^)^Hf
■-^•'^■■•'^-/
mm. .^
0
Plain Scripture Proof
O F
Infants Church-memberlliip
B A P T I S M:
BEING
The Arguments prepared for Cand
partly, managed in ) the publick Difpute with Mr. lombes at Bewdlej on the firft day of Jan. i6^g»
With a ful Reply to what he then anfwered^and
what is contained in his Sermon fincc preached, in
his printed Books, his -^. S. on i Cor,j.i^. which I faw,
againft M. Marpjull^ againft thefe Arguments.
With a Reply to his Valedi(5i:ory Oration at ServMey • And a Correflive for his Antidote.
By Richard Baxter.
A Minifler ofChrifi for hit Church at Kedcrminfter.
Conftrained unavoidably hereto by Mr. Tombes his imporcuniry ;
by frequent Letters, Mcffengers, in bis Pulpit, and at lafi in Print calling out for my Arguments, and charging the Dcniall upon my Confcicnce. VVirh:in Appendix of Anlmadvcrfions on Uv.Bedfordilvz&^ic^ and part of Dr. iVards, which fecm to give too much to Baptifm.
THE THIRD EDI T I O N.
Wherein is added, An Examination of Mr. Ts. P K.<^ CVRSOR.
AND .
J friendly Accommointion ivithMy. Bedf'^rd. ^
fOJ^LoNDON , Piinted for Robert White, i6;3.^»p?^P*
Mark: lo. 14.
WHen Jefus faw it, he was much difpleafed , and faid unto them j Suffer the little children to come to me, and forbid them not ; for of fixh is the Kingdom of God.
MArk'^.l6 57, AndhetookaChiid.andfethiminthemidftofthcmi and when he had taken him in his arms, he faid unto them : Whofoever ftiall receive one of luch children in my Name, receiveth me, &c.
Origen.Hom. 8. inLcvit. ^l»iid caufx efi cum Baptifma Ecclefta in remi/ponempeccatorumdetur, fectsndMm Ecclefia obfervantiam etiam farvula Baptifrnm detnry ^c, it a Hom.l^, in Luc, & lib.^. in C4p,6. ad Rom^n,
jiugufl. de Bapt, cont. Donatifi. L^. r.i 3. If any man ask for Divine Authority in this matter, although we moft rightly believe , that what the Univerfal Church holdcth, and was not inftituted by Councels, but hath been ever held , was not delivered but by Apoftolical authority i yet may we truly conjedure what the Sacrament of Baptifmperformcth to Infants, by Circumcifion which the former people did receive.
Augufi.de peccat. Merit. & Remif.l.'^^c.'^, Ail AntiquitJc hath firmly held that Believers Infants do receive Re« miflion of Originall fin by Chriftian Baptifm.
Jtiflin, Mart, in Bpift. adZenam. (' Women^ught to look to their children,^f£-^»/c ojfttch u the King' dome of Heaven.
A 3 Cnr*<in
. :^i4jn^i^rr cjprinn 2t\6 66 Bif^'ops in Councel ( Epifi. $(). operum Sdit.
^i?.T^O'ouUriii. ^1^.^61) fully decerminc, that Intancs may be baptized
^^ v^v!t"»/,Abc:foic the eighth day ( which was /"/W^^ doubt i) There bting then
^\ ^^*<P*fi\Q qntftion or doubt once raifc:d , whether they (hould be at all
'yMr? /.v^.SUto-'^cd.
rt^vyiu/.ifitr t^c/^Xjiwh-ch y^f^^ufi. Epijl.2^. ad Hifron faith []^>7>W/»« with his fcN ^r^r!/7?y,**Tow. Eifhops judged that a new-born Inlant might be baptized, ( for .»..rr pi^t^il corret^ion of thcra that thought they might not be baptized before M ««/« fc I /^'^'^ the eighth da' , &c.j Not making anj yjew Decree ^ ^fit keeping the m&J} ^"►^rt.' »c''**^^«/?^''^^ ^f/;f/e///7f Church. Ut any man tbink what he plcaleagainft >iv>*»t n^oJc2,ny opinion of Cyprian, where perhaps he law not what he fliould in^^'f^^pi have ken; Only againft the mofi miinifeft ApoftoUcal Belief , lee ^pl^ZJ^fc ^ ^^ "^*° think.] The like he hath lib, 4. ad Bonif. cap.S, cited by goftlar-
uu ^ry-'^ytLii^u^ Now Qprian^zs Bifhopof C^r/^rf^f j 50 years after the death of ^*^ tten prv Si. fohfi ac the utmoft ; and fo was like to live within near 100 7'*^'*,/^^^ years of 7o;b« : and could a whole Councel, and all the Church f"^/^'^^'^ be ignorant whether Itifants were wont to be baptized 100 years iif/^ ^ ^ before? when fome of thcrafelvcs or their Fathers were thole In- ^Is^^'^rx'^ fants ? Yea, could it be fo forgotten , as that none (hould once doubt
^^ ^'/Ju-f^lJ.*-
The Currant Confenc of Hiftorians alTures us, that HjginHs Bifhop of Rome did firft ordain God- fathers and God-mothtrs, at the bap- tizing of infantsfOcflip'jas Dr.TriVf^w^v cals them,«r 'yrfm»;« cr P^- trina Infantem ftifciferent irthaptifmB, ut Fafcicul. TempOK vel Patrimos er PatrimoiyUt PUtina in vita Hjigtni:)^2](\T\g no qucftion of their bap- tifm it felf , but mentioning it as a ufuall pra«3ice and undoubted duty* CNor doth any other Hiftory fpcak of any beginning of it fince the A- poftlcs times. jNow Hyginm lived as Dan.Tarttus fmh,yinno Dom.i')^. as Helvicm, 1 5 2. as Trideaux, 150, as Fajciculus Temper. 144. asO««- ^hrius, 138. But as Nicephorus before them faith {Ecclef. Hijior. /.g, f.25.j in the fitft year of the Emperour Anto.T'iusi which was accor- ding to Hf/z'/V«j himfelf 137. And Irenaus reheaifing the Catalogue of the Roman Bidiops, fairb that Eleutherius was in his time , the twelfth from the Apoftlesj and Soter, Anicetuj and Tins all after
Hjginas J
L I. p ic
Hvginus J who was therefore the fourth that had been from Irenaus writing upwards ; and yet Iren^us himfelf lived in Polycarpm time f who was5t. Johni Difciple ) al! which he recordcth, Ub.i.adv. haref. rap.-^. where he faith, that the faid Po/jr^rp converfed with thofe that hadfeen Chrift, and was by the Apoftles themfelves made Bifhopof Smyrna ; fo that BjginHS and the Church in his days living but about 4oyeats'aftcrSt.7''^«, andconvetfing, if not with the Apoftles them- felves, Cas ibme did j yet at leaft with the Apoftles Difciples and Fami- liarf, is itpoffible they fhould fo generally be ignorant, whether the Apoftles baptized Infants ? 1 know that in a Dodfrinal point a miftake is eafier ; or a bare Narration of fome one Faft, fas Iren<tHs miftake of the length of Chrifts life ; ) But in a matter of Faft, and of fo publick jiotice, and which fomany thoufands were partakers in, as Baptifm was, how could they be ignorant ? Were not many hundred then alive that could tell what the Apoftles did as having feen them ? and knew whether themfelves and their Parents were baptized in Infancie or not ? Suppofe it were a queftion now among us, whether men were baptized at age only, or in infancie alfo 40 years ago ? or 50 or 100 were it not eafie to know the truth ? And is it poflible all the Kingdom could be ignorant of it, and take the contrary for unqueftionable ? Let M.r.fhew but as much againft Infant- baptifm.
NoK efi tentiior tranfgrejfio in Interfretatione cft*am inConverfatione^ Tertul de pHMcit.c.9 ^<af;^ P<<wf/. pag.708. Tranfgrcffion in Interpre- tation is not lefs then in Convetfation.
Mr. Tomhes felf- condemnation. Treat, of ScandalSj/'^^.j 2 3. ( Ad hominem, )
With the fame fpirit at this day, do many feducing Jefuite? and Seminarie Priefts bred of the fmoak of the bottomlcfs pit^fcan- dalize many ignorant or corrupt fouls, &c. And no better are the ends of many other Hercticks, asSocinians, Anabaptifts, Familifts, Separa- tifts, and the reft of the litter of grievous Wolves, as S. Paul ct\s ihemi v4ft. ao. 50. that enter among Chriftians, and fpare not the flock.
AN^pag. 341^ 342- he faith lAnd others svho out of crafty ^c-vhes and fubdohus in-i *^tcattenSj for worldly advantages apply themjelves to [educe oihrrs. Of which fort no doubt are many Emiffarics out of Popish Seminaries, Agents for Separation, and other Scedfmen of Tares. Shall I tal^; up the Apofilcs wpj Gal. j,i 1. 1 would they were cii: cflFthat trouble us ? Sj indeed we wifh j but my Text puts me out of hope ofatiaimng it :nih;sltfe'f andthcrcforclcandono mrrebut nn'yrcad their donm, thit a keavie direful veohan'^s over their heads, rv'ncb will ru furcly fuU anthem as God is tru;. For how can it be utbcf-wifey but that Gods wr.itb fhou'd brcal^ forth agtinfl thofe that continue f radices againft him as hu Enemies ? Can any Prince brool^ the Sowers of Sedition} the Seducers of his SubjtHs from their Allegiance} the Under miners of his Authority} if CiauiilBS Caefar were f« b!ocl{''(h, we (loall fel dam meet with fitch another. Certain it is God wiUnotfo put it up : he hath proclaimed htmfelfto be a God that will by no means clear the guilty 5 that he will repay them that hate hipi to their face; Let no man de- ceive himfdf^ God is not mocl^ed : There is a trcafurc ofwratlMefervcdfor all fiich Fadun for HcU.Thi- fame cup that Balaam fl«(f Jeroboam aw^Jannes as^ Jarabres, and Elymas dratjii of fliall all Seducing lefuites and inveigling Sedaries, and promoters of Licen- lioufnefs, drinl^^ of. Tic fame judgment abides them j th: fame Hell mufi hold them.
^j<s^pag.349. Remember that of So\on\os\,Prov.n.i^. The fimple belicvcth every word} but the prudent man looketh well to his goings. B: not ca(i'y credulout then of mcris coimfets : tntflnot lightly to their judgments. Try 'ih:ir fpirits i examine their Counfels and Opinions before thou embrace them. Forget not St. Pauls i-ule, Rom. 16.17. To mark them which caufe divifions and offraces contrary to the DoCl/ine which is dclivocd torn, and avoid them. For they that are fuch, fcrve not our Lordjcfui Chrifi^but their own belly ; and by good words and fair fpccchcs deceive the hcartiofihe fiDJple.
And fig- ^o 9. 'Let mt thy %eal be equallfor the fmallcr and the greater matters of the law.Mat.ij.zj. z Be not ra(h or too [lifin thy Opinion^ when it is about difpu table points i fuch as honeft and learned men do vary in^ fo-that it can hardly be difcerncd who 16 in the right. Let thy conceits of thy felf be modeli, and be willing to learn from any one ihnt which is Truth. I Be not apt to [lifpcfl another s unfcundnefs. ludge not that thou be not judged, Mat.7. i .Rom. 14.4,10. 4 a he, ein thou agreeft with thy br other ^profcfs that^ frailicethat with concord, and wait till Codjhall join you together in one mmd, and one Vpayfor therefl^ Phil.3.1 J,i6.
And in his Epifile : Errors in Confcicnce produce many great cvilsy not only ad intra in wens own fouls ^ but alfo ad extra in humam affairs.
Few there be that heed the terrible Comminaiion of our Saviour againfl ScaKdali':^rs , and therefore are affciled as if by tranfmigration they had Cains fpirit^ when he f aid. Am 1 my brothers Keepers ? wlxnce it is that offences are multiply cd dflfy, many fouls perijh; alienations of mind, Schifms, Jars and Wars too arife.
./4«^pag.ioj. As a lame horfe whcnhe is heated will go well enough, but when he tools will halt downright : even fo an Hypocrite though for a time he may go on fairly in his way, yet in //^e Conclufion > lil^ely when he hath attained his ends, he fals fouly. (Compare thj^s with my Expofition oftAit.7.16. which he gain-fayes.)
And pag. 177. The Ordinances whereby the Jens were rejlraincdin their Liberiy^wcre a yoak which they were not able /o bear, Aft. 1510. But it u removed from our ntcl^s by Chrifls death &c. So pig. 1 90.
And in his £j:<zw. pag. loi. Now I pray you what was this yoajf, A61 !•). 10. but Cinimcifion ? as your feif dtclarc, and all the Legall Ceremonies?&c. {compare this with huanfwcr to that Text-) - ' "iO
To the Church at Ke-
derminfter, my dearly Re- lived , my Crown , and my loy,
Leflcd be God , the
Father of our Lord
9^ ^^^ Jcfus Chrift , who ^I Uni 1^ -^^^1^ called you
with a holy cal- ling , and confirmed you in his Truth , and led you not into temptaiion , but delivered you from the evil , who hath ga- thered you to his Son , and kept you yet in him : and taught you to feck after knowledge, without the quenching of Zeal; and to maintain Zeal with- out defpiiing knowledge •, to fcek after Truth in the way of Peace, and after PcvKe in the way of
Truth ;
To the Church at
^ewdley^ my unfaigned*
ly beloved friends
in the Lord.
S my felf and the people of God , who are committed to my overfight , did heartily congratu- late jour fuppofed fcl/aty in your choice of jour late Le6lu > rcr Mr. T. fo tvere rvecon(lrai' ned to be very fcnfible of your danger , when wefarv their hopes frtifirated , and the fp arks of er- rour and df fiord break out into a flame • being blown by that breath which jhould have helpt to kindle your heavenlinefs , and unanimous love. To this fen ft- bility we were engaged by many I a ) obli'
To the church at Kcdcrminfter.
Truth : as knowing how neer they dwell together •, that when other of Chrifts Minifters more dclcrving then my fclf , arc ni:ide by their people even a- weary of their lives , I fliould yet be comforted in your con- ftancy , unity and Peace : that my greaceft danger licth in o- vervaluing my condition ; and being more contented in the en- joyment of you 5 then is meet on earth. And if the behold- ing of your (ledfaftnefs be to me fuch a folace , what a blef- fing m.uft it be to you who do pofcfs it ^ May not your expe- rience of the happinefs of (labi- lity, unity and Peace, perfwade you to hold on in fo fwect a way, though other Argumens were wanting ^ Is ic a fmall mercy that you meet in one fo- ciety, when others arc parcelled into many f and that you can. meet in Love , and take comfort in one anocberjWhcn others look ftrangely, and with Jcaloufie on their brethren i and that your folcmn AfTcmblics ate not em- bittered, but you can publikcly praifc the Lord with an unani- mous joyfulnefsjwhcn others do
viUr
To the Church at BcrvMey,
eb ligations. Ton are our Ancitnt^ cur aeercjl and deercjl neigh- bours: As rve are [eated ncercr to- gether then any two fuch Toms that 1 have feen in the Land, fo have we formerl) held as neer familiarity and love. We were bound to lament the danger of our dear friends ^ andtobe [omewbat fcnfible of our own danger , when the flames and infection wof broke cut fo neer m • but effect ally to lay to heart the danger of the whole country , the wrong to the Reli- gion t Gofpel and intereflofour Lord : Tet did I not flir for the quenching of this fire , //// / ivas called forth by God and you: I had noreafon totrujl onmyfelf to fo ungrateful a work : Tour Magi- fir ate J Minifler, and many of your people did again and again impor- tune me to the undertaking : your mifled neighbours more trnportu- ned me to write : 1 expired no wordly advantage by fuch a la- bour : efpeciaffy in thefe times^ when he that is again fl feperati-^ ons and Errors^ is by many judged to be again fl the Commonwealths if you find any thing difpleafing in the manner of my writings re- member that it tvas labour under- taken :
To the church at Kederminftcr.
vilifie , or depart from the fo- lemn worfliip [ where God hath the higheft honour , and returns the higheft bkflings, ) orelfe they lofe all their comforts of it by the pcevifli fcrupuloufnefs of their confciences , through miftakes. Is it a fmall blcfling, that when others are a re- proach to their profeflion , and harden the ignorant about them to their ruine , that your ftabili- ty and unanimity lliould be convincing and winning < and make way for your counfels to the hearts of the ignorant •: Not for your worthinefs hath God done this , but becaufe he hath fet his love upon you. You are fons of Adam , and have naturally as erroneous and con- tentious difpofitions as others. I doubt not but you feel by the ftirrings of thefe corrupti- ons upon perfonal provocati- ons and difcontents , what pub- like difcords you might have been guilty of-, if God had given your natures their own way, and had but plucked up the floodgate of temptations. I look upon you as I do on my own foul ; I rejoycc that God
hath
To the Church at BetvdUy.
taken for pur f elves : Mj great afflt^ion in fo long diver fion from more frofit able (iudiesy {and ferhaps fome fmall lofs to the church hereby ) hath been oc- cajioned by your necepties. It is I that may complain. Tou may bear with a crack fn freely given coin. 1 have been laraje in a Preface, to let you fee fully the occafton of my writing: the ufe whereof is known to us 5 that know how much mif" reports , and Mr. T 's reputati- on have taken with men : though grangers may ask , To what pur- pofe is aU this i It is no delight^ ful work to Paul, to withftand Peter to the face before the fa- mold's Church of hniioch : and aljo to tell him of his- difimula- tion , and walking not uprightly ; and to publifl) in an Epiflle to //;^Galatians(2. 1 1. 1 ^.)both his^ and Birnabas di Simulation ^ that even other Countries might know of their per fond faults, who were menfo famoui and ho- nour able in the Churches : And yettheincreafe of errors^ the pre- valency offalft teachers , and the firange backfliding of the Galatians from the truth , as if they had been bewitched , did (a i) make
To the Church at Kedcrminfter.
hath done fo much for me: but yet account not my fclFtohave attained ( the race end ) but prefs on , forgetting the things behind, and looking to the du- ty and the Crown before : I dire no: fit down in an Antim mian conceit , that I have no thing to do but exprcfs myjjy and Gratitude. So do Ircjoyce in what God hath done for you : yet dare I not conclude that you are pad all danger, and that I have now no more to do for you but rejoyce in your felicity. You a e yet but in the way -the Crown is not yet on your heads: You are yet but in fight .- Overcome and you are Blc/Ted indeed. If you conti- nue in Chrift, then are you his Difciples indeed : if the Apoftles had need of fuch cautions , and to have their comforts given out with the limitation of fuch con- ditions , how much more \v^ < what glorious Churches hath' Apoftacy demolifhed ? How many , many , many of our dcarcft friends , that feemcd c- vcry way as good as our felves, hath God fufFercd of late to be ihc (hame of their profeflion ^
cfpccially
To the Church at Bewdley,
make all this both lawful and ne- ceffarj. If when fou have impar^ iJally flitdiedthis example , with the ordinary language of the Prophets^ ofchriJt^andtheA^ poflles 5 and the occafien of my fpeeches , you (hall jet fee caufe to blame me for fharpnefs , J refnfe not to bear the blame : I am like enough to be faulty ^ when 1 think it my duty. Only be intreated to lay no faults of mine upon the Caufe ofchrijl , and then I care not. 1 am ?wt very ambitious of flandmg right in your e- fieem, fo that Chrifls truth may but fo fland right. Remember ihat the qneflion is not , Whether Mr. 'X .or 1 be the more learned^ er godly ? or which of w more time-fervin^ , and which mtre faithful t(f the truth ? nor which of us hath done and fufferedmore for it i nor which oftis hath the more clear and piercing under- flandmg ^ or which is the loth- er to mif guide you , or the likeli" er to be mifguided < nor which aimeth more at advantage in the world i Jtidge of all thefe, as you pleafe, for me : Or rather jftdge them not at all : But the ifue/lton is of the church-member fnip ind
Bap'
To the church at Kedermnifter.
efpecially if the judgement be once peivcrced, what finfohai- nous that will not feem a venues the killing of the Saints will be doing God feivicc : Yea and the cafe feem To clear, that they will wonder that all men think not as they : and think them fpleenifli or ungodly that will not offer faciifice to Mars^ and keep holy-days for it. For e- ven thofe men , whofe Fathers killed the Prophets , and they built Tombes ( in iionour of them ) andfaid , If we had li- ved in the daycs of our fathers, we would not have been par- takers with them in the blood of the Prophets ( Mat. 23, 19, 30. ) Yet themfelvcs will at the fame time out-go their fore- fathers. Yea , a 'Jehu who is raifed to deflroy a perfccuting family , will be prcfencly par- taker of their fin / Oh dear friends, be very jealous of your underftandings • for if thofe be loft , all is loft with you : If the eye he dark, how great is that darknefs < If my own brother did but think he were bound to kill me , he would do it without fc ruplc , and
I hank
To the Church at Setvdley,
Baftifm of Infants, He confeffeth that [ All fliould be admitted Church-members byBaptifm] hutdenyeth only that [] Infants are Church- members] and yet co^ifefjeth that [ once they were ] and that [of the univer- fal vilible Church ] examine well how he proves this Repeal- ed, I. / challenge him here, to name me one particular Church ftnce Adam, either of fews or Gentiles^ where Infants were not church members { if they had any Infants ) till 100 yeers ago. 2 . And 1 challenge him to name me one man that was againjl , er did once quejlien Infants Church- meml^erjh/p from the Creation^ till 500 years ago { according to his own fal [e computation) or till 200 years agoand Icfs^ (accor- ding to the truth. > As far as will fl and With modefl'^ , / ma}:e thefe twoch/illenges to him. And fer •jou.^ I deftre pn but impartially to ccnfider , // Chrtjl had revoked Infants Church - member fl)ipt whether it be pofible that no word in Scripture jhoiild once mention it'! nor one Apoftle either que fl ion or difcover if. or that the fews^ i . who xvere inprefent
.7# th ChunPj ai KcderminCiei .
thank God for his fuccefs. A nd fo ftrangely uncurablc i$ this difcafc , that be there never fo much Zeal , Yet nei- ther Arguments nor miracles will convince men , as the Pharifees example fhewcs you. Abhor the impenitent opinion of them , who think the un- derftanding uncapable of fin. You are yet but learners in the myfteries of Chrift : un- able to deal with manyafedu- ccr : They arc Devils abroad in the fliape of Angels of Light : and wolves within, ihat are fhcep without. O let it be known when I am taken from you , that it was the in- cereft that truth had in you, and not meerly which I had, which kept you in the truth : and that the Lord of Peace himfelf was the foundation of your Peace. The laft Epiftle •which I wrote to you, I thought would have been my laft. In it I gave you that advice which I beg of God to write upon your hearts. Part of it was ill taken by Mr, T. which hath occafioned the latter pare of this Treatife.
You
To the Church at IBewdicj,
po(ftJi:on of it , 3. And were fo ha'fjoufl) offended at the not cir- ciimcifwgof their Infants ( A(ft. 2 1.2 I. ) rvould not once open their mouths to objeCl againfi the total ttnchurching of them ^ which was an hundred times morei That neither the believing lews fIjotUd once fcrnple it , nor the unhcliC' ving charge it on Chrijl : nor the Coftnccl, A(5t. 1 5 . reveal it. Even when thofe that taught Cir- cumcifion, did take it for grant' ed that infants were Church- members , or elfc they could not have f aid J they muft be Circum- cifed. Is there a po^ibility in all this^if Scripture be perfeSl't Nay^ that the Jpoftle [hould tell them. Their children were Holy ^and the Lord lefm leave 06 his will , that wefujfer them to come to him and forbid them not , becaufe offuch is the Kingdom of God !' and was much difpleafed with thofe that kept them from him: which jljews that it Wiis then a known truth that Infants were members of Gods Kingdom , and therefore vifibly members of the Church 5 and that on this ground the Di^ fcipUs f])0uld have admitted thcm.turn over your Bibles , and
fnd
To the Church at Kederminfter.
