled: it and conti- nue Infidels ; and anocher part would do all for- mally, as we fee they do now at the other Sacra- ment, where the fame Covenant is to berenewed, 2* There is a better remedy*
£. 15. For,
$. iy. For we hold that all that are Baptk 2ed in Infancy fhould as underftandingly , and as ferioufly and ( if it may be conveniently ) as folemnly, own and make that Covenant with God when they come to age, as if they had never been baptized ; ( if not more, as being more obliged. ) The reafons of this I have given long ago at^ large, in a Treatife of Confirmation, written when we had hope of fetting up this Courfe, under the name of Confirmation, which fome of us pra&i- fed in our AfTemblies not without fuccefs. To be ferioufly devoted to God by our Parents firft, and to be brought at age as ferioufly to devote our felves to him , as any Anabaptift can do, is a much liklier way -to fill the Church with ferious Chriftians , than to leave all men without the fenfe of an early Infant obligation. •
£. 1 6. I am as fully perfwaded that Infants Church-memberfhip and Baptifm is according to Gods will, as ever I was, when I was mqft en- gaged in the Coivroverfie : And I am perfwaded that thefe Papers of mine to Mr. Tombes , are fo unfatisfaclorily anfwered as is worfe than no An- fwer, and fheweth how little is to be faid.
$. 17. Though the Ad of Baptizing be a du- ty, and fo necefiary neceffitate fr&cepi, yet Pro- tectants hold that it is not fo neceflary neceffitate medii^ but that in fome cafes thofe that are unba- ptized may be faved : As in cafe the Child die before it can be done, or in cafe the abfence or delay of the Baptizer be the caufe .• It is true-con- fenting to his Covenant ( for our felves and thofe that we have power to confent and accept it for)
which
which Chrift hath made necejfary to falvatldn j and if he fhould damn a true Confenter, he fhould damn one that hath the Love of God , and one to whom he promifeth falvation, John }J i6,.i8.
£. 1 8. It is utterly incongruous to the reft of the Law of Grace , which is fpiritual , and to Chrifts alterations, who took down the Law of burdenfom Ceremonies ; to think that he fhould lay fo great a ftrefs upon the very outward wafh- ing , as that he would damn true Believers that Love God, for want of it : when he hath done fo much to convince the world, that God feeketh fuch to'worfhip him as will do it in fpffft and truth, and that Circumcifion or Uncircumcifion is nothing, but Faith that worketh by Love : And if Penitent Loving Believers fhall not.be faved j Gods .promifes give us no aflurance or fecurity*
5> . 19. When the Apoftle, Ephef. 4. 4^ j. putteth \^one Baptifm^ among the neceflaries of Church- Concord , by Baptifm is meant, our folemn de- voting our felves ( and ours under that truft ) to Chrift in the B apt if mat Covenant • which can mean no more but that as there are three things fon our part) in Baptifm, i. Heart-con fent i 2. Profejfion of that content, 3. The Reception of wafliing as the profeiiing fymbol ; So , 1 . The heart-confent is necefTary to our memberfhip of the Church as invifible, that is, to our union with Cbrfft and our falvation ; 2. The Profejfion of Confent as there is opportunity is necefTary, both to prove the fincerity of Confent it felf , and to other mens notice of it, and fo to our member- fhip of the Church as vifible^ 3. And our fro*
'feffing
("50
ftffM£ lt by being Baptized is necefTary to the regular and orderly manner of our Trofeffion : And Co far to our concord;
£. 20. And he that knoweth Baptifm to be hie et nunc his duty and yet will not receive it 5 fheweth his unfoundnefs by his difobedi- ence.
<$. 21. As Baptifm is made our great duty under that name , fo Profejfion or Confejfion of Chrift, as fuch , is oft mentioned as necefTary, even to falvation, Rom. 10.9,10. 1 7^.4.2. 3, 15. Mat. 10. 32. Phil. 2. 11. 2 John j.
And Baptifm being our 0/?<?>z confejftng and Owning Chrift by a folemn Vow and Covenant, it is principally as fuch that it is necefTary tofal- vation , yea and to a perfect memberfhip of the vifible Churchy
0 . 22. Therefore if any man that in a defart or dry Countrey could have no water , or that lived where there is no Minifter , fhould openly before all the people devote himfelf to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, according to the Baptifmal Covenant , and folemnly pro- fefs himfelf a Cbriftian, that man were a true member of the vifible Church, though defective as. to the mode of entrance , and were to be num- bered with Chriftians : And Conflantine and many another were called Chriftians long before they were baptized. And it were injurious \o the Rationality and fpirituality of Chrifts Cove- nant , to feign him to be fo ceremonious, as to rejeft a found profefling believer for want of water.
( 226)
£.23. Though Augufiine be called dmus pa- ter Infantum^ and be fuppoied for fome paiTa- gcs by many Papifts and others to damn allun- baptized perfons fave Martyrs, yet thefe follow- ing words among others r in his later times in his deliberate difputes againft the Donatifts , ful- ly (hew his contrary judgement ( which yet 1 believe the Interefl of his caufe againft the Do- natifts was a help to in this point) And remem- ber that he confirmeth it in his Retra&ations, by retra&mg only the inftance of the thief on. the * ■ crofs , as uncertain whether he was baptized or. not.
<f. 24. Aug de baptif. cont. Donat. li. 4. c. 29. Q Quod etiam at que etiam confiderans in- venio , non tantum Pajfionem pro nomine Chri- fti y id quod ex Baft if mo deer at fojfe fupplere, fed etiam Fidem convcrfionemque Cordis y (i for- te ad cekbrandum myfierium bapifmi in an-
gufiiis temporum fuccurri non pot eft Et
Cap. 24. Cum Mimfterium baptifmi non con* temptus religionk fed articulm neceffitatis exekt-* dit : & baptif mm \quidem ptefi inejfe ubi con* verfo cordis defuerit : Converfto autem cordis potefi quidem inejfe non percepto baptifmo ; fed contempto non potefi : neque enim ullo modo dicen- da efi converfio cordis ad Denm, cum Deifacra-* mentam contemnitur. Converfion then will fave without baptifm , when baptifm is not contemn- ed : It is the contempt that deftroyeth , and that as k proveth men unconverted. And this he profeflfeth to be his judgement after long and great confideration.
*. 25-
(Hi)
£. 25. Baftifm is to Qoriftianity much like what Ordination is to the f acred Mimftry, and what folemn Matrimony is to Marriage. It is neceflary as a -D/*/y> and as a <JM.eans to our ordinary and regular admittance to the Com- munion of the Church. But as in cafe there were no Or darner to be had, in a far Countrey in ^America, no doubt but a qualified perfon might become a Faftor, rather than God fhouid have no Church , nor be folemnly wor/hipped j And as in cafe there could be no regular jolemmz^ati- on of Marriage ( as in fuch a wildernefs ) a published confent may tie the knot • fo in cafe there could be no Baptizing, a folcmn Frofcjfion and Covenanting would ferve to Gods acceptance, and to a right to the Chriftian name.
^. 26. I only leave it to Chriftian Charity and wifcjom to confider how far fome mens Edu* cation, natural weaknefs of judgement, and other impediments of information , may make their error againft Infant Bapcifm , to participate of fuch a Necejfity : The cafe hath its difficulties : Papifts and Protectants confefs it , as to Scri- pture evidence : Weak men cannot know all things s And even confiderable heads, that have heard and thought of much againft it, which they can- not anfwer, may grow very confident that they are in the right , and after by that prejudice may become uncapable of what fhouid fatisfie them ; Abundance of the forts of the Church that talk moft againft them , give fuch weak reafons for Infant Baptifm, and are fo unable to confute an jinabAftifly as gieweth, that it is not More Qjl know-
(228)
knowledge y but fomewhat' elfe more incli- ning them to the truth therein, that keepeth them right.
o. 27. If the cafe were , whether the Lords Supper might be Adminiftred with Beer , or Milk, where there is no-Wine t> Or whether Ba- ptifm might be Adminiftred by Mrlk or Wine, where there is no water ? fuppofe the affirming party were certainly in the right • yet if the con- trary minded t*ould fay, I own Chrifts Sacra- ment , and folemnly profefs my confent to his Covenant ; and I would participate as you do, but that I take it to be a fin , and with all the means that I can ufe , in conference, reading, meditation , prayer, my judgement is not chan- ged ,3 I fhould not break fuch communion with fuch a man, as he were capable and willing to hold with the Church. And how near fome A- nabapiifts cafe is to this, I leave to confidera* tion.
<. 2?. But making no queftron but many of them are far better men than I , and knowing my felf ly ible to error, and knowing how much Chrift in his promifes iayeih upon fmcerity of Faith and Love more than upon ceremony \ and having endeavoured to learn what this meaneth, / Will have mercy and not fucrifice ■ As I am far more offended at their Schifm , or feparation froVn Communion with our Churches, than at their opinion , fo I will here lay down thofe terms on which I am perfwaded good and fo- ber men will be willing on both fides to agree and hold communion : Or on which I am fure
I
(229)
Lwould gladly live in brotherly love and com- munion with them my felf.
£. 29. Let the Anabaftifts confent to and profefs as followeth or to this fenfe.
u Q Though we judge Infant Baptifm diflb- <c nant from Chrifts inftituced order , yet find- <c ing that God hath made many promifes to the " feed of the faithful above others, and that Chrift " expreflTed his readinefs to receive little children " when they were brought to him for his blef- <c fing, and knowing that all Chriftian Parents "fhould earneftly defire that their children may "be the children of God through Chrift , and ct fhould devote them to him, as far as is in their " power , and knowing that there are- difficul- ties about the extent of this power , and *c Chrifts promifes • we do here folemnly pro- "fefs, that we thankfully delire all thofe mer- <ccies for this child which God hath promifed ic$ fuch in his word • and that we heartily " offer, devote and dedicate this child to God the <c Father, Son and Holy Ghoft , as far as he ** hath given us power to do it, befeeching him ac- f f cordingly to accept him-.And we promife faithful- cc ly to endeavour to educate him in the nurture cc and admonition of the Lord, and as we are cC able to perfwade him when he is capable, to "believe in Chrift, and folemnly devote himfelf " to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft in " Baptifm. ]
Let this much be done in the Church or fo openly as may fatisfie the Church, that they are not defpifers of Gods mercies, nor their childrens fouls. Q^3 Mucli
(230)
Much more would it tend to our quietnefs and concord , if thofe that profefs that they cannot fatisfie their conferences in their Infant Baptifm, would but do as the Liturgie doth by thofe whofe Baptifm is uncertain , [ If thou be not Baptized, I Baptise thee^\ and fo would fay, [Be- ing uncertain whether my Infant Baptifm be va- lid , If it be not I now receive that which is J And when they have fitisfied their confciences, WDuld live quietly in the Love and communi- on of the Church J Who would not receive them, though we approve not of their way ?
tf. 30. And were it in my power as a Paftor of the Church , I would give fatisfa&ion by fuch an anfwerable profeflion as this.
ic £ Though it be our judgement that Infants uhave ever been members of Gods vifible Church, " fince he had a Church and there were Infants " in the world, and do believe that thrift hath "fignified in the Gofpel that it is his gractdus "will that they lhould ftill be fo - And that c< he that commanded, Mat. 28. 19. [_ Go ye and ^Difciple all Nations 'Baptizing thcm~} would <c have his Minifters endeavour accordingly to "do it, and hath hereby made Baptifm the re- gular orderly way of folemn entrance into a *c vifible Church ftate •, and therefore we devote " this child ro God in the Baptifmal Covenant : <c Yet we do alfo hold, that when he cometh ic to age , it will be his duty as ferioufly and u devoutly to make this Covenant with God " underftandingly himfelf , and to dedicate him- " felf to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft,
e>30
H as thofe mull do that never were Baptized in ic Irifancie : And we promife to endeavour faith- C4 fully as we have opportunity, to inftrud: and "perfwade him fo to do , hoping that this fi his early Baptifmai dedication , and obligati- <c on to God will rather much prepare him for "it, than hinder it.
<$. 31. Me thinks rhefe Profeffions fhouidput off the chief matter of offence and exception againft each other , as to the ill consequents of our opi- nions ? And if fober good men would by fuch a mutual approach, be the more difpofed to live to- gether in love and holy peace, how eafilyfhould I bear the fcorns of thofe Formalifts that will reproach me for fo much as motioning [ a Peace with the Anabaftifls , even in the fame Commu- nion ! 1 Who by making it a reproach will but perfwade me, that fuch as they are lefs wor- thy jof Chriftian Communion than fober, pious, and peaceable Anabaptiftu
£. 32. And if with the partial fort of them- felves fuch motions of Peace be turned into mat- ter of contempt , and they proceed in their clamours and reviling of me, as an enemy of the truth, for being againft their way, I fhall account it no wonder nor matter of much provo- cation, finding in all Seds as well as theirs, that the injudicious fort are apt to be abufively cen- forious, and the more mens Pride, Ignorance and uncbaritablenefs remain, the more they will fwell into felf-conceit , ^nd trouble the Church with a miftaking wrangling hurtful fore of zeal.
f 232)
£. 33. And as I muft needs believe as ill of {ome fort of Zeal as St. James hath fpoken of it, Jam. 3. and experience hath too long told the world of it ; yet I take it for truly amiable in men , that they have a love and Zeal for Truth in general, and a hatred to that which they think to be againft it 5 and that their bit- ternefs againft the truth and me, is upon a fup- pofition that both are againft the truth and God j for this beareth them witnefs that they have a zeal of God, though it be not according to Know- ledge • and if they knew truth indeed, they would be zealous for it,
$. 34. I conclude with this notice to the con- trary minded,that the evidence for Infants Church- memberfhip fecmeth to me fo clear, both in na- ture and in Scriprure , that I bid them de- fpair of ever perfwading me againft it : But if they will have any hope of changing my judge- ment, it muft be by confejfing the vtfible Church- memberjhip of Infants , and proving that yet they are not to be baptised ,and that Baptifm was appointed for initiating none but adult con- verts , and, not to be the common entrance into the £hurch : which yet I thinkthey canneverdo, while the plain Law of Chrift Mat. 29. 19. and the expofition of theuniverfal Church, doth ftand on record to confute fuch an opinion / But here they have more room for adifpute.
£. 35. But ( though I expeft to be cenfured for it ) I will fay onc^ ( becaufe truth is truth ) that though Rebaptix-ing and Reordaining are juftly both condemned by the ancient Churches ,
and
and pronounced alike ridiculous by Gregory Mag* Lib.i.Ep* IndiB. u. c.46. and many others • yet were men Re baptized but for Certainty to them- felves or to the Church , and to quiet their con- tinences , and on fuch terms as in my Chriflian DireBory I have {hewed that a feeming Reor- dination might in fome cafes be tolerated, and would not wrong Infants , nor make it an occafi- on of divifion or alienation ^ I know not by any Scripture or reafon that fuch Rebaptizkig is fo heinous a fin , as fhould warrant us to contemn our brethren : No though it were as faulty as the oft commemorative baptizing ufed by the sAbaj- fines.
CHAR
(*34)
—^ — , — jMJl — ! 1 — i —
CHAP. III. tA General Viewof\Axf Danvers book^
$' l * TV /T^' danvers book is entitled * Trea* 1V1 f#/i of Baptifm^ in which he giveth us the Hiftory of Infant and Adult Baptifm out of Antiquiiy , as making it appear that Infant Baptifm was not pra&ifed for 300 years (in his fecond edit, it is [_ near 300. ) And in his Ap- fend. ed. 2.£ / cannot find that it was pratti- fed upon any till the fourth Century :~] And he giveth us a Catalogue of witneffes againft it. By which thofe that hold their Religion on the belief of fuch mens words , will conclude that all this is true, and that Infant Baptifm is a Novel- ty , and thofe that are againft it do go the old and Cat ho lie k^rv ay,
$. 2. Having perufed his teftimonies on both fides, I am humbled and afhamed for the dul- nefs of my heart, that doth not with floods of companionate tears lament the pittiful condition of the feduced , that muft be thus deceived in the dark j and of the Churches of Chrift that muft be thus afTaulted , and fhaken; and diftra- ded , by fuch inhumane horrid means : The booK being compofed , in that part of hiftory which the ftrefs of the caufe lyeth on, of fuch UNTRUTHS m fatl and hiftory, as I pro- fefs it one of my greateft difficulties to know how to call them. Should I fay , that they are
fo
fo notorious and fhamelefs , as that ( I fay sot only a Papift, ) but any fober Turk or Pagan fHould blufh to have been guilty but of fome page or lines of them, and much more a man of any tendernefs of confcience , the Readers would think that the language were harfh, were it never fo true , and fome would fay , Let us have [oft words and hard arguments J. And fhould I not tell the Reader the truth of the c*fe, I might help to betray him into too much fearlefncfs of his bait and fnare, and I doubt I may be guilty of untruth by concealing the^j/*- iity of his untruths : And it is not matter of Argument , but faB that I am fpeaking ok
JS. 3. But it pleafeth that God whofe coun-^ fels are unfearchable , as to permit five parts of the Earth to remain yet grangers unto Chriil, fo to permit his Church to be fo tryed and dt- ftraded between Church Tyranny, and dividing Reparations , Setts and parties, as that in many ages it hath not been eafie to know which of them was the more pernicious.
£.4. And it mult grieve every confcionable and difcerning lover of Truth and Peace, to ob- ferve how. thefe two Church-difturbing parties, do by their extremities of opposition, increafe as well as exafperate each other : As the Ithaci- an Prelates did by the Prifcillianifts , and the Trifcillianifls by them. The Pride , covetouf- nefs, dead formality, and cruel violence of Cler- gie Tyrants maketh the poor Se&arics think that they muft go fofar from them, till they have loft thetnfelves and know not where they are ^
and
(236)
and as Mr. Danvers mufters up a catalogue of my fayings in his mode and drefs , which feem ugly to the poor man that thinks he feeih Antichriftianity in fuch G off el and natural truths which he underftandeth not , ( Like that melan- choly perfon, who thinks fhe feeth Spiders upon every one that comes near her , and they muft brufh them off before fhe can converfe with them , though fhe be c&tera fana ) j fo thofe on the other extream think them fo fanatick, and almoft mad , that they are apt to fufped eve- ry word almoft that they fay, of madnefs, and fometimes thereby injure the truths of the Gof- pel, and foberer people, that partake not of their guilt , and fo fay of fuch as agree with them but in aliquo tertio, They are all alike,
tf. 5. This was the main caufe which made St Martin feparate from his neighbour Bifhops, and deny communion with them to the death : Becaufe their perlecution of the Frifcillianifis had fo animated the loofer fort againft ftrid Reli- gious people , that they had brought men un- der the fufpicion of PrjfcilUanifm, , if they did but faft,and pray, and read and talk of the Scripture. It's eafie to fee of late who they are that have done the like,
£. 6. When this fort of men fee the weaknefs of the Sectaries , and the bold-faced falfhood which fuch as Wir.Ddnverj obtrude on the world, and hear them furioufly revile what they under- ftand not,it maketh them think that they are fitter for Bedlam than for humane focietie : And their consciences juftifie them for all the cruelties that
they
they ufe againft cither them , or rtiore innocent perfons, whom in their ignorance and uncharita- blenefs they number with them.
f. 7. And on the like account when they read and hear their erroneous Do&rines, and hear their incongruous words in prayer , they think " they can never be too ftrid in (hackling them and all others in prefcribed forms : And nothing quieteth their Confciences in all this fo much, as the undeniable errors , and follies and mifcarria- ges of thofe that thus provoke them.
£. 8. But in this the Church in Auguftines days did not think that way the wifeft cure : when he faith \_ Ajferat^ ut fieri folet, aliquant frecem in qua loquatur contra regulam fidei ( multi quifft irrmnt in freces non folum ab imferitis lequaci- bwy fed etiam ab h&reticis comfofitas, & fer ig- worantia fimflicitatem non eas valentes difcerne* re7 muntur iti> arbitr antes quod bona fint : ) Nee tamen quod in eis ferverfum eft evacuat ilia que ibi reQa funt -5 fed tib eis fotim evacuatur ] Aug. de bapt. cont. Donau f as I remember about lib. 5. c. 11.) O truly charitable and peaceable Doctrine ! And he that will feparate from other for every difference ( or real error ) in Doctrine or Prayers, fliall have enow to feparate from bim.
#. 9. I know nothing that fo much multiplieth Sectaries as the notorious mifcarriages of Church- Tyrants that oppofe them : And I know no- thing, next carnal intereft it felf , that fo much tnultiplieth and confirmeth Papifts and Church- Tyrants , as the madnefs of the Sectaries • The
wildenefs,
(238)
Wildenefs , but efpecially the diverfity of theii* opinions, hath done more to increafethe number of Papifts among us than any thing that ever the Papifts themfelves could otherwife fay for their caufe ; For people fee fo many giddy with turn- ing round, and fee fo many Seels among us, that they are confounded, and know not which to be of • but they rauft lay hold of fomewhat that is more ftable, or be wheel-lick,
$. io. O what a confirmation is it to a Papift to find fuch a one as Mr. Danvers calling Gods Truths and Ordinances Antichriftian I Yea, our very Baptifmal Covenant and dedication to Chrift is Antichriftian, and the chief Fathers and Mar- tyrs of the Church are Antichriftian/ ( no won- der if I be fo. ) And I doubt almoft all the Church of Chrift for 900 years, at leaft in this mans recko- ning. And what will the Papifts defire more > With what fcorn will they deride fuch men ? Wo be to him by whom offence cometh. The chief Quakers are charged by Mr. Faldo and others (even fome of their own name ) of denying the perfonand office of Chrift himfelf: It is worth the enquiring whether they rejed him not as An- tichrift, and call not Chriftianky by the name of Antichriftianity ?
CHAP,
(*39)
C H A P. I V.
Of Mr* Danvcrs^ his Witneffes againft Infant- Baptifm*
£• u "\T7*Hen ne hath told you, that In his VV "fmaUfearch f fhamefuliy fmall) " he cannot find there is any authentick teftimony "that it was pra&ifed on any till the fourth Cen- <c tury •, he in the next words faith that it is grant- ed that Tertullian fpake againftit in Africa , " which is clear evidence that fome had been " fpeaking for it in that corner of the world : ]] This is no contradiction with him : And did they only Jpeak^ for it and not pratlffe it i Speak once like a man : And was not that till the fwrth Century t
^. 2. His Catalogue containeth three Columns : The firft of the Baptifm of the Adult : And what Chriftian ever denied this ? And what meaneth the man in labouring to prove it? The fecond is of the Inftituting and afferting of Infant-Baptifm ; of which more anon. The third is of his Witneffes againft Infant-Baptifm. And the fir ft of thefe mentioned in the Catalogue is Tertnllian in the third Century. By which he feemeth to confefs that till the third Century he hath no wknefs againft it. But I have faid fo much elfewhere and others more, to prove, i. That Tertnlli- ans words prove that Infant-Baptifm de fafto was then in ufe j 2. That he only telleth his opi- nion
C*4o)
hion of the point of convenience , but concluded riot againft Infant-Baptifm as unlawful 5*3. That it is moll probable he fpeaketh of the Infants of Heathens • 4. That he fpeaketh from that ftritt fingulartty which made him plead alfo for the *JMontanifts Fanaticifm, and againft fecond rtoar- riages, and for his inordinate faftings, &c. as a man differing from the Churches and numbered with the Hereticks (though I think him a learn- ed Godly man. ) And I refer it to the Readers judgement whether in my book of Infant-Baptifm
I have not proved by many other words in Ter- tullian that he was not againft all Intant-Baptifra, but for it among Chriftians.
£. 3. His next and great Witnefs is the Doha- tifts together. This is fomething, were it true : but it is fuch a kind of falfhood as I muft not name in its due epithets, left you think me over- friar p.
a $. 4. His words are £ Donatus a learned man u in Africa taught that they fhould baptize no
II Children but only that believed and defired "it.]
Anfw. Utterly falfe : And how doth he prove it ? By Sebafi. Frank, whom I will not fearch to fee whether he fay fo or not. Reader, if the queftion be, what was done, faid or held by thou- fands of men twelve hundred years ago, and the Writings of them and their Adverfaries were ex- tant, and the Hiftories written of them in that and the next Ages, would you have a man pafs by all proof fromthefc, and tell you what a fellow of his own opinion faith eleven hundred years af- ter?
ter } He brings us with great oftentationthe.D/tfc/? Avabaptifis Martyrologie and fnch like Hiflorie^ of a few years old, of fellows that knew little more than as he doth, what their Party or Com- panions told them, cr what they iguorantly ga- thered from fuch Books as are yet to be feen by us as well as by them. If Ifhould difpute what Augn~ flim held, would Mr. D. fetch his proofs from the writings of James Nailor, or George Vox, or Jfaac Pennington, yea or Mr. Tombes to prove his afTertions, while Augufiines works are at hand to be feen ?
. cc ^. 5. So next, he faith [that the followers of cc D mat us were ail one wLh the Anabapdfts, de- " nying Baptiim to Children, admitting the Be* "lievers only thereto who defired the fame J And be citeth one called ( Twisk*
Anfxv. Utterly falfe ; They held no fuch thing. £.6. His next proof is indeed from an unque- ftionable witnefs * he faith u \_ Augufiines third " and fourth Books againft the Donarifts do de- <c monftratc that they denied Infant-Baprifm , <c wherein he manageth the argument for Infant- u Baptifm againft them , with great zeal, enfor- cc cing it by feveral arguments, but efpecially from cc Apoftolical Traditicn , and curfing with great: <{ bitternefs they that fhould not embrace if.
£.7. Anfw. Mr. Bag flaw is now quite ovef- done in the quality of untruths : Reader , either this man had feen and read the Books of An-
J gttftine mentioned by him, or he had not. If not , doth he ufe Gods Church and the
■ fouls of poor ignorant people with any cender-
R ■ ners
(242)
nefs of Confidence, fobriety or humanity , to talk at this rate of Books, that he never faw or read, which are fo common among us to be feen ? If he underftand not Latine , how unfit is he to give us the Hiftory of thefe antiquities > And how audacious to talk thus of what he know- eth not ? If he underftand it, what cruelty is it to the Church to venture on fuch untruths to fave him the labour of opening and reading the books he talketh of? But if he have read them% then I can fcarce match him again among all the falfifiers that I know in the world ^ 1 dare not be fo uncha- ritable to him as to think that ever he read them. $• 8. The Books are feven that Auguftine wrore of Baptifm againft the Donatifts : And in them all I cannot find one fyllable of intimation that ever the Donatifts denied Infant- Baptifm, but enough to the contrary that they did not : Nor do the third and fourth books mentioned by him meddle with it any more than the reft : There is not in the feven books nor in all the reft of Au- flins books againft the Donatifts, one word that I can find , of any fuch controverfie with them at all : And for a man to fay that in two bookj he managcth the arguments for Infant - Baptifm againft them with great zealy &c. when there is not one word that fuppofeth them to deny it , blufh Reader in companion for fuch a man. «- £. o. Reader, the Donatifts were a great par- ty of men in Africa : They were Prelatical and for Ceremonies as the other Churches were : They differed from the reft on the account of the Perfonal fncce^ion . of their Bifhops. In a
time
time of petfecution they faid ( tfuly or falfly was a great controverfic ) that one of the Bifhops de- livered up the Church-books to the Perfecutors , 10 be burnt, rather than die himfelf, when they demanded them ; And that the Catholick Bifhops received fucceffively their ordination from that man , and called them Traditores 5 whereas the Bifhop that all their Biflwps had fucceffively been ordained by, was one that had refufed to deliver up the Church-books j And confequently he was the right Bifhop, and they that had their fuccef- fion from him were true Bifhops and Churches , and all the reft were no true Bifhops or Churches * and therefore that all their Baptifmand Sacra- ments were nullities , and their Communion un- lawful, and that all people were bound in Confci- ence as ever they would be faved to feparare from the reft ( called Catholicks ) and to come to them and to be rebaptized. So that their Schifm was much like the Papifts, who confine the Church to their party, and condemn all others, fave that the Papifts (ordinarily) rebaptize not ( though they fay fome Monks have done it, aselfewhere I have cited.) The Donatifts were Epifcopal ceremonious Separates, that did it on the account, of a purer Epifcopal fuccefiom Till their days the holy Do- dors of the Church had almoft all been againft drawing the fword againft Hereticks, even Align- ftin himfelf. But the greatnefs of their party and the proud conceit of their greater zeal "ancl ftri&nefs than the Catholicks had, made them fo furious that the Catholick Paftors could not live quietly by them. Infomuch that fome of them
R z wounded
wounded the Minifters in the ftreets, and fdfrie of them made a fait fliarp water and fpouted into Minifters eyes as they paft the ftreet, to put out their eyes j till many fuch infolencics provoked Augufim to change his judgement of toleration , (and efpecially the multitudes feduced by them, ) and the Bifhops to crave the Emperors aid : The Emperor made Edicts for mulcts and banifhment to thofe that perfevered : This ( being a new way ) fo exafperated the Donatifts, that in very pafljon many of them ( yea Bifhops ) murdered themfelves to bring odium on the Catholicks, to make the people believe that the cruelty of the Catholicks compelled'' them to it : And this was the flat e of thefe two parties -9 but not a word of difference about Infant-Baptifm between them tlftt ever I read in either part.
p, 10. The Controverfie between Anfiin and them he thus ftateth ; Lib. I. c. i, 2. Si haberi foris fotefly etiam dari l:ur non poteft f Baptifm received out of the Catholick, or true Church among Schifmaticks is true baptifm : and there- fore baptifm given without by Schifmaticks is true baptifr/t,
" Impie facer e qui rebaptiz^are conantur crbis " unit at em ^ & nos retle facere qui Dei Sacra- <c menta improbare , nee in ipfo fchifmate aude- <c mtu ; They do impioufly that endeavor to re- <c baptize all the united Chriftian world, and we " do lightly who dare not deny Gods Sacraments, <c no not in a Schifm. ] For Aagufiin peaceably held the Donatifts baptifm to be true and valid though irregular and unlawfully given and. taken,
but
(245) but the Donatifts held all the Ouholicks, Mini- ftry and baptifm null.
£. u. Therefore he thus fummeth up their dif- ferences, cap. 3. Duo flint qua, dicimns , & ejfs in Catholica Baptifmum, & ilUc. tantun rcVte ac- dpi : Item alia duo dicimus , ejfe apud Donatio ft as baptifmnm -, non ant em re tie acetyl : Hamm fententiamm tres noftra t ant urn font, unam vera Htrique dicimm.~\ That is, <c[Two things ws "fay, that there is Baptifm in the Catholick " Church, and that there only it is rightly recei- cc ved : Alfo two things more we fay, that there " is Baptifm with the Donatifts . but that with " them it is not rightly received : of thefe fen- <c fences,, three are only ours, and one is com- <c mon to us both : ] Ah ft in held it a fin , to be baptized among Schifmaticks, ( to joyn with their Sect ) but not a nullity.
£. 12. Hereufon he addreffethhimfelfto evince the firifulnefs of their Schifm and unchriftianing all the Churches : And indeed he feenn; to think that though Baptifw was among them> yet hardly Salvation: And his argument (though I think we rnuft abate for mens pajfions and temptations) is worth the Scparatifts confederation : that baptifm that deftroyetb (. remitt'eth he calls it ) not fin , is not [aving: that which is without Uve remit nth not fin : But Schifmaticks , faith he, have net love: For, Nulli Schifm at a facer ent fi fra- terno odio non txeaedfentur : Anno'n eft in Schif- mate odium f rate-mum ? Qnts hoc dixerit ? Cum .& origo & pertinacia Schifmatis nulla fit alia mfi odium f rater nurt\~\ That is, Cc None M'o'utd
R 3 un*'ks
(MO
ff make fchifms if they were not blinded by the t£ hatred of their brethren: Is there not the ha- ci tred of brethren in Schifm .? What man will fay " fo ? Whenas both the Rife and the Pertinacie Cc of Schifm is no ocher than the hatred of bre- thren. ] But blind zeal will not let men know their own hatred , when yet they defame their brethren as no brethren , and endeavour to have all others' thinly them fn bad as not to be commu~ nicated mthy and feparate from them on that ac- count.