You are fully acquainted with the occafion of the whole. For your prefcrvation and our dear neighbours of Bewdley did I engage in this unpleafing bulinefs. You importuned me to it : you folcmnly fought God before our Difpute for flrength to my weak body, and difcovery of his truth •• By the hearing of it you are confirmed : For which bene- fit you thought it your duty to return as folemn thanks to God. If temptations fhould be renewed, I doubt not but the remembrance of ihefe will be confirming to you. But left it fhould not fuffice , fee, Cod hath compelled me ( a- gainft my ftrong refolutions and rcfiftance ) to prepare you this Prefervative, and leave it in your hands , that it may teach you when my mouth is flopped with the dufh The Lord who hath forced it from mc 5 make it a blelfing. But let me ftill intrcat you , that you make thefe the fmaller parts of your fludy. Read far more the laft book ( of Reft ) which I wrote for you.
Get
To the Church at Bervdlej,
find where Chrifi er his Apejlles^ have [aid as much , or the hun* dreth part [o much , againfl our admitting Infants Church-mem- hers :and then ccnfidcr which way you may fafelie/l venture on. Its true^ he faith to the aged , Ifthott believe , thou maift be baptized : Ar,d fo he fatth,He that beltcveth flitill be faved •, and he that he- l/eveth not jl) all be damned : if yet this extend not to Infants^ why jlould the other ? What great comfort would follow this conclu- fton^ \_ that All your Infants are out of Chrifls vifible Church ] that men fhould bend their wits fo to prove it -f Do you not know that to be vifibly in or out of the churchy is all one as vldbly ( or to our judgement ) to belong or not belong to Chrffi end Hea- njen c* Is it worth your fo hot di- fputcSj as to turn the church into (uch doleful diflempers by it^ only to prove that your dear children are no Chriflians < And can you prove that Chrifl willfave thefe that are no Chriflians < no Difci- pies < not jo much as vifibly er feemingly fubjeCis of his King' dome < Prove it if you can, When 1 behold the fcandals and inhu^
manc
10 the church at Kcderminfter. ( To the Church at Bavdley.
Get to heaven well, and you will fee through all ditficul- cics in a moment. To t!vs end , prt fs on with painful - nefs and patience ; fpcnd not all your time (as fome do J in feeding For aflL^rance , nnd comforc ; but far more in mor- tificacion , and advancing of your graces. As delighting in God is a duty, be much in it : but as Joy is part ot the Reward , leave it more to God 5 and commit your fouls to him in well doing. It is not ingenuous to look more after the Reward then the work : and to complain more of God for not doing his part in giving , then of our felves for not doing ours in obeying. Love more, and fin lefs , and make that yonr dayly ftudy, and you will find it a fpscdi- cr way to comfort, then io fpcnd all your time in enqui- j ring after Marks of Grace. ; The frevalencj of Chrijls a^tuall Jnterefi in your fouls above all , the inter eft of the flefh , is (al- : mod ) the only iMark of Crace , as being the very point wherein (incerity doth
con-
1 mane de all rgs of the. aged , and ; their xvilfnt ohduratenefs therein . ^evcn that fecm go:ily] n m.ikcth < r/ie almoft co/iclude as Buccr en Mat. 19. [thatno oncageaN fordct!^ Heaven fo many Citi- zens as Infancy.] At leaft if frobability in this w/Hnotftrve, jonmnjl fhutout all-^ for you have no certarnty of the fmcerity of the aged. But all this is more fat- ly opened in this Book : which j^ for your fakes it was written, andiheprft occ^fton of it under- taken^ fo io you I commend it, he- feeching the father of Lights to fhew jou whither it be true or falfe • that if it h found , yoti may receive it ^ // not^ you may rejeii it ; // you cannot reach to difcem • that jou may have fome modefl regard to the judgements of Gods Minifters and Churches in all Ages of the world •, and may in the mean time maintain the churches unity And Peace, and not dare to venture on new dividing courfes m uncer- tainties. Sure 1 am that when you come to heaven , you will not find one there that was again jl the Baptizing of Infants^ till lefs then 200 years agoe , for ought
that
T6 the church 4tKcdam\n^ct. 1 To the Church at 5eW/^y.
confift. It (hould bee there- fore the chief ftudy and la- bour of your lives, to weak- en the fleflies intcreft , and ftrcngthcn Chrifts. If I had but one word of counfel to give you while 1 lived, that fliould be it. The three Princes of the Kingdom of the Fleili,are Pride, Senfuality , and Covetoufnefs, whofe objecfls are, Honour, Pleafure and worldly Wealth. Get down Pride, and you have got down the chief. Think not him the beft Chriftian that can talk beft .• but him that can love thofe that fleight, defpife and hate him •, and can eafieft put up ill words and ftrokes • and hath learned of Chrift to be meek and lowly. This is a hard lelTon to the car- nal 5 but it muft bee learnt : and will fweeten the life of him that hath learnt it : when the proud are tormenting them- felves by their paiTions. Vo- luptuoufnefs is brutifhnefs : yet a fin that millions are undone by. There is no one way, by which men are here more deeply guilty , and with- out rtmorfe , then by pleafing
the
thatM.T* or 1 have yet difcove- redinan'j credible Hifiory. If the hook (eem tedious to you , Read but the two fir ft farts. The refi are but fiich vain contendings , which if we p)0uld write againft one another twenty times , we were ft til like to be guilty of. It is the honour of a Scold , not ofi Chrtftian, to have the laft word : I am not ambitious of that he- nour. If M.T» write again , if I be altve , and he convince me, you jhall hear of my recantation ; If I judge it vain^ like the reft of his writings , you [ball know by my ftience. I have heard al- ready what he can fay, I doubt not but he can get more Ink and Paper , which is the beft fart of his Books : and when one a?igry woman can fnd words againft an^ other from morning to nighty much more may a man of learn* ingfindfomewhat tofay fliH-j as you may fee by the fill unwearied writings of the Papifts. if this much will not undeceive the mif- led^ let them for me be deceived fldl .' for multitude of words are unlike to prevail. For my fart ^ I ' have fatisfied my Confcience in this much : and I know the root- i (b; cd
re the church at Kcderminftcr.
ihe taflc in meats and drink>. Make no provifiion fortheflcfh to fatifie its lufts. And for the love of the world, I hope your low cftates , and the af- fli(5lions of the Church , will fo iffibittcrit to you, that you will never feek great things for your felvcs. And for fet- ting up the intereft of Chrift, Take hut God in Cbrifl for 'jOur enlj Happiaefs and End , and Chrifl as (Ji^ediator for your only Saviour and jupreum Lord , and you are happy for ever. I have fully proved to you , that the faith which is the condition of Juftification and Salvation , is your hearty Accepting Chrift for your Soveraign, as well as for your Saviour. And that the Gofpel or Ncvv-Teftament, is his new Law, containing pre- cepts and threatnings , as well as. promifes and narratives. Thefc are not idle notions : but truths which have mighty in- fluence into heart and life. Though I would not have you take old errourfor new Light; yet muft every true fpark from Heaven be welcomed with gbdnefs.. The Lord be your
Tea-
To the Church at Bewdley,
ed fvi/i jland fafl , and the ap'* proved will he made mir\'\kh^ and for the reft I leave them to God. I hear Mr. T. blames me for pub I if]) nig this without acquainting him , and asking him whether he would orvn his words in the difpute. But I. Hath he nof called for it^ till I could in confcience be fi- lent no- longer < and a> it not as eafte for me to write for all men to perufe it , as him < i. If he had recanted any thing , be Jhsuld have^ told me. 3. And have recanted as publikely as he [educed. 4. Did he not thank Cod ( in your Pulpit ) that he had delivered No- thing but found Argument ? 5. And in print require me to fhew his abfurdities f The Lord of Truth and Peace., who is Love it felf , reduce yoH all to Truth and Peace^ and Love, and maintain the integrity of thofe who are yet fledfafl 5 and keep you gniltlefs of the fcandals and diviftons of this age 5 that we may enjoy the comfort of unity and amity accor- ding to our vicinity with
To the Church at Kederminfter. | To the Church at Bcwdley.
Teacher : And for me, I defirc no higher preferment on earth j then in Faichfulncfs and fuccefs to be imployed under him in promoting your Faith , Obedi- ence, and Salvation.
Tours (while ycur Prayers
can cotttirtue my Com'
mipori)
Richard Baxter.
)6u on Earth , And a moreferfeSi unity and amity in Glory,
So heartily praycth an unfeigned de- firer of your hap- pinefs.
Richard Baxter*
(bi)
-wC
t'r<?)
The true Hiftoiy of the Coneeption and
Nativity of this Treatife : being the Authors
Apology for his attempt of this
unpleafanc task.
Hough to acquaint the Vcorld with thepajfa^ts of my filgriwAge ( even thofe that are of far more remark^ ahle quality ) ^ouldfavour of vanity ^ it being not nor- th) their notice ^ that ever there wa^fuch a per] on as I in being : Tet Cj^r.Tombes hii frequent mifreports , and hii accufatiens o/Venome, incogitancy, unadvifednefsy {p/een, not ioving the truth, nor him, drc. require me to make a faithful r-eport of what may concern the prefcnt coxtroverfcy and $0 let the world fee how it comes to pafsj that I \Yho have writtten and preachtfo muchfor peace, and againji the furious quarrels of th^ Age, and bend all myjludies to find out the Vcay of peace {Vcith truth) and am fo much for toleration of all tolerable differences , JJwuld yet be draW'n into this Contentious Work^ quite contrary to my Jirongeft refolutions ; to the wajling of my fjort and pretioui time , the grieving and weary it^g of my own minde, and in all likelihood the evafperating efmofi Dljfenters.
when l*iyas firjl called forth to the facred tJAiiniflerial ^orl^, though my Z£al Wasfirong , and I can truly fay , that a fervent defire of winning fouls to God ^ "^'as my motive: yet being young and of fmall experience , and no great reading (bcingthcna jirxngerto almofl all the Fathers , and moft of the Schoolmen) J was a Isl^vice in k^o\\>ledge , and my concep- tions were uncertain, Jljallo'^ and crude : In feme mijiakes I was confident ^ andoffome truths I \V<« very doubtful andfulfiicious. tAmong others, by
( b i) that
th^it time I had hjiftiz^ed bnt two Children f'rff Bridgnorth ) 1 he^un to h-ive fame dottbts of the Uvafnlnefs of Infant Baptifm. IVherehpott I filentlj forboretke praElife, and [et mjfelf, asl^,uab/e, to the ftudy of the point. One part of my temptation wm the Dotlrine ofjome Divines, ^'horuntoofar in the other exiream. I had read Dr Purges and {fome jeers after) Air. Bedi^otd for Baptifmil Regeneration, and hetrdit the common pr.ijer , that God Would blefs Baptifm to the Infants Regenerati' 019 (n'bich I thought they had meant of a Real, and not a Relative change) Ifoon dijcemed the error of this doHrine, when I found in Scrip ■ ture that Repentance and Faith in the a^ed were ever prereqit ijite, and that no ivordef Cjoddid make that the end to Infants Which tvm prere^juijite in ethers ] and that figns cannot bj moral operation be thelnjlrumentsofa Real change on InfJ^Kts , but only of a Relative ; and that to dream of a Thjficalinjirumentiility, was worfe then PoptJJj , andto do th-tt in Bap- tifm, whichTranf>tb(^antiationh.ith done int'-e Lords Supper; even to tie God to the conJJant Working of a. miracle : ForM r\mc{\\iS faith, beU hrm. Hn^rv. To. 3.I.2 c. t,. ^external Biptifm cannot be the Phyfi- call inflrument of the Infujion of Grace ; becaufe it no Way hath it in it felf.~] yt/w^<tf Danxas conr. Belbr. ad To. 2. Cone. 4. p. 238. [^By the commonej} rule in Phyfick^ , corporeal fiq^ns cannot Workjind make an impreffion upon incorporeal fouls ]] And I k»ew that they whofaid they roorkt Hyperphyjically (a^if that had been a tertium a4 to the nature of the caufality ) were men that underfioodnot thediflmflionofPhyJical and Moral caufation^ ;«^ Suarez, Ruvio, Schibler rf«^ ^// explain it. This error therefore difcovered , made me the more jealous oftherefl of the dotlrine ( 04 I fee many ignorant ones do at this day : When they do but thinkjhey find men mijlaking in one thing , they are ready tofufpeSithat they err in almofl all ; aidfo they turn their ears to feducers , and lofe their Faith through prejudicial conceits of their Teachers.) And I was un- happy alfoinmy acquaintance (as to this) converfng with thufe only whofe hearts were better then their heads, fuf peeing things becaufe impofed, and TV ere greater helps to my affeBions then to my underflanding. TctdidI fcarce open my doubts to any , leafl it might caufe them to fnatch up that inconfiderately, which I was but conftdering of : V pon my frfi feriout ftudy , Iprefintly difcerned , that though Infants Were not capable of what u before expreffed, nor of every benefit by baptifm oi are the aged, yet that they Were capable of the principal ends : That it might be a lign to enter them Church- members, and folemnize their Dedication to Chrifi, and en- gage them to be his people, and to take him for their Lord and Savionr, and
Co to coyifer on them rem ffion of fins, an^n-hat Chrifl hy the Covenant pro. mifeth to the Baptized, { Though] et themf elves unt^erfand not th^ ; even as Wf VMt the names of Infants in Bonds or Leafes which they can neither read nor kjioVi* of) And tvith.ill upon fearch it foon appeared to me undeny- able, ThJt it wm the Will of God, th.it th.- If rnts of Believers fjould be admitted mtmbers ofh'S Univerfii vifible Church ; Thefe difcoveries did effiickly (lay me, andfjeW^ me more probability for Infant B apt if m, then Vcxs a(rainp it. ( z^nd thefepArating, dividing, fc^indalotu courfes of all the Afintbaptifls that I \V,tJ acccjuainted with , their Ignorance and proud felf cfleem, anddefpifing theprctioufejl A^wif}ersof(^hrifi, diddcterrme from ajfociatini^ With them, and fo kfptmeout of the W^ay ef further temp- tation ) Yet did I remain doutful fome time after , by reafon the Scrip' ture Cpoke f<^fp^^^*^^h ^° the point, and becaufe mj apprehenfions of thofe things which in themfelves were clear and certain , remained crude and VceAk^till time had helped them t-o digejl and ripen. And the many weak^ ylrffuments which I met with in the words and writings of fome Divines (to which I formed mojl of the fame anfWers as Mr. T. noW doth) were not the leafl (tumbling blockjn my Way. I refolved therefore filently to forbear the fra^ife, While I further (iud)ed the point. And being more in doubt about the other Sacrament then this, I durfi not adventure upon a full TafloraL charge, but to preach only as a LeElurer , till [ Were fullj refolved : In which Jlate I continued where J n-ow atn>, till I was removed by the wars ^ flill thinkjng andfpeakjng very favourably of meer Anabaptijfs. Being at Glocefter when Mr, Winnels boof^Againfl them came forth, I (po^fo much in e.vtenuation of their error, that my confcience hathfince checked me for it ; lefi IJhould be a means thereby of draWing any from the truth, though I did difcover my oWn judgement to be againfi them : AsT)oQor Taylors Arguments de lib. Prophet, have done by too many. Thefe mj former weakneffes^ I acknowledge to my fhame \ and therein do but imitate Paul, 4 better man ., Whoconfeffedhimfelffometime foolijh ^ anddifobf dient, ore. and that he verily thought he ought to do many things againfi the name of Jefu, c^c. And I admired to find that learned holy Reformer Zuinglius {afterWard the mall of the Anabaptifls) to deliver his expe- riencein the very like kind, and that hUcafe and mine Werefoneer the fame^ that by zy^rguments giving too much to Baptifm^he was driven (\uitt to deny Infant- baptifm {there he went beyond me ; but thenfo he did alfo afterward in his powerful oppojit ion to that error) as j ou may fee in I om, 2. pag. 63. as I have tranfcribed it before my Appendix. And Why fijould not I oi freely confefs mj infirmities as he ? Who yet afterwards
fpoh
jpoke more fharplj Againjl their doEirine , fra^ices^ and ferfons , then ever I me An to do, for allfome rvillfo much cenfure me as bitter (^As al- /od//«;iLuther, Calvin, Bui linger, Rhcgius, vV|ganclii<;, Schlu{{clburgius, yvith the rej} of thofe holjr learned Reformers, Whofe JJj.irpneft I do pro - mife to come Jhort of ^here I am judged mojl flj^rp ) I fa)v then Ana- baptiflry but in the feed and egg ; and who then could dijcern what the tree and fruit "A'ould prove ? But they that no\\< fee tt at the fiature of Ranting ( againfl Which an A&: ^df lately ma.de ) may eafiljer knoW it, H^ mu(i be a good Phyfptian that knows fuch dijeafes in the firfl detn-ee, and can difcern <« Cancer W/?^^ the tttmor i6 no bigger then apeafe; but When it devoureth the found contiguous parts, then any man may kttow it.
The Garifonand Cltj of Coventry ( where I lived next ) wxi almofl free from them when 1 fi^fi cante thither, and a good wh^e after .- But while we flept, the envioM man fo^'edthefe Tares \ andour tendernefs of them, as godly people, caufed m atfirji the more remifslyto gainfay them, andfo their number to increafe : Till at lafl they got afeperatedfociety, anddefpifedthe Aiiniflersy andgot themfelves a heap ofTaachers, fome ofVchich we before ejl'eemed godly men ; but k^ew to be filly men te be- come Teachers. All thU while 1 had no contefl with them, much left any falling out. For few of the foldiers had taken the infe5lioMj they being many of them the mofifober, flayed men, that I ever met with in any Garifon ; and had a reverend efleem of the counfel of their Teachers (which being returned home they do yet continue.) But it Was fome yonger people of the City that were then infeEied mofl. At lafl one Air. Coxe (ah Ancient (jA^Uni^er of competent learning and parts) Was fent from London to confirm them. Which when he had done awhile, he was defired to depart. After that he came down a fecond time, and becaufe he Vfoftld not prsmife to leave the City and come no more, the (Committee did imprifon him, which fome of his ptrty gave out to be procured by me : when I can truly fay that I never fpoke word to put htm in prifon, but (at the motion of Mr. V'lnion ) did fpeak.to get him out. In this time I di» fired that Mr. Coxe Would entertain fome difpute about our differences : which Was confented to, and begun by words, and afterWard we agreed to follow it by writing : But to my firfl Paper I could never have anfWer (fave to the extemptrate writing before at our meeting) andfo that Ubor ended. In which difpute my zeal for u^ity and Teace was fo much greater then my z,eal againfl Rebaptiz^ingi that I refolvedto difpute thecafe of feparati»n firfi, and Baptifm next ; prof effing, that if they did net .hinder the Gof-
pel,
fel, andjttt again fl the plain word l^j Divtjiofjs, I Jhould eafily bear with any ty.t diferedfrom me in the point ofBaptifm. For Mr. Coxc taught them (and it W'as prefently fw allowed) that our Minijlers, being unbap • ti3:.ed, were indeed no Minijlersef (^hrifl-, and it was unla^fnltohear them, or tojoj/n with our peopIe( though never fo godly )beeaufe they ^ereall Hnbtiptiz^ed perfons y'^'hich doElrine began to make men look^at others oa Th- gans, and to breakjill to pieces ; fo that the Rebaptized husbAnd would not pray with hh (fuppofedlj) unbaptized ^'ife.
Before thefe fiirrings I had never {to my remembrance') medled Vcith them in the Pulpit. Till at lafl it pleafed the Committee and Governor, difcerning the inconvenience f and the danger of the Qarrifon, to defireme^ as being my duty, to preach on thatfubjetl ; "^hich before I ^ould rcfolve to do, I fet myfelf more [erioufly to thefiudj ofthM point : I read all the Books for Rebaptizing that I could get j J daily begged of God, that he y>rould not fuffer me to err , or ever to be an Inflrument to oppofe any truth: Till tit lafi I arrivedatafull refolutioHj and G od f jewed me more for his truth , andtheW'eaknefs of the oppofttion, then I had ever before attained , though defired and endeavored. I had before in all learned mens company y th^t W'ere likely to inform me , objeEled againfi Infant B^iptifm (where Ifaw nounfetled Chrifliansthat might be fjaken by my objcEii- ons.) When i had after thefe preparations and inducements , preached many Sermons againfl feparation^ and Governing the Church by the major vote of the members , and Rebapti zing , and for Infant* Baptifm^ it pleafed th€ Committee to fend me their de fires , that I Would print thofe Le^ures. Thu menage they fent by Sir Rich Skcffington {that truly gracious humble Saint, now in Heaven '^ whom I mention in love and honor to his name Whom Cjod removed from the evil to come) and Col, iSarker (with whom I lived) being then Cover nour^ and my fecial frienh. Though they might have commandedfrom me any thinq that I could Well perform ; and though I had unmannerly denyedthem thclikf requefl before (when they defredmeby Col. Vyixkcr and Olir. Georcic Abbot (norv with God) to print many Le^ures on another fuhjeU:) and though thefe Le^ureshadcofi me more labor then ever I am like to be (low upon any again i yet did I again, though unmannerly ^ as refolvedly deny them th'^reejuefl alfo: partly bccaufe I then purpofed never to have appeared in pri-Kt , elpecially in that cjuarrel : Which a4 I judged to be of the lower ranke , fo I ejieemed many of them to be Cjodly peeple Whom I mufl contradiH : Atad thoutrh I knoW the godly /Ijculd be inflruEied a-<d reproved m Well as others : and never given up as uncurable btcanfe they are godly (for vcho Jhould receive
(c) reproof
refroofandinfoiTnation, if not they? aridwhofe fouls pjonld A4inijlirs bt more tender of, even reproving them p}(irply^ rehenneed retjmresit, that thej may be found in the Faith?) Tet did I find thefe men generally fo tender- ear' d, and impatient of any difcovery of their Error {though I had done it hi meer Arj^ument without any reproach ) that it did but hurt them, and fill them vrith prejudice againfi the Speaker; forthejtook^hlm for an Enemy, ifnotaPerfccutor, that told them the Truth; partly, be- caufe it would have been a great Volumn, and 1 was fenfible of the vanity And hurtfullnefs of filling^ the world With too many Boohs. But fpecially be- caufe I hadfo lately in the point of B apt ifm been refolvedmjf elf ; aadkneW not but fomeW'h.it might comefenh which might P^ak^e me again. So far ^'4-/ I then from being intemperate againfi them; and fo far am I no\^ from that rap.wefs and inconfideratnefs ^ and Want of Love to th^ Truth, in this cafe ^ which Mv. T. fo accufethnteof. Iconfefsjamaslikelytobe ignorant as another : but if Ijhouldfaj 1 am un'^^illing to kyiow the Truth t 1 Jljouldlje againfi my Confcience, and continual pralhfei when my thirft isfo infatiable and exceffive after itt and my timefo wholly (pent infeeklng it, that I could Well forbear to eat or fleep, if my frail fiejh could be without it> The Arguments that I have managed in this prefent 7 rfatife , are but two of the twelve, Which I handled in the forementioned LeSlures ; / left out all therefi, partly becaufe the BookWouldfwelltoo big, partly becaufe my time and flrength is too little for tedious works ; partly becaufe my Auditors did many of them hear them , for Whofe fake I chiefly Write ; but chlefiy becaufe other men have handled mofi of them al- ready.