£.13. The main fubjed: of all the reft of thefe feven Books of Anfiin is to anfwer the Donatifts claim of Cyprian and his Carthage Council as on their fide- and to anfwer all the layings of him. and the feveral Bifhops of that Council. The plain truth is this : In the firft age the Churches were fo fober and charitable ast not to account every erring brother and party Hemicks, but fuch as fubverted the EfTentLls of Religion : And fome of thefe corrupted the very form of Baptifm s The baptifm of thefe the Church took for null, and baptized fuch as they pretended to have ba- ptized. Cyprian and the other African Bifhops knowing this, and being much troubled with he- retical Churches about them , ftretched this too far and rcbapiized them that fuch Hereticksbapti- zed as did not change the form of Baptifm , but incorporated men into their corrupt focieties : The Donatifts took advantage by this example and all the Reafons of the Council, to go fo much further as to take the Catholickj for Heretic^* or unlawful Churches 7 and rHJ*ptiz,e thofe that
they
C247) they baptized : Auflin anfwereth all the Councils reaions , but praifeth Cyprian as a holy Martyr, and no Heretick ihough miftaken.
£. 14. And if is noc enough for me to fay that all thele Books of Aufltn have not a word of what he fpeaketh, as controverting Infant -Baptifm with the Donatifls, but moreover, he bringeth the Do- natifts agreement with the Catholicks in the point of Infant-Baptifm , as a medium in his arguing againft them, Lib. 4. c. 23. (hewing how much baptifm availeth, in that Chrifl himfelf would be baptised by a fervant , and Infants that cannot them fe Ives believe are baptized " f" Quod tradi- cctum tenet univerfitas Ecclefia cum parvuli In- u fames baptizantur qui nondum pojjunt corde ere- <c dere ad juflitiam & ore confiteri ad.falutem , u quod latro potuit : Quinetiam flendo & vagien- ic do cum ineis myfterium celebratury ipfis wyfiicis <c vocibus obflrepunt ^ & tarr.en NuIIm Chriftia- ." nits dixcrit eos inaniter baptizari. ] That is, £ Which all the * fourch holdeth when little Infants are bapti- * Including the Do- zed> who certainly cannot yet natifh. with the heart believe to righ- teoufnef and with the mouth confefi to Salvation : And yet no foriftian will fay that they are ba- ptized in vain, ] .
Thus he argueth againft the Donatifls , If the whole Church hold Infant-Baptifm, andnoChri- ftiau will fay that it is in vain, though ihey them- felves believe not and confef s not, then you fhonid not fay all baptifm is vain becaufe we Catholicks adminifter it, or becaufe it is received in our
R 4 Churches.
Churches. The whole tenor of Aafiins charita- ble language to the Donatifts , and the fcope of this place fheweth, that he here pleaded umver? falcon ferity and by '[all the Church^ and [~ no Chrifiian J inciudech the Donatifts. And to he oft argueth againft the Pelagians, who though they denied original fin, durft not differ from the whole Chriitian world by denying Infant- baptifm, but pretended that it was for the convey- ance of Grace, though not for remitting fin.
tf. 15. And Aitfttn next addeth \_ht ft quif- *quam m hac re author it at em divinam qiurat ( Qmnquam quod waiver fa tenet Ecciefia , nee Concilia infinitum ^ fed femper retentum eft, non nifi authoritate Apoflolica traditum rcilijfime cre- ditur i tarnen veraciter conjicere poffumiu, &c. ~\ That is, Cc [ And if any one in this cafe ( of In* f* fant-baptifm) ask^for Divine authority (Though u that which the univ erf d (or whole ) Church <c doth hold , and was not mfituted by Councils cc but was ever held, is mo ft rightly Relieved to iibe delivered by the Apo files authority) yet we may truly con'jeVcare , &c. ( and fo he paueth to the Scripture argument from Circumcificn. )
$. 16. Here note, 1. That this was no contro- vcrfie with the Donatifts, 2. Norwich any other Setl9 but held by all the. Church, 3. That he only faith as in a Patfefithfem that [that which all the whole Church holdcth, and did ever hold, not in- fiituted by any Council, is jiift'y talzen for an Apoftclical tradition , ] which I think k\v Pro- tectants or fober Christians will deny. Who can imagine that Timothy 3 Titm , &'/^ anq all the
whole
(249) jwfoole Church in the Apoftles daies and ever fincc, ihould hold and agree in any thing as a part of (fhriftian Doflrine or Worfhip, which they had not from the Apoftles ? Had the Apoftles fo lit- tie charity as not to endeavour to re&ifie any of their errors? 4, Note here that the Donatifts ne- ver denied this (that Infant-baptifm vpas ever held by the whole Church to that day , and not inftitutsdby any Council: ) And were not Auftin, the Donatifts and the whole Church liker to know the universality and Antiquity of the thing, fhan the Holland or Englifti Anabaptifts about fourteen hundred years after them ? 5. Note that he bringeth Scripture for it alfo,
$, 17. Indeed I find fome that before thofe times had been above Ordinances and again ft all fraptifm^ but none againft Infant-bapttfm as un- lawfuLTheretorc Auguftine faith elfewhere,that it is e after to find Heretic kj that deny all baptifm, than' any that change the form of baptising • fo fure haih the Tradition of univerfal practice de- livered down the form and words of baptifm to us.
$. 18. Afterward fag, 230 Ed. 2, Mr. Dan- vers corner^ to ts4uftin again , and faith thac Vtncentias Killer did oppofe Auftin in the point of Infant-baptifm y citing Auguft. li. 3. C, 14.de Anirna.
An fa* Not a word of truth : no fuch matter in that Chaprer or the whole book0
$. 10. Next he faith Cc f Crefconius did alfo u oppofe Auftin in the point of Infants baptifm^ and 71 did maintain — that there w<u no true irk-
m
(250) €c ptifm but that which adminiflred after faith.
Anfw. Utterly falfe ftill. There was no fuch controverfie between them. No wonder if he had mifcited fentences that will thus go to falfifie whole Books, as fpeaking of that which they ne- ver meddle with I Auguftine having written againft Tetilian ( their beft (peaker, having of a Lawyer been made a Biftiop ) Crefconins a Donatift Gram- marian interpofed for Tetilian , and perfwaded Auftin to gentler thoughts of them ; but fpeaks not a word againft Jnfant-baptifm.
$. 20. Nay, lib. 3. cap* 31. Auftin tells us that they held it as well as the Catholicks -. faith he, £ Circumcifionem certe praputii in figura f atari baptifmi {hrifti ab antiquis obfervatum ejfe , ne- gare, at arbitror^ non audetis : That is, " lfup- " pofe yoa dare not deny that Circumcifton was u obferved by the ancients in figure of the Chri- €6ftian baptifm.~] It was a granted thing.
£. 21. And it was Crefcomus words to Auftin [[ Vna Religio^ eadem SacY amenta, nihil in Chri- ftiana obfervatione diver fum : & adhuc adverfm invicem labor amm ? Saith Auftin, jQuare ergo re- baptists Chriflianum ? Ego non rebaptiz.0 ; that is, tc £ We have all one Religion, the fame Sacra- " ments, there is nothing in our Chriftian obfer- tc vat ion divers (faith Crefconins) And yet do cc we ftrive againft each ether ? Why then do ft iC thou rebaftiz^e a. Chriftian ( that diifereth not "from them? ) / rebapti^e no Chriftian, (faith lc Auftin,) So that here was no disagreement in Sacraments or any Chriftian observance. Only as Auftin faith lib, 7. de bapt, c. 2, the quarrel
was
fas that the Cathalicks were charged to beTra- Stores quia ex traditoribtu, the fucceffors of [in- ner s\ Thus being -wife and righteous overmuch did tear and almoft mine the Churches.
£. 22. " He addeth, fag. 223. Ed. 2. the fay- ccing ofOfiander, Fuller , Bulltnger, that the Do-' ic natifts and the Anabaptifts held the fame opini-
"ons?
Anfw. 1. In what > In all things or fome ? that is, in the point of Rebaptizing ferfons before baptized ( do you own that indeed ? ) But not as being againft Infant -baptifm. 2. So, many Pre- lacies have called the Puritans Donatifts^ and abundance of Proteflants lay that the Papifts fuc- ceed the Donatifts in approbating the Church to their party. Do not write next that they fay the Papifts are againft Infant -baptifm, left you make your f elves Antichriftian alfo.
£.23. Reader, the Donatifts were fo great a party of men and had fo great a number of Bi- flops, and fo many wrote againft them whofe works are yet extant, and their caufe had fo ma- ny pub lick, examinations , that I leave it to thee if thou have the brains of a man, to judge whe- ther if they had been againft Infant -b apt ifm in a time when Auftin faid no Chriftian denied it, neither Optatus, nor Auftin , nor any other of their moil copious oppofers would ever* have charged them with fuch an opinion, nor any ex- aminers , Councils or Hiftorians of their ages j even when the Catalogues of .hereticks unhappi- ly took in fo many little matters as they did, and made hereticks' fome more and worfe than
they
they were? And now if JobnBecold will fay they were of his fide, we muft believe him,
f. 24. His dealing with the Novatians is the fame or worfe : He feared not in the face of the Sun, to write that the Novatians oppofed Infant- baptifm, and numbreth them alfo with his party. When it is afalfhood as much aggravated as thefe particulars import. 1. They were an honeftand numerous people , and fcattered almoft all over the Empire •, tolerated till Innocents time in Rome, and long tolerated and much favoured by many Emperors and Patriarchs in Conftantinople , be- cause fas Socrates faith ) they agreed in Do- ctrine with the Catholicks : And could they have denied Infant-baptifm , and not be accuied of it ? 2. They had many bitter enemies that would foon have caft this in their teeth. 3. Many Councils had to do with them, where multitudes had op- portunity to accufe them. 4. They were an an- cient Sed, arifing even in Cyprians time, and long continued : And in fo many generations it would have been known. 5. They are put in the Catalogues of many Herefiographers that are keen enough , and none of them ( that ever I tound ) accufe them of any fuch thing ; No not f.piphaniiu himfelf, who is moll copious, and not very backward to accufe. . And fhall either John of Ley den or any of his party now in the end of the world perfvvade us , by flandering fo many thoufands of innocent men, that they were guil- ty ? And' can Mr. Banvers now tell us that they held that which for a thoufand years hath Iain unknown }
<\ 25. He
(253)
'§. 2$. He citeth Socrates, L 7. c. 9. that In- nocent banifhed them out of Rome,
Anfw. Elfewhere indeed Socrates and many more fay fo : But doth that prove they were againft Infant- baftifm ?
£.20'. Somewhat he would fain fay at the fe* cond hand out ofAlbajpinatu, Obferv* 20. I hope he never read the book : Albafyin&m there pur* pofely decideth the Controverfie, what the Nova- tian Herejie was , in feveral Chapters 3 and ne- ver mentioneth any fuch opinion or fajpicion of them. The fame doth that great Antiquary Je- fuit Veiavius *, ( and what thefe two men knew not of the Fathers and Church-hiftory, few in the world knew, unlefs I may except JBlondel and Vfter:) In his notes on Efifhanim of the No- vatians , he entreth on the fame Comroverlie as Albajpinam did, arid never mentioneth any fuch thing.
f. 27. Next he tells us that " Ecbertus andEmz- " ricus do ajfert that the Waldenfes I the new Ca" ic thariy conform to the Dottrine and manners of the u old \ the Nov at i an s.
Anfw. But did they fay that the Novatians were againft Infant -Baftifm} Why did you cite neither words, page nor Book? And if they had, fhould two railing ilanderous Papifts near a thou- fand years after Novatian be taken for witnefTes that he was againft Ik f ant-baft ifa againft: all the Hiftory of the Church that concerneth them to the contrary? Socrates himfelf (an honeft Hifterian ) and Sozj>men aifo are ordinarily by the Papifts ac- cused as' Novatians, becaufe they fpeak fairly and
impar*
( »54J
imprtiaily of them as honeft meni ( and whether they were or not I know not, but by their own words conje&ure the contrary ) And they lived when and where the Novatians were beft known ; And yet tell us not a fyllable of any fuch fufpi- cion of them.
£. 28. Next he faith, Perin faith that the WaU denies were the off-jpring of the Novations, dri- ven out of Rome about Anno 400.
Anfw. It is very probable : Therefore the WaU denfes were not againft Infant-bapttfm. For it is certain the Novatians were not : And the fame Perin faith the Waldenfes were not. But if they had, would that prove that the Novatians were , feven hundred or eight hundred years before ?
£.29. fsiext he citeth as Cajfanders reafon againft him that the Donatifts were for Infant- baptifm , the fixth Council of Carthage, faying that £ All that returned from the Donatifts (hould be received into the Catholick Qwrch without rebaptization though baptized in Infancy, ] and faith , "[It is but afuppofttion at beft that they "might be baptized in Infancy or they might not, <c and can fignifie nothing againft all the former Ci evidence. J And is it not fhame and pity that fo publick matters of fad muft be handled at this rate } What is his former evidence but fuch as humane nature may blufh at, to find that one call- ed a man and a Chriftian, and too good for the communion of fuch as we , (hould be guilty of ? And why talketh he of this one reafon againft him in fo publick a matter of Hiftory ? as if he knew not what abundance more may eafily be
pro-
produced , if it were of any need ? And how fhamefully are^ thefe plain words of a Council put off, as if all the Bifliops that lived in the fame time and Countrey with them knew not what the Donatifis hold, fo well as he and fuch as he?
£. 30. His next witneffes are [ the ancient Britain that having received the Chrifiian do- Urine and worjhip from the Apo files times did
intirely keep thereto whom Auftin the Monk*
would have engaged [ ejpecially in Chrifiening children and keeping Eafter> but in afmuch as they utterly refused to be [educed by him there- in &c.
Anfw. This is a witnefs ( being fuch a body
of witneffes ) of great importance fas that o£
the Donatifis and Novatians was ) if it were
true : But it's all falfe ftill : And muft our own
Countrey , yea all our Chrifiian Anceftors be
thus flandered ? Whether Britain received the '
Chrifiian do&rine and worfhip from the Apo*
files time ( if he mean in that time ) is very
doubtful and nothing to our bufinefs : we have
no fufheient proof of any fuch thing : The Reafox
of the cafe maketh me conjecture that Chriftia-
nity was firft brought hither by Soldiers, of the
Roman Legions ; especially fince I read in TSeda
that the firft Temple I find any mention of was
built at or near Canterbury by fuch Soldiers.
But who ever brought it, it's like they were of
the Afian and not the Roman opinion , fwhe-
ther Soldiers that had been in the ACian Legions,
or who elfe, is not known ) and it is certain
that
that they were not againft the obfervition of Eafter : For both they and the Scots that con- curred with them againft the. Romans , did ftri- dly keep it t But all the tmeilion was of the due time* ■'- ,
$. 31, Nor is there the leaft proof or pro- bability that they were againft Infant Baptifm, i. Becaufe Auguftine the Monk that quarrel- led with them, never chargeth them- with it, in his Ep. to Gregory or to themfelves. 2. Beda that was downright againfi them, and a Roman zealot j and the ancienteft Writer after aAtiftins time, and lived in the fame Comtry with them$ and knew them , and defcribeth all the contefis with them, yet never layeth any fuch thing to their charge - when yet he ntentioneth the Re- btptizjng of One by Bijhop John, becaufe it fras an ignorant inefficient man -for the Pried- hood, thit Baptized him • and this a rare inftance.
3. The Beets that about Eafter and other con- trarieties to the Romans, were of the Britains mind , and refufed fo much as to eat with the Romans , yet are charged with no fuch thing.
4. And the controverfie continued for above an hundred years after Auftins time, and great ftir and meetings and difputes were about it, as Bcdd tells us at large, before the Scots were changed : And in all that time , there would have been opportunity for their forward adverfaries ( efpe- cially Wilfrid, afterward St .Boniface ofMentz, who was the Chief ) to have found out this matter of accufation. 5. None of the hiftorians near following thofe times do charge any fuch
thing
057) thing on them. And yet were the old Britain? againft Infant -Baptifm ?
£.32. But to put all out of doubt take the words of Anftin to them in his three demands thus by Beda recorded , Eccl. Hill. li. 2. c. 2. "_ Vt Vafcha fuo tempore celebretis •, ut sJMini- flerium ba$tiz.andi quo Deo renafcimur jttxta morem Rom& fantta Ecclefa, et Apofioltca Eccle- fi& compleatis •, ut genti Anglorum una nobifcum pradicetis verbum domini}. That is, cc £ i.That u yon celebrate Eafler at the due time ^ 2. That uye complcat the Miniftry of Baptifm by which <c we are born again toGod ^according to thefafhion cc(or manner) of the holy Church ofRome^and iC the csfpoftolical Qonrch. 3. That you Treach *c with m the word of God to the Englifli Na- tion}.
And what is here of Infant -Baptifm ? ^low proveth he that that was meant by the, Soman manner or fajliion of Baptizing ? Is th"e^ ' fubjelb of Baptifm, the Manner? when about the Man- ner indeed there were then fo many and different ceremonies ? Nay when above an hundred years before this Auflms dayes , a wifer Auftin had told the Donatifts, that the whole Church was agreed for Infant-Baptifm , and »o one Chriflian held it to be in vain ? fure this was not fo long I after , a Manner peculiar to Rome ? But thus j the honour of our Anceftors , and the hiftoryof ; the Church , and the fouls of poor ignorant Chriftians among us, mufl all be heinoufly wrong- ed by the falihoods of rafh prefuming ignorant men.
S f. 33-
(258)
£. 33» And if this had been as true as it is felfe f that the old Britains were againft Infant- Baptifm ) it would inform thefe men that k is not delaying Baptifm till riper age , that will keep it from formality, nor the Church from falling into all impiety : For if our eldeft hifto- rian Gildas may be believed (and who may if not he?) his Countrymen the Britains, were Princes, Priefts and People fallen to fuch abho- minable wickednefs , murder, drunkennefs, filthy lufts, deceit, theft , cruelty &c. that he takes the Princes for wolves and monfters , and the Priefts for no Priefts but traytors , ( excepting fpme good men among them ) &c. It is neither Infant not Adtdt Baptifm that will fecure againft the corrupting of Churches, but Grace with either hath faved fouls.
5f. 34. He cites himfelf hereF^v, quoting Be- da, Pclychron. and others. And what fay they ? £ Baptizing after the manner of Rome ~\ And what's that to his queftion ? But he tells you that Vabian faith £ that yon give Chriftendom to children f\ I have not fabian to examine : but if he do , when he knoweth that he is an empty fellow, of the other day as it were, and that he hath nothing but what cometh from Gregory^ and Beda ; and that in them there is no fuch thing : will a known falfification of a fabler about nine hundred years after , difprove the yet*vifi- ble words of the eldeft records , which undertake to give you not only the fen ft but the very terms >
£0 35. He proceedeth to prove by argument
that
that the Britains were again ft -Infant Ba~ ptifm.
I . Becanfe they received the Scriptures , the Chriftian Faith, Dolirine and, Difcipline from the Apoftles and Aiiatick Churches, who had no fuch thing as the Baptising of Infants among them $
Anfrv. No fuch thing in the Afiaticks Chur- ches ? He might as well fay, There is now no fuch thing in England. But perhaps hee'l fay- that he meaneth in the Apoftles time or foon after : Of which you have tryed part of his ftrength. But when he hath ftudied well Bifhop Vjhers Primordia who faith all that is to be faid for our Antiquity, he will find no proof that we had our Religion from the Apoftles or any in their time.
$i 36. But ask the man whether Afia it felf long before the dayes of Gregory had not Infant- Baptifm ? And whether they received not the Scriptures and Religion as certainly from the Afiatick, Churches, and fo from the Apoftles , as the Britains did ? And whether this will prove that at that time they were againft Infant- Baptifm? If nor, why .will it prove the fame of the Britains >
$. 37. His fecond Argument is [ Becaufc they fo fully prized and faithfully adhered to the Scri- pture, &c]
Anfw. What will not partiality fay ? 1. You
muft believe him that Scripture is Againft Jn-
fant-Baptifm : And then the coatroverfie is at
an end. 2. You muft believe hm how elofely
S 2 they
( i6o)
they adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you have read (fildas ( who is tranflated into En- glish J their neighbour , one of them, the only cer- tain hiftorian that knew them, who defcribeth them as I have faid, as moft flagitious heinous wicked men. Though I hope they amended after Gild as ciayes ,yet that (hewed you how they held to Apoftolick difcipline or Scripture. The book is fo very (mall ^ it is but equal to intreac him to read it before he ufe
* Itfeeiusby fome this argument again *. 3. You citations oik of it af- muft bu to tnat al] tnat: ter that he hath read . . ,, « .*•
it , and yet fpeaks Pnze and adhere to Scn- thus! pture are againft Infant -Ea~
pnfm. Read and .try whe- ther there be not greater evidence that Cyprian, Athanafim, Nazianzene, foryfoftome, Aisgaftine, the JEgyptian Monks, and other fuch ftrid per- fons in thofe ages, at leaft the Novatians , and Donatifis (in his own judgement) prized the - Scripture than the Brit aim $ And doth it fol- low ( in defpite of their own profeffions and pra- difes J that all thefe and the reft fuch,were agamfi Jpfant-TZaptifm I
£. 38. Were not this as good an argument ? Ltifher, Calvin j Zuingliui, Bradford, Hooper • all the Martyrs in Queen Maries dayes, &c. prized the Scriptures : Ergo they were all againft In- fant -Baprifm. Yea even Independents and Pref- hyterians and all that prize and cleave to them now in England ?
Jfo 39. 3. He addeth [_ucBecaufe they did fo "vehemently reje3 humane Traditiomin the \xor-
(i6l)
c< fl)ip of God • efpecially all Romijh Rites dnd cc Ceremonies ; this as before undeniably appear- cc ing to come from Romes ordination and ImpO" <c fit ton. J
Anfw. i. [Vndeniably] is a word thitjliameth you to every intelligent Reader that underftand-- eth Church hiftory. Will you not ccnfefs your felf that Cyprian and that Carthage Council, Naz.ianz.ene, BafiL) Auguftine &c. were for In- fant-Baptifm ? were all thefe Papifts, or Romans ? Can you prove any Roman Ordination of it be- fore all thefe ?
2. How know you that they fo vehemently rejected humane Traditions in the wo? flip of God ? Did they not ufe the Afiatick Ceremonies I Did they not precifely obferve Eafter , and place Re- ligion in keeping it on their own dayes ? Had they not Bifhops, and were they not Monks ? And do you gather by Gildas that they were fuch as you dream ? And did they not Plead Tradi- tion for their difference from Rome t
3. And were not the Scots then of their mind, and as much againft Traditions as they ? and more againft* vice and formality in and after Colmans and Colnmbanm dayes ? And are not the Independents more againft Traditions now than the Britains were ? And are they therefore Anabaptifls ?
$. 40. He addeth [ 4. " Becwife Conftantine " the Great (the fon 0/Conftance and the famous 1 c Helena , both eminent Chriftians ) in the yc> r u 305. was not Baptised till he was age % as be- J* fore. A clear proof that the Chrifi inns in Bri-
S 3 c:tain
*c tain in thofe dayes did not 'Baptize their chiU "drenj.
u4nfw. Some will laugh at thefe things, bui I had rather mourn for the poor peoples fnares. I. It's falfe that Con fiance was a Chriftian , at leaft when Con ft amine was young. No regarda- ble hiflory maketh him any better than a mode- rate favourer of the Chriftians. 2. It is not proveable that Helena was one in Conftantines Infancy. 3 . There is no probability that he was born in England, as many Learned men have proved. 4. It is certain he was educated and lived in other Lands. 5. He was no Chrifti- an in his youth himfelf, nor profefTed it till after he was Emperor : The fign of a Crofs appear- ing in the skies and his viftory thereupon is faid to be the means. 6. He lived long at Rome, and Conftantinoplc, and elfe where before he was Baptized. And was that a certain proof that none of thofe Gountreys were for Infant- Baptifm, no nor for Baptifm at Converfion nei- ther, becaufe Confidntine was not Baptized ! 7. He kept in with the Philofophers (f having one at his Table familiar with him) to hold all parties to him. 8. And many in thofe times thought that all fin being pardoned at Baptilm, they muft lwe much ftn&lier after they were Baptized , and were in much more dinger by their fin , and ^therefore would not be Baptized till old , as Confiautinc when he was like to die. And now where is this mans cltar proof that the BntaiM were Azabaptifts ?
£. 41 . 5 . Saith he £tc Becaufe of the Correfpon- dency and unity that were between the French Qoriftians after called the Waldenfes, and them
viz. Germanus and Lupus. ~\
Anfw. What abundance of untruths will one mans head hold / i. He would make the igno- rant believe that the French Churches that fent over Germanus and Lupus were fuch as after were called Waldenfes : When yet before he ci- teth Per in faying that the Waldenfes were the off- fpring of the Noyatians banifhed from Rome* Beda Hift. Eccl. lib. i. c. 17, 18, 19, 20,21. tells lis briefly that the Britains being infe&ed with Pelagian ifm by Agricola the fon of S ever i anus a Pelagian Bifhop , fent to France for help, as being unable themfelves to difpute the cafe. The Bifhops of France in a great Synod agreed to lend Germanus Bifhop of estfltijfwdore , and Lu~ fus Bifhop of Trecajfe ( brother to Vincentius Lerinenfis* ) Projper in his Chronicle tells us that Germanus was fent by Pope Celefline by the inftigation of Palladim a Deacon : Vfier reciteth and rejeð not Baronius his conciliation, that it was done by the Pope and French Biftiops* Germanus and Lupus come over, and work mi-" racks by the way, and here Germanus carried a box with him of the Reliques of ail the Apo- ftles and many Martyrs ( Bedac.iS.) This he layeth to the eyes of a blind maid and cured her fuddedly, which confounded the Pelagians: Thefe Reliques he buryed in St. Albanes Sepul- chre -, Ana inftead of them took with him fome oi the duft where St; Albanes bloo<Jhad been fhed, $ 4 which
which remained red till then. And after other mi- racles and a vi&ory he returned with a pro- fperous navigation, faith Beda c. 20. by his own Merits and St. A.oancs inrercefiion. Afterwards he returned again :n a fecond neceility with Se- vent*', and delivered the Brit aim from Pelagi- anifm, who yet lived in fuch wickednefs as Be- da after GVA^r defcri be th.
Here let the Reader note againft Mr. Dan* 'vers dream, 1. That this was done in, 429, And if Mr. D. could prove indeed that all the Bifhops of France then were Waldertfes, or of the judgement fo called fo long after, he would do us Knights fervice againft the Papifts in the queftion of the perpetual vifibility of the Church. But if I cite Mr .Danvers for it, I doubt they will laugh at me , and make no more of his authority than I do of the Butch Anabaptifls Martyrology.
2. Note that Prof per faith it was the Pope that'fent Germanm.
3. Note that he was fent by the Bifhops of Prance , who then did little differ from Komey but fubmitted to his Primacy, (and Patriarchate ) in the Empire , though referving their liberties • Read the Epiftlcs of Leo 1. againft Hillary Arelat. and all that ftory, and you will fee how much the Pope ufurped there betimes.
4. Pope Cclefiine was the great maintainer of tAugitftinz zgzmftPelagiw, and fo theapter todothif.
5. The Pope had before this fent Palla- dia to the Br it aim who received him : And
there-
therefore they were then on fome fair terms with him.
6. Germanus and Lupus were Bifhops, and they that fent him ^ and fo Antichriftian to fomc Anabaptifts
7. Germanus fure was not of Mr. D*s. Churchy that ufed Reliques fo ftrangely for working mi-; racles ? Was this an Anabaptift ? •
8. This was all done after Augufiine had written, that no Chriftian thought Infant-Ba- pnfm vain : ( or about that time. ) And yet were all the Britains then of another mind?
9. The Bifhops of France ( with Pope Ce~ leftine ) took part with Auguftme againft Be lo- gin* > and fent Lupin with Germanus to do that work : And yet were all thefe Bifhops againft Augufline^ about Infant-Baptifm, which he faith all the Church Vniverfal agreed in ?
10. Laftly , the Britains were infected with Pe- lagianifm ^ Velagim ( called tJMorgan, being a Britain ( and Vjher faith, fdhie fay born the fame day with Augufline ) and fcleftius ■ a Scctf or /r*/fe man . And the Pelagians themfeives were for Infan-tBaptifm , ( And if any Chriftians in the world had been againft it, they would have been the likelieft , who denyed Original fin : Yet even they durft not deny this. ) And is it a credible thing that all thefe Britains who were fome ofPelagiws mind, and fome of Augufiines, were yet againft both in point of Infant-Ba- ptifm ? Yea and not a word faid of this by any writer , when their Pelagianifm made fo great a ftir / Yet this man gathereth that tbe Churches
of
{266)
©f France were Anabaptifts ( contrary to all hiftory ) becaufe the Waldenfes 600 years after were Anabaptifts (which is alio falfe:) And the Jfri- tains were Anabaptifts r becaufe the Churches of France fent two Learned men to difpute againfl Pelagianifrn in England , fwhen the unlearned Britains could not do it ). Reader , will not this kind of arguing make thee an Anabaptifts or elfe make thee pitty the feduced party ? O what a temptation to Popery do fuch men lay before the people / When men fee that every fuch a one that hath ignorance and pride enough to make him wife in his own eyes , (hall thus pour out Mfhoods to cheat mankind , and the ignorant know not but it may all be true, it tern- pteth men to think that there muft be fome Authorised men whom the Ignorant muft believe be fere fitch feducers, or elfe confufion and fa If- hood will take place of truth, and the people will be as children toffed up and down, andcar- ryed to and fro wkh every wind of dotlrine» And indeed a concordant Miniftry is fo to be preferred , though it infer not 3 Roman infalli- bility.
f. 42. 6. His Iaft proof that the Britains Were " againfl Infant Baptifm, is becaufe Augu- u ftine the aJfyfonk was himfelf fo raw and igno- u rant in the rite , as to ask^y How long the ic Baptizing of a child might be deferred , there u being no danger of death? ~\
Anfw. I grow afhamed that I have medled With fuch a Collector : A baculo ad angulum* Doth it not raftier imply tkat there was no contro- vert
(267) verfie between him and the Brit aim about In- fant- Baptifm, feeing he never mentioned any fuch thing ?
£. 43. His next witneflTes againft Infant-Ba- ptifm are in the fourth Century, called by hira u Dadoes , Saba* , Adulphus , and Simonis who "(faith he in his catalogue) oppofe it. And ct p. 229. he faith to prove it, but thit they were <c charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament ^of the Altar and of Infants Bapttfm* And he " citeth Hi ft or. Tripartita It. 7. c. 1 1. ( and fome "fellow an hundred years ago.)
Anfw. And have we here any honefter dea- ling than before ? Read and judge. That which the Tripartite Hiflory cited by him faith is this> that £ There was then a Sed called Meffalians or Machetes ( known in the Catalogues of Here- ticks ) and called The Praying Hereticks ) who expedied the operation of fome Devil think- ing him to be the Spirit of God , refufing to work and giving themfelves to lie and fleep to exped Revelations ^ Indeed their opinion was that Frayer wot all, and Baptifm and the Lords Sup- per were nothing , dicentes Divinum cibum nihil nee prodeffe nee Udere ± that the Sacred or Sacra," mental food, did neither profit nor hurt : Thefe men were led by one Dadoes, Sabbos, Adelphi- w, Hermas and Simeon : And Adclphm when old ( for they hid their opinion ) bewrayed his error in a fpeech to Flavian of <^Antioch ; that Baptifm doth the Baptised perfon no good, but prayer enly expelkth the DeviL And 1. Thefe men were no more againft Infant -Baptifm than
tigainft
againft the adults Baptijw. For they were above all Ordinances fave Frayer. 2. They were againft neither as unlawful , but againft both and other ordinances as unprofitable. 3. They car- ryed this much in fecret ; which they could not have concealed had they not Baptized In- fants. 4. Some hereticks, sind all Infidels and Pagans were againft all Baptifm as well as they : And doth any of this prove that any one Chri- ftian was againft Infant Baptifm more than adult .<*
f. 44. "Next he tells you that Vauftus Re- ct gienfis faith that Perjonal and attual de fire was *' re qui fit e in every one that was to be Baptised ( Vincent and Crefconius I fpoke to before ) And he citeth not a word of his writings for it, nor any other but one Jacob Merning , I fuppofe a Butch Anabaptift.
Anfw. Reader, thou feeft ftill how thou art ufed. Fauftm Rhegienfis is a known Author ; his works are common •, He is commonly taken for a Semipelagian, and he hath a book to prove that fouls are bodies^ which Claudianm Mammertus hath anfwered. But I never read one fy liable in him, nor in any other that ever wrote of him or againft him, that fhould make one doubt whether he was for Infant -baptifm. Could he be in fuch a ftation as he was, and have fo many writings, and fo many adverfaries , and yet hold fuch an opinion and never be fufpe&ed ? Do the Anaba- ptifts no better own their caufe ? But the words he alledgeth are but fuch as he citeth of my own ; If truly cited, no doubt fpoken only of the adult ,
-ad
(*69)
s»nd of what the Infants do by them. But who can anfwer words not cited ? Muft we read all his works again to fee if there be fuch a word , as oft as fuch a man will talk to us at this rate?
£. 45. The next is " [ Albania a zealous god- a ly Minifter in the fixth Century was put to* u death for baptizing Believers , though baptized jc in Infancy or by Hereticks.]
Anfw. Still" all alike. 1. Baronim is cited an. 413. n. 6. when in my Book there is not a fy lia- ble of any fuch matter : 2. But thereabout he hath the Hiftory of the Donatifts, who rebaptized all both old and young , as if our Separatifts now fhould tell all England , j Ton are all out of the true Church which is only with m^ and if you come not to m and be not baptized in our Churches , you have no true baptifm nor can be fa~ ved. ] And for fuch rebaptizing many were troubled. And is this a witnefs againft Infant- baptifm? Shall we not have one true word?
$. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for to zJMerning and Rulicim > or Lulicim and Glanaus , men that I know not fo well as him- klf, and I had rather he had referred me to him- felf or Mr. Tombes.
£.47. He addeth p. 23 1 . Cc £ Nicephorm 1. 17. u c\ 9. faith that Q In the year 550. one Peter Bi- cc jhop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk^ in Syria <£ did maintain and defend the point of dippings *& rebaptiz,ation or weder-dipping.
Anfw. Did Nicephorm write in Dutch ? 1. Is dipping any thing to the cafe of Infants ? 2. Are you really for Rebaptizing 5 and are you juftify-
- |ng
(270)
ing it.? If nor, why cite you inftances of Rebapti- Zers ? Too many befidcs the Donatifts rebaptized others to engage them to their Se& as the only Church, 3. Do you know the Hiftory of the Council of Calcedon and Diofcorus7 and the Ne- ftorians > Reader, believe not this man any fur- ther than fenfe or great evidence conftraineth thee : That which Nicephorus there faith is this, £Severus of Antioch, and Peter of Apamea, and Zooras a Monkey were found to curfe the Coun- cil of Calcedon, and to hold but one nature in Chrtft •, pr&terea anabaptifmos aliaque nefanda obfcxnitatis plena facinora peragerey that is, Q and alfo to have praftifed Rebaptiz.ings, and other vil- lanies full of fitch obfcenity that is not to be na- med. 2 If he rejoyce in thefe Witne/Tes, is here a word of Infant-baptifm ? When fhall I come to a fentence that is true ?
tf. 48. The next is £ Adrian Bifiop of Co- rinth in the five nth lent my did publicity op- pofe Infant -B apt ifm , infomnch as he would nei- ther Baptise them himfelf , nor fujfer them to be Baptised by others , but wholly denyed Ba- ft ifm to them : Wherefore he was accufid by Gre- gory Mag. Bifwp of Ronu , to John Bijhop of LarifTa, as appears by Gregories Letter to the faid John, in which among others he complains « gain ft the faid Adrian that he turned away children from B apt ifm and let them die with- out it, for which they proceeded againfi him as a great tranfgreffor and bUf?be',ner*~]
Anfw. Not one true Sentence in all this : 1. It's falfe that Adrian publickly oppofid In- fant-
fant-Baptifm. 2. It's falfe that he was accufed for it by Gregory , or that Gregory laid any fuch thing to his charge : 3. Or that they fo pro- ceeded, if my books be true. Reader, the cafe in Gregories Epiftles here cited is this. Adri- an was accufed malevolently of many things ( not by Gregory) but to Gregory : Among others , that through him fome Infants had dy- ed without Baptifm. Gregory writeth to John Bifhop of Larijfa on his behalf ', and faith that [ no one of the witnejfes could fay that he knew any fuch thing by him, but that they were t&ld fo by the mothers. of fome children, whofe Hus- bands had fir their faults been removed ( Irom the Church) fed nee in baptizatos eos mortis tempus profejfi funt occupajfe , ficut accufatorum continebat invidiofa faggeftio -> cum in Deme- triade Civitate baptizatos eos ejfe con flit erit ~\ that is, [_ Nor did ( the witnejfes ) fay, that they di- ed unbaptized , as the envious fuggeftion of the accufers contained^ for it is mamfeft that they were baptized in the City Demetrias. ]
1 . Is here a word that he was again ft Infant- baptifm ? 2. CouldaBifhop cf fo great a City and Diocefs have been againft Infant-baptifm and none to be able to prove it, even in er.viotu ac- cufations ? Would not every week deled it ? 3. Would Great Gregory have thus juftified him, if he had but fufpe&ed fuch a thing, above a hun- dred years after Auftin faid no one Chriftian thought Infant-baptifm vain ? Was this great Pope an Anabaptifl ? 4. Is ir not plain by all this, that it was but the particular children of fome e x-
com-
027O communicate mens wives, who malicioufly accufe liim ( not for being againft Infant -baptifm . no nor againft their Infants baptifm ; but ) for delay- ing it? It is like, to difference them from the children of Church-members : And yet that they were afterward baptized. See here what a wit- nefs he hath brought ?
£. 49. " The next in his Catalogue is, [ c%y- u ptian Divines ] but after in his book before it u he tells you of one Berinius an eminent learned cc man that profeffed infiruEiion to be neceffary be- fore baptifm, and that without it baptifm ought not to be adminiftred to high or low 3 and ri-
ce
c*teh BedaL^ c. 16
Reader, the paflage in Beda is but this, That Ceadwall having conquered the Ifle of Wight gave it to Bifhop Wilfrid (no friend to Ana- baptifts ) who gave it his Sifters Son Bernwin appointing him a Prieft called Hildila, who by his labour among the Heathens converted and bapti- zed two of the Kings Sons , who were baptized and had a ftrange deliverance. And is there a fyllable in this ftory that Infant-baprifm is concern- ed in ? No nor a word of one Bennus an eminent learned man that profeffed as he faith , though it be nothing to the purpofe : Nor was thebulinefs done as he iaith in Lower Saxony but in the Ifle of Wight j fo little is there that hath the leaft kin to truth in this lamentable Reporter.
§. 50. His Teftimony of Egyptian Divines he citeth two late Papifts for ( inftead of juft proof) who neither of them ever dreamed that thofe Egyptians were sgainft Infant-Bapriftn.
That
(■TO J
That the adult fhould be Catechifed and intru- ded before Baptifm, ail the Chriftian world agreed : Thatiliere were fome Monafterie s of the iEgyptian Monks that would not hold communi- on wuh the Church of Rome , is known • and what a turn was made among many of the Cler- gy after the Council of Cbakedon on Diojloras his account, whereupon a great body of the Sou- thern Churches cut off from Rome^ and difown- ing them are called Ncftorians ( many injurioufly ) to this day. And Fulgent ivu was difTwaded from go- ing to the ftric% Heremites and Monafticks near cs£gy[t , becaufe they were feparated from the Roman Communion, as you may fee in Fu/gen- | tim*% life. But what is all this to Infant-baptifm?
(. 51. Next he tells us that in the ninth Cen- tury Hincmams Laudunenf. was agafnft Infanr- ; baptifm, and reciteth many words of Hincmarui Rhcnenfis to him.
Jlnfw. The book is Bib. Tat. SuppL To. Z. 'containing 55. Chapters I And if I mult read eve- ry" word of fuch long books to try his Citations, I rfiuft fpend many months to be able to tell you 'that a man told you fo many untruths: Ail that ! I can find by a curfory peruiai is but this, about I a Village in the other Pari h , whom it fhould , pay Tythes to, [" habebas tmbreviatos o[not lnfan- ! tes fine baptifmate> & q*ot homines fine Commu- nione inde obierunt^ qua mihi in publicum objicere nolles, ne poflcatibi tmproperarem 5 at f\ alia ma- 1 la df me fcires , ilia etiam de me diceres. Reader , is here a Syllable againft .Infant-ba- ptifm ? V/ho was the accufer here ? What is in
X the
(2740 the accufation but as in Adrians to Greg, which plainly proveth the contrary, that he was for In- , fant-baptifm and ordinarily ufed it, when the in- timation was but that he had let fome Infants die without baptifm and fome men without Communi- on ? Hath not many a Minifter among us been fo ac- cufed ? And are we therefore againft Infant-ba- ptifm ? Or was Hincmarm againft adult Com- munion becaufe envy faid he let fome die with- out it ?
tf. 52. Reader, the truth is I am fo weary of this work, that I cannot perfwade my felf to fol- low it any further, it is fo fad and loathfom a bu- fmefs that is fet before us ; fitter to be wept over than anfwered at large. I (hall yet take notice of what he faith of the Waldenfes , and to that further fay, i.That I have elfewhere vindicated them already from this (lander. 2. That fo do many of their bitter adverfaries, in laying nofuch thing to their charge. Among whom to what is faid elfewhere, I add but the Teftimony of Naucle- rm a Pcpii.h bitter enemy to them, who Vol. 2. pan 2. pag. 265. recitcth their Do&rine as being agreeable with the body of Do&rine held in the Reformed Churches , never mentioning any de- nial of Infant-baptifm, but only that they affirm- ed Water to be'Ht'uthcient without Oyl.
And
C275)
AN D Row as to our Tefiimonies for the Com- mon practice of Infant-baprifm from the daks of the ApoflJes, I will not abufe the Rea- der by reciting again the teftimonics long ago re- cited. " Let him but confider what I have there (aid out cf Juftin ^Irenaus, Origen, Tertulliany Cyprian, Naz^ianzene, aAuguCvin and others, and I leave the matter to his Judgement.
fp 53. And further where they feign Nazjian- z,cn to be indifferent I will add but thefe words but of his Orat. 40. vol. 1. p. 648. Ed. Morel.
[ N/mJJ/ OCT OVi • .£/.« K&f&TW yjWfOJ/ Y\ H&AA& —
iC [ Haft thou an Infant? Let not naughtinefs fur*
lc prize him firft, [_ Let him be fan&ifted from his
u Infancy : Let him be confecrated to the fpirit
<cfrom hislnfancie : But doft thou fear the fcal
<c becaufe of the weaknefs of his nature ? How
u weak a minded mother art thou , and of how
" little faith? But Hannah, &c. Thou haft no
u need of Amulets and Inchant-
ic mcnts * with which the wick- t * w,^j? **E". I <c j 1 • u ' thens ulcd to Chin
ed one creepetb into the drcn#
\<c minds of vain men , fteal- "ing to himfelf the veneration due to God i cc Give him the Trinity, that great and excellent "[Amulet. J
That all this is fpoken cf Baptifm is paft all doubt : Yet Naz.ianz.en- in fome cafes admitteth
I of delay till three years old: Bu: took baptifm to be fo neceffary for Infants , that he thought that if any though by furprize and not the Pa~
T 2 rent*
(276)
rents contempt fhould die unbaptized, they fhould noi goe to Heaven ( or be Rewarded ) though he thought they fhould not go to Hell or be pu- nifhed : lb. Or at. 40. His opinion therefore tor delay three years in cafe of faiety confifted with too much apprehenfion of its neceilicy even to In- fants.
$ c 54. When I read his language of holy Cyprian, I confefs the apparition of fo frightful a fpirir, doth affright me from his doctrine. Firfii The. man ( with greater audacioumefs than the Papifts ufe the fathers, ) dodi firft attempt againft all content of antiquity, and without any proof", to queftion the truth of the fentence of Cyprian and the Carthage Council to Fiditu
Secondly, And what could he fay more to be- tray the Proteffent Caufe to the Papifts, than as after [_Euher Cyprian had been vilely Ruffmed , or that he himfdf wai a notable Factor for Anti- chrifi , . t in him the my fiery of iniquity
did very flrongly work^ ] K The man it teems hud never read Jeremy Ste- phens his m of Cyprian de unit, Eccl. and how thofe few words of Peter and the Church of ie were added by Corrupters (though he is willing to believe in the general that his writings were corrupted ) But we have certain Copies at I lea ft of fo much of them , as confute his Caufe* I. remember cur great Antiquary Bifhop Vfljer told me that it was Tertullian and Cyfrianihzxht took for the Chief Records of Church Antiquities,' next a few fmall things which give little informa- tion of matters of fair. And fame of the things .
that
that this man fo ftarteth at, Cyprian held , and as Epiphanim faith, <ts4ll tbe'Chriftian Churches z And muft he then be a Fatlor for Ant. tire* Who then is this Man a Fa&or for ? Mark, Rea- der, whether it be any wonder if I be abhomina- ble and Antichriftian to him, when Cyprian and the fixty fix Bifhops with him muft come under ( hypothetically ) that fufpicion. i. That Cypri- an who was fo holy and wife a man ^ 2. That lived before Antichrift was born- 3. That died a Martyr for Chrift •, 4. Who is fo, great a part of the pure antiquity • that if youcaft him away, what will the reft be for a great time? 5. That Cyprian who is called by fome the firft Anaba- ptift , becaufe he was for rebaptizing thofe bapti- zed by Hereticks •, 6* That Cyprian who fo ftifiy
; oppofed the Bifliop of Ror/e ( though himfelf was
1 in the error *') 7. That Cyprian whom the Do- natifts boafted of as their predecefTor in rebapti- zing*, and Attftin was put to anfwer ( though with
! his honour • ) 8. That Cyprian who lived before any Cbriftian Emperor, when ftrift difciplinc upheld religion without and againft the Magiftrates fword ; and who wrote fo many of his Epiftles . only for the rigor -of Church-difcipline? O wh.t pleafure is this to Papifts ? If we be but fuch An-
i richriftiams fay they, as holy (jprian and the pri- mitive^ Churches were, we" will prefer it before the Anabaptifts Chriftianity ?
' §. 55. And if Cyprian was Antichriftian, where then was the Church of Chrift? It will be hard to anfwer P piit or Seeker about its viability, or
j Infidel abcut its reality : And what a King do
T 3 they
they make Chrifh that make him to have no King- dom , that tbey can prove to have been exi- gent
$. 56. We will eafily grant him thai Cyprian de unit. EccL is abufed by the Papifls, and the very words thruft in are proved fo to be by ma- ny Copies that have them not: Yea, Jeremy Ste- phens faith that there are eight Copies in Eng- land which omit twenty three of the Epiftjes which are commonly received (and it's moft cre- dible by other Copies are Genuine ; J And yet none of thefe leave out the Epiftle to Eidta about Infant-baptifm.
<. 57. And whereas he faith that Cyprian ur- ged not Tradition, J anfwer, there was.nocaufe: For the queftion was not whether Infants Jhou Id be baptized ^ much lefs whether they were to be dedica- ted in Covenant to God0 and to be Qmirch-mcmbers • but only whether they jhould be baptized before the eighth day : For Fidus thought that at one two or three days old they were fo unclean as made them unmeet for baptifm, and that the eighth day was the time of their purification ; which Cyprian and the fixty fix Bifhops confu- ted, and fhewed that Gods mercy accepteth them from the beginning without refpedt to legal days, And .what ufe was here for a plea from Traditi- on for Infant -b apt 1 fo^ which was not dented?
£.58. And it'ieemsto me to be a great evi- dence that the Tradition of the Church' was then for ft, in that. this Council of Bifhops ( before; true Popery was born ) fo unanimoufly deter- mine of the day or tirne^ and not one of them ,
no
~79)
no nor Fidns himfelf that raifed the doubt , did fo much as raife any fcruple or queftion about Infant-baptifm it felf at all : which fure they would have done on iuch an occafion if any or many Chriftians, or any Churches had denied it. No wonder therefore if Auguftin fo long after fay that no Chriftian takjth it to be in vain ?
£. 59. Yet again I will confefs, that the words of Tertptllian and N-az.ianz.en , fhew that it was long before all were agreed of the very time^ or of the neceffity of baptizing Infants before any ufe of Keafon , in cafe they were like to live to maturity : For I am perfwaded that the Apoftles and firft Minifters were fo taken up with the Converting of Infidels ( Jews and Gentiles ) that the cafe of Infant-baptifm was fo poftponed and taken but as an Appendix to the baptifm of the adult, as that it was thought left needful to give it a particular exprefs mention in the Records and Hi- ftory of the Church. The Churches made no que- ftion of Infants Church-'memberp)ipy as being un- doubtedly in the promife, and devoted to God by all faithful parents : And they took not baptifm at firft, for their fir ft Covenanting or Confent^ but for the folemm nation of it ; and fo not for In- fants fir ft real fate of relation to Chrift and right to life ( which was before it, as it was to belie- vers before -baptifm -, ) but for the folemn invefti- ture in thofe rights : And fo Greg. Na*zian, Or. 40. giveth this brief definition of baptifm, that it is nothing eljs but a Covenant made with God for a new and purer k$nd of life: And here- upon many who thought Infants fturch-wembers
T4 fviz.)
(28o)
('vifible^ and fafe upon their Parents Covevant* consent , thoughc that the time of f I emni nation was fo far left to prudence as that ( as the Ifra- elites did Circumcifion in the wildernefs^) it might be delayed a few years by fuch Parents as flelirecj it, till children could fomewhat anfwer for them- felves.
§. 60. Yet after my review of this controverfie ppon their urgencie , I find no proof brought by any of thefe men , {hat ever one Church in the world wus without Irfant-men.bers^ (that had In- fants, ) nor enc perfon in the Church againft In- fant Church-member ftuy and bapifm, from Chrifts days till the Waldenfes ( about eleven hundred or a thoufand years ) except that Tertu!liany who took them for Innocent and therefore Chnrcb~ members7 did in (offie cafe advife the delay : I fay, I find not one Chriftian or Heretick againft it ;) (unlefs you wijl impute it to them that were againft allbaptifm, which Infidels alio are. ) And though I verily believe that the Waldenfes were- not againft Infant- baptifm, nor is there full proof that any in their time were, yet becaufe I am loth to judge the Papifts utrerjy impudent lyars , I think it moft probable that in the Waldenfes days and Country, there was a fort of odious Herericks, that denied Infanf-baptifm, and the Refurre'&ion, snd held community of Wives and other abomi- nations reported all together by their oppofers in chofe times,
CHAP<
CHAP. V.
Mr. DanversV great Cahimnie of my felf refuted.
£. i. TV yfR. D. pag. 134. Ed. 1. faith thus XVI [ Tet is not sJMr. Baxter ajhamed to fix fucb an abominable flander upon the Baptifts of this our age of baptising naked: ( which it feems was fo long the real practice of thep&doba- ptifts ) and about which he fiends three whole pa- , ges to aggravate the heynoufnef of their cufiom ( which he is pleafed to father on them. ) And though I am perfwaded he cannot but be convin- ced that the thing is moft notorioufly falfe , and brought forth by him rather out of prejudice ( not to fay malice) rather than any proof or good teftimony he ever received thereof . yet have I never heard that he hath done him f elf , his inju- red neighbours and the abufed world that right as to own his great weaknef and finful Jhortnefi therein, in any of the many Editions of that piece 7 which 1 humbly conceive as well deferved a re- cantation as fame other things he has judged wor- thy thereof J
<. 2. Anfw. To live and die imp enitently in (o unprofitable a fin ( and unpleafing to any but dia- bolical natures ) as is the belying of others ,*is a very dreadful kind of folly. I would heartily vvifh tbar Mr.Danvcrs and I migh.: meet and help to bring each other to repentance, by a willing im- partial examination of each of our guiltinefTes here- in. £.3.1
^ '(l$2)
$. 3. I never look to fpeakto them thus more, nor long to any man on earth , and in this stati- on and with thele thoughts I muft profefs (not thinking it lawful to belie my felf ) that in the year 1647, or 1648. or both when Anabaptiftry be- gan fuddenly to be obtruded with more fuccefT- ful fervency than before, I lived near Mr.Tombes in a Country where fome were, and within the hearing of their practice in other parts of the land : And that in that beginning the common frame of Minifters and people was, that in divers places fome baptized naked and fome did not : And that I never to my bell remembrance heard man or woman contradict that report till this man did it in this writing : And that no An3baptiit contra- dicted it to me that I then or finceconverfed with : And that thereupon in 1659. 1 wrote againfi: both forts , thofe that baptized naked, and thofe that did not : And after all this when Mr. Tombes an- fwered my book and thofe very pafTages, he ne- ver denied the truth of the thing ( though he did not fo baptize himfelf f unlefs he have any where elfe fince faid any thing of it which I never faw or heard of. ) And I appeal to impartial reafon, whether he would not then at the time have de- nied it, had it been deniable: And whether this man now twenty five or fix years after be fitter to be believed in- a matter of fad, than commonxan- fent at the prefent time ? And whether it be law- ful for me to take all forts then living for lyars, rather than this one man that hath written us fuch a book ? and who in a negative 25 years after
can-
cannot pofiibly be a competent witnefs, no nor if he had written at that time : For who can fay that there was or is no fuch thing done beyonci his knowledge ?
c . 4. But if Mr, D. would perfwade the world either that I wrote that of all the Anabaptifts,or of moft, or of any in any other age, or that I have fince faid that any continue the fame practice, he would but deceive men : for it is nothing fo.
5<. 5. I muft confefs I did not fee the per fons ba- ptized naked, nor do I take it to be lawful to de- fame any upon doubtful reports : But when it is a fame common and not denied by themfdves either Minifters or people at the time, I think it is to be taken fo much notice of, as the confuting of the evil doth require.
£. 6. I know not by fight that there is ever a Fornicator, Adulterer, Murderer or Thief ( as I remember) in England: And yet if I neither Write nor Vreach to call fuch to repentance, left I be a Slanderer in faying that there are any fuch, I think it would be foolifh uncharitable Charity, and unrighteous juftice.
£.7. Mofl Se&s do in their height and heat at Erft do that which afterward they furceafe with fhame : The Donatift Circumcellians continued not felf- murder ; the Anabaptifts held not on to do as they did at Mitnfter, or in the time of J)*h vtd George : Our Ranters continued not- open [wearing and whoredom long: The fame of En- gland which I never heard gainfayed is that the Quakers at firft did fial>e and vomit and infect Others ftrangely : And is he a lyar that faith ir,
bec
becaufe they do not fo now ? I was at Worcefter my felf when at the Aflizes one of them went na- ked ( as a Prophet ) before our eyes through the high ftreet, and they laid they did fo in many other places : I know not the mans name now, nor any of the multitude of Spectators, if after twenty years and more I were called to prove it, I know by uncontrolled fame that Miftrefs Safari Tierfdn folemnly undertook to raife the dead ( ta- king up a dead Quaker at dairies and command- ing him ( in vain ) to live. ) But if now after more than twenty years my witnefTes were called for, I muft travel to the place before I could produce ihem.
<$ . 8. Yea , I never faw any Anabaptift reba- ptize ( or baptize the aged : ) But fame faith they do fo and none deny it. If it prove falfe, I fhall be glad, and will joyn in vindicating them ; And fo I fay of the prefent cafe • And will heartily joyn with any in reforming backbiting , and rafh ungrounded defamations of others.
HAP.
CHAP. VI.
Of Mr, Danvers'j frequent Citations of my Words*
C. i. \X7*^en * rea<^ ^r* Tombes his twenty VV Citations of me as againft myfelf, which Mr. £>. provoketh me to anfwer , and when I find Mr. D. fo often imitating them, and alkdging my words , as juftifyirig his caufe , I have no conviftion on my mind that it is lawful for me to waft my time and the Readers, about a particular vindication of my words, fo triflingly and vainly ufed by them.
tf.2. Either it is the authority of the Writer which they fuppofe will ferve them, or i\\t force of the arguments • or elfe it is only to make the Reader believe that the Writer is fo foolijli as not to know when he contraditteth himfelf.. The firfi I may well prefume it is not r" If it were, the fame perfons authority would be as much mere againft thenv as his judgement is. Ii it be the fecond9 why do they u(e any arguments of mine , when they are able to form fuch of their own as feem much more ufeful to them than any that I can give them ? And why then do they not infift on- ly on the Argument and fiegled the Author? But feeing I muft believe that the laft is their bu- finefs, I can have leifure to fay little more than this to them, that it is not my bufinefsto prove my fclf no fool but to prove Infants Church- members -3 nor will it make me fmart if all of
their
their mind in England fo judge of me \ But ye'' I am not fo fooliln but that I know my own mind better than they do, and can reconcile my words when they cannot* If this fatisfie not them, it fatisficth me.
£. 3. In fumm, the words of mine which they; alledge againft my felf need but thefe two things to be faid for them againft fuch filly cavils : 1. That moft of them fpeak to the Queftion £ What is the kind of Covenant confent required in baptifm ? Whether a meer dogmatical faith pro- fejfed f Or the profejfhon of a faving faith ? as" to the matter believed and the fincerity of the be- lief and confent ? ] And I prove that it is no other fort of faith, but a true faving faith as to object and alt which is required and accepted of God the fearcher of hearts, as the Condition of his Covenant : And that it is not the Profeffion of any lower fort of faith ( as to object or act ) but of this faving faith, which the Church muft accept to the admiffion of members : A lower profefti- on will ferve for none. 2. But I (till maintain ( and I think fully proved ) that God fo far taketh the child as if he were apart of the Parent (na- ture and grace having committed him to his will and difpofal for his good till he have a will to choofe for himfelf) as that by this fort of faith and con- fent the Parent is to enter his Child into Cove- nant wich God as well as himfelf, and that in Gods acceptance the Child doth thus truly con- fent by the believing Parent, and doth Covenant with God, as a child Covenanteth and confenteth reparative ly amor.g men , who by his Parents is
made
<*87; N
made a Party in a Contract , as in a leafe for his life , or the like. Not that in fcnfn fhyfico the perfon of the Child being the fame with the Pa- rents doth confent in his confent ^ but that the Parent having the treble intereft in the Child, of an Owner, a Governour and a Lover , God by Nature and Grace conjunctly alloweth and requi- reth the Parent to dedicate the Child to God, and to confent that he fhali be a member of Chrifl and his Church according to his capacity , and by that Covenanting confent to oblige the Child to live as a Chriftian when he cometh to age : And this (hall be as acceptable to the Childs Co- venant-relation and rights , as if he had done it hirafelf • and in this fenfe may be faid reputatively to have confented or Covenanted by his Parents , which in proper fpeech, is, They did it for him At Gods Command*
0.4. He that is not fatisfied with this Gene- ral Anfwer, let him either perufe the words tbemfelves in my Writings, with thofe before and after that explain them , or eife if he will do as this man doth , abufe his own underftanding and his ignorant Readers, by fuch filly wranglings ani- mated by partiality, let him bear the Confequents, and know thar I have fomewhat elfe to do with my few remaining hours, than to write books on fuch infufficient invitations and expectations.
chap;
<i8<J)
■—
CHAP. VII. Of Mr. Danvers'j many other ace nf at ions of
me.
$. i. TT was one of the old Characters of the Jl Hereticks in the Apoftles dayes, To jpeak^ evil of the , things that they underftood not.
And that may well be their Chara&er in which they contradid the three great conftitutive parts of Chriftianity , and all Religion, and true honefty, ife TRUTH, HUMILITY *nd LOVE, by Falfiood, Pride and Mahgnityy ( called commonly Vncharitablnefs. )
(. 2. The Hoot of this is, when Reigning, an unfanSiified heart in which thefe vices remain unmortified , covered from the owners knowledge, by a form of Godlinefs , and efpecially a zeal for the wayes of fome Party, more honoured in the perfons eyes for wifdom, or piety than others : In others there is a great meaftre of the fame vices mixed with true Grace , where an evil and a good caufe are conjoyned as to fome erFe&s : They love God and his Truth, and they hate all that they think againft him, they would pro- mote-piety in the world, and reprefs what they think againft it . And being perfons whofe wits and fludies were not fuch, as exathnefs and large- nefs of knowledge do require , but yet lovers of knowledge, truth, and Scripture, they have
more
ftiore knowledge than prophane Tots , but tittle, alas , little, in companion of that which is ne- cefTary to a methodical, accurate underftanding of the matters which frequently fall under contro- verfie ^ And fo knowing but little they know not what they are ignorant of, nor what others know beyond them ; And it being the common vice of mans underftanding, to be hafty in judged ing before they hear or know one half that is r-ecefTary to a true and faithful judgement, and fo to be consent before they underftand^ thefe men hereby are led to confidence in many an error : And an erring judgement firft telleth them that Truth is falfhood, and falfhooi truth, that Good is evil, and evil good, that Du- ty is fin , and fin is duty ; and then a good Caufe and a bad , the Love of Truth and a per- I verfe and partial zeal concur , to put them on in the way of error. Ignorance and error fee them on a wrong cmife, and a mixt affitlioft or z.eal^ partly good and partly evil fpurreth them on. And in thefe the Error and Here fie and confe- q jent fins, are no more predominant than the caufe 5 and God will have mercy on thofe that in ignorance, with good meanings, oppofe many truths, and do much evil.
^.3. And the great means of nourifhing this fin in Churches is departing from Chrifts Church order, who hath appointed Teaching and Learning to be the fetted way of getting know- ledge -, And therefore required all hisdifciplesro fome to his Church, as little children to School, with teachable humble minds, to Learn, and not U srftfi
with proud wrangling minds to difpute : If all our children fhoufd fpend their time at School in dispu- ting, wich the Teacher and fetting their wits againft his as in a conflict, what would they thus Learn ?
#. 4. Therefore Paul faith, that thz fervant of the Ljrd muft not ftrive, and oft calleth men from perverfe di fput trigs, and flriving about words which fubvert the hearers, and from fuch con-4 tendings as edifie not but tend to more ungodli- nefs , ( [hough the faith may be contended for, and truth defended, when oppolition maketh k truly neceflary).
?. 5. When a man feeketh after knowledge as a Learner, he meeteth it with a willing mind -, he cometh towards it with an appetite, and fo is a capable receiver : But when a man cometh as a difpHtant, he is ingaged already to one fide^ ,and if that be falfe he cometh out to fight a- gainft' the truth, with a / pint of oppofit ion, ha- ting truth as error, and good as evil-, and thinks it his ditty and interefi to deftroy and fhame it if he can, and therefore is unapt to think what may befaidfcr it , but ftudyeth all that he can againft it. And is this loathing , and oppofi- tioaand fighting againft truth the way to know it ? \5. 6. Therefore that which hath undone the Churches peace is, that too many Teachers, be- ing themfelves too forward to controversies, have roo haftily drawn in their people into their quar- rels,' and caft fuch bones before them in books and pulpits inftead of food, which break their reeth and fet them together by the ears inftead of nourifhing them. £nd fo one mans hearers
are
'are taught to dilute for this fort of Govern- rrient, and anothers for- that fort ; one mans fc*r free^vHl and anothers againfl it -5 when perhaps neither ihey nor the matter of the quarrel can tell you what it is ? and fo of an hundred more fuch like. The honeft hearers when they fhould be digefting the ancient Chriftian dcftrine, and
*' learnirig' to inereafe in Love to Gcd and mart, and to pradife a holy and a heavenly life, and prepare for a comfortable deatn, and happy eter- nity by a Living faith and hope, are taught that if they be not zealots for this opinion or that , for Anabaptiftry i for feparation,- eVc. if they pray by a book, or if they joyn with thofe th.->c hold fuch things as they hear called by odious frightful names , they are not then right &e*i*t& Chnftians, but corrupt or complyers or lttkf\varw;$ And thus each Church is made a miferabk Church-militant, and trained up to war againft each oiher.
$. 7. And this Minifters have done, partly to ftrengthen themfelves by the content and num-
! ber of their adherents, as the Captain mud con- quer by his Souldiers t When, they can fetagreat number on hating their adverfaries , and backbi- ting them, and teHing the hearers wherever they come, to make them feem odious , how errone- ous and bad fuch and fuch men are , they tfonk they have done much of their Work ? And while they think it is for Chrift , they know not how notably they pleafe and ferve the DeviL, Eut'l muft remember that I have fpoken of th*s elfe- where, and fodifmifsir.