After all this , rvhen the bufnefs did not flop at Baptifm , but the in- feclionWM got nearer the vitals of (fhrifii-anityy and the pulfeof the Na- tion fo evidently fh ewe d that it had tainted the Arterial blood and fpirits^ that a mean Phyfttian might have prognofitcated the critical /jfne Which 7ve have feen and felt ; and When fame tolJ us that the Army was not the free (i p trt of the Land ; beings invited thither by my much Ho- noured fri:nd Col. Whaley andfome others^ upon the advice of the Mi"- nifiers , / accepted the invitation : 7'artly becaufe many of my deareji friends Were there, whofe focitty hadformerly been delightful to me, and whofe Welfare I Was tender of beino^ men that had a deeper inter efh in my aff'eBions then any in the world haa before that time ; and partly becaufe I believed A^r. V\ncs ( Serm.yiirch. li. J6^^) llf they hadno Preachers^ they would have too many, anh the Countrey would favor of the Field DoBrine\} And J am not afliamed nor afraid to fay, that the difcharge
of my Confcience indoingmj hejl to prevent the Evil which in this hdth beftilnui, W\w not the lajl or leajl of my ends therein X And though there Were far more cak and (if czy, and comentf and giin (then) to be found in Cities r.nd peaceable hiibitations ; yet I ^oubt not if others of the Mini- jlry had done as much in time {as fame did) our calamity in and by this might have probably been prevented ', an i cur eyes might never havefeen thofe Eftcds of Error : Alas, to fit at home and aocufe poor Soldiers of Er- rors, vtrhen they hadfe"^' or none to teach them better , W'^m not the way of prevention or of cure 1 They are men, as we are ; and not bred up in Learn- ing and Academies : nor capable ofrefifiing the temptation themf elves, andofrefolvingall the Romipifcruples Which Jefuitical Wits had hatched and difperfed through the Land : and when queflions come among them, and they have-not able Teachers at hand ^ they mufi learnoffuchas are next them, and have mofl interefl in them. Some will fay y They Were vi- olent , and would not hear nor regard ! which for many I cannot deny : But, alas , We meet with many fuch in our own Congregations, and yet we dare not give them off : And for m y own part , for thofe two years t hat I woi a- mongthem, I found all friendly acceptance andreffeSl^ and never fell out with one man among them, ^nd though many that I converfed with were againfl Infant- baptifm, and I hadfreejuent occafion of arguing with them, yet did I never fall into any paffionate contentions with any : and for the moji part, chofe Weightier points to confer on. So that hitherto I Was not fo Fio- lent andRajhasMx. T. accufethme.
But to draw a little 'near the occafion of my trouble: Before this, be- ing in great weai^nefs, and forced to repair to London to the Phyfitian^ Mr. '{amh^% came into my ^u^arters ( at the Heufe of my dear friend Co - lonel Sylvanus Taylor: } andhaving greedily read over his Exhortation and Ex amen a little before, I Was glad of that opportunity for my further fatisfaQiony fuppofing that What more was to be faid again fl Infant -bap- tifm, I Was as lively to hear from him as any. I urged him therefore With the very fame Arguments Which in the Difpute at Bewdely / managed againjl him (from Infants Church'memberPjip'. )to Which he gave me fuch feeble Anfwers, and I found him fo confident When he had nothing to fay which feemed to me of any moment , that I quickly g^ve over ; being much confirmed^ When I under flood that the Champion of that C^ufe had no more to defend it. And yet though I had ufed this Argument with him , and none t'fft this fo many years ago , Mr.T. was not afraid te tell them in theTulpit^ that he could never know my Arguments till the Difpute, and that I hid my fveapons tilll meant to firike ', yea, though he hadalfo feenfome lS(ctes of
(cl) WJf
my (tAr^ument hi the fere mentioned LcHures, yvherethisrvxs thefrjl.
pyhen the H'urs Vrere ended, and I returned home to vijit my friends, the people o/Hcvvdtly Wfrf dejiittfte of a Treacher for their Ch-^iprel, and Mr. William Hopkins (no'^' W'ith Chrift) came to me to ask.my advice therein ; ttUiy.g me they \>:ere motioned to Air. Gexce,and C^fr. Tombes, Ifftt the loiter he waa fcrnpuloni about , becnufe he Vcas a^ainfl Infant- baptifm. Mj anfn-er was . th.it I judged Mr. T. a pious able man -, and though he were againf} Infant b.-^ptifm yet being Orthodox in all things elfe {04 I then thought he woi) and the point but [mall, and I hoped he ivxs a peaceable temperate man^ I \vas perf\\>aded it Vrould remain but 04 a dif- ference in Opinion , and that he would not make any difiurbance about ir, nor ( as the ignorant fort of them do) labour to propagate his Opinion.^ and . to make parties and divifton among the people : which I told him, I the ra- thcr beliez'ed. in that I had he^rd that he had promifed in London to be Jilerd in that point: except any came Into his place to preach againfl him : and therefore I doubted not but he ^ould do fo with them : and th.it his parts and piety tvoftld be more advantagioiu to them , then his different Opinion ( thus filenced by temperance ) would be hurtful. Thiswoi the grcatefi ^^rong that ever I kiie^ I did to Bcvvdely ; and if I be guilty {as Mr. T. charged me) of making a Schifm among them, it wa6 only by this {though yet I believe not that my "^ords had any great in fuence into the buftnefs. ) fVhen I was returned home, I more rejoyced in Nl r. T's Nei^h' bourhood, and made more ufe of it, then ofmofl of others : and accordingly dejiredand enjoyed his afft fiance , for which I return him unfeigned thankj. zAnd W'henfome godly Divines that Vcere accquainted With his carriage of the bufinefs in London, did tell me he Was a man very proud, and had far higher thoughts ofhimfelfthen was meet , I did not believe them , butfiill 4ef ended him. And leafi my touching that C ont rover fie ^ though at a dtflancey might irritate him to fall upon it, I never jpake one Word in my Congregation of it {to my befi remembrance) to thi^day, for fear of gi- ving any occafion of difference. Tet he writes in hit Letters to me , that [_manj told him of my by-flings at him~\ Which I never u fed either di- re^ly or indire^ly. The only pajfage obje^ed that I i.m hear of^ is this ; that I once told men the danger of thinking themfehcs found ^hrifiians becaufe they are baptised again ^ or are of this Church or that Opinion. And is it not hard that I may not fay this much to my oWn Hearers ? I had ■ hoped Mr. X. would have faid as much himfelf. He b.uh an HI caufe or an ill mind that cannot bear thofe words : therefore he Jljould -^irfi hdVi taught the Reporters to obey the ninth (Commandment , before
he.
he had entered them into thefe dijputes. Whereever I fell into Mr. T's company, either J JJjumed any dijcourfe on thi^ pointy leflitfljouldturMto contention ; or elfe I laboured but to perfrvade him of the difjicttltji and fmalnefsofit, that V^'e might be contented to differ peacetdfly , "^here We could i:ot clofe. But I could never convince him of either oftJjefe : but he confidentlj Jlill affirmed that it WAi eajie And plain, and of prater moment. 1 repljed , that if it were fo eaJie , then fo many thou/and learned godly Divines in England and through the Chrijiian '^orld, ti'ouldnot all be igno- rant in it , who ^ere oi '^"iliing to krio^ the truth a,i he, and Jludyed, and prayeddaily that they might kjtowit. 7 hough they may err; net hard- ly fo generally in fo eaJie a cafe. To which he anfwered^ that they all erred through wilfulnefs or mter negligence : m the Lutherans didabout Confub- fiantiation. Let the Reader judge ofthii anfwer as he fees caufe. For mj o)X'n p(7rf , <w / told him , / would I Were as able to fee the truth as I am willing (thenjhould I think^myfelf thewifefi manin the '^orld, without the leafi fcruple of arrogancy.) Tct I perceived that my conflantjpeech for Peace, wa4 interpreted Oi tf I were loth to own the truth for fear of breaking Peace. Being once preaching for Peace {which is the very drift of my do^rine and life, though [ fpeak^fljarply againfl Peace- breakers) among other caufes of the breach of the (fhurches Peace^ I mentioned this \_Aien thinly that n9 Truth is to be fufpended for Peace"] andfotvhatfatver they judge to be truth, they mufi publifh to the World though it cofl the (fhurch never fo dear. To this yiT.T. fends me Word by a godly m An. that iflfofaid, I fpoke that which u falfe ( which fi>ice he cxpoui^ds of fufpe»- ding truth fo as to lofe it ) ^s if I had intended this againfl him, When^ alas^ I ^oke it as to the healing of the (^hurches wounds {which thts. ok€ mifiake w enough to keep bleeding j till it come totheLifl g.vjpe, if ire had no more) {God may once give Alugiflrates Who will be as tender of Chr'frs honour a4 their own, and be as fevere again/} thofe thut wrong Chrifr 04 themfelves.) All th:^ while I had never baptized an Infant {tut the tWo fore mentioned) till feme "f my oWn hearers begun tofujpecimetobecfhis judgement ( though I tef} if ed my approbation by my prejence at the ord' ■ nance.) Thus fir \Ai. l. and I did live peaceably '. But When tixe timts changed, and Old England wa4 fo much more then 2^W {and yet oldjlill) he begante openhimfelf fi'lly in the Congregation: he exclaimed agatnfl: the corruption of Infant' jj'rinklif'g (as he called it) he prejl them tot^iksi^ ' as no baptifm, and to be baptized again. He troubleth his Sermons with ■ the names of Ulfr. MatlhU, Air. lijake , and my ft If, and with printed pajfagesofminef ever and over, N.oyp ^twdc\y being a place where (by
(c 3) ty
the help of an able minijlry heretofore) '^'ere many ancient ft^yed (^hri(ii' ans, that ^ould not oi children be tofl up and doWn, andcarrjed to and fro "^ith every wind ofdoflrine ; hif do^ri-ne did not mt*ch prevail, at leajl not according to his defire : At thU the man gre^ <^^^^Ti and began to charge itfo fliarply on their confciences , that poor people ivere much troptbled. He told them in the 'Pulpit, that \Jtt them budge at it how i hey Vi'oh/d, it Vi'as their Hypocrijie that hindered them from receiving the truth^ *t^ tfthofe that yielded not to him Were Hypocrites. {Though fince I hear he hath got above twenty rebaptiz>ed Difciples, whom he oft vijits and confirms. ) Tet then for all thii there did but few come in to him : whereupon he proceed- edyet more angrily , and charged their blood on their o\\>n heads (as if their damnation were like to follow, if they were not rebaptized. ) He told them alfo that ^ Infant-baptifm pleaded from circumcifion as Mr. \A\i^%\dothy is a Herefie , and one of the firjfi condemned Herefies in the Church-^ J confefs I did not believe thii report atthefirjl^ becaufe he had been fo angry With thofe th.it call t^nabaptifm Herefie : but When I asked him of itjseconfeffed and fiiflifiedit in the words I have herefet doWn. And to make it govd^ he defined Herefie to be any error for which men made a party, I anfwered^ that then he would make Independents Heretickj feeing he judged that they erred : ■ He told me, that if they make a party they are : / anf^ered that I durfi not judge fo hardly of them j for he kpew they made a party , and did he think he wa4 bound to avoid an Independent after thefirjl andfecond Admonition ? A while after this I undcrflood by fame of Mr. T's followers that he was writing a full Treatife in anfwer to CMr. Marlliil, Mr. Blake, Mr. Geree, and all that Was worth the anfwering, andfo fijoulddtfpatch all the bufinefs at once : And the next time I faW Mr. T. he told me he was Writing againfi Mr. M3ii(hi\ and many others. And becaufe I thought that fur e if any mere could befaid then I had heard^ I Jhould there meet with it , therefore I defire d him to lend it me : So he fent mefome tWo or three Sheets again (I Mr. M. on i Cor. 7. 14. which (as my manner i6) I quickjy read, and wrote out thefubflance, and fent it him again. But I pre fently heard that he Was offended ., that I fent them home fo foon and without my Animadverfions ; when yet he never required any fuch matter at the delivery , nor would I have received them on any fuch terms) and it would have been plain folly in me, fo to have fain a- boardwith him in the middleof a bufinefs and on Mr. MixChih grounds: Befidesthaty J hadthen afullrefotution to avoid all contefiation with him fofar as ever I couldWithout injury to the truth and to the fouls of men ; fiportly after this Mr, T. camming to o»r LeBure (as heufually did) We
had
hadfpeech hriefly about hit Papers, anci he manifefledto me, that he tookjt not vfellthAt Ifent him not my AnimadverJio>^s on them ^ ifldtdnot ap» prove them: I told him that they ^erefArfromfatisfaBory in my judge- ment ; yet gave him my re(tfoKs, why it famed unreafonable to expeEl my confutation of them {inWhich I^Ul appeal to any reafon.ible indifferent man.) yifter thi^ day, as I remember Mr. "X, never came to our LeElure more ; For ^'hat ends he came tillKo'A\ Heave to his orvn confcience. By this time I began to fee that Mr, T. ^04 no longer a man for the Churches Peace, but W'os fully and vehemently fet to carry on his Opinion , and wake himfelfa party, and ttol^it ill that his endeavors did no better fucceed. J did before believe that he rvas moderate and peaceable, for all his differing judgement, and that he truly abhorrred divijioa and fusions in the Church. But when I had occafion to try him, I found it otherwife to my grief
A ^hile after tktt Ihadfent back. Mr. T's Papers, I received from one of Mr. T'S Hearers, a recjuefl only in his own name, that I would give himfome i^Arguments tofatisfe him of the lawfulnefs of Infant baptifm ; /or Mr. T. had prefi the contrary fo hard upon their confciences, that they X^'ere no longer able to Withfiand it, I told him if he would difcufs the bufinefswith me, I was ready then or any time to give him the beflfatis- foBion I couU But he refufed that, and would needs have feme Arguments in writing, and nothing but writing would ferve ; whereupon J pcrceved that heVtasfent by Mr. T. and askfd himV^hether he c^me not by Mr. T's confent, and he corfefi that he did; 1 told him thtit if he \>!:'«uld not argue the c.'ife himfelf , and yet mufi have fat it faH ion, I though it the befl wai to bring fame oy:e elfe that could argue it, either Mr. T. or who he W'ould Tet withal that being now cjuiet I did not urge Mr. T. to this, nor ^'ould meddle in it without u better call ; but for writina, it would be endlefs, arrd there was eKOuqh already. tiy4 while after comes five more to- gether and tell me, they could not rejifl nor bear Mr.T% re:roofs any longer ; and if I did net give them my Arguments to fat i.- fie them, they mujl yield. J asked them \vh(t her they had read Air. Cobbec and fome other Bool;/ that were Written pilready ; and they told me they had not, ard thM they were not able tofnde cut the truth in ted:o:*s volnmns ; / asked them why then they urge I me to Write., feeing it Would doubt lefs fXxeU tofuch Volums before we hiid done, if we once begun ? But fiill they ur^edme to write, and told wjMr- T. refufed to diffute. By this time I perceived my fe If inafiraight , and that my forbearing ever to preach for Infant baptifm or to Baptize any , Would not ferve turn to continue my peace, but M. T.
Woula
Would force me to erigage whether I would or no , or elfe to betray the truth
And mens fouls ; if I hsdrefufedto debate it ^ Mr. T's hearers Who had
turned to him, rvopt/d hive laid all the blame on me, and faid they fought fa-
tiifaElion and could have none ; m y oWn hearers Were in no doubt but
yet told me if I relinquilhtd the bufnefs , I fhould be gtiiltj of betray in f
the truth of God^ and of the great Apofitcy and divifion that wxs like to
follow in the Country about, I noW perceived the inconvenience of an rwj-
peaceable neighbor ^ and I fcarce k»erv which of the evils to choofe. But fee
ing Air. T. never defredany thing ai' towards his oWn fatisfaElion but on^
ly hii neighbor Si I made thefe motions (feeing I mufi needs engage in the
contr over fie:')
1 . That vfe might preach each ofus two Sermons ^ andfo leave all te the judgement of the people.
2. Or if that Were refufed^ that in their hearing We might difpute it,
3 . Or that we might difpute it privately before afevf that ypere mofi un- fatisfied.
4. Or th^.t we might Write together ex tempore.
5, Or if none of this Would ferve^ I offered to Write, fo L^tr.'X' would give me any ajfurance of a cfuickjiifpatch , and (heW me any way to afcer^ tain it before w§ begun, left weJhouldWrite volumintufly and Without end or profit. Thefe motions I fignifed to Mr. Ti in my Letters, buthecon- fented not to any one of them, butfiillimportuned me to write, write, Write* I gave him tWelvereafons againfl writing, that 1 was wea\^. had not time ; hii hearers could not flay for fatUfaElion till we had done ; they could not examine Writings ; he had written with others long^ and not yet ended &c. Hegainfaidnoneofthefe^andyetjlill importuned me to write, and told me that they would elfe take it for granted thit I could fay no more then was faid already by others in print, and that all that wasan- fwered, Unlefs I would f jew you the weaknefs of the an fwers. I thought this a firangeconclufionfromjuchpremifes : ButnoW I difcovered, as I thought^ more of the deftgnthen before, ^ir, T. hath a Book^ preparing for the Prefs, Which in his Antidote he Intitleth hi^ Review , in which at once he intends to k^KcckdoWn all : and therefore J perceived would feign have had my Arguments to thrufl into the croud among the refl, that he might fay he had confuted all at once. I obferved hoW he dealt with (Jl'r. Marflial in his Apology, and Mr. Blike in his t^ppendi-v : and that hU friends had fo high an efleem of his ability in writing, andejpecially he of his oWn, that all that he had writ againfl ^ was taken for anfWered, When yet they con-
fefl themfeives Pinable to examine Writings , and^hen I knew that all ivas jlubberedoverfo, as it did not indeed deferve the name of an z^nfyver : And therefore I expeBed to he fo dealt With my felf ^ thM rekrit ever he had writ againj} me, it might he faid 1 \\\is anfrvered. And therefore bejides all my otherreafons , npon this I refolved to put bj writing, t^nd where it Us given out as if I V^'e^e the provoker todijpute^ it was only xi a Jhift to efcape a more tedious inconvenience, A While after thi^s, the bujlnefs flept ^ and I was in great hope it Would be buried, and I might jet have peace : But the next neWs I heard , Wm, that J^fr.T. rva^refolved to en- tertain a dijpute ; which I confefs I wasforrj to hear. Upon this hefals a preaching only on thefubjeEl : 'But after a While when hi^ people were weary of hearing nothing but Baptifm , fame ofthemfpoke openly to him by way of contradi^ion ; and among others ^ one unhappily asl^ed him, Why he re- fufed to difpute- With me , and yet would trouble them with thofe things ? upon which (jueflionhe fuddenly was forced for his credit fake to tell them publikely , that he Was refolved to difpute With me^ but thought good by thefe Sermons to inform them frjl of the flat e of the controverfie. This rajhpromife mardall, &hinc ill* lachrymaj. Hereupon be Went on and preached eight or ten Sermons againfl Infant- Baptifm, telling them he had anfwered all the arguments of any moment that by anj were ufed. Some Would have hadme have moved to preach before the difpute as well as he, feeing one Sermon would per f Wade the people more then a difpute which Was pafl their capacity ; much more Would eight or ten Sermons prepoffefs ■them. But It-efolved to fit fill till I Were forced to fiir i Ifentfometo fetch me the notes of his Sermons exa^ly ; and I perceived he had culled out the weakefl arguments , andfattsfied himfelfwith as weakjinfwers to fome of them. nAll this While ^ir, T. had my name up over and over in the Pulpit , and very injuriouflj fometimes.. Ifaid nothing to all this, but refolved to let him go on till he were weary. But at lafl, the Bailiff and Minifler i and divers of the godly Inhabitants, fentto me to de fire me to come and preach with them on that controverfie , on which A'fr. T, had preachtfo long, that they might hear What could be faid on bothfdes. I told them, I Would not preach in Mr. T*s Chappel Without his confent , though I had the call of the C^Iagiflrate and his fellow- Minifler) and if IflioulA preach) he would fay , he could have confuted all\ and therefore when they further urgedme then to difpute with him^ I told them that if he confented uponfuchacall, I durfi not reft4fe it ; Whereupon the people pref- finghimto it^ prevailed for his confent , and the day fell out to be the firft of J anuary 1^49, / had importnntd God in my prayers as I Wm able, long
(d) hefore
j^
before that if [^^ ere mlflakjtn , he nouldfliew me my error ; tiniif Ai, T. h^d the truth on hii fide ^ that he vpould not fufermetoreftfi it^orfpeAku word ^gaiyifiit . Ar.d the more I prayed, the more I -rvas animated to the ^ork^ I hidheenfo tveak^and pained long before , that Irva^ fcarce able to rife and rra/i^abottt theverji day before; yet did I refolveto goif I were able to ride and fpeak^i aniX^hen the time came, I was eafedmuch of all my pains; iyfnd^''hereai I can hardly on any Lords day jpeak above an hour without the preflration of my ffrength. and extream langptifhingof my body , nor could fcarce takje the aire without taking a dangerous cold j it pleafed God then inthemidft of winter to enable me to continue the dijpute in the open Church ^and that fafting.fr om before ten of the docket ill betVceen four and five, without any of my ufuall infirmities, and had more eafefrom them a fomight after then of many months : Which thofe that k»ow me do confidently believe U'*j from the direH: encouraging hand of CJod ; / ^as known to be fo unable in body , that Air. Good came purpofely prepared (without my knowledge ) to have managed the difpute if my ftrength fijould fail. The main thing that ever encouraged me to this difijute, "^as , that J judged Air.T.fo accurate aDijputant,that I vertly thought be'^ouldnot have digrejfed one hair from tht rules of difputation; and therefore I hoped We might prefently drive it to an ijfue ; That Which made me beyond doubt of this, was J becaufe he hadfofijarply dealt with Adr. Murhall/ir non-fyllo- gizaing, and becanfe hehadfpoken to me fo much againfl thofe men that Would not fiickfloff to the LaWs ofdifputation^andin commendation of thofe that Would , and becaufe he hadfent me his refolution before hand. to lay by Rhetorickjtnd ufe nieer Legickj, andlaft., becaufe he had told ha Hearers in the Pulpit (the ufual dealing that I had from him) that if I did any thing againfthim, it would be by Rhetorick, (ortothateffeSl.) J found no fault With this publike infinuatton ; it pleafed mefo exceedingly to hear that I wasnotliketo fpend my felf in vain babling and roving difcourfe, as With the ordinary ignorant ones 1 Was forced to do. But When it came to the try nil ^ to my great a^onifioment and trouble, I found it aim oft clean con- trary to all my expe^aticns. 1 had nofooner brought him to a fir eight, but he breaks over the hedge ^ and turns aU the Difpute into a difcourfe . and goes up and down at pleafure. IcAme thither with a full refolution fcarce to f peak, a word but Syllogifm ; but ail was fruftrate j Tet did I endeavor fiill to re- duce Mm as I was able ; but all Was in vain ; for the next Ivfs that he wm at, he Was gone ever the hedge aiain ^ and from the Argument he would turn tofome other queftions or difcourfe. I intreated him to return to the meet ditty t>f4 Refpondentj andintreattd him again and again i but all in
vain ;
'vaift ; Tvhen he ^ohU propopfnd three or four (fuefiioMS one after another ^ at the UJi I told him, that was like Catechizing^and not diffuting ; a»drt>heK he would turn all to a lawlefs difcourfc^ and I intr:ated him to l^cep"^ Logim call difpMting , he had nothing to fay ^ hut, The people mrtfl he fatufed, and thereupon fall a difceurfwg to the people j To ^h ch I told him that I came not to fatiffie the people (i e. on that manner hy digrejfive difcourfes , whivh alas^ the ptople little dejired) hut to difpute ^'ithhim ; iJiij meaning tt'<«/, "^'ejhouldjpeuk^to each other ^ andfiottotbem, when he )^fW not what to fay to an argument. Thefe two wofds are all that A'fr. T. could find in above fix hours difputation y to mention as hUmi-^orthy {^hUh I jet fee no harm m) and upon the ground of thefe two words ^ hechargeth me ^aff Along to h^ive carry ed my felfmagifieriallifcornfuUy, andunhrotherly, not as one th.it minded clearing of truth , hut todimini/h his efleem and to gain an opinion to my feif of having the hetter~] Antid. p. J 2. tt'^fw / feri- ouflj profefs, that I kn'o'iv not yet ever any., even of A^r. T's own friends, did to this hour hlame me to my face for one unfeemly or pafftonate word that day ; hut divers thanked me for that I wholly for h ore it : nor can (J\ir. T. name any ether , or elfe I (houldfurt have heard of it : Nor am I confci- om of any pjffton (iirrtng towards him that day hut the great trouble of my mind for thecroffing of my hopes, when I perceived that he wtuldnot be held to any Logicall difputing. And when I palpably perceived that he had learned the common arttfice , knowing that the people judge much by multi- tude and earneflnefs of \ivords , therefore when ever he W.iy at k lofs , that the people might not perceive it , he prefently would fall into a 'W'^ordy vagary ; a great part of which, to my mofi impartiall judgement y was litle better then plain non fence ; And the C^Linijiers about me concluded the fame , and therefore '^ould have had me give over. I never blamed Mr. "X. for any pafftonate W'ords to me that day ; alof , what great harm would they have done me ? Tet he once told them that I ^as unacquainted "With the School ^tfputing, and began to infinuate to them as if Ifcarcekne'^ what difputing Whts ; And another time^ he told me Q Woul^ he hifi out of the Schools y if I fo difputedthere~]andthat Ifpoke gtbherifh on a meer bravado to take with the people , and to make up that in confidence which he "Wanted in argument ^ till the Aiinifiersfpoke openly ^and told him, it Veas hethat^ouldbebifloutofthe Schools; and Mr. Good W'ould have re- duced him, andfet himin the School way , but that he was filencedj faid only this to him , that 1 came not thither on fo low an errand as to plead for the reputation of my o)^n learning^nor had I any time to fpare forfo niean a ivork^j and therefore was refolved I would notfpeak^awordtoit, I never
(d I) faw
fa^ lefs dijlurbance in my di^me then (Jt/r.T. had that day ; there being not the leAjl CA»fe of offence given thAt I could difcern, though the mfiltitude dtulcrisvJ rraife exceedwg great. Only once the people begun to laugh at JUr, r. but werejhpt at a word. And for ^hat he fpeakj^ that \_the buji nefsrroi packtt$cry upa^z^ttx'] Antid.p 30. I ftrioufly affirm, that as I never heard ofanyfuch packJKg , fo I have catife to be confident , that it is an untruth^ it being thefudden motion ofthofe that did it ; ar7d 1 per- ceived not any of my familiar friet^Jis^ that hxd a voice in that cry, but en- deavoredtojlill it. And it wai not till all was done, andthe iy4jfembly difmiffed; I undertouk^indeed before for Afr. I'sfecurity, thM the people fbouldbejilent and quiet during the difpute^or elfe I ^ould breakjt ojf- But to undertake for the tcugues offuch a multitude afterwards^ was more then 1 could do. when all'^'os done. Air. Borafton by the confer.t offomegod' ly people [and before thu the Alagifirate had defired it) did before the Con ■ gregatien a.'k^A^r, T. ^'hether he would give bii confent that I foould preach one or two Sermons there on thatfubje^ , feeing himfelfhad preach- ed fo many, and that before the d:Jpute toprepojfefs the people (and might do after, and did) But Mr. 'X .Would not grant it, but faid he could not give Tvay to have me come there to f educe the people- J Vca.s glad to hear that he was againfi unlimited liberty of prophecy ing ; but I thought it no credit to hiscaufe, that he ciurfi not fuffer me to preach one Sermon againf} hit terr, ^henyet he had liberty to contradifl me. Of the fuccefs of that dayes difpu- tation JJhallfay nothing ; only thu^thofe that were Air. Ts great eft friends (Miniflers and others) did the broadly eft jpeak^in my hearing of his being foiled, and U\lr. T. htmfelffrequently confe(fed little left in private to di vers; and laid the blame on me for treading a ne'^ path. He pyortly afteY preached a Sermon, ^hich he faid wm abundant confut at ioyj of all I hid faid, which yet overpaft the very fr ft and main argument . anci moft of the reft , his memory is certainly deplorate, and his notaries imperfeff. I had aufweredthat Sermon ex ^tclly , but that it containeth but the very fame ( of any moment) "^ith h^ Farewell (peech if^d Antidote; what u more, I fhall ar.f^er. Then he again fals upon me in h:^ T^ulpit , for unbrotherly dealing, in that I did not fend him my Animadverfions on bis papers ^ thjt ts, becaufe I did not put my finger into the fire of contention eaftly , and en* gagein a ejuarrelwithhimas long as I lived , and that when I had not ftrengthfor works of a hundredfold more excellency ; and that I did not all this in a prepofterous , ridiculous, unprofitable Way ; for this muft his PuU pit found ^ith my accufations. zy4s alfo , that I did not fend him my Ar. guments before hand to keep him from erring , when as he never deftred
them
them for himfelfbut hii peo^/e, and we had take** a more expeditions courfe for their fati^fatiion ; yea ^hen he had told me that the Controverfte is fo eajie, that All our Divines that differ from him, do it through ^ilfulnefs or negligence '. Had I anyreafonthento fend him oy^rguments, as to teach him that was fofarpafl doubt ? And yet for this mu(i mj name alfocome into his Pulpit ? After this he fets upon me again by Letters, to fend him my Arguments, {ttfeems he thought hefptdnot "^ell in his Difpute,)\^hen yet he had heard them openly from my own mouth : Butinthofe Letters Vcere heaptfo many untruths (about matter offaSl which he knew) that I durfi never to this day anjrver them , lefi the very naming to him his untruths might caufe him to fay I reproached or failed. Tet after all this hearing of divers private half confeffions that he W<w "t^'or- fied, and wondring deepely with my felf how fo Learned and god- . ly a man could foffibly cjuiet his Confcience with fuch k,tnd of an- fW'ers as he gave wf <?« Jamiary , i. and being firongly affeEled with theconjideration th.nthe Church Jljouldnot onely lofe fuch a man while he wa^ yet living , but alfo have him for fo great a fcourge; and what good he might do , ifGod/bould but recover him-^ and Vcit hall perceiving great caufe to believe the old report of his exceeding pride offpirit, and thinking that he might thereforeyeeld more eafily to plain truth in fecret, then before a mul- titude \ upon thefe thoughts I htd no refi inmj mind ^ ttll I had folicited him to a private conference between us two alone , if yet there might b^ hope : But upon try/til all proved vain. This is the conference that he fpeak^ ethfo oft of his yielding to , which I confefs I took, well from him, and k>ww no reajen but he had as much caufe to take it ds ^etlfrom me, who dreW him to it, but in a vain hope of his oWw good and the Churches in him. andfcr no other end th.it my Confcieyce is ci^are of: Tet after all this he )X'rote to mi again , th^t at leaj} I would let him have my Arguments ag-ainft his Ex* pojition of I Cor. 7. 14 ^0 that I now perceived that he would force meto'- breakjny rejolution, and to engage in \\>riting, or elfe to ^rong the caufe of God y I bout thu time my Book^ofRt([ being Printed, J was forced to fend up the Epi/Ile, in which W-riting to my dear friends and hearers of Keder- mmrter (ofWbofe welfare ! am 04 tender as if they Jeremy children ) and finding my body almofi con fumed, and that my abode on l art h was like to be very fhoy t, ^^nd X^ithall being fevfible of their danger when I am gone, and of the defverate evils that this Opinion doth ufually ending I durfi not in ■ Confcience but give them fame warning that might (land by them When I Vca^ gone J / k?ew I Jfjoulddifpleafe Mr. T. and others : but my C'^^^cirnre a^kedme, whether I durfl for fear of di^leafingmeny betray the fouls of my
{d S) dear
dear friends and people tnto thefnare^andbeJllcMt now when I was unlikely tcfpenkjothem by a durable vojce any more ? I knewfome ^ould fay it was bitter , and it was arainf} godly men ; But my confcience anfwered Shouldft not thotihe bitter againji fin ? t-s it hot i bitter root ? is it not bitter to thyfelf? to the finners ? and u it not now bitter to thefe difirj-ffed Churches of Chrifi ? Thou hafi fpoken bitteily aguinfl drunkards j and irhoremongerSy and^hy fhouldj} thou(peuk.f>(iceetlyofthi6, ivhich ts like to ^0 more again/} the Chmch^ though the foul mrj fcape that U guilty of it f Woi not all fin bitte*- to Chyifl, and ^orfe then the Fine^ar and Qall > and fifouldit not be bitter to thee ? and fl:ouUJl not thou labor to m^ke it bitter to others } It muft be bitter to them., either here or in Hell. And ^hat though many are godl/ ? fijould I not therefore reprove them . but fuffer them to lie and rot in their fin andruine the Church, as if I loved them lefs then the ungodly } JVhat have I done th-.i tvcelve years but preach bit- terly againflfin ? andfiall / now fpeakjvceetly of it ? Let them do it that
findfweetnefs in it; for I do not j to me it hath been bitter. ■ upon
thefe confider at ions y I fet dvwn thofe lines in that Epiftle. But when it came abroad . nhat a fearful paffion Voas Mr. T. in ? not able to con- tainhimfelf An^befijes the private venting ofbidfpleenby "^ords and Letters ( Which I have known,) he fals upon it in the 7ulpit. And it fell out to be the day of hid departure from Bewdly , where after hi^ Sermon^ he makes that Speech of an hour long againfi me^ ^hich I have inferted and anfwered word by ^ord in the third part of this Treatife. When I had an- fwered'thify thencomes out hU Antidote,containing the fame ^ithfomefmal alteration ; which therefore I han/efaid the lefs to, for avoiding repetition. In this Printed Paper he chargeth me publikely over and over for not giving him my Arguments in writing : So that lam no^ compelled to it, and without forfakjng the truth there is no remedy. I have done what I could to avoid ity and was fully refolved never to have engage din this ijuarrelfeme bufinefs ; but I fee I cannot difpofe of my felf; I take it for one of the heaviefi affii^ions that ever befell me, that I have been forced to divert my fiudies and Meditations fo long from SubjeUs fo much fweeter to me, andufefull to the (^hurch ; / hope the guilt will not lie on me^ though I have theforro\\> and the loft. I had hoped mj name fhoaldnot have been found among the Contenders of this age : But (jods ^ili mufi be done^ and V(ho can refifi it ? Iconfefs the fubjed: isfo loVe , and to mefounplea- fant , that I have little comfort in what I have done, but only in this, I, That I am confident I have writt en for the truth . 2. ^nd though of Jovfer nature, yet through theprefent dijiurbance of the ^hurch, it is become
ofqreat ntcejfitj to defend it. J. And God hath competed we whether I "Would or no; and he k^o'^es hoW to wake that ufefulWhich he hath thut forced front we. I go on thU wejfage as Jonah to Nineve, againfl wy rrillf after a former peremptory refufall when I wm defired bj the Comwittee at CQStntiy tfi Print on this fubjeEl long ago, 4. zydnd it cannot be deny ed butmofl Books extant do takeinfome weal^ Arguments, and leave out fomeflron^. If the Church or any foul receive benefit by this Treutife, let them thank^only God and Mr. "X. God for the matter, and U^fr.T alfofor the Publication , and me for neither : for I confefs they have it againfi my Mcilly and could 1 Well have helpt it , they had never feen it ; I admire the wife providence of our God, Who rather then Schifm Jhall go unrejijied, vcill campell the almojl dead to tejlifie againfi it , and wa^e the Leaders to be the injlrumentsofcompulfion. I know Mr. T. Will be angry With we for the Writing ofthi^ 'Book ; though he have cowpelled we to it again]} mj will. How fsou/d a man live peaceably with fuch wen ? the Apojlle knew what hefaid. When he put in [_l fit bepoflible] []<««^as much as inyoulieth] Kom. 14.18. / dejire the wifefi wan that Itves to tell we how it it poffible fsr me to do it ? when I never preach againjl hi^ Opinion , nor pra^ife In- fant- Baptifw ; jet becaufe it « difcerned that my 'judgement vs not the fame With Mr. T's. j wuflbefollicited by Me^engers and Letters af- ter Letters to enter an endlefs <juarrel by writing ; fVhen I give twelve Rcafons againfi it , no excufes willferve turn : His Followers mufl come together to we to force we to it , or elfe I wufi bear the blame of their Re^ haptiz^ing and Divifions : 7^ Books , no P erf on mufl fat ii fie them hut I- Alas, th^t a man may not live neer Mr. T. except he Will Write agaifffl his Opinion . IVhy might not I have denyed this contention^ and lived quietly as Well as others ? Tea, When all will not do, the people mufi hear of it in the Pulpit as unbrotherly and uncharitable^ becaufe J Will not write • Tea. the World mufi hear of it from the *Prefs with loud out crjes , th^t 1 will rot write r An^ yet when I do Write , <( dtfpleafeth him mofi of all. when I wrote but a few lines in an Epifile , it cafi him into fuch afeaver of paf-. jio-4, a^ I would hot be in for all his revenues, were they four times were r ■S'o- th.1t if the kindled humor had not had a free ventilation in Pulpit and iri Prefs^ I doubt it might have Jpoiled him. Whatever it may do yet. IVh^it coHrfe fhould I take topleafefuch a wan, that Will- neither fufer we to be filent, nor tofpeakj as Balac did with Balaam. The only w^y is to Jpeak, What he would have me. But if no other caufe will advance me into his fa- vour, I am contented that Qod fhould kee^ me frow that honour. The truths At far 04 kanpofibly learny « this\ The root of all wyfufferings by him, is,
the
i . '^
the inter eft that God hath given me in the eft eem and ajfeUions of ^he people ofthefe partf^ efpeciallj in mj own Congregation, andjome'^hat in hU. This feemed to him a great block^in the refi^ ofhiifuccifs ; veh'ich if he could re- move ^ he might hope the \<^Grkj\'ofild go on the more frnoothlj ■' He tels them therefore in the laftpage ofh'^ Antidote ^ of their Temptation in the hi ah eft eem they have of me, ivhich m^y caufe them to drin^ in my Errors, I do verily believe that lam v^ifted far above my worrh , btft tvhethcr 1 en- courage people therein, or rather faithfully dijfW^'Je them from it ; and whe- ther 1 ambitiotifty feekjor popular brent h , crh:\\'m»ch I value it. fur- ther thcnit tends tothe propagation of the Gofpel^andthefaving of my &U'» foul, he that fearcheth my heart can tell \ T hough I kno'^> I am far from being free from pride i Vchich i-sthe moft radicated and natt'.rfil of all fins. And I hope M.r. T. willfinde, that when I am deah and taken out of bis way , theintereftofCjods Truth and Teace will ft ill Witholdthe people from his Schifrn , and that it was not my intereft in them only or chiefly j {though Iconfefs I never knew a happy (^hurch without a good Cjuidey and a dependance on him and obedience to him.)
zy4nd I perceive I) one parage, p.ig. 2 1 . ojhis Antidote ^ that he is of end' edat me, as if I diminifhed his eft eem \for he complaineth^that [jny Neigh' bors were his <iyiuditors till ( he imagineth) my oppofttion to him tookjhem ojf:~\ A ffdfe imagination. The ftory is thus {feeing the world mufi be troubled \\>ithfuch trifles :) One of my friends had a defer e to perf^^ade one at one day^and another another day to go by turns to fetch the 2>(otes of JUr.l's Sermons ; which was done a long time; andfome of Bcwdely did fo here 5 I well liked neither, being to travel on the Lords day Without need j yet I did not dijfwade them, for three Reafons^ I. Becaufe Iwas willing to hear them my felf , having not the benefit of hearing any ; 2. Becaufe I "^ould not hinder their profiting j if they found it indeed profit them, 5. Becaufe I abhor that proud humor of Minifters that envie if any man be folloVced but themfelves. But I found none went willingly on thu bu' Jinefs i but only to gratifie one man that de fired it ; and at laft that man finding Mr. T. deliver fuch DoSirine oi Was againft his judgement , and Which he durfi not repeat When he came home , did of himfelf break off that praUke as he haditfet afoot , without any knowledge of mine ; for J mind- ed it not, mrknew that they had ceaf edit i ofmanj aweekafter. And this Mr. T. mu^ complain of in print \ 0 whenGod hath taken down the pride of our hearts , we fhaU learn to be lefts tender of our credit ^ and lefts value mens applaufte.
Two things I look.to be que ft toned or hlanted for on in thii Treat ife :
I. fVhe^
1. fVhether I have truly reported Mr.T's anfwers throHghout the ^hole ? To 'Chichi fay, i. Hii valediBory Oration -woi taken from hu mouth in Short h'tndby a SchoUerand a very good T^tary , ^ho ii confident he hath not loft a ward, (except the nujffe of one Author , ivhich Mr. T. told them he had in the Library at Worcclter (rvhich it feems by hit /Antidote to be Eckbertui Shonaugienfi^ ; j ansi I believe I could do it mjfelf upon the advantage of 'sAt. T's. /ZoW delivery : And for the fidelity of the Notary, as he ii Confcienciom.fo he wxi at leafl as favourable to Mr. T. his caufe at t9 the contrary ^ and the only man of my familiarity here that yv as in doubt* ^yindfor the rejl »/Mr J'ifayings mentioned in thii Book, they arejuch as I had from hi^ o^n mouthy mo(l of them in the Dilute before thoufands of fVitneJfes , {\\>hich Difpute I havealfo by me. as taken by the forefaid No- tary:) except fome feW out of hii Book/, and a few in conference. In all Vvhich I herefolemnly affirm in the \K'ordofa Chrtflian, that I am certain I have fpoken thediretl truths and delivered his very words, and th.it I have not k^toTpingly concealed any thing of moment that might make for him, but have delivered all ofconfe^ucnce th.it he anfwered in the Difpute^ and culled ctft of his Bookj that which feemed of greatejl Jirength on his fide ; and the7apers of his Revie'^'' which hejent meon i Cor. 7. 1 4. I have an' fwered as far as they have more then is in the refl^ of any moment.
2. But the main' thing I /hall be blamed for, is bitternefs and harjhnefs, 7o \Wich I anfwer. 1. Sin hath dealt fo bitterly with England )4»c/ efpeciaU ly the fin ofSchifm, andfpecially the Schifm of the Anabaptifts^ that I dare not dealfweetly with it. I have before told you the anfwer of my (^onfcience in this. 2. Let any mmfpeak,asfharply tome as I do to them,fo they will but fpeak^as truly ; and if I bUme them for it, I will give them leave to tell me that I am a proud man and unfit to Treach humility to others. The pbin truth if, the Pride of this ay^ge is grown fo great , and the Reverend 'Pious Miniflers are many of them fo guilty, that it is a very fliame to men' tion it. They are fo tender of their honours, and names, that a plain deal- ing man k»o^s not ho^-^ to fpeakjo them , but they prefently fmart and take offence : Never did any diffembling Courtiers more bafely fatter^ then fame ofthenjmufibefi.ittered,andfoothed, andfirokjd, and extolled: Tho.'-gh they are failed at every VifordvmDo&i, Reverendi, Ctieberrimi ; yet if youdo but difcover the ^iceaknefs of their Arguments , they t hi nk^j/ou con- temn them, and trample them in the dirt : It grieves me thut the Preachers of humility, peace and patience havefo little themfelves. Pride hath made usfo tender , that men mufifet their wits on the rackjo find out Vpords that /ball not difpleafeus : every lower SchoUer in the School of flattery cannot
(e) have
have a room in onr favour ; he mujl he a Graduate at leafi. He mufl be 4 man of very flrong parts ^ that/ha/li>eah/etofuita/lhis exprejjio^s toco»m tent fis» ff'e necejjitate men to learn the School of Complements an J fuch hookj offlutterjfy rrhich among humble men are thought filter to be trodett inthe dirt. Every man that is not a Cmtho rve account areviler : and all plain fpeech we accont plain railing ; We teach the people to tell m that Wf rail in Pulpit and private , -K^hen We cannot endure the huadreth part tf that plainnejs andfjarpnefs Which fve ufe to them. Our intellefi orfan* tafte is oi a Burning glafs Which contraH^eth the rajes of the mofl amicable expreJfionSyfo astofet all our pajjlonsonfire. We have lived fo long a- mongji- contentions^ and War^ till our paffions are become GunpoWder, and eur memories Match, the one to catch fir ey and the other to keep it . I /peak, not of all; but I Would the guilty roould lay it to heart. As I Will excufe noexafperating words , fo I finde it is the excoriation and exulceratian of mens fpir its that ufually caufeth thefmart , and makjth words tofeem in- tolerable Which are either but a duty , or wholly blamelefs , or at leaf} a found mind would never hive felt them.^ . And I confefs it is my judgement, that the Truthof our fpeech lieth in the fitting of Words to the nature of the matter which they exprefs ; and therefore Where they are not fo fitted, it is akjndof Falfijood ; I confefs it much troubleth me that I am forced to tell LMr. T. fo oft that hU reports are untruths ; but 1 doubt I fliouidfpeak^ fdlfiy my felf if I did otherw'ife. DoElrinal untruths 1 thinly fitter to bt proved] Oj then barely called fo; but in matter of fall I mufl call that an untruth which isfo. To fpcakjaftly of a hainous crime, is a kindoffalfjood of fpeech \ itisanexpreffingandreprefentingthecrime as lefs thenit is. I Will give you a touch of two examples in CMr. T. The lying? apifis do ^cufethe Filb'igenksand Wildenks (our firfl Reformers) tobe tVitches, Buggerersy Sorcerers, and to deny Infant Baptifm , and hereupon they * raife War againfi them, and put them to thefWord, and burn their Cities to ajhes : Thefe godly men deny thefe accufations, and /hew that their Mini- flers being feWy and much abroad tofpread the G of pel , they kept their chil-^ drenunbaptezed till they came home ^ beeaufe they Would not have them baptiz,ed by theTrieflsin the PopifJj fafjion; upon this the flander was raifed, that they Would not have Infants baptized ; nhich they purge them- felves of and profefs their judgement for Infant baptifm. 2{ow what dfith Air. T. but perfwade the World that the Papifis accufations of thefe men were true inthij , and clteth the fayings of tWo or three Papifis as a tertain proof that thefe men were "^OO yeers ago againfi infant baptifm} lieprefi^eth one of their fayings on the Title page of kt4 firfl book^ In thu
booker
i^ookjfe repeat eth it over agMn ; Air. Marfliil told bim ofhU fanltf and he takes no notice ofit^ bntiit the Pulpit at Bewdley ^ithgre*t confidence bath it up again, to delude the poor people that know not the name of a Papififrom another. Teat in hi^ Antidote he hath it over again^ and that mo(i confidently J '^ith this infulting preface, x\z,[_he would have me take notice of it that I may learn to order my pen better. ] Norp what language Jhould I hfio^ on fuch atrichias this } If a Protejiant ffjould fet in with Cope in his ace u fat ion of our Martyrs, and a/ledge the Papifis teflimonies dgainfi their o^n puhlifbed profejjions, ^hat would you fay tofuch a man ? Is it railing to fay, that this dealing is (I ark^brazjen- faced, and uncenfcio- nable ? Another inj}ance is this. I mentioned in my Epijlle theflrange Judgements of God (never to be forgotten) on Mrs. Hucchinfon and Mrs, Dyer, /^«ftw(?«»w»»/»'» New England ; Mr.T-mi/hok^me, nni thought I hadintended it M againfi the c^nabapti^s. fVhereupon in the Pulpit, he firfi labors to make the people believe , that it is rather to be thought that God fends fuch\'Vonders tobe flumbling.blockjto men ; and then he wtli prove to them that thofe bonders did^itnefs againfl my dotlrine of fuflifi- cation : Now my doEirine is this,That w^kj in ?iiu\s fenfe {which mike the rt'^ard to be not of Grace,but of Debt) Kom.^.^. have not the leaji finger infuJ}ification,butWorkjin]ameshisfenfe (and in Chrifisin Mac. 15^. throughout) (which are the Obediential expreffions of faith in Chrifi) though they have no hand in our firji pardon or ^ujlification, yet they are conditions (and no more) of the continuance {or not lojing) of our fufi' fication, andof the confummation at Judgement. 2^w the Antinomians doSlrine was. That faith is not fo much as a condition of the 7^w Covenant, that it hath no conditions on our part, that no man isjufiified by faith, but it is Legal to fay fo ; that all are juflified by Chrifl without them^ and not at nil by faith; to prove )^hich they lay down this argument [To bejujiified by faith is to bejuflifiedby tvorkf] inferring, that therefore no m.in is julfied by faith, becaufeno manisjufiifiedby works. No\ip What doth Mr. T. but name this propofitien of theirs to fhew that my do^rins and theirs are alike, "^hen as lam accufed but for being too much contrary to them ? // it /-ailing to fay that this dealing isfuch as I never found in anj fefuit,fo grofs. Nay and upon further deliberation he hath printed this in his Axtidote. Truly, I dare not retraEl my plain reprehenjion offuch dealings . Indeed his perfenal mifcarriages I never thought to have named; but in that I have done what is done upon the judgement of others, but not again jl my o'^n ; Efpecially becaufe he ttrgeth it as my duty firfi in the Tulpit , and noVP in h.s book, P*g» iy. he faith XiPe have little love to him if we rebuke him not , but
{e 2) fuffer
fujfer Jin on him : And moreover he will needs involve his own credit with
the credit ofhi4 cat*fe, and therefore I thought not unmeet to fay What ii
doney not as againf} himftlf, but hts caufe. 4. e^«i my jftdgement tels me
without any doubting, that 7 eace- breakers anddividers of the Church,
ejpecially that violently and refolxeMy go on in that praHife, fjouli not have
the fame language as others. Aiy endeavors are for the peace of the place
^here I live \ therefore if I abufe any y or if I do not part ^ithmy o^h
right , and fujfer rvrongs^ for peace, f deferve to be blamed : But if there
be one man in t'<e town thaf^i/lfpit in every mans face that he meets, or
will fall upon them and beat them, or willfet the to'^'n on fire . mu/l I bear
XHpith thi^ man for peace ? mufl 1 let him alone to do all the mifchiefhe caity
andfay.I fuffer himforpeace?or is not the only Way for the peace of the place
to hinder fuch a man from breaking peace? Jf IJhouldchide fuch a man^will
any man fay , why are you fo bitter, and unpeaceable, and do not rather let
him go on? If I deal h^rfhly with any erring brother that is peaceable,
andfeeks only the fatitf action of his own confcience, and not the divijton and
difturbance of the (fhurch^then let me bear the blame. and fpare not. Indeed
Mr, T. faith in the lafl page of his Antidote [jhat as for my Wayes,hoWfar
they are from truth and peace, may eajily bedifcerned by my managing the
buftnefs bet^'een him andme'J^ And in whatp-'.^age of all that bufinefs this
may fo eafily be difcerned, he could not tell the World one Word, but only that
I faidi hi^ turning the dijpute to (jueflioning^Was Catechijtng, and that I
came to dijpute with him, and not to fat ii fie the people ( i. e. by overturning
the dijpute under pretence ofdifcourfmg to them) And is this all ? lean truly
fay, and without vanity, thMthechiefeflfiudyofmylifc is the Churches
peace ; and that all the controverfal Writings which J have written,
or am about .^are all to taks men o^from extr earns, and bring them to Peace^
And that to my befi remembrance, I nevtr fell out with one man in City or
Country, Army or Garrifon,fince I Was a Minifler of the G of pel ; and that
J bear no ill Will to any man on earth ; nor do I know any man that is an ene*,
my to me, except in general, in reference to T^tio-aalor Religious difagree*
ments. I fay therefore as ^tz^ (przfat.anrc 'Jalvin.trad. Thcol.) (iqufs
Calvinamcuiquamconvitium in his fcriptis feciffe , aut in Privata caufa
ira^ indulfiffe J acrnultomagisfiquisfum mendacio patrocinatum fuiffe
convicerit, turn ego plane de fencentia deceflfero ; Sin vero quara a na-
tura infitam vehemenciam habebat , ea ipfe adverfus perditos fophiftas
ufuseft, utinterdumetiammodumnon tenuiffe videripoffic, rogomo-
deratiflimos iftos homines, quibus nimium incalefcere videntur, quicnn-
qu« ipforura more non frigent, ut pro quo & in qnem dicatur paulo at»-
tentiwfi
tentius expendant,nequc heroicos iftos fpiritus ex ingenio fuo metiantar,
Lafllji Yetmlll not fay or think^that I havenot transgre^edin thii or any of my -writings, I confefs my ftile in Writing doth tafte of the natural k^ennefs , and eager ne fs , andferioufnefsofmydifpoftion; wherein lam jealom that I may eafily mifcarry ; and am unlikely my [elf to difcern it fo foon oi another ', which if I have done again fi Adr. T . or anyone elfe, I heartily crave their pardon, and that they would take warning by my fault Sy and avoid them the more carefully themfelves, and joy n )X>ith me in hearty requefls to the Lord^ that he will lay none of our intemperance or mifcarri- ages to our charge. To conclude, you mufl knoW, that ^fter CMr. T. had denyed me leave to preach in hi^ 'Congregation^ the magif rate and people "Would have had me do it Without hii confent^ which I would not do : hut when Mr. T. Was gone from them , and they invi edme again ^ I had fame thoughts to yield to thent, and therefore begun this Treatife in way of a Ser- mon to them, but I /juickly changed my purpofe^ hecaufe Mr. T. fhould not fayy I came to contradiFi him When he was gone-, and becaufe I ever judged Controverfte fitter for the Prefs then the Pulpit : Tet 1 thought meet to let itpafs as I had prepared the beginning of it for that people. 1 amforrythat I have eccafioH to trouble the world with this Apologetical Narrative^ and fo tedious afiory of our particular matters : but thofe that have dealt with the Anabaptifis, have been ufually put to this, witnefs Calvin, Bullinger, Sleidan, Spanhemius, Bayly, C^c. The Lord God that hath compelled me to this work^^o alon^ Wit hit, ace or ding to the truth of it( andnofurther^and blefs it to the recovery of fome of thofe poor Well- meaning fouls, who through the ufual gates cffeparation and z^nabaptifm , are ignorant Ij travelling toward their oWn and the ^hurches dtfiurbance or defolation, Amen. July). 16') Q,
(es) The'
J
Cj3^'/':a.ga^.T:(j^d^frd^tf^d^^-(:7;^^JiJ.* &&i&)<h&ithch^<h&i&i^^
The Contents of the firft Pare.