( 291)
<• 8. That Mr. Danvers^ and his imitaters Ipcuk^ evil (confidently and vehemently ) of the things tluy kjiow net ( yea very many fuchj I am lore. But from what principle or root, or how far that vice which produceth thefe fruits is mortified or unmortified as to all others, I am neither called nor willing to judge. I re- member how Mr. Tho. Puree once dealt with me : When my Religious neighbour could hard- ly be per (waded to communicate with thofe among them that were of his judgement , faying, they were men that would fwear and lie , and lived fcandaloully , I thought it my duty (to keep up difcipline and yet) to moderate their cenfures by telling them what fins I thought might ftand with fome meafure of fincere piety, and Church-com- munion. And what doth he but hence take ad- vantage to tell the world how loofe my doctrine was , and what finful perfons I thought had grace ? So now if I fhould fav, that notwithftand- ing thefe hard-faced fa.I (hoods heaped together, and confidently obtruded on the ignorant, even about publick and vifible matter of fact , yet I hope the Aiuhor feareih God truly in other re- fpefts, and erreth through Ignorance, paffion, '2nd temerity ; I fhould be told publickly ere long by one or other, that I think themoftbia- 7.e*n-fac,d Lyars may be Saints : And if I deny fuch mens Gqodnefs, I look to be told that I am cenfSripus and a reviler of godly men that differ from me. Therefore I am thankful to Chrift that he not, only cxcufeth us from fo hard a work as the Judging of the fincerity of others, tut calls
w
( 2P3 )
ut cjf0 and faith, who art thou that judge ft ano- ther mans fervant ? to Ins own mafier he ftands or falls : But whoever cenfure me for it, I will fay that my judgement ftill inclineth to the hope- ful and charitable part ! For fiding and error may draw good men into heinous fins.
tf. 9. That He and I do differ in 'judgement and Pratlice, is not to be denyed : I thought our difference had been but in fo fmall and tole- rable things ( till I fav worfe in his writings ) as fhould neither abate Love or forbid Commu- nion : And thinking fo, I was the likelier to pra- d:ife as I thought , and not to hate him and fuch as he : But I perceive he takes the differences to be far greater , and my errors and fins to be more heinous and intolerable , and there- fore if he hate me (though I know not that ever he faw me or. I him ) it is no wonder •, it being more agreeable to his judgement -5 And alfo if he would not tohrate me were it in his pow- er.
0. 10. If he fo greatly differ from me, and be in the right , certainly it is becaufe he is ei- ther a great deal wifer and more knowing in thefe matters, or becaufe he is more c on fc tenable to avoid perverting temptations, and more Godly and fit for divine light. I deny not either : but from the bottom of my heart tell him, that I am fo deeply confeious of the darkjiefs and % f Mai- ne fs of my under ft an dmg , and my Htrle gcodnefs and very ill deferts from God, that did he bring me any confiderable evidence for his caufeymy great fufpicion of my felf would prepare me to U 3 bear
\&%t him j But it muft not be (ucb fluff as hs here obtrudcth on us, And I muft tell hirq, though I acknowledge God to be a free Bene- tas5tor , and may give the Greatefi Knowledge to them that have lead kboured for it ^ yet while diligent fe arching is his commanded means , I {hall doubt whether his eafier and fhorter fearch hath attained to fomuch more than my harder and longer, till the fruit ihall prove ir.
p. II. He tells us 'f.d. 2. p. 170.. that 1\can~ u net do my [elf were '.right and my offended bre-> Clthren, than to clear my [elf in theje particulars £C which are indeed fo hein<nu, not only to every, <( one of his Nonconforming brethren, but to mojt $ Fret cfiants that hear them*~\
*Anfw. 1. Still fuch untruths ? Po you know what moft Protefiants think that hear them? ancl every one of my Nonconforming brethren I Why fome of the wifeft of them ' that I know did read them oyer , and approved them before they were printed } Others ( many an$ many ) of the molt judicious alfo of my acquain- tance have fince profeffed their confent : Nay more •, I remember not one lidinifer thap hath made me juiow by word or writing to me that he diflentcth from any one of all thefe heinous things; I remember thjt once fome objected what they heard others fay fnot as contenting to the oppfcfers ) and acquiefced in my anfwer?> or rather in the woids o£ the book peruted. So that if every one of my None on forming brethren be offended, and \ known not of one, nor anyone of ihcm would ever vGuchfafe a \yord or line v>
con'-
convince me, you cenfure them for wofu! di(-
femblers or uncharitable. But I believe them
of themfelves rather than you.
$. 12. He addeth, And I dare be bold to fay <+
hath given more general offence % and loft
Mr. Baxter more amongfl his
Friends *y than any thine: be * N°t fa: much as
dtd tn all his ljfe.1 Mr. »&?$TS
I r ^u cc u- u tllc Anabiptifis for
Anfrv. i. The oiience which writing for Turin! Chrift dreadfully condemneth, Communion, which is fcandalizing the weak *or laying fnares or ftumbling-blocks before them, to tempt them to think ill of Chrift, or Godli- nefs, or to commit any fin, I would avoid as carefully as I can , And to avoid it I have writ- t;en that which offendeth you. But the offence which is but Difpleafing diff enters , yea mi fla- king menyl little regard on my own account. And your talk of my lofs ( or being loft ) doth favour fo rankly of a humane hyper it teal tem- ptation , as maketh me remember what Chrift faid to Peter Alath. 1 6. 23. that would have had him fave himfelf from fuffering , though I will not fpeak out fuch unpleafing words to you : But your words favour too much of the flefh. O Sir, it is but a few moments more, and you and I (hall be in a world , where the thoughts and words of mortals, of us, will be of fmall importance to us ! And themfelves are hafting to the day when all their thoughts perifb. O ceafe from man whofe breath is in his noftrils : for wherein is he to be accounted of ? Would you tempt me to look to the hypocrites reward ? the U 4 a^ pro-
(196)
approbation of man ? O miferabte ' reward ! Were not that book odious to you , I would refer you for my Reafons to the two Chapters of Man-f leafing and Pride : If Gods approbati- on feem not enough for us, why caH we him our God >
But if I have lofi fo. much as yon intimate, you would perfwade me that my fervice is more than I take it to be ? I have felt little comfort in any fervice of God which coft me nothing. But you fhall not tempt me to over-value it fo much v I find no lofsatall by it. Whit have I loft Sir > Not one farthing or farthings- worth, that I am aware of I As I lived not on any man before , fo I am never the poorer for that duty flow. Is it mens praife or good thoughts of me > Not one friend to my remembrance in the City, or Land hath once told me his dijfent^ much lefs that I have loft his good efleem : ( Only one young man that heard me Preach came for fa- tisfadion about one of the .particulars, who was fatisfied as far as I could perceive , and I wifht him but to read over all in my btfokf about that you object concerning the Crucifix) and I heard of him no more,) And if I am fo much lofi with my friends, and no one of them in England tell me that he di[fentethy and wherein, fuch friends are not fo valuable as- to be any of my felicity ! And do yo& call a man [_ loft J that lofeth the thoughts ov the breath of man } As it is their own duty or fin, I regard all mens thoughts or words, and fo would pleafe all men for their good to edificati- on : But as to my own comfort I can fpare;
your:
1*91) yours and theirs • and if you and "a tfioufand fuch ihould write a Cart-load of Calumnies as yoq have done, I think they would break but little of my lleep. Set thefe arguments n^xt before hypocrites that Hve on man : I live not on them.
But your words do mind me , how men that are embodyed in little parties, ( far Ms than the Donattfts or Nwatians ) are inclined to take their Cabin for all the Kingdom, and their Seft for the Church, and are affe&ed with their praife or difpraife almoft as if they were all the world. You hear your folks it feems talk againft me ("with whom backbiting is a duty) andyoufeem to dream that it is all my friend*. It God in Chrift will be my friend, I can fpare others.
And tell me Sir, for what frize or gain do you think I am loft with all my friends ? No man in his wits will voluntarily be loft for nothing. Do you think it is to get other friends that I more value } Who be they ? Is it the Papifts > Enquire what I get by them. Is it iheDiocefdn. party ? What have I got by them but fiiencing and the lofs of all Minifterial maintenance , thefe twelve years ? And ask them whofe writings have more offended them yours or mine.
If I am loft, it hath toft me more years hard ftudy to be loft , and to be erroneous or a fool, than it hath done you to be feme body and to be wife 5 And I tell you I never yet repented of Co ft or loft (or that Truth and duty, which you lament as heinous error and fin. But nak?d thtthy
and
(*9%)
and the faithful endeavours of pleafing God, in- promoting that -Love among Chrifts difciples, and ■peace in his Churches which Church Tyr am i and Setts have fo many ages laboured ( too ■ fuccef- fully ) to deftroy, are [meter than to be forfa- keri either through the perfection of one fore or the ReviUngs of the other, or the lofsofall mens friendfhip upon earth.
Andyetlwill add, that though being long ago glutted with mens applaufe, as finding it a lufcious but unvpholefome thing, and having voluntarily, cafi up much of it my felf I yet perceive no want of . friends, but take your words of them for meer flanders.
f&fcf. SaithMr.I>. (Pref.ed. i^)fcc He hath €C fo much abounded %( 'in contradictions) {none u more that Iknow of;) being as y out find, fome- iCtime a great oppofer , then a great defender of " Epifcopacy. ~\
Anfw. i. Yet I know not that ever this man faw me ( as I faid) or I him. 2. This fal (hood did unhappily overflip him, my writing being fo full a confutation of it, that he can have nothing of fenfe to fay to cloak it. My judgement was for Epifcopacy 1639. by Reading Biihop Dow* name and fome others :-But in 1640. the oath cal- led Et cater a calling us to fwear never to confent to the alteration of the prefent Government by A. Bifoops, "Bifiiops, Deans, Archdeacons, &c. forced me to ftudy the whole caufe to the bottom, fince which time my judgement of Epifcopacy never altered ( which is 34 years ago) having fetled in the Receptibility of crie fort of Epifcopacy,
ana
and the deftrablenefs ot another, and the diflike t)i another fort : All which I hav* fully pub- lijhed in my Difpute of Church- Government 1658. when the Bifhops here were at the low- eft, Either this man knew me and my writings herein, or not. If not, what a man is this that dare talk thus confidently and falfly of what he knew not ? If he did,then how much more flagitious is his practice, thus to tell the world an untruth fo notorious to himfelf ? He faith (as you may find) but never tells you where. Let him tell you where and when I ever defended that Epifcopaoy which I had oppofed ?
§. 14. |[ Mr. D. [_Ci Sometime for* Noncon-. cCformtty ( in whofe tents he hath feeptedtqjhel" ic per himfeif in the ftorm^ .and with their Inditl- " gence to come forth of his hole) and yet At €< length fo highly to di [grace the fame,
Anfw. 1 . Let him (hew you if he can, where or when I have changed my judgement about Conformity , or expreft a change fince 1640? Not that I take it for a difgrace to be mutable by growing wifer ; But neceffity forced me fo long ago to ftudy thofe cpntroverfies fo hard, as fixed me, and I never heard any thing fince which confiderably altered me therein : Which alfo be- ing vifible in the forefaid Difyute of Liturgiey Ceremonies , &c. written 1658. leave no cloak for this mans calumnies. See there whether I faid not more for fo much of Epifcofacy, Litur- gie and Ceremonies which I took to be law- ful , than ever I have done fince Bifhops return- ed i
2. But
2. But what doth he mean by [faltering my felf in a ftorm in their tents J f I cannot ima - gine what, unlcfs fen fe and truth at once fpr- fook him I When & ftorm fell on the Nonconform mifts-> were f^V £e#fj a likely ^lace for fhelter ? Had not the Conformiftsi tents been likelier ? Did the Nonconformifts fhelter me f From what, and how?
3. And what hole was it that I came out of, with their Indulgence ? Are fuch men as this the Vindicators of Gods Truth againft the Chri- ftian world , than pour out untruths at fuch a rate , in defpight of the moft publick notoriety of fad > Do I need to tell the Reader ( only for the fake of youths and forreigners) that when the Nonconformifis caufe was at the bar, when fpeaking had any room and hope , they fet me in their forlorn , and engaged me ( with my Confidence and defire to have prevented that which I forefaw ) in the tasks of writing and (Jpeaking which would moft exafperate and offend the Biihops •, till I was "I -think the firft among them that was forbidden to Preach. I continued after that in London z year, where I never had place or flock, but was a ftranger : ficknefs then forced me to "remove into the Countrey. The Tents I was (bekered in, were Gods protection in my own habitation^ which if a hole I thought good enough for me. I Preacht to fuch as would hear me , till, king near the Church door , "and the people numerous, Clergie^cnvy caufed
me to be fent to the common Gaol, among malefa- ctors -, As foop as I was our, another warrant
was
was put into the Officers hands to apprehend me' again, and fend me to Newgate for fix month. -, Upon which I removed my dwelling to the next Village out of the County t Ire^ fitted none there that defired to hear me, of my Neighbours. The writings which he revileth, fhew that I lived not idle ; And I think he could wifli I had done lefs and fpoken ro fewer. I came not out of that bole of many months af- ter the Indulgence was granted : I flayed on 4 reafons of Self-denyal, becaufe I would fore-flail no London Minifters , nor hinder their Audito- ries, and therefore refolved to flay till they were fetled : I came on terms of far greater Self- denyal , to the great abatement of my health, ( to fay nothing of my greater coftj ) which now, nath a^ain forced me at prefent to retire. You fee now at what rate thefe men inform the world , and how far they are to be believ- ed.
As for his talk of [_ Difgracing the Noncon- formifts~] it's true in two fenfes. i. As he and I difgrace Chriftianity by being fo ignorant and bad : 2. Or if he mean not My own Nonconfor- mity but bis, ( even his Nonconformity to a great deal of trntb and Qjrifttan duty and common honefty ( by concatenated falfhoods ) , I have done my part ( when conftrained ) to difgrace ir.
f. 15. [Sometime a frienjkto Calvin, and then a greater to Arminius j faitWie,
A'fw. 1. Did he tell the Reader where by vne (in any words ) I contradict the other ?
1 2. But
C 302';
a. But fee the mifery of a Se&arian fpin> j that taketh it for a contradi&ion to be a friend to Calvin and Ar minim both } He would as this inferreth ,- take it ill to be thought a friend to Anabaptifts and Padobaptifts both, to Indepen- dents and Prefoyterians and Epifeopal too. But that is to fuch as I, thegreateft duty, which to him is a fhameful contradidion : When I think none Chriftians but Anabaptifis , I will be a friend to no other as fuch : Men of fo little a Church,- muft have anfwerabiy little Love : Cenforioufnefs is a friend but unto few. 3. But by this your friendlhip feemeth narrower than I thought it •. I thought it had extended to all the Anabaptiftsj But they are divided into [_Frec-v?illers^ and \_J?ret-graccrs~\ as they call them, that is, into Calvimfls and Armenians : and are you a friend but unto one part of them ? 4. But indeed Sir, dae Controverfies intended by you under thefe names, are not fuch as a man of my poor mea- fure can fix his judgement in very young, and promife that it fhail never change, nor that I can take it for a (hame to grow any wifer in them, than heretofore, though perhaps your judgement changed not from your Childhood. And I hope ( if what I have written may be published) to make it appear that foch as you that fpeak evil of what you underhand not, are the grievous enemies of the Churches of Chrift, as to Truth ; Holinefs^ and Peace, by yowi militant noife about Cahi- nifm, and <*s4rminmhifm, itirring up contentions, and deftroying Love, by making differences feerrt greater than they are *, and laying the Churches'
Con*
Concord and Communion and mens falvatioii up- on fuch queftions, as Whether the honfe fhonidke.- built of Wood or Timber ? And is not this wor- thy of your zeal ?
£. 1 6. He adds [" Sometimes a great Defin- iCder of the Parliament and their Caufey and then "none more to renounce them and betray tor them iCfor their fains. ]
An fa. I, Was there never but One Parlia- ment and One Caufe ? Perhaps* you mean that the Parliament called 1640 and. the Rump(& cal- led ) and the Armies Little Parliament, and Oli- ver, and the Army Council and all the reft of the Soveraigns were all One Parliament $ Or that to fwear to the iirft Parliament, or fighc for them, and to fhut out and imprifon them, and to diflblve them , as Ufurpers , and to fee up one chofen by — who knows whom- — and to fet up Oliver and his Son , and to pull him down again, and to fet u& the Kumf again, and to pull them down and fet lipJj Council of State, &c. were all one Caufe -5 And that one day it was Treafon not to be for oneSoveraign,and another day not to be againftthat, a ijd for another. Your Ar- ray did not betraytor them, when they forced one one part as Traytors firft , and thruft out the major part, after imprifoning and reproaching ma- ny worthy wife and religious men, and when they pulled down all the reft at laft ? Had you* or I more hand in thefe matters ?. Whether you know your felfl know not, but I am fureyou know not me, nor what you talk of.
fi l7- ft
(3°4) $. 17. It followeth [Sometime s a great Off ofef of Tradition , and anon a great defender there
°n
Anfve. 1 . If you take Tradition equivocally , you calumniate but by equivocation • but \i [there - of 2 mean [the fame. Tradition'] your faifhood hath not the cloak of an equivocation. Prove what you fay by any words of mine > It is be- tween twenty and thirty years I think iince I largely opened my judgement of Tradition, in the Preface to the iecond edition of my book cal- led the Saints Reft, which I never changed fince. If you will deny that your Father delivered you the Bible ( or any other J or that the Church hath ufed both* Bible and ISaftifm from the Apoftles dayes til! now, Let the reproach of fuch Tradi- tion be your glory , if you will ; It (hall be none of mine. But do you write a book to prove the Tradition of Adult Baptifm from Chrifts time to ours, and when you have done renounce and fcorn it ? See Reader, how he valueth his own work ?
$< 18. He addeth [ " Sometimes a violent im- *c fngner of Pofery, and yet at laft who hath fpokfn u more in favour of it f ]
Anfw* Here again if by [ Pofery ] and [ it 3 you mean the fame thiiig, You hold on the fame courfe : Prove it true , and take the honour of once writing a true accufation. I have not hid my judgement about Popery, having written about feven or eight books againft it in above twenty year? time, by which you may fee in comparing them whether I changed my judgement. If you Cannot, refufe not to blufh. Bur
But I was and am a defender of that which Js Popery and Antichriftianity with you , the Church-member/hip , Covenant-jntereft and Baptifm of Infants, and it's like many more par- cels of the Treafures of Chrift , which you zea- loufly rob him off, and give to Antichrift •, As too many Sectaries do, the greateft part( I doubt more than nine parts of ten- ) of his Kingdom or Church univerfal : And as Divines ufe to prove that carnal minds arc enemies and haters of God, becaufe they confefs , honour and worfhip him both in Name, and in refpeft of many of his At- tributes and relations and works, yet in refpedt of others they are averfe to him -y (o I would be a monitor to you, and fuch like Sectaries, to take heed of going much further, left before you know what you do , while you honour Chrift s name , and cry up fome of his Grace, and doctrines, you fhould really hate, oppugn and blafpheme him, and take Chrift himfelf for Antichrift, and his Chur- ches and fervants for Antichriftian. If you will take him for Antichrift that taketh Infants into the vifible Church, I think it will prove tobe Chrift \ himfelf.
$. 19. Reader, How big a volume wouldft thou have me write in anfwering fuch fluff as this ? Tears are fitter than Ink, for fuch fearlefs* fafh, continued, vifible falfhoods, to be delibe- rately publimed to the world as truths, by one that calleth himfelf a man, and a Chriftian, and feemeth zealous to new Chriften moft of the Chriftian world. Unlefs I ftiould tire my fdf and thee, I muft ftop, and ceafe this noyfome X work :
work : Only one charge more which runs through much of his book, 1 will anfwer , becaufe iE' concerneth the caufe it felt*.
0. 20. He oft tells you that when I have cal- led my book^Plain Scripture proof ] I yet there and after comradid my felf , by faying that the con- trover fie ts difficult ] and by faying that in the ancient Churches men were left at liberty to Ba- ptise their children when they would.
And i. His very words prove that this is no contradiction : For thefe very words I will make plain to a boy of ten years old, and yet the world mud know in print that he is not able to under- ftand them , and that this is worthy the conside- ration of his profelytes. z. My meaning I ope- ned long ago, which he concealeth : The Proofs of Infants Church-memberfhip are Plain : the proof therefore of their right to Biptifm is plain though not in the fame degree ? but there are ob- jections of difficulty which may be brought againfl it, which every weak Chriftian (nor Mincer neither) cannot anfwer. And the hardefi is that which is little taken notice of by themfelves, but I ( impartially ) opened in my Chriftian 'Dire&o- ?y. - And is k a contradiction to fay that a do- ctrine that hath Plain Proof ', may be afTauked by difficult ob^tlions ? Ancl yet fuch as a fober Chriftian ihould not be changed by,. unlets on the fame reafons he will forfake all Chriftianity , and his everlafting hopes : , For I take the do&rine of the Souls Immortali- ty to be fuch as may be Plainly proved : But truly I take it to, be five degrees above the abi- lity
( $97 )
l lityof this Writer, to anfwer folidly all that can be faid againlt it. I take it to be Plainly pro- vable that the Scripture is certainly true : And yet I take it to be quite above this confident mans ability well to folve all the, diinculties ob- jected ? were it but thofe poor ones of \Bent- diclm Spinofa in his lace peftilent7rrf$*f/# The* ologico-Yoliticus. I ithink I have plain proofthac God is not the Author of fin, and man is not moved in it and all his ads as an engine by un- avoidable nece'iiitation : But I defpaif that ten years ftudy more fhould inable this Writer, clear- ly to folve the objections of Hobbes or Camera about it. In a word, though we have Plain proof that Chrifi is the Son of (3odi I fhould be loch that the faith of this Nation mould lie upon the fuccefs of a difpute about it , between a crafty Infidel and this felt-conceited man.
p. 2ii And why fhould my impartiality ia acknowledging the Churches liberty as to the time of Baptifm, at firft, be fo unkindly received ? I meant not, nor faid, that Chrift had\dt it Indif- ferent and to their Liberty , but that they kk one another at liberty herein : Becaufe i. The firffc and great work was in fetling the Chur- ches by converting Jews and Gentiles to the faith : And the Adult who were the active mem- bers,' were they that the Apoftles had moft to do with, ( and therefore whofe cafe is expreffy fpoken of.)
2. Becaufe it was a known thing thar the In- fants of Church members had ever been Church- members and were in pofTeifion of that Relaa- X a on
( 3o8 )
on when Chrift and his Apoftles fet up B> ptifm.
3. And it was a granted cafe , that all Sancti- fied perfons devoted themfelves and all that they had to God • and every thing according to its capacity : And therefore their Infants according to their capacity, which God himfelf had before expounded.
4. And it was never the meaning of Chrift to lay fo much on the outward wathing, as ma- ny Papiits and Jnabaptifts do : But as the un- circumcifed Infants in the Wildernefs were ne- verthelefs Church- members and faved ^ fo when Infants were in the Covenant of God by the Pa- rents true and known confent, their damnation was not to be feared, upon their dying unbapti- zed by furprize.
5. But yet obedience to God being neceffary , many Parents haftned their childrens Baptifm, ac two or three dayes old. Others {laid till the eighth day : others longer • and multitudes had children that were in feveral degrees entred on the ufe of reafon , when the Parents were con- verted , and it remained doubtful whether they were fas to the Covenant ) at their Parents choice or their own : And to this day there want not thofe that think that Baprifm was not inftituted to be the ordinary initiating Sacrament of the children of Church-members , but only of Pro- felytes -, And that Chriftians Infants took their- places in the Church of cottrfry but Frofelytes from without only were to be Baptized. Though this be an error, it is probable that there were
feme
(3^9)
fome then, as well as now of that opinion. Bu1 nothing more occafioned ( as far as I can find ) the 4elay of Baptifm, than the fear of the danger of fi rtning after it, efpecially of apoftafie. All held that all fin pad was pardoned in Baptifm. And Heb*6. and 10. aniother texts, and the com- mon dodrine of the Church made them think it a very perillous thing to fin wilfully ^fter illu- mination and the acknowledgement of the truth. And therefore abundance delayed their own Ba- ptifm till age, and many were backward to Ba- ptize their children, leftchildifh folly and youth- ful lufts, and worldly temptations, fhould draw them to trample upon the blood of the Cove- nant ^ And on fuch accounts, all were not Ba- ptized at one age. And divers that were Ba- ptized at age upon their own converfion from Heathenifm , were not fuddenly fo knowings as to be acquainted with all the cafes about their childrens rights, but mud have a confiderable time to learn. For it was ( be it fpoken without offence to ftrider men } a General and Nar- row fort of Knowledge which the ApofHes and the Primitive Churches required in the adult as neceffary to Baptifm , yea when they had at laft kept them long under Catechizing. For even in Anguftines time , though all ufed the fare words olBaptifm,fo few had a clear underitaiid- jng of the very Eaptifaial form or words , that (vjrinng(itbifupra)debapt.contr.Donat. ) he faith that as to the Meaning of thofe words not only, the Hereticks , Jed ipfi carnales parvuli Ecclefi<e9 fi poffent firtgult diligentcr imerrogari , tot di- X 3 w-
verfitates opinianum fottaffis , quot homines nuwe*\ rarentur : Ammalis enimhomo non percipit^Q. Annon tamen ideo non integrum facr amentum acr cipiunt ?
§* 22. There remaineth a Catalogue of my hey- nous errors which he hath put in the preface to his firft edition, and in the end of the fecond, and which he and fuch as he hav£ taught many honeft wrak people in London, both Anabaptifts and Independents to talk frightfully and odtoul- ly of from one another behind my back. What fhould I fay to him and them ? Shall I anfvver them that never fpeak or write to me ? Shall I take this mans accufation for a confutation or con- viction f> Is fo deadly an enemy of Antichrift conceited of a felf-infallibility , or that I muft take my faith or truftfrom Mf\jD^w^though not from the Church, Pope, or General Council ? If nor, what did the man think that a recitation ihould do with me ? Did not I know what I had written till he told me }
$• 23. But it is others that he tells it to \ Thofe others wilt read my own words or, they will not f If they will, I will not befocenfo- rious of them as to think that tbey need any more to his fruftration : If they will not, muft I write another book to tell them what I have written in the former ? How fhall I know that they will any more read the laft than the firft > If Satan have To much power over them, that he can make them err, and lie and (lander and back- bite as oft as a man profefling zeal for the truth, will be his inftrument and meffenger , ir is not
my
(itt).
my writing more books that can fave them* The end muft tell them, whether IortheyfhaU be the greater lofers by it.
$. 24. I have therefore but thefe two wayes now to take ; 1. Whereas this man fakh, that my doctrine feemeth heynons to every one of my Non- conforming brethren, and moft Trotejiants^ and that I have loft my felf among my friends, I do demand as their duty and my right , the Means of my conviction and reducton from thofe brer thrcn ( if any ) whom he doth not belie : I pro- fefs my felf ready privately or publickly to give them an account of the reafons of all my doctrine, and thankfully to retract whate- ver they frail manifeit to be an error. And I challenge any of them to prove that ever I re- fufed to be accountable to them, or denyed a fo-
1 ber anfwer to their reafons, or refufed to learn of any that would teach me, or to iludyas hard
. to know as they ? or that ever partiality, facti- on or worldly intereft, bribed me to deal falfly with my confeience, and betray the truth. And if after this claim , they will be filent, I will take them for confentcrs , or if by backbiting on- ly any will ftill notifie their diflent, I will take them forfuch as I take this writer, and infone refpeft worfe though not in all. ^,
<5. 25. 1 1. My fecond remedy is, I will go wil- lingly to School to Mr. D. and having faid fo much for the Learning, againft the Diluting way, I will become his hearer and reader, if he have any thing to teach me, that favour eth of Truth X 4 and
f3iO
and Mode fly more than this noyfome fardel doth which he hath pubiifhed. And to that end I will here give him a Catalogue of the contra- ry opinions to mine, which I defire him folidly to prove. If he hold not the contrary doEirines^ why doth he exclaim againfi mine, as heynom ? If he do hold the contrary to what I have with due and clear diftindion and explication opened, ( and his Readers after the perufing of all my own words together be of his mind J I then take thefe follow- ing to be their own opinions , and part of their Religion, which I defire them to make good, an4 teach them me by fufficient proof.
CHAP,
(3*3)
CHAP. VIII.
]Ji Catalogue of feme Dottrines of Mr .Dan vers and the reft that with him accufe my Chriftian Di- rectory , if indeed they hold the contrary to wine which they accufe ( as muft be fuppofed by their accujation) which as a Learned lintr cat any of themfolidly to prove*
OF the Queflion 49. p. 826. as cited by him (The falfhood of his inferring £ in a Popijb Countrey in their way of Baptizing 3 in that cited place which fpake only of the Lutherans, I pafs by as weary of anfwering fuch : But
I. That it is a fin for any man ( fuppofing In- fant Baptijm a duty ) to offer his child to be Ba- ptised where it will be done with the fign of the Crofs, or fuch ceremonies as the Lutherans ufe, though he frofefs his own dijfent and diffallow~ ance of thofe ceremonies , and though he cannot lawfully have it done better, but muft have that cr no Baft if mat all ?
I I. That in the ancient Churches of the /?- cond, third, and fourth ages, it had been better to be unbaptiaed than to hfe a white Garment in Baptifm as they did , or to be anointed as then, cr to tafte Milk and Honey, though the Terfoti offering his child to fuch Baptifm, had profejfed his dijfent as aforefaid ?
III. That
(314)
III. That all the Churches of (lirift in thofe fecond, third, and fourth, and following ages, who were Baptised thus ( Infant or adult, ) had wo Baptifm but what was worfe than none : ( Though Church hiflory certifie m that this ufe was fo univerfal , that it's hard to find any one Chrifiian in all thofe or many after ages that ever was againft the lawfulnefs of it, or refufed
in) . . •
( By the way, it was but one of your tricks
which you know not how to for- * p. 572. edty bear, * to foift in [Peril of
Law 2 when I had not fuch a word or fenfe as Peril : As if you knew of no Obli- gation thexe but from Peril* )
. IV. Tour fag* 373. ed. z»\That anointings fifing the white Garment , Milh^ and Honey, were Blafphemous rites, and Popifh beforePopery was exifient $ or if otherwife , that jlll Chrifts Church was Popijh then ?
V. Tour Pref. ed. 1 . [ That Chrifts Mlnifters rightly ordained and dedicated to God in that fa- cred- office * are not fo much as Relatively holy asfeparated to God therein ?
VI. That Temple's , and Church Vtenfils de- voted and lawfully feparated by man to holy ufes , either are not juftly Related to God as fo fepa- rated, or though fo feparated and Related are in no degree to be called Holy 2
V 1 1. Tour
-
VII. Tour Pref. 16. [That no Reverence is due to nJWinifters and Church utenflls ? ]
VIII* Ibid. [ To be uncovered, in the fiurcb; - and ufe reverent carriage and ge ft ures there, doth riot at all tend to preferve due reverence to God and his'worfloip ?
IX. Ibid. [That the unjufl alienation of Tern' pies, Vtenfils, lands, dayes, which were fefara-. ted% by Cjod him [elf, it no facr Hedge : no not ta have turned the Temple of old, and the facred, things to a common ufe unjuftly : nor the Lords day now. ( But thou that abhorreft Idols, doft thou more than commit Sacriiedge ? Even teach men fo to do, and fay It is no Sacriledge ? no not when God himfelf is the feparater and man the unjufl alienater £ And yet is Infant-Baptifm a fin?)
X. Ibid. [That it's no facr Hedge unjufl ly to alienate things juflly confecrated and feparated to God by man (as sjltmifters, Lands , Vtenflls, & c. .) ( Remember Ananias and Saphira. )
X I. Ibid. [ That it is a fin to call a nJMinifler a Fneft, though it be done in no til defign,, nor With any fcandal or temptation to error, and though he that uftth the Word profcfs that he doth it but as a tranfiation of the Greeks word [ Presbyter ] and as God himfelf doth Rev. I» 6. and 5*10. and 20. 6. and 1 Pet. 2.
5-
5. 9. ( Queftion. Whether it is finfully ufed in Scripture ? )
XII. lb. [" Accordingly it is fin to ufe the word [Altar J for £ Table] or the word[ Sa- crifice J /or [ worfhip j (as thanksgiving &c. ) though with all the forefaid cautions ^ and though Cod fo ufe them in the Scripture, 1 Pet, 2.5. Heb. 13. 15,16. Phil. 4. 18. Eph. 5.2. Rom. 12. 1. Heb. 13. 10. Rev. 6. 9.and 8.3, 5. and 16. 7. And that all the ancient writers and Churches finned that fo (pake f j
XIII. That no fober Chrifiians fhould allow each other the Liberty cf fuch phrafes without cenforioufnefs or breach of Charity and peace^ lbid.pref.
XIV. Ibid. \_It is a finto fet a Rail about the Communion Table though it be not done to any ill defign nor with fcandal , but only to keep dogs from pijftng or dunging at it, and boyes from abu- fing it.
XV. That in fuch cafe, yea though fcandal be removed by the publick. profejfion of the Church, it is a fin to come to fuch a railed table to com- municate ; even when no finfuldi fiance between tho Clergie and Laity is intended.
XVI. Ibid. £ Chrifiians ought to cenfure and condemn each other , if one come to fuch a Table, or Receive kneeling, fuppo fing it a lawful thing.~^
XVII.
XVII. Ibid. [ That it is a fm to keep a thank^ ful remembrance of Gods mercy to his Churchy by an anniverfary day of folemnity , in giving them any Apoftle; Martyr, or extraordinary in~ ftrument of his bleffing,at fame keep their birthday s, or vpedding-dayes,or dayes of fame great deliverance, and England the fifth of November h Though it he not terminated in the honour of a Saint, but of (jod, nor made equal to the Lords day, nor kept otberwife than jpiritualiy andpioufy?
XVIII. Ibid. [ That for a man that is again ft commanding the Ahflinence of Lent, and againjb obeying fuch commands as an Imitation ofChrift's forty dayes fafting , and in all cafes of injury to our fouls, bodies, or others ^
yet to fay that he is not a- Read Rom. 14. and hie to prove it a fm to obey judge. by meer abftinence, when the Magi fir ate peremptorily commandeth it , meetly in Commemoration, and not Imitation of Chriftfs faft , is a fin in him that faith it, though it be true : zAnd confequently though it would do no harm to my felf or others , I ought rather to die than to forbear fie jh in Lent, if the King com* mandit ?
XIX. Ibid. \That Church Alufick, (and con- fey next ly finging which is the prime Mufick.) is no help to any wan in the fervice. of Cod?
XX-
(3iS)
X X. lb. [That though he find it a help, it is Jin for any man to ufe it .<*
XXL That either Chrift did not joyn with the jews in worfiup whichihad Mufick. ( in the Tem- ple ) or elfe he finned info doing ?
XXII. That the experience of prejudiced fe If - conceited men, that know not what melody is, trntft be fet againfi the experience of others fo far as to deprive them of all fuch helps and mer- cies, as the other find no benefit by , ( As ftnging is now cafi out of many Churches.)
XXIII. That it is no wrong to Ignorant Chriftians to put fuch whimfies and fcruples into their heads f
XXIV. lb. [It is a fin to Vow Chaftity for any man in the world, though it be with this ex- ception or condition, [ Unlcfs any thing (hall fall out which (hall make it a fin to me not to marry]. And though under the mofi extraor- dinary neceffities of avoiding marriage , he find fuch confirmation of his Refolutions need-
0t
XXV. lb.[That it is in no Cafe lawful tokeep a Vow of Chaftity, at le aft among the Papifls ? And confequently whereas Chrift faith , He that can keep this faying, Let him, It is every mans du- ty te breaks Chaftity that hath once vowed it ,
though
though it were no duty , but a fin before* For doubtlefs <L?ldarriage U a fin accidentally tofinr,ey though not in its own nature , and far from be- ing a duty to all ? But according to thia dotlrine^ if a man were eighty years old, and utterly impo- tent, and unable to breaks his vow of Chaftity if he would, he is bound to do it , which he can- not do, and to break, his vow when he cannot breaks it ? or if an old mans marriage that hath no nee e [fit y^ would undo him f elf and his (former) children , he is bound to marry , if he have but once vowed that he will not -, cr at leafi he way do it? (For which of the contraries you chufe \_ May or Muft 3 / am uncertain, )
X X V I. lb, [That either it was a fin to put TiLlures in the Geneva BibleSy and a fin to have our Dutch Chimney bricks which contain all the hiflory of the Go/pel, or any other Image of Chrifi crucified wherever , or once to fee fuch a Pitlure ; or elfe it is a fin to have any holy ajfeclion fiirrd up in our hearts by feeing it : fo that though ail things are fantlified and pure to the pure, and I may excite holy affections when I fee but a worm or flower, or any creature , or a houfe, or any wori^ of man, yea when I fee the fins of the wick- ed y 1 may ftir up thankfulnefs for grace 9 yet if I fee in a Qmmney piece y or a Geneva Bi~ ble, or elfe -where y the Image of Chrifi crucified, it is a fin to excite holy affettions thereupon -, Though the twenty one Cafes which I have named as un- lawful to ufe an Image in, be every one obferved ( astht Cafes of danger y fcandal and all the refl.)
XXVII,'
(32°;
XXVII. The Image of Chrifl Crucified in the Imagination or mind of a Believer is a fin; Therefore it is a fin to thinks of a Crucified Chrifl 7 or to k^ow Chrifi crucified^ or to love Chrifl cru- cified as finch : Tor it is impojfible to think, on btm, know him or love him as crucified, without the Image of him on the mind : Therefore Paul determined to do nothing hut fin, when he deter* mined to know ?Jothing but Chrifl and him crucified : and inflead of anathematizing them that love him not , he fliould have anathematized or repro- ved all that love him sas crucified*
Do you and your Companions know that you are renouncing your Baptifm, and Chriftianity, and the Crofs of Chrifl:, while you would reba- prize us all ? I charge it not on you as your meaning ; But if it be not the downright confe- quence of the words of all my Religious backbi- ters, who fay that the Image of* Chrift crucified hefitteth not our minds or imaginations , but is a fin there , I have loft all my reafoning faculty , and know not what Man or Reafon is.
XXVIII. Ibid. &Ed*2. p. 372- [That the Ordination and ^JMinifterial Office received by any that live in Communion with the Qhurch of Rome, and confidently all their baptizing! and other miniflrations are not only lins but nullities : ( Though they were fuch as Bernard , Malachie , Patrick, Gerfon , Ferus , Kempis , Gerard Zut- phanienfis, &c. ) And fio none of the Enghfh Na- tion had true baptifm from their firfl Converfi-
§n
liT
C3.*0
tnVy Auguftine till the Reformation , bat all di- ed unbaptizcd and Jhould have been baptised again : And fo ftiould all baptised by them in any Kingdoms of Europe or the World: and fo Luther, ^uinglius. Martyr^ Mufculus, and the reft of onr fir ft Reformers, were never Chriftned, but all dyed unbupti^ed perfons , and Jhould have been bapti- zed after their converfion.
XXIX. lb. That it were better have all Eu- rope unbaptiz^ed ' ( Infants and adult ) than fuch as Bernard, Ferus , Callander , &c . ftjould ba- ft ine them, though they had leave to prote ft again ft a/1 that is finful in it, and were put upon no fin-> ful promifesy profejfions, or atts them fe Ives*
XXX. lb. That it is a fin for thofe in any Country that can have no other , to confent that a} Papift Prieft do teach a Child to Speak^or to Ready or to Write, dr teach him Mufick^, Arithmetic^ Geometry, Latme, Greeks or Hebrew, Logick^y or Grammar , or any Art, though but fuch as Labou- rers get their daily bread by,
X X X ft lb. That it is a fin for thofe in Italy, or any Kingdom that can have no other , to let 4 ; Popip Prieft teach their Children the Creed y Lords prayer and Ten-Commandments which all Chriftians are agreed in: but it's better that tlyy never learned a word of the Bible, or Chriftian- Faith, than learn it of fuch a Prieft : fo finfully did Biftop llfher make the motion to the Prieft $ in Ireland, that P rote ft ants and they might joyn
Y in
(322)
in teaching the barbarous people the Creed and- camj.on principles of Religion,
XXXII. lb. That it is a fin to hear a Po- fijh Vrieft read Gods word or any good book > though it were a Protefiants, or one of the Anci- ent fathers : or to hear him Jpeak^ the truefl Do- Urine , though in a Country where it can no other vpay be heard or learned,
XXXIII. lb. That in fuch a Country where v ps no other , it is a fin to joyn with one of
them in any Prayer how good foever , though cra- ving a bleffing on our meat, or in a family , or elfewhere •- even in the Lords Prayer %
XXXIV. lb. That it is necejfary to Salva- tion to believe that the Pope is Antichrift, and fo no man , woman, or child can 1oe faved that belie - veth it not. And fo fine e Antichrifi arcfe , we have a new Article in our Creed: Even for thofe that know not what the Pope isy whether male cr female, fefi or fijh.
XXXV. lb. That it i* a fin to read any good book^ m the Church be fides the Scripture,any Chapter ■ in the Apocrypha, an) Homily or Sermon, though written by an Anabaptifi, and though we dec: what it is , and mention it for no other end but what it is written for, as we cite Authors as wit- ?:effes : ( And yec ir is lawful for Mr. D* ro pubf- m many ( falfly ) inPrinr.)
XXXVI.
•v
(3*30
XXXV I. lb. That it is a fin to read a' Pray. in the Church, though it were the Prayer of Chrift John 17. or of Moles or others in the Pfalmes, or any others.
X X X V I T. lb. That if one pray <JUr. Dan- vers to pray for htm, it is Idolatry , or if the peo- ple or fick^ pray the Mimfter to pray for them , or Children their Parents -3 or if one jhould do fo by an Angel that foould appear to him • or to a Saint or Angel unfeen^ imagining that he were preftnt ^' this is not only Super ft it ion andfo ftnful^ bat alfo Idolatry •, which is giving Gods proper War flip to a creature : And confequentlyi it is the proper werjhip of God only , to pray him to pray for ns to himfclf
XXXVIII. Ib» That it is a fin to bow thi kyee at the naming of Jefmy though we renounce all in it that is fuperftitioits and fcandalow, arid bow equally at the name of God, Jehovah, Chrift, &c.
X X X I X< lb. That it is a fin to ft and when the Gofpel is read, 'though we be never fo weary of fittings and ft and equally at the reading of all the reft of the Scripture^ or at Sermon without diftin- tlion -, fo heynoiijly did the Vntverfal Church ftn for many hundred years in their long ftandings • and fo finful a shing it is to hear in a Church or Meeting-place that hath no feat s7 unleft we ft an the ground*
Y a XL
(3H)
XL. lb. That it is a fin to kneel while the Ten~fimmandments are read, though it he by wo- men whofe cuftom that pofture is ( upon a bofi ) through the rift of the dates exercife ; and though it be never fa openly declared that we take them not for a prayer , nor do it to any ill figmftcati- on or intent.
X L I. lib. That he finneth who doth not con- demn the Univerfal Church of Chrifi for many hundred years ( of the greateft antiquity that we have any records of fine e the Apo files) for their Worfiupping with their faces towards the Baft y Though he jhould himfelf diflike that practice and never ufe it, nor con fen t to have it ufed.
X L 1 1. lb. That it is a fin to fay , that any
children of any wicked men in the world, have any
guilt of any of their nearer Parents fins, but on~
ly of Adams : ( And confequently it muft be held
that God unjufl'ly threat ned and punifiied any fuel)
children for their Parents fin , from the dates of
Cain, Cham, Pharaoh, Ifhm-tei , Efau, Achan ,
Gehezi, till the dales of that Generation threat-
ved Matth. 23. And alfo that no man receiveth
any pravity from Adam neither , becaufe it muft
pafs to him through his next Parents and be
their sy and he receiveth none that is theirs: And
fo all Nations are juftified againft all guilt of any
Parents fin but Adam, and warranted to deny ta
confefs any fuch gut It , or to be beholden to
Chrifi or wtrcy for the pardon of it , ihm^h
( 3*5?
David , Daniel and Nehemiah did othewife.) I fay again , cither Mr. D.and his likedore- aHy hold the contraries of the a/Tertions of mine which he thus notifieth as hey nous errors, or not: If not , he raileth agairrft his Confcience in hy- pocrifie : If yea, then thefe propofitions which I have named to you are the contraries to mine. And it is fo curfed a thing to add two and four- ty New Commandments to the Law of God , that I who think them to be no better, do again and again defire him , to give me the full proof of all thefe ftrange Commandments, and tell me where they are written ( if I have overlook! them. )
If this cannot be obtained, I call to his imita- tors and my backbiters to let me know, whether really they will own all thefe, and give me leave to tell the World, and the Ages to come , that thefe were their Do&rines, for the love of which they whifpered or clamoured againft me.
But here he flops and pittieth the Reader, and referreth them to my Book it felf : And I will joyn with him and add, that the Reader that will think that he knoweth what I hold or wrote, by this and fuch like mens citations or reports , and will not read the Book it felf, and all in k to- gether that concerneth the queftioned fubjedt, be- fore he judge > I take not my felf bound to write more books to tell him what I wrote in the far- mer, nor do I think that I am orherwife obliged to rectifie his Error,. than by Prayer or Coun- fd, endeavouring to bring him to fome tendernefs of Confcience , fear of God and fobriety of mind. Y 3 But
( mi
But his flrength tieth in frightful exclamation?*, £ O was ever the like yet heard, dec. to palliate abominations 3 and reconcile us to Idolatrous Vopifii names, as Altar, Priefis, Sacrifices, &c. and their baptifm. ] And yet he might have known' that all thefe words are oft ufed by the ancicnter lort of the holy Paftors of the Churches after the Apoftles, and I remember not that ever one Chriftian was againft it , Or fcrupled the ufe of them : And I before (hewed that they are ufed by the Holy-Ghoft in Scripture, whom I dare not accufe of Idolatrous names , or reconciling us to them. Whether all the Papifts.baptifm admini- ftred and received be nullities, and all Papifts to b.e rebaptized,and ail Proteftants that were baptized by Papifts? are queftions which I will not be fo vain as todifputewith one that talketh at thismais rate.
But yet we have not done with the high char* ges of his Preface : He faith ." [_ Oh ! were not ic thofe twenty Queries., fo much againft the felf- cc evidencing authority of the Scriptures, in his u Admon. p. 142. in favour of Tradition a hey- cc not* provocation? to fay no more of them .? 3
<iAnfw. It feems they were fo to you. But re- ally , did you read that book and the other to Mr. Bag flaw, and yet not fear to follow him and ouf-do him in notorious untruths, after fo full a convidion and warning as was given him ? Think On it, and again cry out f But alas! whereto mill not men run left to themselves? ~\ I there profef- I'd and proved to your friend Mr. Bagfhaw that I was for, and wrote for the fclf-evidencing au- thority of the Scripture, audit is untrue that thofe
twenty
(3*7) twenty Queries or any one of them is againft if But feeing you think otherwife , if indeed, you held the contrary to the aflertions implied in thofe twenty Queries, I am not at the end of the Ca- talogue of your ftrange Doctrines : If you and my revilers own them, fo will not fober men : e. g.
X L 1 1 I. £ Every Chriftian muft fee the Co- fies of the Scripture written by the Prophets and Apoftles own hands : Or at leaf muft under f and theTranfcripts tnthe Original tongues* \
XLIV. \_ God hath promt fed unerring infal~ libility to all Scribes in the world that write out the Bible, and all Printers that print it : Or at leafl to fome of thew7 and we may be certain who thofe are.2
XL V. £ Though the fever at Copies have a multitude of differences, it is certain none of them are erroneous, or miftaken*~\
X L V I. £ Thufe men and women that Under**
.ftand not Hebrew or Greek may be certain only
by feeing a Hebrew and Greeks Bible, without a
Tranftators help , that every word in it is jhe
Word of God, 3
• X L V I T. £ Either he that will be fire which Copy is without mi f writing-, mufl: fir ft fee all the Copies in the world that jfffer -, or elfe if he never fee but one (or few ) he may be cer- tain i hat it h * right in* the wftds in which it Y 4 differ ah
(>8)
dtffertth frpm nil the reft which he never faw.J
X L V 1 1 1. [No corrupt or mif-written fipy of the Scripture can come to a true Believers hands : Or if it do, he can infallibly tell tu the Er- rata, 2
X L I X. A true Believer that newer faw the
Originals can by feeing a tranflation judge of all the dtverfe readings in the Originals*
L. The. Tranflators are either all infallible in translating •, or elfe a true 'Believer is certain which of them is , and which not , and which, tranflation among many faulty ones is fault lefs.
L I. He that never faw all Tranflations , but, perhaps but one , can by that one tell that it is truer than all the differing ones, which he never
Jaw.
LIL <zAll this of Copies and Tranflations is known to Believers either by Prophetical Revela- tion from Heaven , or by the f elf -evidencing de- pionjhation of the Copy and Tranflation which he Jccth,
L 1 1 1. [Every true Believer without being ever told it by man, can ted by the fe If ^evidencing de- monffiration of the words , that the Canticles and the B.ooks of Judas , Ruth , Chronicles, Jonah, are Qanonical^ anoTthat the wifdom of Solomon, fearuck, Pauls Epiftle to the Laodiceans , Cle- mens
puens wlj Corinthians, &c. Are not Can6ni«
gal.
L I V. Either God will giitt faith to no one that cannot read ( among ail the illiterate King- 4oms of the world where the Gojpel is to be preach- ed, ) or elfe all that cannot read, may without ever reading a word be certain by f elf -evidence which readings in the differing Copies, and which Tran- fations are true or falje, and which books and verfes and fentences are Canonical and which not*
L V. Either God hath promifed that every illi- terate Chriftian ( that cannot read ) Jhall hear feme one elfe read every word of the Bible to him ( in Originals and Tranjlations, or one ) that he may judge • or elfe by the f elf -evidence that per- fon that cannot read,nor never heard half the Bible read, can certainly teU what words are truly or falfly written, or Tranflated7 without ever hear* ing them*
L V I. When the greate ft s Learned Linguifls dif- fer about a Letlion , or Tranflation , ( as the Septuagwt, &c. ) ( fuch as Lud. Capellus, Ufher, Buxtorf, Bootius, De Dieu, 1/ Empereur, Wal- ton, &c. ) or when fuch a* Luther, Althames, &c. differ about a Canonical Book^ ( as James ) it is.be- caufe they fee not that fe if -evidence, which every Chriftian may fee, that car^fbt read nor was ever told it, that one fart, (if not more ) do herein err, wfcile their judgements are contrary.
None
Clio)
None of thefe fifty fix are Articles of^By Faith, nor Gods Commandments ( that I can find. ) I fay not that thefe ignorant Revilers hold all thefe • but I fay that He -£ and They) that will openly ex- claim againfl the contrary affertions as beynous er- rorj, or tell about among the receivers of falfe reports, that I bold dangerom errors for fayingthe contrary to thefe, doth either perfwade men that all thefe are his Opinions, or elfe that he is an impudent Hypocrite , in reviling known truth as heynous error; or elfe a raft) CalHn.m at or that: dare reproach "or fpeak evil &T that which heun- derftandeth not , nor will not , fo much as by reading my plain words , be at the labour to un- derftand.
Perhaps fome better minded perfon will fay, It cafleth poor Chrifiians into perplexity to hearfuch doubts aboift the Scripture readings and translati- ons, were they not better concealed ? Anfw. They are not to be talkt of unfeafonably to unapable perfons : They are not to be told the ignorant in- ftead of a Catecjhiun : But they are ail publick- ly known to the learned world long ago, and told the ignorant people by the Papifts to ill ends : And if any one will perfwade you to hold the contrary , and make you believe that all or any of thefe abfurdi ties and falfhoods are the true Proteftant Religion, or any part of it, and that they that hold the contrary are Popifh , it is time to vindicate the Proreftant Religion and all fober godly Proteft^s, from the fcorn of fucli imputed douiges.
But
But this is the unhappy fruit of overdoing : There are fome men among us, fo overmfe and over righteous in ckkixiing die fafjiciency of the ScYiftnreSy that they would perfwade'us, that it is fHjficient to expand it felt without a teaching Expolltor, and to preach it felf without a Preacher, and ( by confequence from their generals ) to Write and Print it felf without a Writer or Printer, and to bring it felf down from the Apo- ftles to every man without the hand or tongue of man , and to preferve it felf from corruption without the care of man, and to tranflate it felf without a Tranilator •, And that all Printed Ser- mons, or books of Divinity, all Catechifms, all Sermon notes for memory, all forms of Prayer , yea- the dividing the Bible into Chapters and Ver- ies, and Printing Contents, and Citations or Re- ferences ( much more the Geneva Notes and Pi- ctures ) are all finful additions to the Word of God. As if i\\z fufficiency of the Statutes of the Land lay in Keeping , Printing , Tranfcribing , Pleading and Expounding themfeives, without the life of Scribes , Clerks , Lawyers, Law-books or Judges.
I am well aflured that God needeth not oar Lies to his Glory, and that truth and falfhood do fp ill agree , that though falfhood may ileal a cloak from truth, yet truth will never be IjehoU den to falfhood for friendfhip and defence •, And if ever Lies pretend any kindnefs or fervice to the truth, it is but treacherouilv. to fupplant it , and will turn to its differvice ana injury at laft.
In
f 330
In a word, All the Devils in Hell, and all the Confiftory at Rome, could not eafily find out a more effe&ual way ( as far as I can underftand ) to turn multitudes to Popery , than i. By calling truth and fober Principles Antichriftian, Popery and Idolatrous.: 2. And by defcribing the Religi- on of the enemies of Popery, as made up of Lies and Dotages : 3 . And by falling all together by the ears, and breaking into a multitude of Sedfo, and condemning each other as unmeet to be com- municated with ; and fo making men believe that they muft be Papifts or diftra&ed Dotards, whofe feif-conceitednefs in Religion haih ma4e them mad : I fay , nothing that I know of doth tend more to multiply Papifts, than this . ( unlefs I may except the way of fenfuality and violence , murdering fome and drawing others by flefhlyand worldly motives :) Nor do I know any thing in the world, that more quieteth the Consciences of Perfecutors and Scorners , in all that they do and fay againft us , and hindreth them more from all convidion and repentance.
Mr. Danvers endeth his book, Ed. 1. with a fmart reflection on Mr. WiUiam AHen and Mr. Lamb for forfaking the caufe of Anabaptiftry and Separation which they had written for : And I will end mine with a few words concerning them, concluding with a free and faithful Admoni- tion to' Mr. Danversy to confider whether He or They (hould be moft earneftly called to Repen- tisicQy and moil fpeedily praftife k.
CHAP.
(333)
CHAP. IX.
REader, having the following vindication of Mr. Allen put into my hand, I think it not unmeet upon this occafion to undeceive fome who to render his example in receding from the way of Separation wherein he was fometime engaged upon the account of Infant- baptifm, the lefs imita- ble, and his endeavours to draw off others, the lefs fuccefsful h have given out that he did but turn with the times for worldly ends when the King came in. Whereas I can bear him witnefs that that return was made by him the year before the coming in of the King, as did fufficiently appear to me both by Letters which then pafTed between him and my felf about that affair, and alfo by his book called A Retrattation of Separation, pub- lished by him that fame year. Which Book I would entreat the fober Reader to get and lend to fome of the feparating mind : they will find no temporizing or formality in it , but a fpirit of Cbriltian love and peace. And if the reafons in that Book and in his pcrfwafive to peace and uni- ty fince publifhed, be fuch as none of the Sepa- rators can confute or {land before, they will have no reafon to impute the Authors change to car- nal reafon or worldly intereft. I queftion not bur experience after trial, which is wont to make teach- able men wifer, pin him upon reviewing the grounds of his practice, and fohad a greac hand in that al- teration which he made. And I-woutd have thofe
Cm)
who account it a difparagernent to a man to alter bis Judgement at any time, to tell us at what age we come under that law, when we muft grow no wifer nor no better.
And what I fay of Mr. Aliens alteration of his judgement,! muft % alfo of Mr.X^kr,whom thofe that eaflly judge before they know , have accufed alfo as turning with the times, when as on my knoivledge his change was in 1658. or the begin- ning of 1659. For by letters I did foliicite him to that alteration and received his anfwers, foontr than I knew of Mr. Aliens change : And I -per- ceive that Mr. Lambs words and example are flighted by very many , upon two accufations , 1. That he is run into the other extream of over- much conformity: 2. That he is over hot. As to the firfl, my diftance irnketh me a flranger to his mind and pra&ice. ' But as long as he con- formeth hot as Minifters do , but to that which belongeth to a private man, what doth he more than Mr. Tombes hath largely written for ? And Mr. Nye hath written to prove it lawful to hear Conformifts in the Parifh Churches, and for the Magiflrates to appoint publick Teachers for the people. 2. And as to the fecond ( not juftifying rny own earneftnefs , much lefs others which I am not acquainted with ) ro calm the minds of the offended I may well fay, i.That it is no wonder if a man that is naturally of a warm and earneft fpirit, do fhew it mofl wfcen he thinks that he fpeaks for God, and Truth, and the Church, and mens Souls. 2. That it is no wonder if a man that was drawn himfelf fo deep into the
guilt,
dm)
guilt, as to be a Teacher of an Anabaptifts Church and to write for them, be an earneit exprefifer of his Repentance when he is recovered , and ear- neftly defirous to fave others from the fnares in which he was intangled, and to do as much for Truth, Unity and peace, as ever he did againft
• What followes are Mr. Aliens own words* «
Worthy Sir,
1 Having fome intimation that you are about to make fome return to the Author of a late Trea- tife of Baptifm , do apprehend that if you think fit to Print this following Paper at the end of your Book, you may do the good office of remo- ving a (tumbling-block , at which fome are too apt to dafh their foot , and thereby alfo further caution men againft being milled by giving too much credit to the quotation of Authors , as ma- naged by that Treatifor.
In reading a Treatife of. Baptifm of the Hrft Edition, Penned by H. D. I obferved that in the two laft pages of his Poftfcript, he mentions two difcourfes that were publi led about one and twen- ty years ago the one by my felf and the other by another ; and faith that both of us are gone back to that which therein we call will-worjhip and Idola~ try.
Indeed I am forry that that author fhould put me upon any neceffity of reflecting fo much up- on dim in vindicating my felf, as to tell the world
that
t|iac upon this occafion I having twice reviewed that: Book of mine, did not find io much as the mention of either of thofe two words will-worfiip or idolatry y upon any occaflon whatfoever. Nor am I confeious to my felf of ever being fo abfurd as once to think that to be idolatry , which he mod untruly faith I call fo in that Book. That caufedoubtlefs whatfoever it is, is little beholding to fuch an Advocate as thinks to reconcile men to it by abufing difTenters.
As for the alteration I have made , I gave the world an account of the reafons and grounds of it, in my Retractation of Separation, publifhed in the year 1659. which was before the turn of times, and in my perfwafive to Peace and Vnityy fince publifhed. And if this Author could have folidly dilcovered the infufficiency of thofe rea- fons and grounds to juftifie fuch an alteration and my prefenc practice , he would have, done his caufe better fervice in my opinion, than he hath done in his Treatife by labouring to fupport it by a mifreprefentation of perfons and their opi- nions. As for me, I can truly fay I have had great fatisfa&ion and peace in my own mind, touching the alteration I have made upon thofe grounds, not only at other times, but even then alfo when I have been near unto death in my own apprehenfion, As for the other perfon he men- tions with me, I fuppofe he may e're long give the world an account of that alteration he alfo is charged with as a great faulr.
Will. Alknl
(537)
An Admonition to Mr. Dangers,
SIR,
YOur vehement importunity having greatly injured me, by occasioning the lofs offomc of my time (who have none to fpare ) upon this writing, which elk would have been needlefs • ^ou muft bear with me while I defire you, fome- time alone , to anfwer thefe Queftions ferioufly to your Confidence*
Que ft. i. Whether the untruths in matter of fad which you confidently publifh , be not of fo ftupendious a magnitude, as fhould have affrighted the Confidence of a Turk or Pagan? When no lefs than four whole Bodies of men are fo flander- ed by you, the Donatifts, the Novatians, the Old Brittainsy zndthzWaldenfes, each containing, it's like many hundred thoufands : And when fo ma- ny whole Books (not particular fentences only) are falfified accordingly ?
2 . How great a number would your untruths ap- pear,were they all gathered and enumerated to you? When in all the lines which J have examined I have met with fo ky that are not guilty of them ?'■
3. When yon accufe my Admonition to Mr. Bagfraw , and thereby fhew that you read it , fhould not the evidion of fourfcore undeniable untruths, in matter of faft, have been a warning to you to avoid the like ?
2 4vWfa-
(338)
4- Whether you do not more by fuch notori- ous fcandal to difhonour your felf and all that are fuch, and hinder your own fuccefies, than many writings againft you could have done?
5. Whether you do not • fcandal oufly tempt men to juftihe the contempt of Tender Confciepces^ and what is done and faid againft them by many publick Revilers on the other extream, when your Confcience pretending tendernefs can fwallow fuch Camels, while it cannot endure our Infant- blef- fings ?
. <5. Wnel^cr ^en can judge it probable thai" fuch voluminous notorious Forgers and Slande- rers , have fo much more illumination than all other Chriflicins, as to be meet men to call all the Chriftian world almoft to be new Chriftned, and to unchriften almoft all for about thirteen hundred years ( to leave out the controverted time ? )
7. Would you be believed in other things that can deliberately, in two Editions, do thus ?
8. Is it like that God will blefs fuch unmanly fcandals, to the Churches good ? ( unlefs as fin by overruling providence may occafion good.,) Arethefe likely means to propagate trifth ?
9. Wbn is the matter that men that can do all this, cannot Conform I What durft I not jubfcnbe to, if Tdurft do all this?
io. Is it not a difhonour to your rebaptized Churches to be fo polluted, and to have fo loofe or pmial a difcipiine, as tofufler fuch publick fcandajj as thefe ; and to retain fuch a member as you7 ajid not brin^vou to repentance or excom- - ^W& municatc
- (3390 municate you ? Have our worft Parifli Churches many greater fcandals ?
If pride, partiality and paffion will not let your Confcience work upon thefe things, but you wjll turn them into gall inftead of repentance, atleaft I offer them to the Confederation of others, to prevent or remedy their infection.
And remembe* ( which you have told the world now in Print J tfiat you fent your Bookfeller to> me, to know what I had to fay againft your firft Edition, before you published the fecond ^ And I have here partly told you what : I was not fo idle as to anfwer your Reafons, knowing how little a part they are of what Mr. Tombes hath faid more largely : And that I anfwer him at all^ is long of you, who would not let me hold my peace, I heartily defire your Recovery from the* unthankful error , and your Repentance for the finful means of propagating it , and for your in- jury to our early Rights and bleffings.
Z 2
J I
The 'Third Tart :
OBSERVATIONS
O N
Mr' Danvers
R E P L Y
Mr- WiLlES:
Detecting his impenitent proceeding infalfe Accufation, in hope of his Repentance, and the undeceiving ot others, and to warn this Age to take more heed of the common fin, of HASTY RASH JUDG- ING of things which they have not throughly examined, partial- ly taking them on their Lea- ders truft.
By (Rjcbard Baxter.
LONDON, Printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Robwfon. 1675.
■
n
(343)
APr
R
E MONITION.
Eader, there are two ftumbling-blocks to be taken out of thy way, which I had; rather have had no occafion to mention. The firft is the Name and Authority of that very worthy and ex- cellent man, Doct. T. "Barlow , S.Tb. Prof, in Oxford , which Mr. D. over and over cketh as for his caufe. Of which tilt he think meet to fpeak for hhnfelf I only mind thee that, 'i. It is -a fecret Letter to Mr.T. which they cite. 2. That it is unlikely that he that fuhfcribeth the Articles find Liturgie of the Church of England, is againil Infant-baptifm, when the Art. 27, faith, TbeBd- ftifm of Young Children it in any wife to be re- tained in the Church at mofi agreeable with the Infiitiition of Q°rift.~\
1 1. There is another worthy and eximious Do- dor of the fame llniverfity ( Doct. 77?. Tullie ) who having thought meet in a Latine Treatife of Juftiflcation to endeavonr at large fin a zeal for Orthodoxnefs no doubt ) to confute ray fuppofed errors (in my Aphorifms about twenty two years ago revoked ♦, taking no notice of the many Treatifes fince written by me on that fubjecr, but only of a late Epiftle to Mr. Allent Book, ) he hath alfo thought good to warn young men to Z 4 take
(344 ) take heed that they do not rafhly receive my Theology as bringing forth novel paradoxes, be* caufe I hold fome guilt in Children of their nea- rer Parents fins : exclaiming £ O c&cqs ante The- ologos quicpmcjue nnqaam fhijits ! ] It feemeth that this Famous Learned man knew not, that this was Auguftins judgement ( and many another ancient and modern Writer's, ) and that he is lefs for the tetany than I (that fybferibe or cjeclare not full afTent) who heartily pray, Remember not Lord our offences , nor the offences of our fore-Fa- thers, Sec. This having fome refped: to the fub- jed of this Eook , I thought meet here to give you notice , that if God, will I hope in time to give the world yet fuller fatisfa&ion on both thefe fubjefts , ( Justification , and fecondary Original fin : ) Though I thought my unanfwered Difpu- tations of Juftification , and other Treatifes had fully done the firft : And the publifhing of fome old Papers of Original fin, I think will fully do the ptlier*
OB
UdxpuKflW cpuxp ,;
Observations
O N
Mr' drivers Reply to
M" Wills.