CHAP. I.
W Herein is premlfed ten things necejfary to be kj?o'^nof allthat wi/i impartia/lj and fnccefs fully fludj thecontroverfie of Infant-
haptifm. Page i . &c.
Ghap. 2. If herein are laid do'^^n three more preparatory propofitions. I . That
the controverjie about Infant-baptifm is difficult. pag-9*
2i Andoflefs'^eightthenmanytak.eittobe. psg.P'
3. Tet the grounds on rohich it flancieth, and which ufuallj are denyed by
thofe that deny Infant- baptifm, are of very great momenta pag. 1 2,
Some termes explained. paglj.
Chap.5. Containing my firfl yirgumenti from the LMedium of Infant S'
Difciplepnp. pag . I J ,
1. Infants proved Difciples from A(3. I J. 10. and that Text fully vindi^ catedfrom CMr. T's. mifinterpretatlon. pag. 1 5 , &c.
2. A fecond Argument to prove Infants to be Difciples ; and theText Lt:vit.25.4i,42. fully vindicated. pag.lS, &C.
3. iyi third argument from Luk p. 47, 48. compared )^ith Mat. 18. 1$. Maik, 9. 41- pag. 22.
The ohjeUion \^th,^.t Infants cannot learn~\ anfrrered. pag. 23.
Chap. 4, Containing the fecond and main (>yfrgnmentfor Infant- B apt if m^ They ought to be admitted vifble (^kurch members, and therefore to be b.-iptiz.ed pag. 2 4.
The full p^ oof of the Major ( that a'lfuch Jhouldbe baptized, Vcho mufl be admitted members of the viftbe Church ) \\'hich LAir, T. deny eth not,
p3g.24.
Chap. 5. The firft: ''Argument to prove Infants Church memberJJAp : In- fants veere formerly Church members by Gods appointment ^and that « not anywhere repealed ; therefore they mufl befojiilL. pag.i <5,-
Mr. T. confe^eth they were once ChHrch-members : He is to prove the re^
peal, pag.i?-
Mr.T. hit (lamentable) proof of the repent of Infants Chtirch-memberjhip
from Gal 4- 1 ,2,3. examined ; and the contrary thfncepreved. pag.28,
H^ other proof fromMdit.2^.2^,'^o. examined i and the contrary thence
prove i pag.ap.
Hiay^rguments from the alteration of the lews Church conflitution and
call, examined, P^g-^^r
Some Dif^inSions necejfary for the right underflanding of the queflion^How
far the Jews Chu/chis taken down ? P^g.gc.
The palpable vanity of Mr. Vs Argument ^ from the peculiarity of the
Jews Church- call by Abraham <?»^ Mofes, to the overthroiv of their
Church'ConfiitutioH'2 manifefied : And the Ambiguity ofhU terms [jcall
andconftitutio/ij dijpelled. pag. ^ ^,
Hii other Argument [from the overthrow of Temple, Sanedrim, Prie/l-
hood, &C.1 manifefied exceeding vain. P'g'?7«
Chap. 6. Thefrfl Argument to prove that Infants Church- member Jhip ii
not repealed. pag. 5 8,
Vindicated from Afr. "^'^fir^^ge anfwers, wherein he feems to give up his
caufe. p3g.38,&c.
Chap. 7. Thefecond Argument to prove Infants Church-rnember/htp not
repealed, butflillto continue, from Romt 11.17, P^g-43»
Chap. 8. A third Argument from Rom.i 1.20. P^g 44*
That V2^\\Jpeaks of the vifible Church, and that mc^ dlreBly, is fully proved
by many arguments. P^^g^T*
Chap. p. A fourth Argument draVt'n fromKom.li 24. P2ig.48,
Chap. 10. 4 fifth Argument from Kom. 1^.2^,1^, 26, pag. 49,
Chap. II. A Jixth Argument fromKom.ll. ly^l^, 2^. pag. 50,
Chap.I2. The feventh Argument fromMiZ. 2^. ■^'j,-^S,}p, P^g-Ji.
Chap. 13. The eighth Argument fromKcv. 11. i^. pag52.
Chap. 14. The ninth Argument from the certainty that believing fews
are no lofers by Chrift oa to themf elves or Infants. pag. 53.
Chap. 15. The tenth Argument from Heb. 8. 6. and 7 22. Rom. 5. 14.
I J, 20. The (^htivch under Chrifl no^ in a better condition then before,
therefore all Infants not unchurched. pag 55'
Chap. 16. The eleventh ^^rgument . If all Infants were put out of the
Church, the very gentiles (hould be in a \forfe cafe fine e Chrifl then be
fore. P3ig'5^»
Chap. 17. The twelfth Argument from Dcai.2$.io, 1 1^1 2, p>g 57'
Chap.
Chap.liJ. The II, Argument from Rom.4.il. pig.58
Chap. I p. The l^.ArgPtment. Infants Church'memberfhip no pxrtoftheCert'
mBn'ffilfir Judicial La^snor of a Covenant of works j therefore not repct/eJ,
Chap.20t The 1 5;. Argument. AH Infants that vfere members of any particif lar ^hurch, ^'ere alfo members of the vifible univerfal Churchy which cer* tainlj ii not repealed} pag. 60
Chap. 21. The 16. Argument from Gods promife in thefecond Commandment, Deut,2o. pJ»g.6}
Chap.22.7'^r 17, Argument fromVUl,-i-/,i6. pag.66
Chap. 2 3 . The 1 8 . Argument from Infants being Church^members vifible be* fore the Jervs Commonwealth and circumcif.on ^ ^hich i6 proved by three Arguments. pag.65
Chap. l^.The 19. Argument from Godsfevirity to thefeedofthe mcked.^zg. 69 Chap.25.Z/?f ao. Argument from 'DziMi'6.^.l'i,ii.^i. pag-?©
Ch3^.26.The 21. Argument.' If Infants be not of the vifible Church of Chrifl^ then they are of the vifible Kingdom of the Devil, which isfalfe, pag.7 1 Chap.27.irAf 22. Argument. If no Infants are members of the vifible Churchy then we can have no found hope of thefalv^tion of any Infant in the world that dyeth in Infancy. pag-7»
Ho^ much bettter ground of hope we have cffucbithen Mr. T. his do^rine Would alloW M4, V^i'7^
Chip.i2.The 2 ^.Argument. Chrifl while he wot an Infant was head of the ' vifible Churchy therefore it ii utterly improbable that he would have no In- fants to be members. pag. 79
Chap.29, The 2 1 Argument from 1 Cor.7.14. pag. 80
Thetruefenfeofthe ^^'ord [^Hol]/'^ cleared. pag. 80
The fame fenfe proveci by many plain Arguments.and Mr,Vsfenfe overthrown, and aHhis exceptions aufwered. pag.82,e7-c.
Whether We may kno)v Who are BaptK^ble according to my expofition. AndhoW far we mufiufe a judgement of Char itj : The nature of that judgement by which Aiiniflers mufl deliver Sacrament Si is more difiinSlly explained, jp 9^ 7 he obje^lion from Tit.l.15. anfwered, pag.98.
il/r,T*s ^eat objeUlon anfWered about thefanUify'ng of an unbelieving Whore,
pag.98
fiAnother of his objeSiions^ anfwered^that if the Covenant fan ft tfie, they mufi be
Holy Asfoon as th€ Covenant was made, pig. 1 00
whether any children of Infidels in Abrahams Family Were by birth'priviledge
Holj} whertthe great quefiion is refolvedt Whether any but Believers /«•
fants may be Baptfced } pag. 1 01
C/) Cbap.
4
Chap.jo.T^f 1^. Argument. Scripture tels w fully of the ceafing of Circunici. fort, but not a Word of the ceafm^ of Infants Qhurch member Jhip^ ^'hich it greater, nor any ejueflion or doubt about it. pag.i02
Chap.3 1 . The 2(5. Argument from Chrijls plain and frequent exprefpons, Mark 9.36,^7 & lO.i j,i4,I5,l(5,c^f. many oyfrguments briefly expreffed from thofe words, and the right fenfe of the T.ext vindicated agamfi Mr. J, hii exceptions, pag.103
The Contents of the fecond part.
CHAP. r.
A Tether ayfrgumentfor Infant baptifm briefly named pag.lOp
The great objeHion anfjpered, which is drawn from Rom. p. 8, Eph.2 3,
pag.iio
Chap 2. An anfwer to the Obje^ioH^Tbat Infants are UMCApable of theendsof Baptifm. pag. HI
Chap. 3. A. 3. ObjeUionarf^eredy How can children Covenant with God? And by "^hat right do P arents Covenant for tbem^And'^'hether we did Cove- nant with God in Baptifm or not } pag. 1 1 2
Chip. 4. /^ 4« ObjeBion anf^ered^ why Infants may not at well receive the Lord Supper? pag.114
Chap. 5 . A.^.ObjeUion anfwered^hy hath God left it fo darl^, and /aid no more of ity if it be hii Voill that Infants Jhould be baptiz,ed ? pag 1 1 5
Chap. 6. A. 6. ObjeflionanjVpered, drawn from the evil con fequents that are fuppo fed to follow Infant- Baptifm, as Ignorance ^ prefumption, and ^ant of folemn engagement to ^hrifi, c^c. pag. 117
^in humble motion that the Direllory may be in this revifed^er the ^hurchesfa- tisfied,with their reafons to the contrary ^ in thefe 4. points. I . That the Pa* rent mtny not only promife to do hii o^n duty ; but m*j alfo enter hit child in- to Coveu.mt with God, bypromifinginhisname, what the Covenant re^ui- reth. And that the P^irent may profejs hi) own ajfent to the Articles of Fait h^ and hi^confent to the duties ef the (^ovenAnt. ^. That the ey^'ncient praSlice of Confirmation may be reduced to its primitive ufe; andinflead ofT^olitical and controvertible Covenants that every (fhriflian who was baptized in ln» fancy ^may lolemnlj at age rene^ his Covenant perfonally\bef ore he be Admit- ted to the Lords Supper. 3 ^ That the Church may have poVcer to fee totht renewing of this Covenant ofte»^ when there us nece^ary occafort. 4 That the
VPords
Vcords of the Covtmmt may be (from Scripture) p'efcrUeJ, (j^dfto LMiniJier or Churches have povfer to alter it. pag 1 20
The duty of Solemn perfonafl Covenanting proved from Scrlptnre, agninjl thofe th^t thinkjt an humane invention: And that this Wotild he far morefolemnly engaging then adult baptifm^ and more agreeable to the ^ill and )^>ord ef God.
pagi22 Chap. 7. Thefirfi Argument againfl delaying of our Infants ^aptifm^ tnthat there ii no Word of precept or example in all the Scripture for the baptizing a Chriflians child at age ( except it befinfnlljf negletled before ) pag. 1 2 5 Chap. 8. Thefecond Argument. The baptizing of Chrijiians children at age ordinarily i is plainly manif eft ed to be utterly inconfjient with obedience to Chrifis rule for baptizing. ^ pag.126,
Chrifis Rule is for baptizing upon the firfl Difclpling. pag. 126.
Mr, "^'s qualifications of requifite profeffion^ examined, pag. 1 28
Chap. 9. iyi third Argument again/} delay of baptifm. P^g-i^O
Chap. 10. iyf fourth Argument. BaptizingChriJhans children at agetwilluna^ void.iblyfill the (^hurch "^ith contentions and confttJio»,argive Miniflers the mo(l Tyrannical power that ever Was ufurped.even more then 7apal. pag 1 50 Chip II. A fifth Argttmcnt agMnfl their ground. Mr. T's arguing from Mat. 2 S.Veould tend to Jljut out Baptifm from the Church. pag 1 3 2
Chap. 1 2. Aftxth Argument again]} their ordinary baptizing in cold rivers, by dipping overhead , as necejfary. P^g. '54
Chap. I ^.Afeventh Argument againft their ordinary baptizing naked pag.tg6 Chap. 1 4. An eighth Argument. AnabaptiJ}ry hath been purjued bj go^s evi- dent Judgements ever fine e thefirfi rife of it. PSg-^jS J. They h-tve been great hinderers of the QofpeL 2. And the inlet to mofl horrid opinions. 3. Andnotorioujly fcandalous.^. And purfnedrnth Gods ruinating Judgements. pag. 13 8 The Hifiory of their carriage in Germany. pag' 1 39 The doleful fcandals by them in England. P'g '45 Chap. 15. cAntiquity for Infant Baptifm. pag'I5* Cyprian and Tertullian acknowledged for us by Alr.T. pag. 1 jg Further teflimony out of Tertullian. P^g*! SS Irencus Tefiimony vindicated. pag. i 54 Juftin Marcyrs Tefiimoniesfor ut. P3g'l55 A^r.\'s Teflimony from Antiquity examined : where his mofl horrid vile alle- gations of the fianders of the Papifis againfl the Albigenfes and Waldenfes tsdetetled. P2&I57 'JLhe conclufion.With the found judgement o/Mtlmdhon 4n^ CaiHec-O.pag.ldO Teflimonies from Cy^UJt^i Chryloftome, Ambrofc.
(f^) The
The Contents of the third part.
A Preface. pag. 1 55
That I never call Mr. T. Heretick^ pjg^ 1 ^j
Ofthefeafon of ptiblijhingthofe words in my E pi file. pag. 1 72
Of the name of AtiAhaftifis^ mhether A<fr.TJarejuJlifiea/ltheprophit?ie, at ha- ving not violated any (fovenant in Baptifm. pag. i ja
fFhether Anahaptifis pUj not arvorfe part then the Devils materially ? And horp they are accufersmf their own children. P*S- 174
fVhether Mr,T. keep them out of the vifible Church ? P^g-IT^
, JVhcther they that plead far Infant- baptifm do play the T^ evils part ^as LMr.X. faith they do ? ^ pag. ijj
fVhether Infants may he engaged hy Covenant to ^hrifl ? pag. 178
fVhether Mr, T. plead again [I Infants being Chrijls Difciples and ferv ants ?
pag. 179
Of his denial of Infants tiolin efs by feparation to God. pag .180
Concerning Levit.2 5,4i,42.& Dcur.2p,i 1,12. pag. 182
Aft . I 5 . 1 o . vindicated. P* g • 1 8 4
rt/^bout I CoT.J.i^. another exception of Mr. Vsanf^ered. pag 187
Of the term SeFlary : and of Judgements onfuch. pag. 1 88
.My dcBrine ofjuflifcation vindicated from Mr,'X .his afperjions ; his matching' it\^ith the clean contrary doElrine of the Antinomifls in New-England, is fuch dealings that Iknorvno ^efuite matcheth. Pag.lpo
Mr.T. hi* pleading againfl the right ufe of Gods rpondtrs in New-England/A"- amined. P2g.iP7
"tMy -expofition of Mat, 7 .15. vindicated. pag. i pp
fJo"^falfe Teachtrs may be kno'^n by their fruits ? pag. 200
Mr '.\. r,9t charged as he reHl needs fuppofe : yet not free. pag.202'
JffrjW cor.fJenre and his mifreports of the difpute. pa^.ioj
Severall Abf^irdities that Mr. T. maintained in the difpute^ Jan. I. Id4p
P3g.207
ijifunj more of his e"lder,t untruths about the f aid difpute. pag«2op
tVhether I crcrpedover xMr.'X. or trampled him underfoot. pag.210
Mnre untrue reports of his confuted. pag.2ii
More of the carriage of the difpute. pag. 21 2
Thf true RiAfen of my fpeakjngfo much againfl (*yfnabaptijls in the Epijile be* fsre vty book^entituled. The Saints Reft. pag.612
That
Tkat I cafi not dirt in the face of Mr. T. hut only cfhUiU caufe. pag. 217
Mr.T's error about the not concealing any Truth for Peace^ confuted, pag. a 1 8
Hii error {^that thofe that are no Minifiers may "Baptize^ confuted, pag. 2 30
H« error\jhat private men may adminijier the Lords Supper^confuted. p. 1 2 1
Hid error [jhat Godfealeth not ^Eiually^ but W'hen the Sacrament is aim'u
nijired to a believer^ confuted. pag. 221
His error [j hat the Covenant, Whereof Baptifm is the feal, isonly the abfolute
Covenant y made oniytothe EleEl'] confuted. pag. 2 23
His error agMnfl Magiflrates fubordination to Chrijtthe A lediat or, confuted,
and my do6irine vindicated. Air. Rutherford, and Adr.SS^W are aoWn right
for itf That all the Kings and Rulers oh Earth have their power from, and
under the Afediator. P 3 g . 2 2 7
The Contents of the Corredive.
SOmefayings of others infiead of a T^reface. pag. 237
SeU. I . Mr. I's Epifile an/rvered, and my other writings vindicated from his miftnterpretation, "Whether our Minifiers are meer formal Teachers, and Infant, baptifm be a damning Error. pag, 24 1
SeEi.i. Hisfirfi SeElion anfWered about dipping, and whether ^e are off dating ■Priefls ? whether we "Ocouldhave deflroyedor banifhed Afr. T. Aly own judge- ment about Liberty of Confcienoe. pag.24<) Sclll> Hisfecond and third Seflions anfwered, fundry more untruths deleted.
pag.248 Se[l...\ }ii4 fourth Se^ionanf^ered about Levit.25.4i. pag 24S
Se^.^. His fifth SeElion anfwered about Deut.2p. pag. 249
SeSi. 6. His fi.vth SeElion anfwered about h&.. I J. 1 o. pag. 25 2
Sefl.y.Hiifeventh SeElion anf^>tred about 1 Cor.7.14. P2g'253
SeB, 8. His eighth SeElion anfwered; his falfe accufation of me about Indepen- dency \ moreaboutthe monflers in Ncw-Englind. pags257 SeEl. 9. His ninth SeElion anfwered of Mat. 7. By their fruits ye fijall know them. pag. 259 Of Heretic, \^hatitis. pag-259 Mr.Vs Authors for the Antiquity andgodlinefs of yfnabapti/h^examinedp. 260 Fuller proof of the tsyfntiquity of Infant baptifm from Fathers and Counceis^,
pag.26s
CMr.Tiwitneffes examined particularly^ Bernard^ Cluniacenfis, Eckbertus,
Schonaugienfis and Walafridus Strabo. pag.264
(f 3) Cypiiais
Cyprian tjesfalvation to the vifible Church. . pag.«6tf
A deer argument that ^/?r//? never repealed iMfants ChHrch-rfieml;erJJjip,\b\d. Admonitions about Schifm from Cyprian, pag. 267
To thife thut diftajle goMinefs for the fcandah of thefe times. fomewhat out of Clemens Alexandrinus. pag.268
The Levellers {and Rnnters ) fljew m "^hat ayinabapti/frj ii^'^hen it « ripe(a'' gainjl whom the State is fain to make AEls, ) pag. 2 69
SeH 10. Hu tenth Section anfwered.The Oxford Tejlimonj conjideredpig. 271 The true reafon of my inferting thofe parages in the EpifiU before mj Treatife of the Saints Refit ^hich (JMr.T. is angry at. P^lg-^? *
Af<^i»fi cJIfr.T's chargCythat \^Iam become a Ringleader of men that mind not the things ofChrifi^nor regard me^but to ftfhoid their reputed] pag. 27} The renfon of my plain Jpeech, which is called keennefs. pag. 274
fVhether my Judgement about univerfal redemption be meer Herejie ? And how many of the mofi learned and famous Divines that ever the Reformed Churches had, do maintain it f IVhethermy J udgement^that Magi fir at es hold their power under the Mediator, be recr Herejie ? more Authors alledged for it, and the matn obj,anf. pag. 276 whether my. maintaining Infant haptifm be Herefie ? P^g- 278
The main fir^ngth of Mr.Vs anfwer proved vain. psg. 279
Pajfages about the difpute and my [elf. pag. 2 80,28 1
The refult of my mofi impartial examination of all Air. "X^S paper sand argu- ments. P3g'28j An advert ifement to the Reader, pag. 284
The Contents of the Appendix.
A Premonition to the Reader. pag. 288
The fayings of fundry great TDivinesupon the point, P^ig- '9 1
The reafons of this undertaking. pag. 293
Mr. Bcdfords opinion laid do'^n out of his three books. pag 39 1
Ady own Judgement laid down in tenpropofitions, after fome difiinElions prepa, ratory thereto. P2g-^95
tyiboui traditio/iy and humane additions to Gods worfhip. P^g- 3© i
Bapttfm only a CMoral Infirument , and not 2^turaU or fupernaturall,
pag3o5 fyh(tbtr there be a hyperphyftcalctmfalitj difiir.^ bo:hfrom phjficaland moruL
pag.jod fVhether
whether Faith give men only jus ad rem, before Baptifmy and not alfo jus in re.
pag.507
In what fenfe B apt i fin is a condition of purification, e^r. P^g- 3 09
Jigainfl the nectjjitj of Baptifm to falvation. Pag 5 i o
Whether God give femiml true grace to thofe Infants that afterWardpcripj.
pag.^ll
whether there be any third thing infufed hefidcs the ejfence and rvorl^ofthe Spi- rit ? and W'hich of thefe it if? i b i(|. whether there beany true efeHuviI faving grace in Infants,whieh will not cer- tainlj AEl when they come to age / pag- 3 1 ^ what Ad: it ii by ^'hich God forgiveth and jujlifieth- pag. 5 1 ? There is jpecial grace from^hrifly before any that flo^s from union With him.
pag.3l<J 7 he Texts that are brought for their Tenet AnfUeered. pjg, ^ j 7
Of the nature of our union with Chrifl. P^S 3 1 ^
whether experience jpeak^ for the Tenet I oppofe f P 3 g- 3 1 9
what for givenefs is} P'g"3*I
H(CU' far Chrifi dyed for Unbelief and Impenitency^ and how fir he did not ? opened. ibid.
IJV the Animadverfionson Doflor WtrdsTraBate,
WHat kindoj Jnflrument "Baptifm is, viz. moral. pag. 3 25
Biadwardines Judgement of ejfeSlual grace. ibid.
How far it is true, that Chrifis death, though a fuficient remedy, yet profit eth not except we apply it, P*g- 5 2 3
Several points Wherein DoSlor Ward it againfl Mr. B. ib.
'DoBor W's mi flake It hat baptifm fealcth not to Infants^ confuted- pag 3 2 4 His mijlake [that the Word apply eth not Chrifis merits to Infants} confuteel,
pag.325
His mifiake it hat baptifm is the firfi means of pardon, and not the ^ovenant^
confuted. P2g3i6
Some pofit ions about Ju(lification by the Covenant, and by Baptifri^. ib.
The Dr. danger ou(ly gather eth from A61. 2. 3 7. that common f^ith is thecond'f
tion of Baptifm, and Baptifm the means of remiffion, before true lively faith*
pag. 327
More proof that the Covenant Juflifieth before Baptifm. ib.
Dr. W's ty4rgHments againfi Covenant juflifcation of Infants before Baptifm^
anfwered. P3g.33o
Ca Ivins Teflimony againfi Baptifmal precedency. pag. 331
Th9 .
The DoElors found judgement. I. About Cjodsfoleef^citncy %n f unification, 2. And about the univerfality of the conditional Covenant. P^g' 3 3 ^
The Auhors judiement of Do^oyDivtninZi^ndU^fr. Owens cenfure of hu late excellent 'Difertations. pag. 3 jz
Dzvcnznts cle^r judgement, i. In the poi^jt of univerfal redemption, 1. And ofjftfiification, how far ^-orks concur, P^g.JJ?
ThefumofDviitmTitiEpifile, P*g'334
whether Bi/hop UHier and CMr. Cranford be for LMr.U. pag. 335
That the Parents Faith « the condition for the child ^ proved. P*g-.^3<5
V^rk\m judgement herein plain and full, ibid.
The judgement o/Rivet.Beza.ZuingliuSjTwifSjO^r AJfemblj ,and Auftin.p. 3 J7
A
N ^Addition to the twentieth fhap.ofthefirfi partyabsut the Catholickvi- fible Church, referring to Ulfr, Budtons bool^. P^g«33P
ARgumentj againfi the Socinians , who deny thettfe of Baptifm to fetled Churches tand agtunji the duty of Baptizing t^Hee . paf . 341
, »
The Cenclufion of the whale* pag. 3 44
Mat. 2S. 19.^
Go je therefore And Difci^le to me alt T^tlonSy SaptlsJng them in the Name of the Father^ and of the Son^and of the Holy GhoJ}.
CHAP. I.
^Eloved Friends and Neighbours, I im Invited hither by your felves, and the providence of God, to perform a work to me fo fad and unplcafing, that no ordinary motives could ever have engaged me to : But the delivering fo many beloved friends and neer neighbours from fo dangerous a fnare; the preventing of thofc doleful divifions. diftraftl- ons, heart-burnings, and ruins which Ana baptifm hath Introduced where ever It yet was entertained (fo far as I can peflibly learn ^ the quenching a fire fo near my own dwel- ling ; the curing ofthat plague which elfe may Infed my own Congregation j and cfpccially the vindicating of Gods precious truth, and his Peoples pretious privi-. ledges, which 1 dare not betray by my filence, being fo called forth for their defence • Thcfe are ail Arguments which I cannot gainfay^ and have conftrained meto this task, how ungrateful foever. It can be no plcafing work to me, the Lord knows, to preach the truth in a way of a contradidion .' to fpeak againft the doftrine of a Brother whom 1 fo much love and reverence : to nmufe the poor ignorant people, while they hear one man preach one thing, and another the contrary •, one pleading Scripture for this opinion^ and another againft it ; one interpreting it this way, and another I'nt way ; as if we were all brought to a lofs in our Religion, and fo caufe people to call away all as uncertain. To be put to defend Gods truth againft fuch a friend and lover of truth j and Gods Church and people againft a Builder, a Shepherd, a Guide, a Father in the Church j and to heal the wounds that you have received by a frie.id ; to turn my labours and your attention from matters of greater moment , to thefe tri- vial quarrels; to fee the beginning of that plague broke forth in aCongtegaticji whichfolate.y were minding Chrift in Love, and Unity, and Peace, which hatha!, ready made fuch Iiavock in hiejand j and in the face of this Congregation to bthold the doleful ftatc of the Nationj and by the fight of your Sparks , to be forced to rc-
B membet
Plai?$ Scripture Proof of
aiember our publike flames J which have made us a fcorn to our enemies, a wonder to, flrangcrs, a grief and aftonifliment to our fricncis, a confufion to our ftlves , a fliamc. to the Gofpel , and a perpetual reproach to the caufe of God ; So far is this from be- ing a pleafing imploymcnc, that it makes me begin with anafflifted heart. I pray God you may have more joy in the end by your Information, then I have in the be- ginning from the naturcof my work ! For if 1 had not hopes of that, I fhould not have come hither. But feeing God will have it fo, and bccaufe of your ncceffity there Is no remedy, I will here aifure you of thefe two things in the piefcnce of God, the fearcher of hearts, i. That 1 have not raflily entertained the Doctrine which I come to maintain, nor have I negledcd the fludyofit through carelefnefs and contempt : I never baptized but two Children, and both thofe of godly Parents : Before I pro- ceeded any further in the pradice, I >grew into doubts of the lawfuUnefs of it my felf, and that upon the fame grounds for the mofl part, which Mr. T. hath (ince publirtied ; This was about ten or eleven yeers ago ; fince which tim« I have ufed all diligence that I could tod ifcover the truth, and upon that and other reafons fufpended my pra- fiice. I blefs God, that gave me not over to a fpirit of rafhnefs and headinefs, to run on new untrycd wayes, upon every doubting about the old j and that gave me all along to fee as great probabiiiry for the truth as againft itj and that gave me ftill a <let£KatioG of S<hirm*, and a high eftsem of the Churches unity and peace j or elfe I had certainly then turned Anabaptift(for I think it no fin to take this fhame to my felf. In confelUng my former imperfei^ions) But, Nil tarn certum qaam quod ex dimo cenum efty we are moft fure in thofe points that we have mofl doubted in ; And I profefs I am far moreconfiJenr, and beyond all doubt now, that it is the VViUof Chrift that Infants (hould be Baptized, then ever I was in my life, notwithftandingithath been oppofed more of late then ever. 2. And this alfo I here folemnly promife you, fo ia^t ' as I am acquainted with my own heart, that I will not fpeak any thing to you in this bufinefs, fave what in my judgement and confcience I believe to be the truth ; And he that knoweth my heart, knoweththac I have fo unfatiable a thirft after the knowledge of Truth, that if I did think that it were a Truth of Uod, that Infants Hiould not be Baptized, I fiiould not only entertain it^ but gladly entertain it 5 and it is as de- lightful to me to difcover even a difgraced trutii, at it is to finde the moft precious treafuix ; I never difcover a Truth in my ftudies, but it is as fweee to my mind as a feaft to my body j even Nature it felf hath a longing defire to know. I fpend my time, and ftrength and fplrits in almoft nothing but fludying after Truth ; and if after all ahati (hould be.unwillingto find it, I were monftrcufiy yetverfe. It hith hitherto been my lot, ever lined have been a Preacher of the Gofpel, to be on the fuffcring llde. If after fo much contradiftion to the corruptions of the times, and fo many ha- zards of my lifCj and To many doleful fights, and tedious nights and days which in wars 1 have endured, when others were at eafe, and after the overthrow of my bodi- ly health, and all for confcience and prefervation of Truth, I (hould nowbeun-- willing to receive it and acknowledge it, I fliould be a moft treacherous enemy to ray felf. Ifamin thatlives inconftant expeftationofdeath, and daily looks to be fummoned before the Lord his Jadge, as I do, (hould yet through pride or any world- ly refpcd be falfcto.the Truth and his own foul, and that in a time when error is the more thrivin^g way,rure fuch a man were unexcufably wicked. All which I therefore fay formy felf ('though lam aonfident among you that know me it is elfe needlefs^ be- ■c^ufe^Jic. T. hath told me in Conference, that the able Miniftcrs generally that differ frpra him, do erf through meere wilfulnefs ot negligence, fo eafie it is to fee the Trutijt ■c^ hi;^ fide, T5e Lp;d prefervc.aas jnd aU his people from that . csalos Jouihefs andf
beigh:-.
Infants Charch-memherfhip andHaptifm.
hei^ftt of fpiric. For my part, I folemnly profcfs to you, that if I deliver you not the Truth, ic is through difability and weaknefs rather then wllfulnefs or negligence ; though I know my will is alfo imperfeft.
Before [ come to the proof of Infam-Baptlfm diredly, I muft needs firft lay down •feveral PofitJons that muft neceffarily be well underftood before you can undctftind the point in hand ; when a people are ignorant or miftaken in the antecedent, no won- der if they deny the confequents : and if their underftandings have once received falfc foundations and principles, itiseafieto build tip afalfe fuperftrufture. The Pofiti* ons I lay down fi: ft, are thefe.
Vofition I. JT hathpleafcd the Holy Ghoft to fpeakof fome things in Scripture more fully, and of others more fparingly ; And where God fpeaks more fpitingly, the thing mnft needs be more diificult, and yet his Truth ftill. In Four cafes efpecially Scrip- ture is thus fparing. I. In fpeaking of thofe to whom it fpeaks not; God fpeaks more fully to men of themfelves, but of others he fpeaks lefs t for he is not bound to give Hs account of his dealing with others J Therefore he fpeaks fo little concerning the Heathen that never had the Gofpel, Whether any of them be faved ? or upon whac terms he dcaleth With them for Life or Death? Far is it from my reach to difcover his mind in this. Andfo for Infants; they hear not the word j it is not fpoke to them, and therefore it fpeaks more fparingly of them j Yet God hath fo much care of the comfort of Godly Parents, that he hath much more fully revealed his mind con- cerning their children, thenthecbildrenof the wicked and open enemies, i. Scrip- ture fpeaks fparingly of fmaller points j and of greater and thofe that are of necelu- ty to faivation, more fully. I (hall fliew you anon, that this Is not fo great a point as many m.ikc it, and therefore no wonder if it be the more fparingly mentioned. 3. Scripture fpeJiks fully of thofe particular controverfies that were afoot in thofe times, but more fparingly of thofe that were not then Queftloned. The great Que- flions then were. Whether Chnft were the Mefliahi' Whether the Gentiles were within the Covenant, and to be received into the Church ? Whether Circumcifion, and the reft of the Ceremonial fervice muft be ufed by the Gentiles ? Whether Jufti- Hcation be by the works of the Law , or by faith In Chrift ? Whether the dead fhould rife ? and how ? How fully are all thefe rcfolved in the Scripture ? fo all thofe lefler Queftions which the Corinthians and others moved about feparating from unbelievers ; and Saciament, and things offered to Idols, and meats and drinks, &c. how plainly are all thefe determined? But many others as difficult which then were no controverfies, have no fuch determination. And yet Scripture is fufficient to direft us for the determination of thefe too, if wchave wifdom to apply general Rules to particular Cafesi and have fenfes cxcrclfed to difcern the Scope of the Spirit. Such is the cafe of Infam-baptifm. 4. The New Teftamenc fpeaketh more fparingly of that which is more fully difcovered in the Old. V\hat need the fame thing be fo done twice, except men had qucftioned the Authority of the Old ? The whole S'cripture is the perfcd Word and Law of God ; and if he flioold reveal all his mind in one parr, what ufefliould we make6fthe other? How filent is the New Tcftament concerning a Chriftian Magiftracy ? wrhich made the A- nabaptifts of old deny it : where find you a Chriftian in efie New Teftament that cxercifed the place of a King or Parliament man, or Juftice of Peace, or the like ? fo of an Oath before a Magiltrate, oBVar^ of the SabboLh, &c* how fparing is the New
" B i ' Tcfta-
Fldin Scripture proof of
Teftament ? and why ? but becaufe there was enough faid of them before in the Old ? • This alfo is the very Cafe In the Queftion In hand. The main Q^icftion is noc, by what fign members arc to be admitted into the Church ? or whether by a lign ot without ? but, At what Age they arc to be admitted Members ? Now this is as ful- ly determined in the old Teftament as moil things in the Bible : and therefore whac need any mote ?
The defpcrate highef! fort of Antinominnsy who to put of this, will wipe out all the Old Tefiament with a flroak, arc men to be deplored rather then difputed with. They may as well do fo by the New Telhmenttoo if theypleafCj when any thing in ic contradideththeirconceits : and they arehatiing to itapacc, when in moflofthc Land our Qiicftion,\Vhether Infants (liould be Baptized, is turned into a higher,Whc- ther the Scriptures be the wot d of God, or not ? But O how happy were thele men, if their difclaiming either the old Scriptures, or the whole, would make themlnvalid^ and abrogate the Precepts and the Threats ! Then perhaps they might difpucc with God in Judgement, as they do now with us, and efcape by excepting againft the Scrip- ture that muft condemn them.
I might be very large herCj i{ refolved brevity did not forbid, and (Tiew you that the degrees of marriage forbidden ( even marrying with a Sifter ) are not forbidden in the New Teftament, with many the like, which yet are fins^becaufe forbidden in the eld. Somefay it is fufficient that they are forbidden in nature j But that is a Silly fliift; It tends to make the Scripture fo imperfeft, as if it did not forbid thofe fins which nature is againft ; Befides,it will hold much difputejWhether it be direftly againft the Law of Nature or no j \\ hethet Cam and Abd did lin in fo doing. And if It be, yet the Law of Nature isfo blotted and impeifeft in the beft, and fo obliterated in q;hers,that it is no fufficiem Rulcj that which Nature tcacheth clearly, it teacheth all men ; but it doth not teach all men this, that it is a fin to marry ones own fitter. You may fay, it is but fomc notorious wicked ones that have prevailed againft the very light of nature, that know not this. Anf, I think many are in a ready way to it, that little imagine it 5 But I have difpmed with fome men of eminency who denyed the Baptifm of Infants, that becaufe they would not admit of proofs from the Old Teftament, have told me plainly, that they doubted whether marrying a Sifter, or any thing elfe which is not for- bidden in the New Teftament be any fin j and for their part they would not acknow- ledge them to be fins. And it deferves tears of blood> to hear how light fome Chriftians make of the Old Teftament. They look at the Jerps with fo ftrange an eye, as if they would not endure to be of the fame Churchjor body with them* (Juft as the j?f»j were wont to look at the Gentiles ) Let them take heed left ncjtt they refule to have the fame Head and Saviour, or the fame Heaven or God as they. Thus you fee in Four Cafes,. Scripture (efpecially the New Teftamenrj fpeaketh very fparingly i And therefore wc cannot cxped to have fuch points at large.
A thing Is not
Tofition 1 1. ^He great difficulty of a point is no proof that it Is not Truth.
therefore to be rcjefted as not of God , becaufe It is not eafie , nor the proof fo clear as we would have it. 1 find a multitude of filly Ignorant Chriftians, it a point be once Queftloaed , and they find not prefently an eafincfs to refolve It , but theScripturesand Arguments brought for it feem daik, they prefently conceit or fufpeft it is no Truth j when they never confider that what Is fald for the contrary,, n^yhavciarkfs evidence crlikelihppd of Trucb. Thofe foot fouls are far gone that ~ "" " wili
Infam Chunh'WemhrJhip and Baptifm.
will needs teach God how to deliver his mind .• They are ncer the pits brink, that fay to God in their hearts, If thou wilt fpeak plainly, and make all the I'xripture eafie to us vre will believe ic : but if thou fpeak fparingly, and leave It difficult, believe it who
If a man miy take the advantage of Scripture difficulties to caft th;m away, then we mufi lofe Dmcl, Z ichary, Kcvclation, and a great part of our Bible. And if dif- ficult doftrinc« (hall be concluded untruths j Farewel mofl of our very Creed and Chriftianity. I am moft confident of it , thatJf a fubtilc Pagan (hould come among you , and difpute that Scripture i^ not the word of God , and that Chri^ Jcftu is not God, he would filence you more then you are in the prcfent controverfie, and you would be Icfs able to anfwer him , then you are to anfwer an Anabaptift. There arc many weighty controverfies, that are more difficult then this ; niuft wc therefore prefently turn from the Truth i* Never did I plead to my remembrance with an able Papift, but he could fay far more for his Religion then Maflcr T. fald for his opi- nion on Jan. 1. or his Sermon fince. I will hazard all the reputation of my llnder- ftanding on It, that there may Ten times more be faid for Free will, then can be faid againft Infant Baptifm } yea, that it is of twenty times more difficulty j and I here cfter my felf to manifcft it to any man that will debate It with me: And what ? Muft we therefore believe Free tv.U ? I think not j ( Bradwitrdine ^nd Gibieufzrc not yetanfwered) Pe/c^-tels us many things arc hard tobe underftood, cwtn in Pauls Epiftlcs, which the ignorant and unlearned wrcft to their «wn deftiu£tion. And yet they are truths for all that. Do not therefore caft away a Ttutb^ becaufc difficult, but ftudy the more.
Fofitim III.
"IF never fo clear Evidence of Truth be produced, It will ftillbe dark to them that arc uncapable of difcerning it. It is one thing to bring full evidence and proof, and another thing to make people apprehend and undetftand it. We may do the one^ but God onely can do the other. 1 perceive moli people think, that when ihey come withaQueftion toa man, we mult prefently give them an anfwer which may make the Cafe plain to them } and if we could create undeiftindings in them, itispoffiblc we might fatlsfic them. They think they are not fo filly and unreafonable as wc would make them God doth not reveal his truth enely or chiefly to the learned ; They have the teaching of the Spirit as well as we. But alas, that men fiiould be fo Ignorant againft both Scripture and experience; God changeth the will on a fudden, but he doth not infufe knowledge, cfpecially of difficult points on a fudden. If he do, why arc we commanded to ftudy the Scripture , and meditate on them day and night? Did they ever know any that was fuddenly made fo wife ? except it were only in his own conceit. There are fcveral ages and forms in the School of Chrift. Men reachnot to tfeeundcrftanding of hard points, till after long ftudy and diligence, and acquaintance with T:a h. If you believe not me, believe the Holy Ghoft, Hcb. 5. II, I i, 1 J, 14. Of whom wt have many things to fay, and hard to be uttered^ feeing ye aie dull of hearing j For when for the Time ye ought to be Teachers, y-e have need that one teach you again which be the firft principles of the Oracles of God, and are become fuc!4 as have need of m'ik, and not of itrong meat j For every one that ufeth milk is unikilfuU jn the word of righteoufnefs, for he Is a babe ; But ftrong meat belongcth to them of full age, even thofe who by rcafon of Ule have their fepfesexercired to difccrn both Good and Evil. 1 he plain truth is, this is the very
»? , Cafe
PUi?t Scripture proof of
Cafe of the moft of the godly among us: They are children in knowledge^ and have jnotby longufc their Cenfcs exercifcd in difcerning. Moftof the bcft of you have need to rew Scripture and Books of Controverfie , fcvcn years at Icaft before you will be capable of undcrUandingmoftconcroverfies. O curfed Pride, that will not fuiFcr one Ignorant Godly man of many, to know that he is fo Ignorant. I think 1 had eight years agoe , read fome hundred Books more then moll of yoUj and thought my felf as wife as moll of you , and others though: me wifer, when I now knuw that in many more weighty points then this, I was a very child j and I hope, if 1 lived as much longer, Iftiould hnd out many more wherein I am ignorant now. Ytt do I noc /perfwadc you that this point in queftion Is beyond your reach; I fee it caficr now then ever. I did. But thus, the generality of the godly arc very ignorant: And if you ■deliver the plaineft Evidence of Truth CO thclgnorant, it will not nuke it plain to them. You may think you can underftand plain Scripture or Rcafon if ycuhearit; but you cannot : O that Pride would let men know^ that they cannot. Read the jplaineft XeQure of Geometry or Arithmetick to one of you, and you cannot underftand it." Read the Grammec to a boy in the Primmer, and he underftandeth never a word you fay i when another perceiveth it all very plain and eafie. If plain teaching a truth could make every one prefcntly underfland it, then the boys in the Primmet might be the next day in their Greek when they hear a plain Greek Ledurc. But knowledge will notbehad foeafily : Therefore I expeft noc thitthemore filly ignorant proftflbrs fhould apprehend the Truth, though I deliver ic never fo plainly and evidently. Ocher- wife one man (hould know as much as another, and all as much as their Teachers, fee^ in^ they all hear and read the fame word of God.