CHAP. I.
The frightful Afpetf of his Reply.
$* l* HV JW ^ Anfwer to Mr. Tombes and
l\ / 1 Mr. Danvers being written
I \/ 1 about the fame time as my
L ▼ -A. Epiftle to hit. Wills his book,
fcath fince then beeH detained in the Printers hand,
whofe delay hath allowed me the fight of Mr.
Panvcrs Reply to Mr. Wills, and the opportu- nity
nity of animadverting on it, before mine is come abroad, And upon my moft impartial confide- ration it reneweth the grief of my heart to think of thefe evils which it fets before me.
$.2. i. That the fouls of poor Chriftians fhould be under the Temptations of fuch writings and teaching as here we find : Where fuch untruths in matter of fad are ftill juftified with fuch a face of confidence, and divulged as for God, and for the fouls of men,* that moll ignorant perfons may be tempted to think that Modefly and Cha- rity require them to believe, thar trrey are real truths, it being a harfh unmanly thing to judge that fuch a perfon can poffibly be fo hardened, as to ftand fo boldly to all thefe things, which have fuch publick hiftorical evidence, if they were all downright falftioods.
And it is a hard task for a writer to be put to anfwer a Chriftian and a Gentleman as Mr. Danvers doth Mr. Wills^Repl. fag, 120. [_ cc Know x^that hence you have a further difcovery of the ic great unfaithfulnefs and -want of confeience in " the Author, for daring" thus to abufe the world Cc with a Cheat, and that which he knoweth to be cta meer forgery of his own] And fag. 122. cC [Let it be judged whether he hath not injuri- <£ oufly belted Oftander, belied Cluniacenfis^ beli- " ed Peter Br his , belied th6 truth, which by this "forgery he would cover and hide • abufedthe
"world, belied and abufed me But much
umore fear his own confeience by this piece of a folly rmdTaUhood.J Tovbe thus at [_Tho» U- *ft ~} and [ Thou lie ft ] . is an uniavoury work ;
Yea
Yea in fo few lines to give the Lie five times at leaft. But for an ignorant Reader to believe what this Author hath done till he needs mufiy is yet far harder. Though we fay, He that will, fa/ear, will lie, and therefore we hardly believe a fwearer ., yet ifa man with many hundred H ly oaths fhould alien r^any particulars of pubiick cognifance, we arte ■ ready..- to \ think it inhum to fufpeft that the man'isfo inhumane as tht^j to fwear if fome of them were not true. Ala for the poor Church of Chrift, that muft have fuch fore temptations / How ihall theybewkh- ftood !
£. 3. 2f And how fad is it that a Chriftian man profefling not only Truth and Godlinefi, but fo much of thefe as to be above Communion with fuch as we , fhould ever degenerate into fuch a thing as his prefent writing doth discover 1 O what need have we to lay to heart that olVauly Rom. 11. be not high-minded but fear I and to learn over and over, Jam. 3. and ChrifFs words to the Sons of Thunder, ye know not what manner offpirit ye are of ?
$. 4. And alas, that ever the bitter volumi- nous Reproaches of the zeal of the prefent age, fhould have fuch a fcandal or (tumbling block laid in their way , to harden them in the ju- ftification of their reproaches 1 as if our Zeal were the Caufe or Cover of fuch heinous fins : Woe to the world becaufe of offences, and woe to them by whom they come I
tf. 5. 4. But what a tremendous warning is tbis-againft the fpirit of unwarrantable /^vtf/0#>
or
(3tf) or true Schifm, when the fame perfon ffial] ven- ture upon all that is here written by him , who yet taketh our Infant Baptifm for a meer Nnl~ lity> and the Chriftian world that hath no other to be uncapable of the Church-Communion of fuch as he ? Me-think this is a Pillar of Salt. I well remember that one of the means of keeping my ancient Flock in Concord, was the terror of thefc horrid opinions and wayes which the two or three that deferred us, fell into.
CHAP.
(349)
CHAP. II.
HU impenitent falfe allegation of 'mtnejfes again jh Infant Baftifm : Tertullian , &c, fiecially WickiifF.
£. i.T have before faid, that I have faid Co X much out of Scripture and Anti- quity, for Infants Church-member (hip and Ba- ptifm, to which I have yet feen no Anfwer that fhould fatisfie an impartial man, either from Mr* Tombes, Mr. Danvers, or any other , that I will not lofe time and labour in replying to their frivolous exceptions. And here I meddle -dire- #ly but with the matter of fad: , becaufe by o- ftentation of hiflory , Mr. D. would feduce the ignorant into the belief of grofs untruths, I be- gan with Tertullian, who is his firft witnefs, in his Catalogue , reprinted here in his re- ply-
$. 2. And why have we no fatisfa&ory an- fwer to thefe things fo oft repiyed ? i. That Tertullians words prove that Infant- Baptifm was then in ufe : And it is the matter of fatt that we are fearching after ? 2. And doth he think that Antichrift was before Tertullians time ? 3. The opinion of Tertullian feemeth not at all to be againft the Lawfulnefs of Infant Baptifm, in general 5 but againft the eligiblenefs of it in cafe of no apparent danger of death. For I have oft proved that the judgement of that age, and
feme
fome following was, that none fliould be compel- led to be Baptized, or to Baptize their Infants, but they fhould themfelves be chufers of the time. For the conceic of the abfolute neceffity of Baptifm to falvation, came in afterwards. And when the feed of the faithful are Holy, .and in Gods Covenant or Promife, upon the Parents Mental dedication of them to God, and foin a ftate of falvation, no wonder if they were not fo hafty and peremptory for the fudden Invefti- ture into the Chriflian Church ftate, when they took it to be but the publick folemnizution of a Covenant , really made and valid before. And as Naz.ianz.ene is for Infant-Baptifm ( long after ) in cafe of danger, but elfe for flaying three or four years, till they can fpeak : fo Tertitllian . feemech to prefer delay for fuch conveniencies as he mentioneth. 4. And if Mr. D. doubt of this, let him tell me why he faith, cuntlatio Mi- liar, $. And giveth the reafon from the incon- venience to the Sponfors. 6. And why he alfo perfwadeth the unmarried zx\$ young Widdowes to delay their Baptifm , till they are married^ or grow corroborate to continencie, left tempta- tion carry them to fin ; And maketh this cafe of the like reafon with that of Infants. Did he think that it was flatly unlawful for maids and young widdows to be Baptized ? or only lefsfafe^and eligible, except in danger of death ? The cafe is plain. 7. And whether he like his other reafon, Quidfefimat innocensa- tas adremifftonemfeccatorum t And whether Ter- titllian here do not tell us that he took thofe Infants that were Baptized to receive thereby folemn Remif-
fion
f350 fion of iin, if they had 'any fin ? If he thought tliey had none, we have little reafon to follow his opinion. 8. Whether his own words plainly (hew not what i have faid of him, that it was (as Conftantine , and multitudes delayed Baptifm)for fear of falling after- wards, which they thought mod dangerous \_ftqni pondus intelligent £aptifmi} magis timebunt confe- cutionem qaam dilationem : Fides Integra fecura eft de faint e ]
And lib. de Anima Tertullian faith, Apoftolos ex fantlificato alter utro [exufanftos procreari aity tarn ex feminis prtrogativa quam ex inftitutionis
difciplina— Omnis Anima in Adam cenfe-* _
tur, donee in Chrifto recenfeatur : See the reft there for Infants birth holinefs.
£. 3 . His renewed reproaches of Cyprian, as ha- ving Antichriftian do&rine , and his renewed queftioning whether there were ever fuch a Council as that at £arthage mentioned, are things fo audacious and grofs that they need no further anfwer. pag. 90.
£. 4. And his citation of An ft in pag, 94, L that which had not been inftituted tn. Councils, &cj is nothing againft this authority, or to difprove its Apoftolical traduction •, For it is eafle for him to fee, 1. That it was not whether Infants fhould be Baptized that was the qneftion, but whether it fhould be done before the eighth day ? 2. That this Council was fo far from Inftituting Infant Baptifm, that it was never brought into doubt or queftion among them, buttaken as the^unqueftiolied practice ofthe Church.
But O that fuch as Mr. P, would give over
ho-
(i?*)
honouring AntichrHl fo far ( and rejoicing and hardningthe PapiftsJ as to make fuch as Cyprian teachers of Antichriftian do&rine ; and Antichtift to have been the Author of Infants Chriftening before Cyprian and Tertullians time ? The Papifts owe fuch adverfaries thanks. ' (• S* ?*&• I04* He boafts of forty more againft Infant Baptifm cited by him, as not yet humbled for his abufe. And becaufe Mr. Willi by miftake granted him Adrian and Hincmarey he feemeth to believe himfelf the more confi- dently, as if they had indeed been againft Infant Baptifm : of which before.
£. 6. Pag. 105. He reciteth his falfe ftoryef BcrinuS) of which before.
$. 7. Pag. 106. He reciteth his fabrication of the Bifhop of Apame*. And turneth us for his proofs to fome book oft called theDutch Cen- tury Writers, and the Dutch oJWartyrologie : I fuppofe both Novel and Anabaptifi Authors .? And he may as well turn us over to -our neigh- bour Anabaptifls to tell us what is written in the ancient Hiftorians and Do&ors , when we have the books themfelves before us.
<$. 8- Pag. 106, 107. He impenitently repea- ted) his flander of Wto jy^referring us to his profs p. 283, &c Where having before falfly told us that he wrote another book^ called Trialogia be- fides his Dialogues (when it is the fame book that is called Trialogus in the M* S. and Dialogue in the printed Copy, as he may fee by many citations out of the Irialogm in Bifhop *V(her, de fuccejf, Ecclef. which are all in the DiaUgus Jhe tells
us
(353) us ot a great many of Wickfiffes words to other purpofes , ajid cannot bring one line or wordn which he denyeth Infant- Baptifm : But only i. The lying accufations of his adverfaries to that end ^ and 2. His own words which deny two Popifh tenents. i. That Baptifm faveth all^ ex cpere operato $ When he proveth contrarily (of young and old ^that where Grace concurreth, it faveth, and el fe not. 2* That Infants unbaptized are damned 5 which in charity he. thinks is to be denyed : And what's this againft their Ba- ptifm ? '
$* 9. Yea Wickjiffh exprefly afferteth Infant-Ba- ptifm, Dialog.- U. 4. c. 1 1. Iwill give the Reader Mr. Danvers words and his together.
Mr, D. Reply, p. 106, 107. " That Wickliffe cc denyed Infant- Baptifm, I produced fo much <£ evidence to prove it, from pag. 283. 10289. cc demonftrating that he not only affirmed that <c Believers were the only fnbje 'U s of Baptifm , but " withal that children are not Sacramentally to cc be Baptized : and what can be more exprefe Ct evidence in the cafe ?
"And Treat, ed. 2. p. 283. That Believers u are the only fubjett of Ba;tifm, as' appcar- u eth in his eleventh Chap, of his Trialog* "And p. 287. as a Lollard he denyeth Infant* "Baptifm.
Whether Mr. D* ever faw his cited tfook I know not : But judge of the mans credit 'by the words : He cites the eleventh Chap, not tel- ling gs of which book. But it is the fointh A a book
U50
book where the matter is handled as follow- ed!.
Wickliffe Trialog. I. 4. Cap. 11. Et primo videamm ubi baptifmus in Evangelio fiabtlitw : Nam lege Mat, ult. quomodo Chrifim manda- vit fuistj4poftoJis , he j docete, &c. et hinc Phi- lippic baptiz^ans Eunucbum AH, 8. prius infirnxit
earn in fide et propter banc for mam verbo-
rum Cbrifii Mat nit. Ecclefea no fir a adducit fideles pro Infante qui difcretionem non attigerat refpondentes : et tales compatres communiter fa* ciunty quod filii fui quos de bapiifmo elevantj fnt in Oratione domwica et fymbolo inflrutli : et alii qui difcretionem attigerant , dum in fir u- untur in fide Chrifti \ ante fiutm baptifmnm vocantur Catechumen* .* Hoc ant em facr amentum efi tarn neceffarium viatori , quod Chrifipts dicit Nicodemoy Job. 3. Nifi quts renatns f Merit ex aqua, &c. Ex tanta itaque authoritate fidei Scripture funt fideles generality baptiz^ati : et crdmavit ecclefia quod qu&libet perfona fidelis
$4 neceffitatis articnlo poterit baptizari Nee
refert Jive immergantur femel vel ter ; five aqu<z fuper capita fua effundantur : fed facien- dum efi Jecundum confuetudinem loci quern quis incolit , tarn in uno ritu legitimo quam in alio : Quia ccrtum efi quod corporalis vaptiz.atio five lotio modicum valet , nifi adfit lotto mentis per fpiritum fanllum^ a peccato originali'irel allna- li. Hoc efi enim Principium in hac fide, quod quicunque rite b apt mat us fuerit , baptifmm de- let quodcunque peccatam invencrit in bomine ba-
ptiz.anr
ft&iando. Et quia ad delationem peccati rcqui- ritur fatisf actio , et , non pctefl fieri fitisjatiio pro peccato nifi per mortem Chrifli , ideo dkit Apoftolus RottU 6. Quicunqus baptiz,ati fumm in Chrifto Jefa) in morte ejus baptizatt fa mm.
A L I T H. Sed die rogo clarim quomodo Chriflm qui tantum odivit figna fenfibilta , tan- tarn necejfitatem falvationts pofuit in hujufmodi lutione : Vidttur enim derogare divina libcraU- tati at que potentix, quod Deus non poffet inter ~ cedere toto mcrito [ho atque pajfione , falvare In- fantem^ vel adult urn fidclem, nip vctula vel alio viante baptiz^etur communiter inftdeli : fimiliter , delato Infante fidelium ad ecclefiam^ ut fecundum Chrifli regulam baptizjCtur P et deficient e aqua vel requifitis aliis , flame pia intentwne totiui popu- li , interim mortuo naturaliter^ mttu Dei , vide- tur grave damnationem Infant is hujufmodi defi- nire jpecialitcry cum nee in fans ifley nee populus peccavit ut taliter damnaretur. Vbi efl ergo mifericors liberalitas Qorifli Dei , fi talis proles fideliltm propter illud quod non eft in poteflate eorum damnabitur^ cum Dem fecundum prwci~ pia Theologize communis fit pronior ad pr simian- dum homines quam ad dammandum : et fpeciali- ter merito et pajfione Chrifli t ant urn fua tentori- al dilatante f
Which is thus Engltfhed.
And firfl let tufee where Baptlfm is flablfijfd
in the Gojpel. For read Mac 28. how Chrifl
commanded his Apoflles, (fo Teach Sec. And
A a z heme
hence Philip Baptizing the Eunich, fir fi inftr li- lted him in the F-iith, A&. 8. And becaufe cf this form of 'Cbrifis words Mar. 28. Our Church brwgeth Believers an fwering for the Infant who had not attained to discretion 1 And fitch God- fathers commonly make the children whom they take from 'Baptifm, to be infiriiil'cd in the Lords Prayer, and the (freed. And others that had at- tained to difcretion, while they are infir titled in the faiihofChnfl before their Baptifm,are called Cate- chumeni : And this Sacrament is fo necefjary to a vi- ator that Chn ft faith to Nicodemus, Job. 3. Except a man be born again of w iter, &(?. So that by fo great authority cf Scripture belief, the faithful are ocnirallf£aptized:And the Church hath ordain- ed that in the point of nee ef^- * that is of death; ty *7 every faithful per) on may be Baptized. Nor U it material whether, they be dipped once or thrice , or the water be pQiired on their heads : but it muft be done according to the cuftom of the place where one dwelleth , as well in one as in another law- ful rite : Fur it is certain that corporal Baptifm or waf.uvg little availcth unlefs there be awajh- ing of the ALni by the Holy Ghoft, from Ori- ginal or AtiuA fin. For this 'is a principle in this belief, that whoever is rightly Baptized ^ Baptifm blutieth out whatever fin it fa: dcth in the man to be Baptised. And becanfe f^t is f alii on is necefjary to the blotting out cf fin, and fat is fail ion for fin cannot be made but by the death of Chrift,therc- . faith the Apoflc, that as many of m as are '■ized in to Cirri ft, are Baptized into his death.
ALITH,
I" C 357>
A L I T H. But tell me plain Her I pray you } bow Chrift who fa much bateth fenfible figms 5 hath put fo great necefftty of fahaticn in this wafting*
i For it feemeth to derogate from Gods liberality and power, that God cannot by all his merit and paffion intercede to five an Infant or an adult bc- liver , unlefs he be Baptized by an old Wowan or fome other viant, commonly an Infdcl: fo alfo , when the Infant of believers is brought to the Qmirch , that ((& ) according to Chrifis Rule he may be Baptized , and for want of water or other re qui fit es , the peoples pious intention continuing , he is dead in the mean time naturally by the will cf Gody it fecmeth hard to define that fuch an Infant is damned •, fpecially when neither the Infant nor the people have fin- ned that he fiioitld fo be damned : Where then is the merciful liberality of Chrift-God if fuch a child of believers fiallbe damned for that which is not in their power ? when God, according to the common Principles ef Theolcgie, is proner to reward men than to damn the h , and fpccially when the merit and paffion of Qbrifi have fo jar
• fit etched cut their tents ?
To this Wickjtffe anfwereth, i. In this Chap, that
I ome things he fpcaketh afTertively, and fome things rcputativcly^and forevieweth the cafe. And i. faith that Ghriil approveth outward figns0 bur noc the abufe of them. That is, i. When the (igns of tl e old 'jewijh Law are kept. 2. By an inmodeft efpOL- iing iliem, and preferring them before Gods De- calogue. 5. By hunhtning the Church with A a 3 • them
(3*8)
them which Chrift would have free ; even more than the Jewifi) Church was bunhened : And thus the Religious now (faith he } abufe thenuhetwo laft wayes.
And in the Twelfth Chapter he proceedeth to anfwer the reft |" Vtdetur mihi probabile quod Chriftw fatis poffet fine lot tone hujm^ infantes fpiri- tualiter baptiz,are , et per conftquens falvare ; unde dicitnr communiter quod triplex eft baptif- mm Ecclefu y viz,, baptfmm f-nrnmu , baptfmm fanguinis , baptifmm ftamintt, ct quilibct eonim
companbm fufticit ad faint em ■ — Nee audeo
ajferere quod Infantes occifi pro Cbrifto fiat damnati — ^aptifmm autcm fiaminvs eft bapt. ff>. fanfti , qui eft fimpliciter neceffarim cmli- bet homini fi falvetur. Idea duo baptifmi priores funt figna antecedents, et ex fuppofitionc neccf- faria ad i ft urn tertium bapt if mum fiaminu* Jdeo abfque dubietate , fi ifte infenfibilis baptif- mm ad f Her it, baptiz.atns eft a crimine munda- tm. Et ft ifte defuerit , quantumcunque adftnt fr tores ., bapttfmm non prodeft animtz ad falutem* Jdeo cum relic fit infenfibilis , &• lantum nobis ignotiUy videtur mihi imprudens pr&fumptio tali< ter fahationem hominis vel damnationem ex ba- ptifmo definire, Reputamiu tamen abfque dilbietat e £/*Quod Infantes rede baptizati flumine^ywr ba^ ptizari tertio bapt if mute , cum habent gratiam
kapiifmalcm. Non enim licet fidelibm
fupponendo bxpttfinuw flaminis y bapt if mum fin- wmvs om?iino relmqucrc , fed neccfje eft data, op- po-ftunitate circuwjhinti& ipjum dcctpsrc. Et
cum
(359)
turn omnia qua eveniunt de nee e flit ate eveniunt, dici potefi quod talis homo non potefi falvari ft* tie tali baptifmate. Thus Englifhed.
[] It feemeth to me probable that fhrifi can Efficiently Baptize Infants- fpiritually without this wafhtng , and by conference , can Jave them. Whence it vs commonly faid, that there is a three- fold Baptifm of the Church , that is, the Ba- ptifm of water , the Baptifm of blood , and the Baptifm of the Spirit : zsind every one of them to* the meet > fufjiceth to falvation — Nor dare I affert that the Infants Mat. 2» killed for Chrifi are damned. But the Baptifm of the fpirit is the Baptifm of the Holy Chofi, which is (imply neceffary to every one that he be faved. There- fore the other two Baptifms are antecedent figns, and fuppofitively neceffary to this third Baptifm of the fpirit. Therefore without doubt where that infenfible baptifm is, the Baptized perfon is clean- fed from his fin : and if that be wanting, let the former be never fo much prefent, Baptifm pro- fiteth not the foul to falvation. Seeing therefore this is infenfible , and fo much unknown to us, it feemeth to me imprudent prefumption fo to define mens falvation, or damnation by their Baptifm. But yet we hold without doubting, that Infants rightly Baptized with water, are Baptized with the third Baptifm , when ( or feeing ) they have
Bavtifmal grace. For it is not lawful for
the faithful, on fuppofnion of the 'Baptifm of tht^ fpirit, to cafl off the Baptifm of water, but it is neceffary to reteive it , when the opporntoity A a 4 of
cf c ire nm fiance is offered. And feeing whatever comctb to pafs, doth\come to pafs of necejjityjt may be fad that fitch a one cannot be Javed without JuchBaptifm. ~\
And to the queflion of an old woman Ba- ptizing children in neceflity,he faith, [ cc Credtmus " tarn en quod quae un que Vetula vel abjetra per- IC fona rite lav ante homrnem cum verbis fiicra- tc mentalibtu B Apt if mum flamims Dew com p let. ]] The Reader mull pardon the Latine to the Au- thor or Printer, which may thus be Engjifhtd. \_u But we believe that what old woman foevcr "or abjed perfon rightly wafheth one with the <c Sacramental words, Gdd fulfilletluhe Baptiftn cCcfthe fpirir.J
It feemeth that whereas Tertullian ( Mr. D.'s firft witnefs ) was for Lay-mcns Baptizing in ale of neceffky , but not for womens, that IVickltjje wasforwomens alfo.
And to the next queflion , Whether Infants wibaptiz^edwhenrBapi(m could net be had, be all damnedfhc anfweteth(i;f per h<zc refpondco ad Sec,) thaf is [ lc And by this Ianfwer your third ob- cc jedion , granting, that God if he will, may "damn fuch an Infant, and do him no Wrong, c^ and if he will he can fave him ; And ] dare " not define ekher part : nor am I careful. about "reputation , or getting evidence in the cafe ; f* but as a dumb man am fifcnt, humbly confef-
cc ing my ignorance , ufmg , * ufc If he will, "conditional word* * -becante "u is not yet clear to me , whe-
MO
t* whether fuch an Infant fhall be faved or damned : <c But I know that whatever God doth in it will " be juft and a work of mercy, to be praifed gf u all the faithful : And let not them like pre- " fumptious fools, pour out themfelves, that of "their own authority, without knowledge, de-
" fine any thing in that matter. J Qui
" autem dicit, &c. But he that faith that in this Ci cafe put , an Infant (hall be faved , as it is " pious to believe, he doth fuperfluoufly uncertain " himfelf *, more than will "♦profit him. But there are * That is, determine ' c fome things in Parents pow- an uncertainty. ic er though lapfed into z thing cc Paji7 lor which it is necelTary by Gods juft cx judgement , that fo it (hould come to pafs : " Therefore he that defineth, that neither Pa- " rents nor people fo finned, that it ihould ^o u come to pals, doth fpeak as a Pie on the head "of his own knowledge. But we believe it as " a point of faith , that nothing befalls a man <c after the firft grace, unlefs fome part of man- a kind either merit or demerit, that this flail come " to pafs. ~]
In the next (thirteenth ) Chapter, he proceed- ed to anfwer the queftion \_ Qmmodo anima ta- lium Infamiwm fine peccato altuaU decedemiim punicntHY ( Having before fpoken of Infants dy- ing unbaptized unavoidably ) that is, How the fouls of JhCh Infants flail be punifled ? whether all finally. or unequally f and whether only with the pamjhmentof lofs, or alfo of fenfe fj An<frhe
con-
(36i)
eoncludeth contrary to the greater part of the PaJ pifts, that they (hall have both the pnniftment of Lofs andSenfe^ and f Note that ) that [ Necef- fe eft peccata originalia hominnm effe intqualift^ ficnt decedentes in originalibHs funt propter iUa inaqualiter condemnandi : Nam jttxta ditia omnes condemnati pro originalibm funt condemnandi tarn poena damni quam poena fenftis : fed impojfibile eft quod condemnemur aqualiter omnino Hits poenis : ergo relinqmtur quod peccata quibu* HUu poena* demernerunt, in&qualia funt dicenda. ~\ That is, |[ " It muft needs be that the Original fins of c<: men are unequal, as thofe that die in Original <c fins are unequally to be condemned for them : For cc as is faid, all that are condemned for original fin €t are condemned both with the punifhment of Lofs "and ofSenfe -, But it is impoflible that they " fhould be damned altogether equally with thofe cc pains. Therefore it remaineth that the fins " by which they deferved thofe punifhments be <c faid to be unequal J.
Reader, I have been the larger in tranfcribing and tranflating the words of Wickjiffe , becaufe an Author is not fo well underftood by a line or two difmembred from the reft , as by whole difcourfes : and fo that his fenfe may be pall all controverfie .• Here it is vifible that Wickiijf was fo far from denying Infant-Baptifm , that i. He exprefly afferteth it, 2. He never fo much as noteth it for any controveriie, nor maketh anv doubt or queftion about it. 3. Yeahetaketh it to oe bold preemption for any to take upon them to
know,
know, whether an Infant that dyeth unavoidably unbaptized be faved or not, but only faith God can do it if he will , and he can damn him, 4. And to thofe that fay that the Parents are not in the fault, nor the people , feeing they intended his Baptifm, he faith, that many things come to pafs for paft fins of Parents, and people, and therefore that cannot be concluded •, and no- thing after the firft grace cometh to pafs unme- rited. 5. And he concludeth that thofe of them that are damned for original fin, are punifhed with pain of lofs and fenfe , but unequally, ha- ving unequal original fins. <>• But Baptifm he afferteth doth put away all fm in the rightly Baptized. 7. And that when Infants are right- ly Baptized with water, they are Baptized with the third Baptifm having Baptifmal grace. 8. That it is according to Chrifts rule that Infants be brought to the Church to be Bapti- zed.
And now Reader, Judge what a fad cafe poor honeft ignorant Chriftians are in, that muft have their fouls feduced, troubled and led into Love- killing alienations, and feparations and cenfures of Chrifts Church, and of their particular bre- thren , by fuch a man as this ? And whether they that dare ufe fouls at this rate , are fo much better than us , as to be above our com- munion > Nay whether thofe that lately revile the Zeal of dilTenters , as cheriiVing the mod .odious crimes , be not too much fcandalizcd and hardened by fuch dealings ? When a man as plea- ding
0*4) ding for Chrift and •Baptifm dare not only print fuch things , but ftand to them in a fecond edi- tion, and defend thenfby a fccond book, and Rage and be Confident in reviling thofe that tell him of his untruths ?
$. 10. But he hath many pretended reafons to prove- that Wickjijf was againft Infant-Baptifm, and fome of them out of the very Chapters which I have tranfcribed : Ct i. Saith he, He "afferted two Sacraments. 2. That believers mull <: be baptized in pure water, (And what are thefe cc to the purpofe ?) 3 That believers are the "enly fubjetls of Baptifm (A grols untruth ) " ( But he giveth you the words that prove k £ Ideo abfqne dubitatione fi ifte infenfibilis ha- Jtifmus affuerit, bapti^atm a crimme eft mun- datm : & fi tile defuerit, quantumcunque effent fr lores , baptifmus non pr 'ode fi anima ad faint enf\. I gave you the words before. And did the man think that this is any thing to his purpofe ? Wickliff faith, £ Water Baptifm favcth no fold ( young or old ) without the Baptifm of the Spirit. ~\ Therefore faith Mr. D. Wklzliff faith , that Believers are the only fubjetts of Baptifm. 2 Will he make the Church of his mind by fuch palpable falihoods as theft >
But he adds, [ He faith, that perfons are firfl to be Baptised with that he calls the infenfible Baptifm, before water, &c.l Anfw. I. Utterly falfe : It is his own forgery. WicklijfCiuh no fuch thing that it mull: be firfl : Nay I doubt he faith quite contrary as \ have re cited. [ Idea
duo
(3*5)
dm baptifmi priorcs fmt figna Ant ece dent ia, & ex fuppofitione neceffaria ad iftnm tertiitm baptif- mum flamimt. 3 See ^iere now fortius man is, to be believed. 2. But though Wickjff called Wa- ter-Baptifm an antecedent fign, yet moft Prote- ftant Writers I think hold that believers In- fants have by virtue of Gods Covenant the Ba- ptifm of the Spirit, ( that is, a feed or difpofiti- on to future gracious a&s if they live) h and thac they are in a ftate of falvation before they are Baptized, being the children of the faithful by them dedicated to God, by heart-con fent, and that Baptifm is but the publick folemnization of the fame Covenant, and delivery of the blefUngs by way of inveftiture. Let Mr. D. read but aft the testimonies cited by Mr. Gataker in his book of Baptifm, againft Dr. Ward., and Bifhop Dave- nant, and he will fee this is no opinion proper to the Anabajtifts : And I fcarce believe that he can prove me and all Proteftants that hold that opinion, to be therefore againft Infant-Ba- ptifm : How then would it have proved Wick^ Uffio ?
4. He faith that Wick Iff faith that Baptifm doth not confer , but only fig ni fie grace given. ] Anfw. 1. And what's that to prove, that he was againft Iniam-Baptifm ? 2. And how proveth he this? Why, Fuller out of Cochlem faith fo.
Anfw. 1. But Cochlewis one of the moft no- table Lyars of all the Papifts that oppofed Luther^ and hath left his Calumnies to pofterity \ And mud he be believed againft Wick Iff} 2. And
Ful-
C 3*0
Fuller wrote but about twenty years ago : And muftoneof our neighbours tell us what Cochleud faith was the opinion of Wkklijf, when we can read his words our felves ? 3. But fto make this like its fellows ) even this much is untrue, Fuller tells us no fuch thing out of Cochlens , but tells us that Gregory charged Wickliff with eighteen Errors ; Tho* Arundel with twenty three ^ the Council of Conftance with ^.Tho.Waldenfis with 80. DtiLucke with 266. and Cochlens with 303. and then he reciteth 62.out o$Waldenfis> where the words are. 4. And Waldenfis is known to be a falfe accufer of him in many particulars, though a learn- ed Papift. 5. And even this Waldenfis that faith his worft, and fought to make the moil of his errors, never here accufeth him as denying In- fant-Baptifm : And would he not have done it, had it been true }
But Mr. \D. ( that by this trick which he is fo ready at , can make Herefies and Hereticks al- fo too eafily ) tells us of a popi(h ' Here fie ^\z« for Baptifm £ to take away all Jin , to confer grace , to worker e generation and fave the foul, as flill held by them that teach young children to fay7 that by their Baptifm they were made children of God , members of (fhrift , and Inhe- ritors fthat is, heirs) of the Kingdom of hea- ven. ].
Anfw. 1. By this it feems the Englijh Pro- teftants and all the reft that take this to be true do&rine , hold a Popifh Herefie. 2. Let the Reader perufe Gataker againft Davcnant of Ba- ptifm;,
( 3*7) ptifm, and he will find almoft all the ancient Fathers Latineand Greek of the fame judgement : And what a pleafure is this to the Papifts to be told that almoft all the ancient Writers held their he- refie ? And then indeed Where was our Church and the Kingdom of Chrift before Luther ,or rather before thofe whom he oppofed? 3. It is unqueftio- nabletrue do&rine that as Marriage-confent in pri- vate, layeth the firft ground of Marriage rights, which by folemn Matrimony are openly and regu- larly delivered by inveftiture, which perfeð the title: even fo, the Heart-Confent orCovenantingfof the perfon,or parents for Infants^ doth lay the firft ground of Chriftian right, which is folemnizedand perfected regularly by Baptifm, which by the way of tradition or publick inveftiture , doth take away all guilt of (iny Sacrament ally regenerate , and fave, and make us children of God, mem- bers of Chrift and his Church, and heirs of hea- ven , who were fo before by a Private initial right, of which the Church did take lefs cogni- fance : And one- would think that no Anaba- ptifl ftioulddeny this,(called Herefie)as to the adult.
5. He next addeth from Wickliff-, They are fools and prefumptuous which affirm fitch Infants not to be favedy which die without Baptifm J fo fuller words it out of Cochleus,
Anfw. 1. Falfe ftili : It is not out of Coch- lear , but Waldenfu. 2. And what's this to the queftionof Infant-Baptifm ?