^ofition. IV.
WHen the Cafeis fo difficult that we cannot attain to aclearncrs and certainty, we muft follow the more probable way. Now whether It be likelier that Chrift would have Infants of Believers to be admitted Church-membersjand fo Baptized, or to be (hut out, I hope I (hall make plain enough before I have done.
Vofnion V.
TEnder-confcIenccd ChrHlians will not beralh and venturous in changing their judgement j They know errors to be dangerous fins ; and therefore are afraid left they (hould be enfnared. They will therefore wait, and pray, and enquire of all that are like to enform them_, and read all the Books they can get that will help them before they will venture. Do not fay, you cannot have while, except you will venture your fouls to fpare you time and labour. Do not fay,you cannot underftand Booksi for then you cannot underftand words, nor theftateofthe controverlie j and will you venture before yon underftand what you do ? If any of you have taken up this opinion, and have not read and ftudlcdMr.Coi'^ef, Ux.Chutch, and other the chief Bookstand been able ( at left to himfelf ^ to confute them, you have but difcovercd a feared confcience, which either taketh error for no fin, or elfe dare venture on fin without fear, and have tbetrayed yonr own fouls by your lazincfs.
Itffants Church'tnemherfhip andBaptifm.
'Ftfcion VI.
•T^He overthrow ofa mans own former weak grounds, Is not the overthrow of the Truth which ha held. I fhall here dlfcorer to you a moft frequent caufe of mens falling into errors. Almoft all men in the beginning do receive many Truths upon weak or falfe grounds, and fo hold them a long time. Now fome men when by others arguaientJ,or their own fludies ihey are beaten «-ut of their old arguments,-do prcfently fufpcft the caufe it felf } as a man that leans on a broken ftafFejWho falls when it breaks^ fo do they let fall the Truth with their own weak grounds j when alas there are fat ber.. ter grounds which they v/ere not aware of. I am perfwaded that there is few among you that did ever receive the Dcftrine of Infant- Baptifm on thebeft grounds and argu- ments j and then when you are driven ofFyour old conceits, you fondly imagine the truth hath no better fupport thcnthoie. I dare fay, by M,T. his Books^ that this is his own Cafe.
Portion VII,
HTHe overthrow of other mens weak argumentsj is nowcakingof the Truth which they maintain : 1 C3r^not deny but fome Divines have argued weakly for Infant Baptifm, and ufed fome unfit Phrafcs,and brought fome mifapplyed Scriptures ; Now it is eafie to write three or four Books againftrhefe, and feem to triumph, and yet the caufe to be no whit fhaken. Some filly people think when they hear an impertinent T ext put by, or fuch or fuch a man anfweredj that all is dore j when it may be all the moft plainScriprurcs and beft ai guments have never been anfwered with fence or reafon.
Pofiion VIIT.
ONe found Argument is enough to prove any thing true,if there were never another, ihd if all the relt fave that one were confuted. Fallhood hath no one found Argir. mmt from Scripture or Reafon to defend it. It is not number but weight that mutl <arry it.Thcreforc I refolve not to heap up trany.V. hat if all the Texts were put by thac are brought fave one? Is not that enough ? There muft be two witncfles witli menj Buc Ciods fingle witnefs is as good as ten thou(and. I fpake not this as if I had not many, . but to reftifie the ignorant in their fond conceits.
P eft Ion I X,
•THe former and prefent xruftoms, of the holyeft Saints and Churches, flrouldbcof
great weight wi:h humble moderate Chriltians in cafes controverted and beyond
their reach. VVhatfoevcr Af '. T. may pretend among the fimple,! Ihall eafily prove, that
Infant- Baptifm was ufed in the Church as nij^h to the Apoftles days as there is any fuf"
ficicntHiltory ex:an: to inform u^Jand that the deferring of Baptifm came in with the
reft of Popery jUpon Popi.Ti or heretical grounds. And ever fincc the Reformation, who ' u L.-' i.iL .t.- 1..J -f.i n i<..<.^.j ._ J I 1.. j-...,«_ .
^oklG».
Plain Scriptt^refroafcf
Pofuion X.
p Vi^ent confcqiicnccs or arguments drawn by Reafon from Scripture, are as true proof as the very cxprefs words of a Text. If you have the words without the mean- ing and reafon, ypu have no proof 5 fothe Devil ufed them to Chrift. And if you have the meaning and reafon, you have enough for evidence. Words are but to cxprefs the fence. God writeth his Laws to Reafonablc creatures, and without Reafon they can make no nfe ofic; Reafon is the cffcnce of the foul. He that hath it not ia fa. culty, is not a man : And he that hath not the ufc of it, is a mad man, or afleep, or in feme Apoplexie,or the like difeaft j would It not make a mm pity fuch fenfl^fs igno" tjnt wretches, that will call for fxp-efs words (Jf Scripture, when ihcy have the Evi- dent confequcnts or fence ? Is Scrip'urc-Reafon, no Scripture? lflp;ove, That all Church-mean^ecsmuft be admitted by Baptifm , and then prove that In^nts are Church- members i Is not this as much as to prove, they muft be Baptized? Butthcfe men are not to be rcafoned with, for it Is Reafon they dlfclaim > we mart not difpute with them; for difputing is Reafoning ; If they will once Renounce Reafon, then they are brute beafts i and who will go to plead with a beaft? It is reafon that difFtren- ceth ;(^man from a bead .- But yn I may a little Queftion with them, and I will defire them to refolve me in thefc two points } i. Do you think the Lord Jefut knew a good argument, orthe right way ofdifpatlng ? Why, how did he prove the Refurredion to the Sadduccs ? From that Text, lam the God ofAhrahaf»j and oflfaaCy and ofjacobl Would not one of th"fe.men, if they had flood by, have chidden Chrift for this argu- ment, and have faid. Give us a Ttxr that faith, the dead fliall rife ? What's this to the Refurredion, that God is the God of Abraham? Would not one of thefe men have reported abroad that Chrift was not able to confute the ffaffiiwcw , or to bring any Scripture for his Dodrine ? x What fay you ? will you allow of fuch an argument foe Infant-Baptifm as Chrift here brings for the Refuirettion ? will youconfefs it to bea fufficient Scripture proof.? Nay, If I bring many Scriptures for that one which Chrift brought ? and every one of them more plain and dired ? Chrift knew bet er then youhowtomakeufeof Scripture, I (hall think it no weak arguing which is like to his ; nor fhall I take my lelf to be out of the way while I follow him. How many confe- quences muft here be to prove the Refurredion from this Text? i. If God be the (jodoi Abraham, then it will follow that i4i>-<*fea/» in foul is living, z. This is not diredly proved from this Text, but another principle muft betaken in to fupport Ir, ^'/c?^ That God is not the God of the dead but of the living. Thefe men would have thought this no proving. 5 , if Abrahams foul be 1 iving, then his body muft needs be raifed 4. If Akaharrs body fhall rife, then there is a Refurredion, and others alfolhali arife. By all thefe confcquences muft the Refurredion hence be proved •• And yet I dare fay this was currant Scripture-proof. Now I fliall go yet a neerer way to work, and prove to you. That i. It is the will of God that fome Infants (hould be Baptized, 2.. That it is the Will of God thatnll Infants of Believers ordinarily fhould be bap- tized. But before 1 come to thefe, I will firft prove to you thefe three Propofic ions. 1. That the Qaeftion of Infant- Baptifm is of greater difficulty then many on both fides will acknowledge. 2. That initfelfconfidered, it is of lefs moment then many onboth fides do imagine, t,. Yet the grcainds on which it is ordinarily dcnyed* and the errors that are the ground of this their denyal^ are of great momen:.
CHAP.
Infants Church-memher^i't^ andBaptifm.
CHAP. II.
iHat it IS a Queftion of difficultyjls evident from thefetwo grounds^ I. Pofitives about wcrflup which are mentioned in Scripture but fparingly and darkly, muft needs be difficult} But the point in Queftion is fuch ; therefore difficult. Allthetalkanddifputing in ihe world, will not make that eafie which God hath left obfcure. z. Thofe points which the moft learnedj godly, impartial Divines cannot agree in after all their writing, difputlng, ftudying and praying, are certainly no eafie points. But this is fuch ; therefore net eafic. Confidence and felf- conceited- nefs may make many think it eaficr then it is, and fpecially when they know not what may be faid againft them. But if it be fo eafie, why did you not fee into it foo- ner ? and why cannot fo many humble, godly, learned men difcern it ? Mr. T. hath told me that it is an eafie point : and in anlwer to this argument, he faid, That the rcafon why all thefe Divines did not difcern it, was their wilfulncfs or negligence 5 and gave inftance in the LHthcran Confubftantiation. But I pray God never to fuf- fer me fo far to overlive my hnmility and modefly, and confcicncioufnefs, as to fay^ that almoft all theDivincs on earth,cxcept my felf,are through wilfulnefs or negligence. Ignorant of thofe eafic things which I underftand. I confefs heartily that prejudice may do wonders in this kind. But that almoft all the humble, godly^ learned men in the world (hould be fo overcome by it in an eafie controverfie, who are fo Incomparably beyond A/<-.T. and me in holinefs, hcavenlinefs, humility and underftanding ('very many of them ) I fhould tremble to pafs fo high a cenfurc.
Yet that you mittake me not, let me add this caution ; Though it be difficult, yet far from that extrcam difficulty as fome other points are ; And alfo that the grounds of It are very eafie and plain, though to many it be difficult to difcern how it is from thofe grounds inferred. And therefore, though fome few learned and godly and humble men do douht of itj yet In the whole known Chriftian part of the world there ij but few. And though it be difficult to yong ftudents, as it was about eight or nine years ago to my felf : yet to thofe that have d ived into the true ftare of the controverfie, it is far more eafie. I do not therefore by the difficulty difcourage you from ftudying it, buc would take you off from hafty conclufions, and let you know that you may think yoti know all when you know but little. And for Mi.T- 1 cannot choofe but obferve that If he think it ii wilfulnefs or negligence that keeps others from being Anabaptifts, then it feems that it was thefe that kept him from it folong till of late years ; ( for fure he will not fay that he was then more fincerc then all his brethren, though he may be now. ) And if he had no better prefervatives againft Anabaptiftry fo long then wilfuinefs and negligtnce, it is little wonder to me that he is now revolted: for indeed (it fo) he was virtually one before.
-• "\/1 Y Second Condufion was,That this controverfie in it felf confidered,is of lefs
'•"-moment then many on both fides imagine. Here i. Let Let us fee what men
judge of it.i.WbaiGod judgethjand then I ftiall leave you to judge of this Condufion,
^ i.Qn
I o Plain Scripture frofif of
I. On the one fide Tome think it no Icfs then Haerefic to deny Infant-Bap- tUm. and to require Re-bap:izing. Not that the generality of foSer Divinesdo fa For though fome of them do number Anabaptifts among Hxreticksj yet they mean not that they are fo for the meer denyal of Baptifm to Infants, but for the reft of the errors which almcft do ever accompany it '• On the other fide, many that arc for Rc- baprizing. or a^ainft Infant biptifm, do think it a nutter of fo high moment, that whofoever is nut Baptized at age^ you may not hear them preach, nor receive the lords Sapper from themj nor with them> nor be of the fame Church with them, no nor pray wi:h them in their Families. O what abundance of my own acquaintance are of this opinion ! Left you fhould think I wrong them, I had a difputc abouc this very point in Ctfz^f/zr/)^, withoncofthelearncdft and ableft Anabaptifts in Eng- land^ Mr, Bcn\amin Coxe ('that I have met with) Whether it be lawful to hear a Minifternot Baptized at age; And I have one of his papers yet to fhew (for we agreed to manage it at laft by writing: but to my anfwer I could never procure hJ&. Reply. I pray God none of you come to this height your felves. Mr.T. hath confeffed to me that he did preach to you in publike, £That to argue for Infant-Baptilm from Cir- cumcifion, as Mr, Martial doth, is Hatrefie, and one of the firft condemned Ha:- refies in the Church] fo then Mr. AT^^ria/ is an Ha^retick with him, and all the Di- vines in the world that go his way. Thefe arc the men that fo ftormed at others for cal- ling fome groifer diffcnters [Haereticks] yea, and which is much more (if my notary fail not, and a multitude of hearers be not miftaken^ Mr, T. faid, That in this he hath told them the Truth of God, which if they obey not, [their blood will lie on their own heads.] Itfeems then he thinks it a matter that mens blood is like to be fpilt for : by which I conceive he means no lefs then their damnation. And if fo, then it ra uft needs be a fundamental point and duty, of abfolute neccflity to falvation 3 or elfe he is fure that his hearers diffent is through meer obftinacy and wilfulnefs .* but this (for all his means to convince them) he will fure never have the face to affirm j for then he muft cemmit no lower a fin, then the challenging of Gods peculiar pre- rogative, (to know mens hearts) and the afcending his Throne (to judgement for their thoughts:) therefore it feemeth evident to me, that Mr. T. doth take this for a fun- damental point, which the falvation or damnation of men doth neceflarily depend on ; or what he means to fay [Their blood be on their own heads] I know not. And yet he blames the Papifts for making Baptifm of neceflity to falvation : and therefore I know not what he would here fix on. But it is the property of error to contradift it felf, as well as the Truth.
Well, but doth God lay fo great a ftrefs on this point ? To them that have read our Divines againftthe Papifts on this point, I need to fay nothing. Onelythis briefly, t. It wastheimperfedionofthcold Law, thatitconfifted fo much of Cere- monials, a. Some of its abolilhed ceremonies were as the Apoftlecals h, Heb 9. 10. Sia.^o£9i( ^oLTiJK^ixon in divers Baptifmes, or wadiings, and carnal Ordinances. . 3, God is a Spirit, and chofeth fpriritual worfliippers. 4. One main excellency of the Gofpel above the Law is^ That it placeth lefs in externals, and freeth Believers from the Ceromonial Yoak \ Therefore fure it layeth not our falvation now upon Cere- monies. 5. Even when the worfhip was fo much in Ceremonies in the time of the Lawj yetthendid God dif- regard them in comparifon of Mcrals. Therefore he cals them vain oblations, and tels them, he will have mercy and not facrifice. &e. Much more now. 6, The Gofpel having taken down Ceremonies, and fet up but two a- new , which we call Sacraments, though as duties they are all great which Scrip- mt€ enjoyneth, and the thing fignifiedby ihcmisthc foundation icfclf, yet com- paratively
Infants Church- member Jhiff and B aptifm, % i
paratively they muft needs bcthcfmalleft parts of fubilamial worfiiip, confidere<f as in themfelvesj feeing the Gofpel cxcellcth in intro.iucing fpu it nnd life, inficad of Ceremony and Letter. 7. Even In ceremonious times, God would difpenfe with the great Ceremonies , when they were^ againft bodily welfare , in ffveral cafes; Thougk he threatned that the uncircumciied (liould be cut cfF, yet inthe wildemefs forty years together bccaufe of their travel , God did forbear the whole Nation in this Ordinance : and doth he lay more upon Baptifm now ? 8. Mark further the language of the New Tcftamcnt, i Tim. 4. 8, Bodily excrcifc profircth little ; Yet fome bodily cxerclfe was a duty, 1 Cor .7.19- Circumciljon is nothing,and unciicumcilion Is nothing, but the keeping the Commandments of God. And yetuncircumcifion tlien was a duty, SoG;?/. y,ii tj?j6. Though P.7«i tcftifies to them, that if they were circumcifed^ Chriftihouldprofit them nothing, and they were dcbtcrs to the whole Xaw : yet he tels them, That in Chrift Jefus neithtr circumcifion availcth any thing, noruncircumciiion ( r. e, of thtmfelves) but Faith which worketh by love. So Col-i'ii. Rom. 1. i'^t^9' He Jsnot a Jew whichisoneoutwardry, nor is that cir* cumcilion which is outward in the flcfli, but he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and Circumcifion is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter, &c. See how mean- ly the Gofpel fpeaketh of ail meer external things. And when P4«/ faw their divili- om Sit Coantbi he thanks God that he Baptized none of them C fave fome few j ^ foi- Chrift fent him not to Baptlic, but to preach the Gofpel. Bu: did not God fend him at all to baptize ? Yes i for I. Elfe he had finned in baptizingany, 2. ThcApoftlcs were fent to preach and baptitc, Mat. 28. and lie wasan Apoftle. But this was a fmall part of his work, in comparifon of preaching, and therefore not named to him at his particular fending, and therefore for the molt part he left ittoo:hersto baptize them, though he by preaching converted them, and was their Father, 1 Cor. i- 14, 17. C^iCoi. 4 If. Therefore Chrift baptized none himfclf, though lie would preach to one filly woman, Joh.^-x. The Papifts objed efpecially two texts, ^arA6.\6. He that believeth and is baptizcd,QialI be fayed. But it faith only. He that believeth nor, is condemned} not, he that is not baptized. Heb.6. j. The Doftrincof Baptifras is ca'lcd one of the foundations. Anfiv. i. That is for its precedency in order of time, bccaufe it is firft laid, and net becaufe it beareth up the building Every ftone under the Sill fupports not the houfe. J. Gut the right anfwerto this, and 3I 'i)ther the like is this ■• When Baptifm is fo extolled, it is the thing fignified by B.iptifm, and done in it, and given by it, which is chiefly meant, and not the meer external wafhing t If we engage faitlifully to Chrift without that w.iOiing, itbiingeth thofe excellencies. Therefore I Pct-l.^i. when hehad fpokcof I'apiifm faving, left they fliouldmiftake, he addvth, not the putting away the filth of the Belh, but the anfwer of a good confci- ence towards Godj As faith is faid to Juftifie, when the thing chiefly intended ii Chrift believed in.
Yet all this extenuates hot their fin on the other extream, who are above both this and all Ordinances. All Chrifts commands muft be obeyed, both great and fmal, fo far as we know them.
But this moft evidently you may gather hence, that if this be fo difficult, and yet comparatively fo final a point : then certainly thofe Chriftiansthat make it a chief part of theit ftudy and conference, and lay ou: at leaft one half of ihcir z.al about it, are fuvc deluded by the dcTil i and if thty were In the truth hereliij yet fure that futh is a fnarc to them, and like to prove the occafion of their mine. Ihcy will fay That all truths are precious , and none to be fet light by , or accounted fixall 5 TruCj Who knows not that .? But though none be tmallabfolutely, yet man^ arc ve-
C a ry
12
Platri Scripture Proof of
jy fmall in comparifon of gieaterior clfc our Creed mutt be as big as the Bible. Tiuths are exceeding many, and our duty very large and weighty ; cur capacity is fmall to uiuicrrtand themj and our time lliort to ftudy and praftice them. Preachers that ftudy cli their lives, do yet know but very little, in comparilon cf all that which they are ig,- rorancof. '1 hercforc thegrca-.cft Truths and dutics-muft be firli madefurcof, and mott ofour time btttowed inthem. Some Truths are of flat neccflity to falvation, fo arenot alienor m< ft, nor bat few; The moft neceffary, God hath made moft plain j He hath not hang'd mens falvation upon difficult fmall controverted points^which poor people are utterly unable to reach. When men are certain that after all their Itudy. tiiiy ihall leave mcft Truths unknown, is it their wifdom to choofc out the fmalleft ? and leave the greateft ? or is not this a plain betjaying of their own fouls ? I dare fay, that ordinarily if you lay out but the hundrcth part of your tlme^ your ftudy, your talk, or ycur zeal upon this Qutftion either for or againft it, that you will never be able to juftifieit J perhapsif Ifaidthethcu{and part. For as there are a multitude of other Tru:hs and duties to be firft learned, fo lome one of thofe may be of a hundred times more moment, and may require a hundred times more of your time, and ftudy, and zeal. How fev/<lid I ever meet with who are the eager difputers about Baptifm and fuchlikcj that arc able to give a rational account of the great doftrincs of faith ? cr that are acquainted with the daily pradic€ of a proBtable and heavenly life, or with thatconftantpains that isneceffary for mortifying their flefli, for watching over their hearts and ways, and for walking with God ? Nay how evidently dothefc difputtngs dtftroy all this, and eat out the very life and power of Godlinefs ? As if they were the greateft plague and mifchief in the Church,
3. "KA Y next Propofitlon is this ; Though the peint of Infant-Baptlfm becompa- ■'• '^•'-ratively of Itfs moment then many judge j Yet the grounds on which it ftan- dcth, and which ufually are denyed by thofe that deny It, are of very great moment ; And therefore though the bare denying of water to Jnfants be no great or dangerous frror in it felf conlidercd; yetas itconfiftethof all itsparts, it is yciygreat. Idontt now fpeak of all or any of thofe other errors which the Icveral forts of Anabaptifts- do hold, butoncly this about denying the grounds of Infant- Baptifm. For example j They all (that ever I fpoke with^ do deny all Infants their McmberihipanJ room in the Vifible Church 5 and that is another matter then to deny them Water. They de- ny them ( ufualfy ) any part in the Covenant of God ; ( except when they fpcak like Antinomiansof the abfoluteCovenat , calling Gods Elcdion, cr hisdifcovery of an Eleftion in general [his Covenant 5 ] and this no parent in the world can fay that his Child hath Intereft in , as themfelves will confcfs ) Alfo they deny the very nitural intereft which parents have in their children, to make Covenants ia their name and behalf. They call that common and andean ( at leaft confcqucntially J ivhich God hath made and ca/led holy. They give us a new model of the vifible Churchof their own making in the very nvaterialsot it. 1 hey provoke Chrift to an- ger in forbidding children to be brought to him into his Chuich. Ihcy repeal acon-v fiderablepart of the Old Teftament, which they can never prove that God hath re- peild i . and what bclongech: to them, that add to thc.Word, or take from ir, you know. They take down the A.fgumcnts which patents fliould iife to prove the JivftU fifation and lalvation of their Children. They leave parents no true ground to be- lieve or Hope for the faiy^tion.of their Children which dye in Infancy ][^ ac^rding to ^
Irffants Church-rnemberfhif and Baptifm* 1 3
the received definitions of Faith and Hope J For they deny them any promife of fal- vation j and Faith and Hope go upon the ground of the Promife ; 1 hey deny them entrance into the vifible Church, which is far wider then the invilible, and thcrcfoi e leave but little hope that they fliould be admitted into Heaven ( according to their Dodrine ) where are none but real Saints , when they may not be admitted into the Ghu'ch, which alfo containcth many workers ofiniquityj^f^^i5.4i. They (hut them out of the Houfe of God ; They leave them as much out of the Church as the Children of Turks and Pagans ; They make the time of the Law to be incomparably more full of GiacetoChildrenthcH the times of the Gofpel J They makethe Jews in this rc- fpeft to be exceeding lofers by Chrifts coming, even thofe Jews that believed in him ; 'I hey make God to un- Church and dif-franchife men before they have forfaken him } and to punilh fome for the (ins of others, when they abhorred and renounced thofe (insj They make God onfaithful in his Covenant, and to break Covenant with thofe thac kept Covenant with him ; They make God more prone far to feverity then to mercy, and to fliew more wrath againft the Infants of the wicked, then mercy to the Infants of his Saincs j They make even the very Gentiles themlelves to be in a far worfe ftate, in refpeft of their Children, then they were in the time of ihc Law , when the Gentiles were ftrangers and Dogs. They exceedingly derogate from the free Grace of the Gof- pel, re(training and confining its unfpeakablc Riches ; They deny our Children thofe
them out of the Church and Houfe of God, and out of his Promifes and Covenant, and the priviledgcs that accompany them 5 and moft ungratefully deny , rej^ft and plead againft the mercies that Cht ill. hatli-purchafed for their Children, and made over to them.
It bccometh not a difputam peremptorily to conclude againft his advcr&ry before proof; But this I may fay, That in my judgement they are truly guilty of all this, with- out any uncharitable or parcial cenUn ing thcm,or any forced wrefting of their Ipccches^ And if God willjl lliall prove all thcfe to you particularly i and till then 1 dtlirc ycut patience '■> and that you will not conclude that 1 wrong them tdl you hear my proofs.