He adds, f And Wicklijfs own words as c. 2. de Trialog. Quod definentet parvulos fdclium fi- ne baptifmO) &c. J
. Anfw*.
(36S)
Jjifiv. Still falfe : i I have before transcri- bed the words out of the Printed book which are far otherwife. 2. It is not defmentes but qui quicquam defimwt. 3. It is not of all children dying without Baptifmy but of thofc that could not have it , being prevented by death , when.it was defired. . 4., He faith this of thofe that de- termine that they are fived alfi. 5. And inftead of c. 2. this is lib. 4.1-. 12.
6. He faith , ["That ail xruth is contained in cc the holy Scripture , and that which is not ori- ginally there, is to be accounted prophane • "And that we are to admit of no fcience or "conclufion that is not proved by Scripture tcteftimony, and that whoever holds thecontra- " ry opinion cannot be a Chriflian but flatly the tc Devils Champion ] with more fuch cited parr- cc ly out of Cochlem by Fuller , ( falfe again ) "and partly^ Verit. Serif t.~]& book of Wicks liffs which I have not , and I conjecture he ne- ver faw : For 1. I told you before the very words of Wickliffihn condemn only fuch abufes of outward fignsy as fhew him to be of a contra- ry opinion. 2. Will any fober man believe that he damned ail as no Chriftians , but Cham~ fions oftheDevily that thought that fome Conclusi- ons Phyfical, Mathematical, Metaphyfical, Medici- nal , Logical , &c. may be true that are ?jot proved by Scripture xeflimony ? and fo that almoft all Chriftiansin the world are no Chri- ftians ?
7* Saith
7. Saith he " [That he (lighted the Authority of "General Councils, as Fuller out of Cocble- */#, &c.
Anfvr* i. Falfe again as to the Author, 2. But what is that to Infant-baptifm }
But his direct proof is out of Waldenps faying that Wicfyiff faith that children are not ftcra- mentally to be baptized*
ts4nfw. 1. IhwenotWaldenfts at hand, but have little caufe to believe Mr. D. 2. And Ful- ler who undertaketh to recite Waldtnfis charge ^ hath not a word of any fuch fenfe. 3. If bitter Papifts fo accufe him, is it therefore true ? Judge by his own words* Indeed Wickltff held that fa- cramental baptifm faveth none ( young or bid ) without the baptifm of the fpirit ; and that it may be feparated from it : And hence was the Papifts noife againft him.
8. Sauhhe "[As a further argument that he cc denied Infant-baptifm, may appear, becaufe. he a did fo vehemently impugn Confirmation, &c*
Anfxv. u Here We have Fuller out oiCochle^ m falily again. 2. Are all Proteftants againft In* iant-baptifm , that are againft the Popifh Sacra- ment of Confirmation? What a prover is this man? Is DalUm that hath written fo large a difpu- Uiion of Confirmation, an Anabaptift ? And the Englifti Nonconformifts too > 3 . But in very deed^ Mr. D.'s falfhood and Wickliffs opinion for In- fant-baptifm, may very probably be gathered from that ( not fifteenth as he, but ) fourteenth Chapt. of Confirmation : For , 1 . He reprehendeth the
B b BifhopS
Biftiops for adding fo many Ceremonies to In* fant-baptifm, never blaming their baprifm it felf. 2. He argueth againft confirming children, as fup^rfluous, becaufe the fpirit is given in baptifm it felf \_& confirmatur ex hoc quodbaptiz^atos no- ftros dicimui rcguUriter Spiritum Santtam acci- pere to ipfo quo legitime baptiz,antur , that is, "And it is hence confirmed , in that we fay that " our baptized ones do regularly receive the Holy " Ghoft , in that for by that very thing) that Ci they are lawfully baptized. ] And he had before faid that they are offered to Baptifm in the Church according to Chrifts Rule.
a. ii. After all this Mr. D. addeth Wicklifs opinions againft Popery to the number of 29. But what all this is to the cafe of Infant-baptifm, what man belldes himfelf can tell ? But let me teU him that I would not have him too eafily be- lieve bitter adverfary Papifts, left he forfeit the little reliefs of his own credit : And that it is not like-that Wicklijf was againft enjoyning the Lords- Prayer as foe citeth : Yea , I would not Tiave Mr. D. come Co near the Papifts yet as IVickJiff d\d* How doth he like fuch words as thefefTrialog.li-4. c. 22. fol.138.-Ef talis eft tri- plex Ecclefia j Ecckftafcilicct Afilitans, Dormiensy & Triumph an s —--- Ecclefia Dormiens eftpra-
defiinati in Vurgatorio patientes that is ,
" There is fuch a threefold Church : The mili- tant Church, the fleeping Church, the mum- .
c< phant Church : The ileeping Church is
"the Predeftinate fuffering in Purgatory. ~]-
And
f 370
Arid lib. i.e. 10. fee what he faith oF Angel* ind adoration of theiru And c. u. of Angels offices , and their being virtually every where. And what he faith of Kings, and Marrimony '^cjxvd exc edit Mia Sacrament a, &C.J li.4. Ci 1 9, zo. fol. 13?-; 133. Nor would I fay that omnia qiu •veniunt de ncceffitate evenuint , as fol. 120. a, 3r that Dem pot eft ejfe Afinus fi velit^ut fol. 90. bi
One of the worft things I like in IVickJrff is , .hat he plungeth himfelf into the deepeft School- Pubtihies, or difficulties, with lefs fubtilty or di- ligence than the cafe reqir'reth, and than Schod- "nen ufe. And indeed I like not divers of his rondufions •, as lib, 2. c. 14. fol. 41. \_OnodDc- « necejfitat creaturas fingnlat aUtvat ad queml'i- 'ret a£hnm fnum r ] It is iuppofed that Hobbs by the "ame Dodrineoverthrowethall theChriftian faith : And I believe that his do&rine there fioL 41 s and Hfewhere, for merit, and how temporale fit caxfii Trxdeflmationis aterna, will difpleafe fome. And Jiis diftinftion of Mortal and Venial fin, as Hi 3; :. 5. fioL 52. And that he raaketh final impeni- tence the fin againfiv the Holy Ghoft ; And that lone can know what fin is mortal in ns9 and ttbat not ? And cap. 6. Co?:cedi pot e fit quod mnl~ \i pr&ficiti [iint in gratia feciindum pr&fientem jiU ftitiam : It may be granted that many reprobates pre in ( 3 (late of ) Grace , according to their
frefient right confine fi Vr&ficiti ant cm rnrn-
quam funt in gratia finaiis perfieverantia : The Reprobate are never in the grace of final perfie- xtrahxa So that he held that prefenc true grace
Bb i wa$
(372) was loft by fome , as Anftin did , which he ex- plaineth cap. 7. And cap. 8. again he is at his Omnia evenium necefjltate abfaluta reviewing what he had (aid , and concluded! that [ no nun can do better than he doth -y but he could if God would ~\ and denieth not fin to be hereby ncceili- tated, &c
tf. 12. Pag. 115. He again impenitently re- neweth his flander of Berengarius, as being againft Infant-baptifm : Concerning whom faith Vjlxr de fucccfi. Ecclef. cap. 7. p. 207. " £ Author " Aciornm, &c. The Author of the Ads of " Bruno ( found in the Library of the Noble Ba- <cron Carexv of Clopton) who faith he was at €c this examination, faith, that they f fome of Be- c< rengaritu followers ) faid that baptifm profi- led not children to falvarion,as alfo DeodviniuLc- u odienfts firft from common fame, and then Guit- <c mundm Arch, Aver [anus on the credit of Leodi- <c enfis report that Bruno Andegavenfis & Beren- <c garim Turonenfis |~ quantum in ipfis erat ba- ct ptifmum parvuiorum evertij[e~\ did as much as <c in them lay overthrow the baptifm of chil- ic dren ; But we find no charge ever brought <c 2Lg\w\&Bere?igariu4 concerning Anabaptifm,in fo u many Synods as were held againft him : Nor <c do they feem to have denied any thing elfe , <cwho are faid to deny that baptifm profiteth lit- " tie Ones to Salvation, but that Baptifm confer- <c reth Grace ex opere opertto : As gathering " from the Apoftles words , He that planteth and " he that watereth is nothing , but God that gi-
<( veth
(vf)
"veth theincreafe: So Alan hs li.i.cont. bxrct. lifui temp, takeththem as if they had faid [ Ba- <c ptifm hath no efficacy either on young or old • " therefore nun are not bound to be bapii- " zed.]
And that this was the plain cafe is proveable , in that it was juft the cafe of Wkkitff and the Waldenfes , who were faid to do as much as in them lay to caft out Infant-baptifm, becaufe they thought that every wicked Prieftdid not fan&ifie them ex of ere operato, and infallibly convey Gods grace to the unprepared.
But his proofs are " [ i. The Magdeb. tell us *cthat Berengarim maintained his herefies, which "they fet down to be denying Tranfulftan- cc tiation, and Baptifm to little ones, under five "heads, which Lavfranh^ Arch- Bill. op of Gan- " terbury anfwers at large in his book called " SciMillans : and as to that of denying Infant- " baptifm he anfwers by faying, he doth thereby u oppofe the general Dodrine and univerfal Con- <c fent of the Church.
jinfw. i. I have not the Ma^deb, at hand, but he hath little to do that wiilask Illyricus^ and Gal- hu and Amfdorfius what Lanfran\ writeth, if he have his book before him. The publisher ofchan* frankj book againft Berengarius giveth us notice of no other, Trithemim de fcript. Ecclef. knew of no other but this, which is in Bibl. Patr. lom% 6. p. 190. And I have iookt over every line of it (fuch labour dothefe men put us to ) and I find not one word where any fuch thing is mentioned
B.b3 by
f374) ty J^anfrmK: bvjt only his accufations of Bet* about Tranfubftantiation : He never oncechargeth him. as denying Infant-baptifm, nor mentioned itt See, Reader , into what hands the poor feduced ones are faflen.
tf . 1 3 , His fecond proof is this, u Caffnndra in fc his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve faith , that cc Guiimund Bifhop of Ayerfc doth affirm that f c he did deny baptifm to Little Ones, &c.
Anfw* 1. Caffander in neither of his Epiftles to the D/uke of Cleve mentioneth any fuch mat- ter. But in his Preface to his Book for Infant- fcaptifmto the Duke of Cleve r he faith that Gait- r/iiind faith \_ Quod inter cateros erroresy parvuhr rum bapttfmum everterit, quern Uimen errorem in publicum non produxit, quod tarn blafyhemiam ut Guitm* Icquitur , ne pejjlmorum (juidem bominum aures toleraturas fciret , & in Serif tuns [car Li locum ejus erroris tuendi pemtus non vidcret. j
Mark here Reader , 1 , Berengarius is not faid to deny Infmt-baptifm, but to overturn ir, (that is, by fome confequence it's like. ) 2. He did ncj puMtfl) this his opinion, but held it unpublifhed : And how then did GuUwund know it? 3. Was Berengarius as honed or as ftout a man as he is^ fuppofecj, and yet when Infants were daily bapti- zed, would never fpeak out his thoughts of the evil of it? 4, Either he baptized Infants himfelf? or rfot,' if he did, was he againft it then > Whar a Knave do chey make him. 'that fo fay J> If not, bk opinion muft needs be publiflied by his pra-
--'y when they whofe csrs could not tolerate ir,
would
( 375;
• would lefs tolerate the refuting of 'their Chil-
\ drens Cbriftning. 5. Was that an honeit man
:. that would fecretly hold an opinion which he
. knew he had no Scripture for ? 6. Note that
even Caffander there tells us, ihat indeed the W*l-
io denfes though agreeing mLch with the Catharifts%
at did yet both approve and ufe Infant-baptifm,
3i p. 671. and that this error flept till his age when
St$rk and Mmtz.tr raifed ic.
c. 14. 2. But what need we ask Caffander what Gaitmund faid ? What childifh play is this? His own book is as common as Caffander s in BibL Patr. To, 6. p. 215. And Gnitmundi words are thefe c< £ Berengarius opened thofe things by " which he might pleafe worldly men, that love " always ( if they may do it unpunifhed ) to (in ; " to wit, deftroying as much as in him lay Law- u ful Marriages, and overturning Infants baptifm ; <c So that in one the Devil by his mouth perfwa- u ded the word men that it was lawful to abufe u all women 3 and in the other [_ Caffato baptif- mate lnfantia, in profundum omnium malorym, nt- pote poflmodum baptiz,andis, impnne mere : Lsge Epift. Leodienfis Epifcopi contra fterengar* ad Henr. Reg, Franc. & eifdem pens verbis eadem ipfa ibi fcripta reperies ] that is , cc [_ making void " the baptifm of Infancie, they might rufh unpu- <c nilhed into the depth of all evils , as being af- " terward to be baptized. Read the Epiftk of l< the Bifhop of Liege to//. R. of France againfl; u fierengarius, and there you (ball find thefe fame " things written, alraoft in the fame words, 3
B b 4. And
(376)
And now, Reader, judge further, i. Whether this Papift who never knew the matter himfelf , and whofebook fheweth him a filly bitter fellow profefllng to transcribe or take his words from the Bifhop of Liege who took it from fame , be to be believed in his accufations of fuch a man, when Lanfrank^ihdi difputed with him before the Pope, nor the Pope himfelf, nor any of the many Sy- nods that examined him, and conftrained him to recant, ever mention fuch a thing? Were thefe Perfecutors think you blind or merciful herein?. 2. If he be to be believed in this u why not in the firft article , of the lawfulnefs of abufing all women commonly? 3. Do not the very words [ quantum in fe, and evcrterit J and [" cajfato ba- jtifmate^ open the cafe, that milice gathered this as a forced confequence only of feme words of Bcrengarius ? It is like becaufe he defined a Sa- crament to their diflike, which Lanfrank^xt^xo- veth him for.
And fo fottifh a fellow was this Gmtmund that his fellow Papifb are put todifown him for fay- ing that their Euchariftical Hoft cannot be cor- rupted or putrifie , or be eaten by Mice, or any Bruits, but only feemeth fo to be: ib.'f. 230. /. 2,
i. 1 J, His third proof is u £ In the BibU Patr,
"Pans j>. 432. it is recorded that Durandm
*c writes — the denying and as much as in them "fay the deftroying the baptifm of Infants, &c.
Anfve. 1 . Did this man ever fee the Bogks he dteth, who citeth fag. 432. of the $ibL fat. as.
if
(377) if were but one Tomb or Volume, that long ago was eleven great Volumes, and now many more? It is like zJWarg. le Bignes Edit, is that he mean- eth. The Epiftleis Tom, 3. p. 319. of the Bigne Tar is 1624. The Author, faith V flier de fuccef, Eccl. p 196. is falily called Durandusy and is Deodmnus or Dietwinus. His words are [_ Fama fupremos Gallia fines pratergrejfa totam Germani- am pervafit, jamtjue omnium noflrum replevit au- res y qualitcr Bruno <L/4ndeg% Epifc, item Beren- garius Turonenfis ajfruant Corpus Domi- ni non tarn Corpus ejfe cjuam umbram & figuram Corporis Domini "? Legitima conjugia deflruant, & quantum in ipfls efty baptifmum parvulorum ever-. tant. ] This is it that Vfiier cited : 1 . You fee here is nothing but a Papift Prelates tale to a King , upon far fetcht fame, 2. Charging him equally,1 yea more with deftroying marriage,
3. And faying but [quantum in [e~\ ofbaptifm;
4. And part of the fame is that the King had cal- led a Council to examine thefe things . which Council never taking notice of any" fuch matter confuteth the fame. And doth Mr, D. the great enemy of Antichrift perfwade poor Anabaptifts to believe fuch fellows and tales as thefe ?
5f. 16, In his Reply he addeth fourthly \Thu- anus witnefTeth that Bruno Arch-Bifhop of Tri- ers did perfecute Berengarius for denying Infants baptifm, as p. 242.
jinfw. 1. Again he tells us of Thuanus, and tells not where, as if we muft read over five vo- lumes in folio to be able to difprove fuch a Tale- teller
C378) teller as this ? But he faith Vjher faith fo de fuc~ cef. Eccl. fag. 252. But all ftil] is falle : my book there hath not fuch a word. Vfierj words are fag. 207. and them alfo he moft horribly falhti- eth. They are but thefe \_Bmnontm qnoqne Trc- virornm Arch. Uiceceft fua expulijfe qiiofdam ex Berengarii Setlatoribus qui illim Dolhrinam in Eburombus At Hat ic is & aliis Belgii populi< dtf- feminabant , narrat Tbuanus. "] That is, £ Thna- nus faith that Bruno Arch-Bifhop of Trevers ex- pelled out of his Diocefs fome of Bersngarius's followers, who fowed his dodrine, &c. ~\ fo that here is no talk of perfecuting Berengarms , but fome of his followers, nor a word of Infant-ba- ptifm. Was ever fuch a reporter as this man before taken for a credible perfon ? I contefs I re- member not that ever I read the like, among Pa- pifts or any other Sed.
In Thuanus the words are found in his Epiftle to the King before all his works, excellently dif- fwading him from blood and perfection , and there is not one fyllable of Infant- baptifm y but only that which Vjher cited : yet durft this man jiiftifie thefe horrid iaifhoods in a fecond Edition and a Reply,
CHAP,
(379)
CHAP. III.
pTKr. D.'s J 'unification of his flander of the Wal- denfes, Confuted more largely.
$. i. TN his Reply/?. ioS.hereafTumeththisCa- JL lumny. And firft he reciteih their Con- frflion to prove it : as if he wanted matter to fill his Book, not having one word againft Infant-ba- ptifm in, that which is by himfelf recited : But it rnuft be inferred, it fuch a man as this be to be believed, becaufe faith is required fin the adult, and them that Covenant for Infants ) and becaufe Traditions and Inventions are difclaimed , and .fuch like, Had the man dealt by the Waldenfes but as he doth by me, when citing my words he will prove that my words are for him while I am againft him, (as if I underftood not what I fay ) it had been much lefs. But to face down the world that the WMdenfes denied Infant-baptifm for fuch filly reafons , is intolerable. It is not worth the labour to (hew him how the Prote- ftants agree with the Waldenfes in all the points where he feigneth adifagreement, f.112.
$. 2. Yet doth the man break out into admi- ration that he having with exa&nefs given a tarticnlar account of all thofe Confejfwns word
fir
for wordy and proved by ample dewonflra-
tions , i# That none of them were extant till the fix tee nth Century^ &c.
Anfw. Wonderful I That fuch a man fhould talk of exattnefs and demonfiration. Stay Reader a, little, and tell me whether it call not for (hame and tears that one fuch Book fhould be written by a Chriftian ? Much more that this calumny fhould be thus over and over audacioufly jufti- fied?
£.3. In Roger Wendover four chiefeft ancient Chronicler, and one that he ofr citeih himfelf, and therefore fhould have read ) In Hen. 2. fol. $19. b* You have a Confeilion of the Tholoufians called Boni homines in which are thefe words c< £ Credimm etiam quod non falvatur quis , nifi <c qui baptiz,atur -4 & parvulos fidvart per ba- iC pttfma. ~} That is, [_ We believe alfo that none " is faved but he tpat is baptized , and that little <£ children are hved by baptifm] ( For we find that it was the denial of the laving virtue of wicked Priefts baptifm ( to voung or old ) as working ex opere operato^ fvhjch occasioned their accufations : ) would you have a fuller proof?
Vjher de fticctf. Eccl. c6. p. 1 5 5, &c. giveth us the Catalogue of their opinions as reported by zALneas Sylvius ( after Pope Pius the fe- cond ) ; where there is fomewhat of theirs againft Confirmation . Chrifm, Extream Un&ion, &c. but not a word againil Infant-baptifm • adding the confent of Jacob.. Picolomin. Anton. Bon- fn. Bern. Lutzenburg* Another Catalogue he
(Ta«0
giveth out of the Magdeb. hift. Centur. 12. c. & co/. 1206, 1207. as taken out of an old zJVf.S. where is not a word againft Infant-baptifm : Yea reciteth Will. Reynolds a bitter Papifts Catalogue, where there is no fuch thing: Yea, mentioneth nine poinrs more in which Parfons, Sanders ^Coc- cins fay they differ from us , but none of this. And ptg. z<\.i. c. 8. he tells you of Gretfers own confeiiion that they were nene but the Waldenfes that Hove den fpeaketh of, that made the fore-' faid Confeflion, though accu fed of ArUnifm* Sec more teftimonies of many others, fag, 306, 507, 308-
Tbuanus ( falfly cited by him as before of Be-. rengarius) lib. 6. an. 2550. reciteth their opini- ons, fag. 185, 186. not mentioning a word of this ^ nay , telling us that fome falfhoods were reported of them , doth not fo much as number -this among the iidions. And fag. 188. he tells you of an inquiry made into their Original and Do&rine by GnL Bell. Lang<tns7 commanded by Authority thereto, wherein no fuch thing is men- tioned of them, but their avoiding Popifh fuper- ftitions.
In the fir ft Confeflion recited by Per in (f. 6?.) they own baptifm, but fay not a word againft In- fant-baptifm.
The fame is true of the fecond Confeflion re- cited by him, /\ 62,63.
In the eivi ; f ftftn you have their Catechifm, and the ttimm of their Do&rine out of feveral of their ; id ; herein not a word againft
In-
(352)
iftfent-baptifm , but exprefly they afTert it : Cap± 6. p.41, 42,43. in their Doctrine of the Sacra- ments , they fay <c [_ And for this caufe we pre- " Tent our Children in baptifm ; which they ought "to do, to whom the children are neareft, as "their Parents, and they to whom God hath gt- u ven this chanty. 2 Juft as Wicklffi Judge now of this mans words ?
<$. 4. " But his fecond Demonftratiort is from "the wkne(s born againft it by fome of their " moft eminent leading men , viit Berengarins , cc Peter rBrtiisy Henricns Amoldtis — — -
jiifw. Berengarius is not ufed to be reckoned as one of the Waldenfes i but if you will fo call him, I have confuced the (lander of him be- fore.
His proof againft Brais is Peter Clttniacenfisi of whom I have faid enough to Mr. Tombcs which I will not recite.
tf. 5. It is true that fome Papiils do raile at the Waldenfes with abominable calumnies, as guilty of the moft odious herefies, £ denying the rdurre&ion, and the falvation of Infants, afTerting the common ufe of women, and abundance fuch .* J Infomuch that it is become a hard queftion whether really there wereanv fuch people, or whether all were ilanders : and among other things they charge them With denying Infant-baptifm. And the Authors go fo much on fame , and fliew fo much falfhood, that many think that all are ficti- ons. But Bilhop Vjlier ( de fnccef. EccL ) and fome others bring many teftimonies to prove that
to
(383)
in that age there were abundance of Mankhees that came into Lombardie , and from thence came into the country of the Waldenfes • and that for their fakes the Papifts accufed the V/aldenfes of all thefe villanies and herefies with Anabaptilm, as if they had been all of a mind. And though I confefs that the horrid lies of abundance of Pa- pifts of Luther , Calvin , ZuingUns and other fuch, and fome experiments in" this age, have gi- ven men occafion to queftion whether all were not meer forgeries, and that nothing is to be be- lieved that they faid of thofe times ; yet I am ready to think that there were fome fuch per- fons as they defcribe that were againft the Re- furre&ion, and for common uncleannefs, and de- nied Infants falvation and baptifm, even fuch Ma* mchees and Arrians as aforefaid : Not that I think it any whit ftrange that fame among fuch world- ly persecutors fhould belie others as much as this comes to ; but becaufe of the hiftorical reports of fuch Manic hers recited by Vjher ttbi fup. fag. 225, 226, dec. cap. 8. & Vignier Hi ft, Ectlef, an. 1023. And that they falfly took thzWalden- fes to have been of the Manichees'mmd , as li- ving among them , is all the cloak that any rea- fonabie charity can afford to thofe old ones that falfly accufed th^n: : And to the later flanderers (Conffordits, -."ifjer^ Sec.) this will be n© cloak, much lels l» Mr. Danvers if in his zeal for his Seel and way, he will own the (landers of blinded Papifts, when he crieth them down himfelf, and hath had time and means to know their calumni- ation. To
C3*4)
To all this, let the Reader add but the pertr* fal AY the grofs contradictions of their accufers againft each other, ( yea the fame Author as re- ported by Coujfardus faying one thing , and as published by Gretfer faying the contrary, I mean Raynerius* ) And let him confider of the tefti- hiony of Vignier concerning an old Copy of their Doftrine fhevved to the great and excellent Chan- cellour of France, Mich. Hofyitalius , wholly agreeing with the doctrine of the later Walden- fes, and renouncing only the Popifh fuperftiti- ons : And the teftimony of Poflinerins that by ma- ny old fragments and monuments which he had feen, in the language of their Country, and by the Ads yet kept of the Difputation between the Bifliop of Jpamca and Mr. Arnolt, and by their own Confclliqns which many afTured him they had feen, the old Albigenfes doctrine was altoge- ther conform to the P tare ft ants do£tri??ey Vjhc,- , p. 308. cio. And then judge whether the charge of Anabaptiftry, and all Jld*nichtan abhominatt- ons be credible.
d . 6. ** But ( faith Mr. D. ) Cajfander teftifieth <c in his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve that Peter " Briths and Henrkns denied baptifm to little "ones, affirming that only the adult fhould be <c baptized.
Anfw* Read but Cajfanders Trcf. and judge of the Credit of this mans accufations. 1. Cap jander faith , that it was the <L?Wanichees and Prifcillianifts ( who were Gnoftickj faith ShI* fit, Severn* who lived in- Trifcillians time )
that
- (385) that brought in the errors aftef mentioned s by him, which twarmed in Bernards daies -9 Mid that this Herefie bred them that were called Catharifts^a. name belonging to one of the three feds of dManichees : but in France they were called Albigenjcs, from the place , and mat it was td thefe Mankhean and PrifcilUan errours, that they added the denyal of Infant-Baptilm. z\ He faithj Peter Bruis^ and Henry ', feem to have been the chief Authors of this addition -3 but in a far differing fenfe from the later Anabaptifts ^ For Peter and Henry equally denyed Baptifm and falvaiion to Infants, or any but actual belie- vers. 3. And for the furmife of Peter and Henry he taketh the word of Peter the Abbot Qmiacenfis : fo that Caffander doth but what Mr. D. doth, even report Qumaccnfh. 4. And he . profeflfeth that the Waldenfes called Picards ■; whofe relifts were in <dMoravia and Bohemia to that day , |~ did approve and ufe Infant -Ba- ft if m as confentaneom to the Gofpel^\zs I before cited him.
t . 7. His next proof is [ u E)r. Prideaux faitfi " in his Lot. Councils, that Peter Bntis and Ar- " nold of Brixia, were in the fecond Laterane " Council cenfured for the herefie of rejecting u Infant- Baptifm, &c. ]
Anfw. I have feldom real an Author whofe Proofs are liker one another : 1. Why 'mutt we be told what Dr. Prideaux faith of the ads of an old Council, as eafily known by us as by him ? 2. Reader, there is not the leaft C c proof
(386)
proof of any (uch matter medled with in thar Council : Peter Crab doth not fo much a9 name that Council : Jsiwjsi only tells you that thi Alls of the Council are not extant , but that Ab- bot Vrjpcrgenfis , and Otto frifutgenfis give us fome account of what they-did, whole words have not a fyllable about any fuch fubjeft, but only that they condemned the Schifmaticks ; who adhered to Peter Leo, an Antipope. 3. But how came Dr. Prideaux fo to miitake ? Anfw. Thofe Papers of Dr. Prideaux were pofthu- tnous fhreds, which whether he would have own- ed we cannot tell. But that which he faith , is that there were thirty Canons lately publifhed as that Council's, which Bellarmine himfelf reje- deth as falfe : And feeing I never faw that for- gery 1 cannot fay whether any fuch thing be in it^ which Prideaux j words recite : But it muft be from that or from nothing. And is this a good proof for Prideaux to tell you what a for- ged writing faith , which Crab and Bimiu and Bellarmine ejtd or take for falfe ? 4. Buc what if that Council had io accufed B>his and Ar- nold, are they to be believed of them ? But there is no fuch thing proved.
0. 8. His next proof is from Bernard, of whom I need to fay no more than what Caf- fander^ Vfier and others have oft faid , that it was the forefaid Manicbean Hereticks called C*- thanfls that Bernard defcribeth by the name of A?oftolick> And that he went by fame (zsLeo- dienfs did ) which falfly accufed the Albigenfcs
among
among them as guilty of the fame hereiles • And that the fame Bernard accufeth thofe that he fpake of, of other heinous things ^ If you be- lieve from him that the Aibigcnfes were guilty of tb e one, you have the fame teftimony that they were guilty of the other.
c 9. His next proof is the report of a. late Papift 'fcf f-rtcecomes , Li.c. 1. Whom he.alfd after, mtntioneth in his Reply , who as truly numbreth Luther, Calvin, and Bez.a with the ad- verfaries of lnfant-Baptifm. If fuch witnefiTes be his proof, he could not have chofen better for his turn than him and Cochlew , and fome fuch calumniators, of which fort I could name him more.
£. id. "His laft wicnefs is, Dr. Hammond "confeffcth that Peter Bruit and Henry his " Scholar and the Petrobrnfiani and Henricani "that fprung from them bppofed Infant-Ba- u ptifm. 2
Anfw i. Not a word of Dr. Hammonds books is cited to prove this , but Mr. Tombes nis Review. And muft we know of Mr.Tombes what Dr. Hammond held ? No wonder then if I and the world muft learn what I hold my felf, and what I have written, from fuch asMr.D^- vers and Mr; Tombes* And why not aifo from all the reft that have written againft m§ } 2i I think it nut worth my labour to fearch over Dr. Hammonds books to fee whether he hath faid this or not : feeing I know that he was my neighbour and lived fo lately that he G c % had
(388)
had no other means to know what thefe two men and their followers held, than whit we and others have as well as he. You mud give us elder proofs than this. 3. And if ic were af- ferted by him or proved by others, it were no proof that the Waldenfes denyed lnfant-Baprifm ^ but it would only follow that Bruis and Henry were Mamchees and not Waldenfes, which feem- eth to be the mi (lake of their later accufcrs at lead.
tf* 11* Pag. 120. He proveth Mr. Wills guilty c&unfaithfulrufs, want of confciencc, chea- ting, forgery > and aiter, pag. 122. of manifold Ly- ing. Becaufe, 1. He knoweth that Cluniacen- fis — hath given no fuch wicked and falfe teftimo- ny,&C And how proveth he that? [For both Oftan- der and the Magdebt from whom he had it, give an account of Fifteen particulars &c.] Anfw.
1. Doth that prove that Cluniac. hath no more?
2. Do they fty that thofe fifteen are all ? 3. And doth that prove that Mr. Wills knew it, who never faith, that he ever faw Cluniac enfis book > as it feems Mr. D. did nor. 4. Doth Mr. £>* himfclf know ir, of a book never read ? See how this accufer proveth Lyes ? For my part I have not at hand either Cluniack^ or ofiander, or the zJJfagdeb. and will not be at the labour to get .and fearch them for nothing.
0. 12. Pag. 121. he faith , VHcknowesthat thefe particulars he mentions, were not charged on Peter Bruis 'but on tin Albigeo's tn the fol- lowing Century by other hands than Bernard
and
and Cluniacenfis who were dead long be- fore.
Anfw. i. How know you another mans know- ledge > 2. Long before what ? Before any ftich accufations on i\\t Aibigenfis ? Read Bernards Serm. 66. in Cant, Saith VjJier ( than whom few men ever knew fuch matters better, or more truly reported them) de fucccj. c. 8. p. 232. Bernard Serm. 65. & 66. in Cant, mentioneth their opinions -partly common with the Manichees, partly with the Orthodox. And that the Mani- chees were before among them he before prov- ed at large, and that they ( called ^athari ) were by ordinary error miftaken for Waldsnfes and Leonifts. And p. 236. faith he [_ Sic £r Apofiolick Bernards Clareval. Catharis Eckc bertus Schnang. Popelicanis Cjuido Armorican. at que Albigenfious Regordus Regu Franc. Chro- nograph us y hare fin attnbuit quam Apofiolm prx-
dixerat deteftantem nuptias , gr cmnem
comedere prohibentem. (Which in Bernard and Ecbertus are commonly to be feen ) Quod ut de Manichetsin terra Albig. commorantibus tid- mitti potefi , it a de toto Albig. genere dillum falfijfimum effe conftat , five cum Thuano a Pet. Valdo five cum Papir* Majfonio a Pet. Bruifio
eorum originem placeat repetere And p. 237,
238. he faith, A Petro Brufio & ejus fuccejfo- re Henrico qui ( ut ex Pet. Cluniacenfi intelli-
gitur) per annos viginti dol}rmam fuam
dijfeminarunt Albigenfium fetlam deducit P.
AfaJfonitiSj Apoflolicos etiam dequtbus Serm.
Cc 3 66.
(39®)
$6. in Cant. agit Rcrnardus, eofdcm ejfe tpiru~ tnrTb>m* Waldenfis cum Publicanu.
$. 13. Pag. 123. he proveth that the Wal- denfes did deny Infant-Baptifm , from the De- crees of 12. feveral Princes, and Popes. For proof of that he referreth us to his former book. When I look there I find as cited p. 248, &c. his evi- ' dence is as fqllowetli.
i.<cDr. Vfher out pfihe Fragments of Aquit. 4cby P. Pithxm tells us, that in the time ofRo- lc bert King o^f ranee, they of Aquit and Tbo- " loufe, (principal places of the 'Waldenfe s ) did "deny Baptifm ( for fo they called denying " Baptifm to little ones ) &c.
Aafw. Mark Reader the truflinefs of this man. 1. He maketh denying Baptifm ( to fig- nifie ) only denying it to Infants , without a word of proof • 2. He leaveth out the deny- ing of our Redeemer , denying Lawful Marri- age , and the eating of fiefo, dec, though con- joyned in the teftimony. 3. He feigneth this to be (kid of the Waldenfes, which is exprefly (aid in the hiftory to be fpoken of the Adani- cbees ? Is not this an excellent Prover ? The words of Pitham hiftory cited by V[her de fuc- cef. p. 229. are thefe, Ewerfijfe in Gallia Ma- nich&os^ &'C. Pith, j Evcftigio exorti funt fcr
Aquitaniam Adanich&i feducentes fuadebant
negarc baptifmum , fignurn cruris, Ecclefiam, & ipfum Redemptorem feculi , honor em SanBorumy conjugia legit im a , efum carnium fimili mo- de apud Tholefam inventi funi Afanichai, &
(39i)
ipJJ igne crcmati funt : & per diver fa* Occi- dents partes flfanicbai y exorti Of the real
prefence here is nothing.
$. 14. 2. Saith Mr. P. [ « Dr. Vfier a\Co " tells us out of Pap. Maffon. that 14. Citizens u of Orleans, were convict of the fame herefie, li for denying Bapiifrnal grace , and the real £C prefence, annd burnt alive, Herbert , Lifms and cc Stephen —
Anfw. Here note, 1. The liiflory cited 6y Vjlicr ( Johan. Fhriacenfis , referente Maffon.) fasth, Q abnegabant facri baftifmi gratiam \ but not a word of Infants : And it was known that the Waldenfes opinion was that Priefls" did not ex opere operato give the Holy Ghoft , norBa- ptifm without the Holy Ghoft, fave any ( young or old ). 2. It addeth that they denied pardon of fin to be received, Marriage, meats which God created, and fat.
f. 15. .3. He addeth, [Dr.Vfier telJs us, . — Many of this Sect, were about Milan , &c,
Anfw. Vjhers words are out of Chron. Her- man. Contrail:. [] Quofdam htreticos, dec. certain hereticks among other opinions of ill error , of the Manichean S*#, execrating the eating of all Ani- mals— were -hanged — J. j. He proveth by this , that they were not the Waldenfes, but Ma- nichees. 2. Not eating flejh is charged on'them, 3. But not a word there of Ttaptifm of young or old.
Cc 4 f. 1$.
( 39* )
f. 15'. 3, He addeth, [ sAlfoout of Radulph. Ard. - that fever al whom they Called the
Manichean Sett denyed cBaptifm, &c. J
Anfw. Note 1. Ardens words cited by Vjh- er arc, | Tales [nut &c. Such are the Maniche-
an hcretickj at this time who faljly fay
they keep the life of the Apoflles •, faying that they lie noty nor fwear at all j and on pretence of abftinence , and continence , do damn eating flefh and marriage : They fay that it is as hei- nous a crime to go to a Wife^ as to a Mother ^ or Daughter : They damn the Old Teflament : of the New, fome they receive ^ and fume not : and which is worfey they predicate two Makers of the World^ believe thatG od made Irnjifibles and the Devil vifibles. So that they fecretly adore the Devily who they thinkjnade their bodies* The Sacrament of the Altar they fay is meer bread rBaptifm they de- ny : They fay none can be faved but by their hands .; They deny the Refurretlion of the bo- dy0~)
i. Here is not a word of Infants •, 2. They are defcribed and called fully Manichees. 3 . If this teftimony be true , believe it : If not, truft it not , or at leaft forge not fuch words as are not here.
$* 16. He addeth, [Tope Leo the Ninth in his Deer etc to Bifbop Aquit. zbout 1050. commandeth that young children be Baptized, becaufe of ori- ginal fin ].
Anfw» I will not turn to fte whether it be (0 : but what . s this to the purpofe ? The Pope
bid§
(393) •bids Baptize Infants ; Ergo not only the Marti- chees hut the Waldevfcs denyed it ? I deny that confequence.
c. 17. He adds, [ ^ Greg. 7. decreed 1070, ct that thofe young children whofe Parents "were abfent or unknown , fhould according iC to the Tradition or the Fathers be Baptized.]]
Anfw. If this prove that the XValdenfes were againft Infant- Baprifm , it will prove that Pa- pifts, Proteftants and all are fo } what proving is this }. Of Bernard (next cited) we fpake before.
0. 18. His next witnefs is, \_Ecbertm a great DoElor againfl the Cathari^ dec.
Anfw. Note Reader, that this Great Dotlor was a Monk , and after an Abbot - who faith that cc the Catharifis againft: whom he wrote, tfx* Deny and damn Marriage. 2. And all eating of flefh , becaufe it comes by copulati- on. 3. That they fay that the Devil made all " flefh. 4, That they do not only fayBaptifm " profTteth not' Infants, but more commonly ^though more privately, that no water Baptifm
11 profueth any one to falvation And
*c that Chrift was not truly born of a Virgin , <c nor had humane flefh , but a (hew of it , nor <( rofe from the dead , but feemed to dkj and "rife. They are Manichees : They keep the " feaft of Manicheus death : That they hold " that mens fouls are nothing but the apoftate ?c Spirits caft out of heaven , which by good 4C works here may procure falvation : ~\ If all this be true, werethefe thcWaldetifrs ? and is this
Mr.
Mr. JU. proof — ** Bibliot. Pat. To. 4. p. 2. p.
79. £7"C.
9. 19. His next proof is, £ Erbrardus anothtr great i o£lor7<kQ.2
Arfw. This Erbrardus profcfTeth to confute in the hereticks that he dealeih with, 1. That the Law is not of faith , but is to be repro- bate 0>fo 2. He proveth it againft them that the Prophets and Patriarchs are faved. 3. That it was the true God that gave Mofes the Law. 5. That God made all things, and that they falfly held a Good and a Bad Maker of the World. 6. That children fhould be Baptized. 7. That it is lawful to marry. 9. For the Refurre&ion, and foon. And are thefe Waldenfts and this man to be believed of them too?
d. 20. PLrmingtnAm another great Writer is his next ptocf.
Anjw. This Ermtngardus alias Ermengandus , ( we pardon him the mi manning ) writeth a- gainft Hereticks that hold, 1. That an evil God made the World. 2. That there are two Gods, a Good, and a Malignant. 3. That it was not the true God that gave Mofes the Law. 4. That Mofes was a Magician. 5. That Marri- age is unlawful, and fo on as the reii, even to the denyal of the Refurredion. And about Bapcifm (Cap. iz.pag. 1249. BibLPat. To. 4. Part. 1. ) that Baptifm profits neither young nor old without the impofition of their hands. J Is this a good witnefs that the Waldevfes were againft Infant-Bajtifm ?
Rea-
(325)
Reader, I am almoft at the end of his proofs hare , and yet Inve not patience thus to lofe preciou,s time , in openinig the reft of his abufes : The few remaining are like the reft I Yet here he foundeth his proot of Twelve Decrees, and endethwithan inlultaacn againft me and e> thers.
$. 21, In. his Kef ly^ f. 125. he adds Rei- neruts -y which giveth me occalion "to tell the Reader, that if he will perufe this one Author, he will better understand the truth of the whole bufinefs , than by reading many confounders that fpc'ak upon fame they know not what. This Rbeixhcrus tells us, that he was one of the Arch-hereticks, and among them feventeen years ; that is the Catbarifis : He tells us up- on his own knowledge, not only how many forts of them there were , whom ( being then ?n Inquifitor ) he calleth hereticks , but alfo how majiy Churches the Catharifls had , _and what number each Church had , and where they were , and what every Se& held , as different from the reft. Whereas ma- ny ignorant writers of thofe times confound them. From him we have diftinct notice that the Manribecs. and Catharifls then held the horrid herefies charged on the Waldenfes, and that the Liomfls or Pauperes de Lugduno (the true Waldenfes and Albigenfes ) were in- deed free from them ^ and abouiW^r/fop and Church, Government, they differed from thzPontificians as the Protectants do • But for dodrinals (about Fre-
defti-
(196)
destination, Free-will , Mans Power , Venial fin, Juftification , Merit, &c. ) there is no re- gardable difference charged on them. Cap. 5. he giveth you a Catalogue of the Leomfis opi- nions, of which twenty are againfb the Papal Government : Then he faith, they damn the Sa- craments of the Church : And here come in the words cited by Mr. D. Where note, j. That he maketh them fay that [Catcch>f,-n Xs nothing^} 2. Item quod ablatio, qu& datnr In- fantibm nihil profit. J That the wafhmg which fs given to Infants, profits not. •£ 3. That the Godfathers underhand not what they (l?onld an- fwer to the Friefi. ] 4. That they rejefi exor-
cifrr.es , and the bcnedillions of Baptifm-
that a Prteft in mortal fin may not confecraie the Sacramenty &c. _} And let the Reader note thatthePopifh doctrine then was, tha: all Baptized Infants were certainly faved, becaufe Baptized, how wicked foever the Parents , Pweft , and Godfathers were : And that all thefe (Triefts, Parents, and Godfathers J were then (0 often grofly ignorant and wicked, as became tie fcandalof all good people. And note that here Rcinhe- rus faith not that they rej cited Baptifm of In- fantsy nor held it unlawful, but that, 1. Ab- lutio, the outward waging. 2. Qua datury which- de fatlo was then giien Infants, 3. Ni- hil profit y profits nothings plainly meaning no more but that the children of wicked igno- rant Parents, prefented by Godfathers that know not ^o much as what to anfwer the Prieft, and
Ba-
Baptized by Wicked Priefts who tell them that ex opcre operato ihey are now certainly in a flate ofr falvation , are not faved by this wafhing , unlefs they have alio the Baptifm of the ipi- ric , which is not this way afcertained to them.
And accordingly they meant of Catechizing ^ that is, of the Popiih Catechizing only • And of the other Sacraments , as under the Popifh notion of a Sacrament which giveth grace ex * cpere operato. And when he faith that £ Sa- cramentum Con'jugii damnant ~\ he openeth the rnyftery of that accufation. i . They denyed Mar- riage to be a Sacrament, 2. And he faith [Di- ce ntes mortaliter peccare conjuges^ fiabfque fpe frolis conveniant. J It feems they were too ri- gid for Chaflity , but not againft Marri- age.
c. 22. And that this is the true meaning of Reinherm appeareth, 1. By the phrale of the contexr. 2. In that he never cfrcreth to con- fute any fuch error of theirs, as the denyal of the lawfulnefsof Infants Baptifm. 3. Andfpeak- i g Cap. 6. of the Grtbibtpfcshi further expound- ed all £ Paw tills vero non predeft niji fuerint pcrfetti in fell a ilia ~] the words before being £ De baptifmo dicnnt^ cnod nihil valeat 5 n'tfi ^quantum vale ant merit a •Daptiz.ant'n. ~] §P that it is not Antiy&dobaptifm that he uccufeth them of, but thac Baptifm profited! no: Infants unkfs th: Baf timers ( or Parents) be good-, that is, as afore- said, when done by wicked Priefts to the children of the wicked* £-23.
C. 23. And for further evidence , the next Hiftorian added by Gretfer, ( Bibl. Patr. Tc. 4. Fart. 2. p. 776. ) Pet. Piitchdorf feemeih one of the molt learned and acquainted vviih what he wro:e ok any other that have then vvritten agairrft the IVaUenfes, and he refutcth their opinion of the invalidity of Sacraments, when adminiftred by wicked Preifts, c. 16, 17* But never faith a word of their denying Infaut-Baptifm , even when he accurately and copioufly in Thirty fix Chap- ters reckons up and confutcth their differences from the Papal Church. And can we think fuch a man ( and almoft all that confound them not with the Catharifts that were Manichees ) would over- look this, in fuch a p^rfecuting bloody time - when they racked every word of the poor diffen- ters to make a herefie of it ?
$• 24. To Pilichdorf is added another accu- rate confuter of their opinions , that hath not a word of any fuch charge.
And next is added an exad Catalogue of theif f fuppofed) errors to the number of Thirty fe- ven , and not a word of this among them all.
• And next is added the M)diu examinandi h&- rcticos ; And next dc er ambus Begehurdorum ; and have not a word of it*
What ,the Papift do&rine was you need no better informer than Lucm Tndenfis foregoing ( Part, 1*636. who writeth again i\ worfe per- ions ( though Gretfer intitleth it againft the Al~ bigcnfcs ) and yet chargeth them not with this )
(399) viz.. Cap. i. li. 2. T In cafe of necejfity every tizophytcmaybe Bapuz.cd^of any Lay-man^ Jew, Htrttu'^y or Gentile. But for the dignity of the Sacrament it mufi be done by a Prelbyter or Deacon , if there be opport unity , and received from any other , it is not at ak to be iterated, By this Sacrament , both Infants and adult are Rege- nerated of Water , and the Spirit 5 and receive re- mtjfign of all fwsy with the adoption of the children of God.
<$. 25. If all this will not clear the Waldenfes at Mr. D.\rbarr, and if he look that we ihould take notice of his Dutch Martyrologie^ and his MemingW) let him that erreth, err ftill.
CHAP.
C4co)
CHAP. IV.
His Impenitence in Calumniating the Donatifts (and Novatians ) reprehended.
$. i. T}4g. 1 3 2.. of his Reply he returneth to JL this notorious calumny, and charging Mr. IVilles with difingenuity he falls to his wont- ed way of proving , i . From Sebaftian Frank and Twisk^ whom I neither have at hand, nor am obliged to believe in telling me what the Do- natifls held , nor to believe thac Mr. D. here fo differs from himfelf, as truly to report them; Once fur all, It is ufual with Writers to charge the Anabaptifts as following the Dmatifts in Re- baptizing, but not in denying Infant-baptifm : For the Donatifts baptized again both Infants and adult. And it is like this deceived this temerarious man.
£.2. Next he repeateth his falflioods of Cref- conius, Fulgentius , Vine. Viftor^ which I have (hewed to be done in great temerity.
5f . 3 . Thirdly he repeateth his ftupendious ilan- der of Auftin as with much x^eal and fury in many Books oppofmg the Donatifts for denying In- fant-baptifm^ of which in them all ( ?s far as I can find ) he hath not one fyllable, but the clear contrary, as is proved by me.
£. 4. Becaufe Eckbertus and Emericus charge the Waldenfes herein as conforming to the Dona- tifts rfffd Novatian?; 1. It was not the Waldenfes
they
(4°0 they (pake of as I proved, but the Manicheari Catharifts ; 2. Or if they confounded them they Wronged them-, 3. And if they fay as he report- eth , they belied the Donatifts -, and why then fhould I believe them ? 4. But this time-robber hath tempted nae once more to perufe Eckbertpis tht Abbot, and to read his Serm, 7. and 8. and where-ever this fubjedt is his theam, and I find not one fy liable of any fuch matter in him of ei- ther Donatifts or Novatians jfuch a man have we now to deal with.
£. The reft of his recitals are riot worthy the recital : The Anfwer before given is fufficient, Only I fay again that his contempt of fo full a teftimony as the Decree of a Council at that time
ifor receiving without rebaptizing fuch as the )onatifts baptised in Infancy^ cited by C«fan- der as a certain proof, is a proof that there is jvorfe than a weak judgement in fault.
j>& CH'AP,
( 402)
CHAP. V.
Hi* renewed Calumny of the old Br it tains re-
ffoved.
f. i. Ty Epeating and defending Fabians fop-' 1\_ Pery> he argueth that it could be no- thing elfe in which they- are [aid to contradict the Apofiolick^ Catholic^ Chilrch t Anfw. i. If Beda lay that Augttftine tells them that in many things they do contrary to the Roman Catholic k^ and the Apoftolicl^Chnrch , doth it follow that the three things in which he requireth their con- currence were all part of thofe many ? To preach the Gofpei to the Saxons was one. Is that a point that they differed from all the Apoftolick Church in ? When it feemeth to be from no oilier reafon, than that they would not own the Saxons that had conquered them , nor the Papal power that would ufurp upon them : And on the fame reafon they might as well refufe to ba- ptize the Saxons children. 2. But there is no inch thing in the words of Hede, as I have (hew- ed [~ but according to the wanner of the Church of Rome , &c. ] And who knoweth not that the Church of Kume , and all in its communion then called the umintfal Ckmk, ufcdin baptifa,
the
(403)
rhe White Garment ^the taftihg Miik^md Hony^and Chryfme , as an .jipoftolical tradition or fuch as they knew no original of ? Tertullian and Epi- pbstniHs alone are full witnefTes of this, if there were no more.
$. 2. There is nothing in the reft that I think needeth a word more of anfwer than I before gave. And I fear being guilty of idle Words and loft time in writing needlefty.
Dd 2 CHAP,
(A°4)
C H A P. V I.
Of his venturous report of Bijhop 11 (hers cenfure of me,
IN his Reply pag.^i* he faith [_ 1 have anho- nourable regard to his perfon , and due value to his labour s, efpecially where he has laid outhim- felf to promote practical holinef ( and wherein as 1 have judged his grcatcfi excellency lies ) fuppofng had he let £ontroverfus alone, and ad- dicted him f elf thereto , he would much more have furthered the pejee and union he pretends to pro- mote : It having been, as I have heard, a judge- ment that Bifiop Ufher made of him, that if he perfifted in Polemical writings , he was like to prove a trouhler, rather than a promoter of peace. ] Here, i . See how he feareth not to make re- ports of the dead by this hcarfay ? No wonder if by this fort of men I my felf am by backbiting fo frequently traduced, and faid to Preach and Print that which never was in my mouth or books or thoughts ?
2. Should one ask him whom he heard this from , do you think we (hould get a fatisfying anfwer ? No one. is here named.
3. It is poiiible BHhop Vficr upon the coming forth of my Aphorilms (which had many crudi- ties, and many quarrelled at it more than there was caufejmight fear any thing that looked like unufual.
4« But
4- But I ask the Reader whether this be a 'pro- bable report, when he underftandeth,
i. That I was for fome weeks familiar with the Bifhop, and he never fpake a fy liable to me of fuch importance. 2. That when Dod. Kendal and I were together with him, and our queftion was what was Auguftins jugement of Redemption, Per -fever ance, and fome other things, he exprefly averred that my AfTertion in all ihofe was the truth. 3. But I imagine this following might be the occation of the report. Dr. Kendal had fome acquaintance with and interefl in the faid Arch- Biihop , ancl he having written two difputations againft me , I had anfwered the firft , and had drawn up part of the anfwer to the fecond : But Mr. Vines and Dr. Kendal defired me to meet at Biiliop V fliers lodging in order to the ending of our difference. There the Bifhop motioned that we fhould promife to write againft each oiherno more : which we did, and I caft by what I had begun. But yet DocT. K. after in a Latine Trea- tife broke that promife (which occafioncd my verfes. in the end of my Difpute of the Object of Juflifying Faith againft Mr. Warner y which fome underftood not. ) Now it is not unlikely that the Bifhop might fay that if Dr. K. and 1 perfifted in that Difpute, it would but trouble the Church. I am fure he faid no more to me, nor fo much.
As for Mr. £>.'s judgement, I deferve' not the
honour he giveth me, but indeed I think that of
moft men that I have Had to deal with in that
kiad, he is one* of the unfirteft to make himfeU a
Dd 3 Judge,
Judge, who U fit to meddle with C or.tr over fie y or to judge him f elf much fitter than me. Doubr- lefs his knowledge hath coft him much lefs time and ftndy than mine hath done me ; And if his advantage be in greater illumination of Gods Spi- rit , as I ferioufly profcfs to fear left I fhculd want it, for my manifold fins againft the Spirit, and therefore have caufe moft earneftly to beg for it •, fo I could wi'li that he had better manifeited it, than in thefe two Voluemshe ha:h done : at leaft by an ordinary humane friendship to histori- cal truth. For my part I had never more pub- lilted any thing in this caufe, if my fenfe of tbc hurt and danger of their Separations and Divilions of Chriftians, and deftru&ion of Love and Peace, had not moved me much more , than any great Zeal againft bare rebaptizing, in it felf confidcrtd, efpecially if hypothetically done.
Poft-
(4°7)
Poftfcript.
s
'/« *• ^^t^nce tne writing of this, I have perufed Smaragdiu, Peter Abbas ClnniacenfiSy and Bernard^ which were not before at hand. And
I fhall give you a true account of their teftimo-
nies.
I. As for Smaragdtu, I never before read him, but on this occafion getting his expofition on the Epiftles and Gofpels I find that there is a great agreement indeed among Mr. Danvers witnefTes, that in his citations he is ftill like him- felf.
tf, 2. Smaragdpis on i Vet. 2. in olh Pafch, fol. 87. faith, £ Sinite parvulos 'venire ad me, taliam enim eft regnum ccelomm : Hanc enim fan- ftam^ ptram & innocentem infantiam, par baf- tifmi gratiam cafta mater gignit Ecclejia ] That is ^faffcr little children to come to me , for of [neb is the Kingdom of God ^ " For this ho- Dd 4 iy
(408.)
"lypute and innocent Infancie , the Church u their chaft Mother dotfi by the grace qi Ba-. " ptifm beget."]
tf. 3. And on Mar. 16. in Afcenf. fol. ioi, £ Cum autem dicatur , Qui vero non crediderih condemnabitur, quid hie dicimm de parvulis, qui per at at em adhuc credere non vaknt i Nam de major ib 114 nulla qnafiio eft : In Ecclefia ergo falvatoyis per alios parvuli credunt, peat ex all- is ea qua tll'is in b apt if mo remit tiwtur peccata traxerunt.'] That is, \_ He that believeth and ts Baptized foall be faved, &c. But when it is faid, 'But he that believeth not jhall be condemnedy what. fay vpe here to little ones who by their age are not yet able to believe ? For of the elder there is no que ft ion. therefore in the Church of our Saviour j little ones believe by others, as- from others they have drawn thofe fins which, tn Ba- ft ifm are forgiven to them.
4. 4. And m fab. Pentecoft. in Aft. 19./0/. 103, 104. having at. large opened how Cate- chumens we-re inftruBed before Baptifm , and defcribed approve dly their Ceremonies , of crcjjing, breathing on them, exorcizing, fait-, the Creed to be recited and under food , he addeth,
Quia eroo Parvitli, necdum ratione utentes% mc mmime cap ere poftunt , oportet ut cum ad . imtelligibilcm at at cm pcrvenermt, doceantur & filci facramenta & confcffionis myfteria, ut ve- raciter credant , & diligenxi cura cuftodiant confeflhnem Juamn plane diximm ; quia, quam- jzujf 1 IU necaum loqui pojfunt , pro i His & con<*
(4op)
foefitur & loquuntur -qui cot de lavaero f otitis fafcipiunt* Nee immento ; dignum eft ut qui alio- rnm peccatis obnoxii font) aliorum etiam confef* fiane, per minifierium baptifmatid, remiffionem originalinm percipient peccatorum, 3 That is [ But feeing little ones that have not yet the ufe ofreafon9 cannot receive thefe things, it is meet that when they come to age of understanding they be taught both the Sacraments of faith and the my fiery of confeffion jhat they may truly believe, and by diligent care may keef their confeffion : And not mdefervedly : It ts meet {or worthy ) that they who are obnoxiom to {or by)others fins, by others confeffion alfo Jhonld by the my fiery of Baptifmyreceive the pardon of original fins. \
55. 5. Yet it's true that this fame Author doth oft call- for confeffion from the aduk, and per- fwade men not to truft to meer outward bapti- zing, as may befeen on 1 Cor. p.fol. 30. crc.Buthe could reconcile this to Infant-Baptifm, though Mr. D. cannot. See him further fol. 85. c. in Math.zS* andfol.8j.in 1 Pett$.& foh84.dHfol.19.Hi Jfa.6o*
tf. 6. II. As to Pet. Cluniacenfis (another Abbot near the fame time , andr contemporary with Bernard ) he is the moil plaufible of all Mr. D.'s witnefTes , as againfV two men, Pet. Bruit, and Henry : But, 1, Fol. 1. Epift, I. he writeth Twenty years after Peters fowing his doctrine. 2. And though Henry lived in his time, yet fol. 2. he faith , \ Sed quia cum ita\ fentire vel prdtdicare , nondum mihi plene fide* faffa- efi7 differs refponfionem qmufque & horum <
qua
£»<* dicttntur indnbitatam habeant certitudinem j chat is, ( having called Henry the heir of Peters voicksdncfs , who rather changed than mended his Devilliflj dotlrine ) "But becaufe I have not "yet teftimony. fully credible Cor am not fure ) H that he fo tbinketh, and preacheth , I delay "my anfwer till I can have undoubted cerr <c tainty of the things reported ]. By which it is plain that he knew neither of them , but went by that fame , which commonly then ilandered them.
f. 7. 3. And in his firft Propofal fol. 7. ( of Hoffmeifters Edit. ) he reciteth the words fuppofed to be theirs , in which they deny as much the Salvation as the Baptifm of all In- fants. Ex his domini verbis Mar. 16. aperte fnonftrant , nullum nifi credidertt , (£• baptiz.a« tm filer it , hoc eft y nifi (fiorifiianam fidem ha- buerit & baptifmum perceperit , poffe faiuari : Nam non alterum horum , fed utrumque pariter falvat : Vnde Infantes^ licet h vobts baptiz.cn- ttir , quia tamen credere , objlante <ttate^ non •poffunt , nequaquam falvantur. \ So that it is the falvation of any Infants that they principal- ly here deny ^ accounting Baptifm needful to falvation.
$. 8. "And fol. 8. He addeth their next " charge that fama vulgavit , fame reported , " that they wholly believed not Chrift^Prophets^or "Apoftles, the Old or New Teftamenr. Sed quia fallaci rumorum monflro non facile affcnfum prabere debeo ( maxime cum quidam vos totum
di-
divinum Canonem abjeciffe ajfirment } malii quA* dam ex iffo vos Jufcepifje contendant ) c it! pare vos de incertis nolo \: Where he fully confefTeth that he knew them not, but went by fame, and that he fufpetted himfelf this fame to be ialfe , calling it a Monfter , and proving it contrary t» it fejfy and profefling that he ought not to be- lieve it : But yet left it fhould be true, hegoeth on to prove the truth of the Scriptures, as he doth Infants falvation and Baptifm.
£. 9. Now I leave it to the Reader,among many uncertainties, which of thefe he will believe moft probable : 1. That all the parties were ilande- red : 2. Or that Peter and Henry were flan- dered by occafionof the mixed Manichees, or by the vulgar lying levity or Popifh malice, 3. Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as fome now, though the reft were not. 4. Or whether they and the Albigenfes and Walden- fes, really denyed all Infants falvation and Ba- ptifm ( their very pretended words being cited.) 5. Or whether they were flandered as to In- fant-falvation , and not as to their Baptifm. 6. Or whether all this rofe not from their denying the falvation of the children of all the wicked, as ex of ere operato, by the Baptifm of the Prieft, and their rcfufing to bring their own children to be Baptized by fuch Priefts, and their- telling the wicked at age , that their Infant-Baptifm would not fave them. Believe which of thefe you find moft caufe.
£. 10. Ill*
• f. 10. III. As (or Bernard , r. Though at holy man, yet his conceit that Papal unity was necefTary, and that the DifTenterscaufedconfufion, tranfported him with fuch prejudice againft them, as we have now againft the vikft Sccls. 2. He was acquainted with Clnniacenfis and might be- lieve him. 3. He took things on truft as he did. 4. He chargeth even- the fecret hcreticks that he writes againft, as holding it unlawful tofwear, and yet lawful to for (wear , rather than reveal their cafe -.Scrim. 65. 5. And that in fee ret they are reported to commit filthy wicked/?fs, not to be named, 6. That he heareth that fome of them rejed Pauls writings , and? the Old Teftament. 7. That they lived fcandaloufly with Women : and he talketh as if it were impoili- ble for men and women to dwell tjgether, and yet to be chaft. 8. Yet fheweth that he moil un- chariiably fufpefted them, faying, \_ Sifidemzn- terrogeSy nihil foriftianiHs • fi converfationem, ni- .hil trreprehenftbiiim ; & qua, loquitur, fattis pro- bst : Videos hominem in teflimonwm faa fidei freqnentare Ecclefiam , honor are prefbyterosy of~ Jarre mnnw fnnmy confejftonem facer e , facra- rnentis communicare ( and did they deny Infant- Baptifm then ? ) Quid fdeliiu ? Jam quod ad vi- tarn morefque fpettat, neminem concHtn, neminem circumvenit^ neminem fitter gr edit ur , pallent or a jejuniis , panem non comedtt otiofm > cperatur manibus qntbm <vitam fuftentat ; XJbi jam VhU pes i:~] And what's the proof again!! them, ffi'-
ne-
C4*3)
ncarww demolttio teflatur vnlpem : Mulicres rt- lift is viris^ Q- viri dtfmjjls uxcribtts, ad ifios fe conferunt : clerici & facerdotes populis Ec- clefitfque relittis intonfi & barbati apnd cos, in- de textores & textriccs piernrnque mventi [ant. jhfinon grav^ demolitto ijta $ Annon opera vulpi- nm hxc f ] And the way he appoints for their purgation is to put women out or their houfes. 9. Serm. 66. he chargeth them for being againjt Marriage, yez that they ' took^filthinefs to be only in having Wives. 10. And with for- bidding to Marry, they joyned abflaining from meats ; and fo holding devilifh dodtrine : But that fome allowed Marriage only to Virgins, .but noc fecond Marriages : That they abhorred Milk ,• and ail that was made of it, and all that was procreated by generation, and that ( de in- fanta Manichdii.) That they held themfelves on- ly to be the Church , and derided them that Baptized Infants : ( yet he himfelf writes large- ly Ep. ad Hug. de Santto Viftore, for the fal- vation of perfons that have faith, and die unba- ptrzed through neceflity ♦, alledging Ambro[ey Ah ft in y Cyprian -, And concludeth Infants faved by others faith, as they were guilty by others fin.) 11. In Epifl. ad Hildefonfam he faith, of Henry by name, that he was an Apoftate, that made a trade of preaching, to live by in ne- ceflity, and what money he eould get of fimple peo- ple and women more than found him food, he fpent in playing at dice, or other more filthy uies : that alter his daies applaufe by the people he was
found
CM)
found at night with whores : that he thus left every where fuch a ftink behind him, that he could come but once to a place, naming many Cities.
Now let the Reader judge if Bernard be to be believed what a man ; this was : If not, what his teftimony is worth.
AS I am writing this, the Hawkers are cry- ing under my window , Mr. Baxters Ar- guments for Believers, &c. The men that cite Authors at this rate, cite me againft my felf, with the like confidence : Becaufe I have prov- ed in my Treat, of Confirmation, the neceflity of perfonal Profeffion in the Adult : And he that will think that fuch dealing as this doth need an anfwer , and that if the Adult muft make an intel- ligent profeffion, Infants muft not be Baptized, let him be ignorant •, for I have not time to fa- tisfie him.
4
FINIS,
; Infant Baptifm Afferted and Vin- dicated by Scripture and Antiquity, in Anfwer to Mr, Henry DanVers ? with a full detection of his Mifre- prefentation of Divers Councils and Authors both Ancient and 'Mo- dern, &c. By 0. Wills: Sold by Jo. ^bhfon at the Golden Lyon in St. Paul's Church -yard.
it» ~* v
*
4
<$£j>,
t ?
v^^%i»"'*v
*%'•#
■"it
^t, m ' 9. V
3ft
m
v -'