IComc now to prove my firft Propofition, tv;;^ [Tkn it is the mil of God that fame ■ Infants jhonldbc Bnpti-Kcd'] or l'[ bjt fii//-,c InPnUs onglu. to bchniit'i-i^cd'] And here Ice me give ycu notice, that 1 intend not to meddle much with thofe Arguments thit 0- thers have already fully managed, feeing that would be but to fpend time and labouir in vain; you may read.thtmin many Books j and though I confefs few have in - ■ proved them as they might have done, or managed them in the moft forcible way: vec 1 beli(ve a judicious deliberate, impartial Reader will foon difcern, that the An- fwers fo much boafted of, arc mccrly frivolous ; A mulriiude there are in Latine that were never anfwercd that lean learn. And To are there many in Englin>, efpccialiy Mr. Cobbct^ which I conjedurc will ner,.r be fatisfadorily Anfwered. 1 (hail there- fore pais over moft th.it thty havefaid, fuppofing thatnoneof you dare venture unon novelty, till you have firft read, and well weighed at leaft the chief Atuhorsand A?- gumtnts already in Ptin:. And though I (lull ule many of theScripturepn.ct's ih,u others do make ufe of, yet it flull be in another way.,^ and to another end ; I vail not i^.^ad to ule many Aroumems, but latlvT drive home a few i And Indctd vyuc it not;
i^ Plain Scripture proof of
that I muft not orerpafs that which my Tcxc affordeth, I would fpend all my time up- on one only, which is drawn from the A/fr^;//»; of Infants Church memberfhip j as being that which doth moft throughly convince my owti judgement: or at leaft but one more, which is drawn from the duty of their fclemn Engagement to God. But though 1 refolve to ftand moft on thefe, yet I muft begin with this in my Text.
For the Explication of the Text, I will fpare time and labour, and fland to moft of that which Mr.T, hath given you already. 1 fay as he, that the verb ua^TiJcm't figni- fieth iMal^eye Difciplcs'] and Baptizing is the Aft, or Sign of their folemn admiffionr As the word [.Difciple'] fignifieth i . Or'one that is a Difciple incompleat, not yet fo- Icmnly joyned to the Church; z. Or one that Is a Difciple compleat, and folcmnly joyned or entered j So muft there be two waycs of making them fo, according to the laid difference ; As a King is firft King by birthri^r,or Covenanr,or the likej but yet incompletely, till he be folemny Crowned and irithrcned j In the former fence it is his Birthright that makes him King(vvhich ;et receivethall its Power from fome foregoing more potent CaufCjas the donation of God, or the peopk*s choice or covenant; ) in the latter fence, h is his Coronation that makes him King j Or as a man and woman are truly manyed by private Covenant j but yet it is not compleat till the legal conjunfti. on or folemnizing j fo it is here ; 3 hey are firft made Difciples, and then folemnly admitted, entred, or lifted by Baptifm^and fo made more compleatly Difciples. Before I come to Argue, I will briefly help yoa to underiland I •What is meant by aDifciplei 2, What it is thatmaketh a Difciple.
1. Bcfides what is faid already, you muft under ftand that one may be called a Dlf^ ciple I. In a larger fence, Relatively j as being of the number of thofc that belong roChrift, as M after and King of the Church, and dcftinated or devoted to his over- fight and rule,and Teaching for the future : Thus Believers 'nfants arc Difciples ; Of which I fliall give you the proofs anon. z. Sometime the word is taken in a narrower fence, for thofe who are aftually Learners. But commonly applyed to men at age, It includcthboth the Relation and Subordination, and alio ASual learning, but the former principally ; but applyed to Infants, it inten^th the Relation as prefent, and aftuall learning as one end of it, intended for the future.
2. To the making of a Difciple there muft concur, i. Somewhat properly caufal. I.e. EffcUlve J 1. Somewhat Conditional. The former Is Gods part, the latter mans. It is Chrift that maketh himfelf Difdplis j in rega-d of the Form of a Difciple, which is Relative, {vIt^ His Relation to the Mafter of the Church before mentioned^ fo Chrift maketh Difciples direftly by his Grant, Gift, or Promlfe in his Law, or Covenant. John 1. 1 1. It is faid of Believers at age that To tUem th.it Receive htm hcgiveth power to become the Sons of God. To be Gods Tons is a Relative Priviledgc i What is the caufc of this ? Why ihe Text tels youj It is Chrifts Gift 3 he giveth them P(Jwer,or Privi- Icdge, cr Title to it ; And how doth he give this ? Not by a voice from Heaven, but by his Laws, or written Promife, or Grant, which containeth all mens Legal Titles, and according to which their Titles muft be trycd at Judgement.
But in regard of the matter of a Difciple, God beftoweth it in a Natural way •* for it is nothing but our Being, i. The condition of Difciplcfhip, is what pleafcs the free Lawgiver to make. If he had enaftcd that of Stones fiiould be made Children or Difciples to him, it Ihould have been fo. But the condition which he rtqulreth, is but the Confent of every man a: age for himfelf, and of Parents for themlelves and their Children, that they dedicate, give up, or enter themfelves under him as the only Ma** fter for them and their Children ; and upon this condition he will take them and their Children fo devoted for his DJiciples. All this Hull be proved anon. In a word; the
Parents
Infants Chttrch'Wemberjhip and Baptifm,
15
Parents l^alth is the condition for himfelf and liis Infants. The caufes of this conditi" oncfDifciplefliip* or Church^memberfhip, may improperly be called the caufes of our Difciple(hlp It felf; but properly Chrlft by his Law, or Covenant-gram is the only caufc tfficient. We do not therefore fay, that the Faith of the Parent is the caufc either of his own, or his Childs priTiledge of Church-member(hip, no more then of their JuftlficatioQj or Salvation, bat only the condition j And when we fay that Children are bom Chriftians, or Dlfclples, we do not make their Nature or birth priviledge any caufe of it but Gods gift is the caufcj and that they be born of Believing Parents,Js buc [to be thote perfons whom the Law of Chrift judgeth to have Intcreft in the Conditi- on, and fo in the Priviledge.]
CHAP. III.
Comenow to my fiAt Argument,which (from the Text) Is this.
All that an Cbafts Difciples^Oi-dinarily ought te be Bapti^cdiBut fomc Infants are chnjls Difciples j Therefore I ome Infants ordinarily ou^ht to be Bapti-^d.
By [Difciples] in both Propofitions [ mean as in the Text .* Thole that arc c/f /are, or incomplcatly Difciples, as a Souldier not yet lifted, or a King not yet Crowned. I put in the word [ordinarily] becaufe there may fall out feveral Cafes wherein God will difpenfe with external Baptifm to Yong or Oldjas he did with Circumcifion 10 the Jews Children forty years in the Wildernefs. Morals natural take place of Po(i- tives. God will have Mercy rather then Sacrifi:e-
The Major Propolicion is evident in the Textj from the conJundion of thetwo Commands: Go m^ilic me Difciples^ B.ipti^'vgthcm. Ifany fliall be fo quarrelfomc againft the plain Text, as to fay, It Is not all Difciples that they were commanded to baptize, but only all that were made Difciples^ and this Making was only by Teaching; I anfwer ; i If I prove Infants Difciples,! fure prove thereby that they were Made fo, or elfe they had never been fo- 2. r y Teaching, the Parents and Children were both made Difciples : the Parents Dircftly,the Infants Remotely, or Mediatly : If they be proved once ro be Difciples, it will cahly follow it is by this way. He that converteth the Parent, makcth both him and his Infant Difciples incompleat, or in Title ; This therefore lies on the p:oof of the Minor. 5. But I would fay more to this., but that CMr. T. (as I underftand) hath in his Sermons proftfled. That if we will prove that Infants are thrifts Difciples, he will acknowledge that they ought to be Baptized i the like he granted to me ; and well he may.
That Infans are Chrifts Difciples, and fo called by the Holy Ghoft, Is moft evi- dent :o any that will not grofly pervert the Text, or overlook it, \n AH. 15. 10, nhy tempt yc God, to put a yoke on the mil,' of the Difciples^ trhich neither our Fathers nor rvc "cvcre able to be.ir ? Now who were thefe Difciples ? No doubt thofe on whom the falfc Teachers would have laid the yoke. And what was that yoke .? It is plain it was CircutDciUon.as neceflaryand as engaging them to keep the Law. And whom would they have pcrfwaded thus to be Citcumcifed ? Why both the Parents and Children in that Age, and only the Children in all following Ages ordinarily. So that thus I sr- gue 5 Thofe on whofe necks the falfe Teachers vvculd b:ve laid this yoke were Difci- ples J Bu: fomC; yu mcft of ihofe were Infants, on whofc necks they would ha^« laid
this
r 6 Plain Scripture proof of
this yoke-, Therefore fomc Infants are difcipies and fo called kere. The Major is plain in the Text. If any will fay. That it is not All, but foraeof thofeon whom they would have laid the Yoak, that are here called Difciples, that is, only them at Agej I anfwcr, Then it is but fomc oncly whofc CircumcifioQ the Apoftle and the Sy- nod doth conclude againft, that is, thole of Age J For he fpeaksagiinft layiog the Yoakcn none but Difciples } And then for any thing the Apollle faich, or this Sy- nod, all Infants might be Circumcifed ftill J which is amoft giofsabfurdity ; when the very bufinefs of this Synod was to Decree againft the neceirity of Circumcifion and the Law. What is further Replycd to this, 1 fliall meet wich anon. But the Mi- nor is it that Mr. T. denyeth ; He faich, it was not on th: neck of Infants that they would have put the Yoak. 1 prove it was the Infants alfo, thus j If it were In- fants alfo whom the falfe Teachers would hive had to be Circumcifed as neceflary, and as engaging to Afo/f J Law, then it wai Infants alfo on whom they would have laid the Yoak •, But it was Infants alfo whom, they would have had circumcifed ,&c. Therefore &c. The Antecedent is undeniable, [t'i^. That it was Infants alfo tbac they would have had Circumcifed] inv.r. i except ye be Civcumcifed after the manner of Mofes ye cannot be faved. If they would have had them Cii cumifed after the manner oiMofcs, then they would have Infants alfo Circumcifed ; But they would have had them Circumcifed after the manner of Mifes j therefore Infants alfo. For zftctthcxMnmrcf Mofesj Mihz Profefytes Children (hould be Circumcifed as well as they ; and ever after, all their Pofterity at eight days old. But it is the confe- quence that Mr. T. denyeth j for he faith , It is not Circumcifion , as neceflary, and as engaging to ilofes Law, which was the Yoak , but it was the DoSrinc of thofc Teachers. But was Ai/-. T. of this mind when he wrote thefe words > exim.p, loi. [Now I pray yon what was this Yoak. (Aftsiy, lo) but Cicumcifion as your fcif declare p. J 9. and all the legal Ceremonies which were great prlviledges to the Jews ? but yet to us it is a priviledge that we are freed from them j and if it be a priviledge to be free from Circumcifion, &c.]But I fliall provetothofe that are willing roknow the truth, that it was Circumcifion as neceflary and engaging to Mofcs LaWf that was that Yoak.
I. The Text faith fo three times over, vcrf.^. They taught the brethren. Ex- cept ye be Circumcifed after the manner of A/o/f J, ye cannot be faved ? And vcrf. 5. They taught. It was needful to Circumcife them, and to command them to keep the Xzvf of Mofcs •, Andncrf.^^.izying^ Ye muft be Circumcifed and keep the Law.
:. Itappearcthevldently from the fame vcrf. lo. the Yoak which neither our Fa- thers nor we were able to bear ; That which neither their Fathers nor they were able to benr, was the Yoak there meant : But it was Circumcifion as neceflary and engaging to keep the Law, and not the Doftrine of thefe falfe Apoftles, which their Fathers and they were not able to bear j therefore Sec. The Major is in the Text ; The Minor is plain ; i. Inthat there is no mention in the Scripture of the Fathers being foburthcned with that falfe Dodrine j but there is mention enough of their being bu'thened with the Law and Circumcifion as engaging to it. 2. It was true and good doctrine befoie Chrift, which thtfe falfe Apoftles taught, v'it:^, That except they were Circumcifed and kept the Law, they could not be faved ; I mean as to the Jews it was true ffor I will not now meddle with that gteat Controvcrfie, Whether the Gentiles were bound to keep Mtf/fi' Law: I know what Cj,oiim^ Frant^tuSy &c. fay on one fide, and C/o,')/)f?;t///-^/«i and many more on the other) But Wr, 7'. faith, it was the Pharifecs doftrinc of being juftified by the Law, which was the Yoak, But I anfwer, J. The PhaFifets were not cffo long Continuance, as to be the burthen of the
Fathers
Infants church- member jhif and Baptifm, i y
Fachers by their doftrine. i. Thcfe in the Text taught but a neceflity that thofe who Bdieved in C hrift Chould be Circumcifed and keep the Law i fo did not the Pharifees;
It Thedodrine is no further a Yoakthenas it hath reference to Circumcifion and keeping the Law, in praftlce, and as it prevaileth to bring them to the Belief and practice ; therefore it is evident that the Dodrine is not the Yoak j but the Judgement and praftice which that doftrine did teach them ; elfe it would be in the power of men to Yoak and burthen us at their pleafure ; for they can teach fuch faife Dofirine at pleafure ; But till we obey it we are free from the Yoak j therefore the Yoak lieth not in the dodrine, but in the obeying.
4. That which this Synod did decree againft, and Pctcf here fpoke againft, that was the Yoak here meant : But it was Circumcifion as needful and engaging to keep the Law, which this Synod decreed againft, and Pcterhcre fpoke againft/ thercfoic this Circumcifion was the Yoak, The Minor is evident In the three vcyfcs before na- med, and in the whole Chapter- Who dare fay, that this Synod did not decree a- gainft Circumcifion and keeping the Law ? And the Major is as plain •, And yet the very fumm and ftrength of all that i5W/-.r. hath to fay againft this lext, is here, which feems apparently to me to be but a meer cavilling with the plain Scripture. He faith, that the Synod decreed againft Circumcifion but by confcquencc, and not exprcfly ; and that thething they dlredly andascxprefly decreed againft, and Peter fpoke a- gainft, was not the Yoak it felf, but the Putting the Yoak on them, which was the ad of the falfe Teachers In teaching. To which 1 anfwer. i. If this were granted, yet neither diiedly nor confequently do they decree againft the Circumcifing of any but Difciplcs ; and therefore Infants muft needs be part of thofe Difciples. i. But the Text cxpreffcth Adual Circumcifion three times over. 3. It is undeniable in the 28. i^.vcr. that it was matter of their pradlce as diredly as the falfe Apoftles teach- ing, and much more which was here decreed againft. Itfeemed good to the Holy Ghoft and to us, to lay upon you no greater burthen then thefe ncceHary things ; Thac ye abftain from meats offered to Idols, &c. Marke , i. Their pradice is the thing decreeed upon exprcfly, andnot the dodrine of the falfe teachers (though that is im' plyed^ They do not Cay, we decree that they preach fono more j but that you al^ftafrt &c. i. This is it alfo which is here called the [burden] in the fame fence no doubt with that which before was called the Yoak,no greater burthen or yoak< j.Andcanany impartial mans confcicnce tell him that the onely or chief Qucftlon here debated and determined, was, Whether the falfe Apoftles (liould any more preach fuch dodrine? and not rather, Whether the Difciples ought to be Circumcifed and keep the Law of Mofcs ? 4, It was the Church of Am'ioch and not the falfe Teachers that fent to Jcrw p/cwforrcfolution. f. And it was to the Brethren, and not to the falfe Teachers that the Synod did dired their Letters and Decrees.' therefore it was the Difciples pradice that is moiediredly decreed againft (oratleaft as much) then the dodiine of the Teachers. 6- If it were granted as >//•. T. would have it, that it is oncly put- ling on the yoak that is here expcfly decreed againft, and the yoak or pradice it felf but only by confequence, then he would make this Synod fo weak as to leare the mat- ter imperfed and obfcure, which they were to determine exprefly : and perhaps ft might put him hard to it to prove that confequence : For it will not alway follow that what may not betaughr, may not be pradifed, as I could (Tiew in feveral cafes. 7. And me thinks we may be allowed to prove Baptifm of Infant; by confequences, if this Synod affembled of purpofe about Circumcfiion and the Law, did yet leave thcni rothing but confequence againft it.
y. Further, that it was Circumcifion it felf as needful, and engaging to Mofci
D Law
1 8 Plain Smpure Proof of
LsWj which is here mvan:, is plain in G.V. 5.1,1,5. No doubt, eithcrthofe that mif- taugh: the Gal^ilb:a-,-!s were the fame with thclc, or their companions teaching the fame (dottiinc, and therefore p.i/// there dccideth the fame caufe ; and mark what he cals the yoak ; ftand faft in the liberty wherewith Chrift hath made hs free, and be not ctK. tangled again with the Yoak of bondage. Behold I P^w/ fay un:o you, that it ye be Circumcifcdj Chrill (hall profit you nothing. For I teiUfie again to every man that is Circumcifed, that he is a debtor to the whole Law. Is not he wilfull , that yet will Dy 1 that the yoak Js oncly the Dodrincof the falfc teachers, and not Circumcihonas en- gaging to keep the Law ? Well but !Mr. T. hath one more atgumenc for his conctk, and b»t one that I have beard, and that is like the conceit it felf. If (Tiith hcj Putting on the Yoak be onely by teaching, then the yoak it felf is only the Dodrine, and con- fequently it was to be put on none but thofe that could be taught. Anf. I deny both the conftquenccs, and he will never prove tTt^. Fori. By [putting] he conftfl'cth is meant [an endeavour to put] j therefore it muft be more then the bare doftrine j And if by doSrine thty prevail toperfwade the people of the necefiicy of praftice, in fo doing they put on them both the misbelief and the mifprafticc. 1. The later confequence is as falfe ; For he that perfwadcth a parent to Circumcife himfJf and his child, doth as properly put thae burden of Circumclfion on the child as on the pa- rent. Though he teach ooely ttte Parent, yet by teaching the Parent, he puts the bur- den on both. IftheParliamem lay an opprefling taxe, and command only the of- ficers to do it in point ofeiecution, yetthey layit onall. If they make a Law that you flujl take your children and go out of the Land 3 though the Law fpeakbtit to you, yet thereby they lay the burthen of Banidiraem on your children as well as you. If a man pcrfwade you to lift and engage your fdf and your children among the Turks Gally- ilaves : doth not his peifwalion as truly lay this burthen on your children as on you ? thoMgh on your fdves more immediately fandyet not immediately neither, for it Is your felres that muft do it^ and on them more mediately. It is an ill caufe that muft be upheld l>y fuch filly wrangling againft the plain Scripture, I leave it now to any impartial Reader to judge J Whether all thofe whom the falfe Apoftles would have burdened with Circumcifion, be not here by Pete/ called Difciples ? and whether ma» ny (yea moft) of thofe were not Infants ? It being after the manner of Mocfs that they would have them Circumcifed; and confcquently, whether thofe infants were not Difciples? , ._ f- — I I ■ ' . I » I I. I I -
Y Second At^ument to prove that fome Infants arcDifciplesJs thisjif no Infants are Difciples, then it is tiiher becaufe they are not capable, or elfe becaufe God will not (hew them fuch a mercy : But neither oi ihefe can be the caufe ; therefore that no Infants are Difciples, is falfe dodrine : M/. T. to this gave this Anfwer [That thereafon why they are not Difciples, is, becaufe thoy have not Learned] Reply. But, alas, that fuch an anfwer (hould fatJsfie fuch a man ! Is this any third Caufe? Oris it not evidently reducible to one of the former i" For if their unlcarnednefs hin- der them.from being Difciples, either it muft be becaufe it maketh ot ihcweth them uncapable, or becaufe God will not (hew the unlearned fo great mercy. Ilhjlhhere. fore prove to you that neither of thcfe can bethecaufc, and confequently. no other, aod fo there is no fach thing.
I. If infants are capable of being fervants of God, then th?y are capable of beitig Difciples* For as ihey lignlfie here the farafi thing, and d«:o^?th« fsnae foKo^fcr-
1/rfants Church-memherfhip andBaptifm. 19
fens, fo there is the fame capacity requifice to both : Or if you will make a difference* there is more required to a Servant then to a Difciglc.
But Infants are capable of being Gods fervants -.This Is plain ; For the Lord God Mmfelfdothtall them his fcrvamSjLfwV.if. 41,4a. They are commanded in the year of Jubik to let their brother that was fold to them, and his children depait j andthe rcafon is added ifortbcy are my fervants-'] That Infants are here included among [his children] cannot be dcnyed, or doubted of. (Mr. T. begun to deny it, but he quickly recalled n-) Is not here then dJreftion enough to help us to Judge of the mind of God^ whether Infants are his Servants and Difciples or no ? Doth not God call them his ferrants himftlf ? What more fliould a man cxpeft to warrant him to do fo ? Men call for plain Scripture j and when they have it, they will not receive it j fo hard is it to in- form a foreftallcd mind < Itmaybefome may fay, They were then capable of being Gods fervants, but they arc not fo now. But this were a wretched anfwer. For their capacity was the fame then and now ; Infants then were like Infants now. ( For Gods will towards them, we arc next to enquire after it J
Nay, maylnot make this a third Argument of it felf? If God call Infants his Servants, though they can do him no fervice, then we may call them fo too ; For wc may fpeak as God doth : But God doth call them fo -, Therefor we may. Again if God call Infants his Servants, though they are uncapablcat prefentof doinghim fervice^ then we may call them Difciples, though at prefent they arc uncapable of Learning .•« But God doth fo call them ; Therefore we may, &c. Hath he a good wit now, or a bad mindjthatcan raifcadaftforthedarkning offoexprefsand plaina Tex:? And yet ftill call for Scripture-proof? I will deal faithfully in telling you 3//- T. his Anfwer to this,and that upon deliberation in his Sermon after the difpute. i. He diftinguidieth of Scty:iiMSoi God dc jure &dcfailo. i Between Servants Aftively and Paffively j and faith that [here the term Servant is meant Paflively and not Aftlvely ; That Is, fuch as God ufeth ; And that they are called Servants here In no other fenfe then the Heavens and the Earth are, Pja[. 1 19. 89,90 They are thy Servants i Are they there- fore Difciples (faith he?) what ridiculous arguing is this ? So iMr.T. ]
O what caufe have we all to look to the tendernefs of cur Confciences in time, be- fore engagement in a linfulcaufe hath benummed them, and made the word of God to be of no force to us? I know fliallow brains are uncapable todifcern the weakncfs of the fillieft Anfwer ; they go that way as their affeftion doth byafs them j their ap- probation of anargument or anfwer is is no credit to it. But let any man of a tolerable underftanding and confcience not feared, but weigh ferioufly this anfwer, and I dare warrant he will think it a bad caufe that mull be underport by fuch palpable abufe of Scripture. For i. He faith they are fervants of God de]ure, but not dcfa^o^ in right, but not in deed j But a Servant is a Relation, that is the form of it: Scrvm eft do- mimfcrvui. And have they only a right to this Relation ? Who then, or whathin- drcth them from poUefling the Relation which they have right to ? Is it not God that giveth them right to this Relation ? And is not that to give them the Relat> tionitfelf? I would he would tejl us what more he giveth them that have the Relati, on\tit\i dc faClo (for I fuppofehedare not Intcrpre it of a future Right.) -. Whe- ther they are fervants Aftively or Paflively, is nothing to the being or form of the Relation j they are fervants of God ftill. And it feems by this anfwer, that if God had called Infants Difciples never lo ofr, Mr.T. would have put God off with his di- ftinaion,and faid, They are Difciples Paflively, but not Aftivcly. For 3. What rea- fon can he give why they may not be called Diiciplcs in a paflivc fenfc, as well as Sci- vants ? 4. Doth not God bid his Apofiles Baptize thoke that were Difciples with.
D J cue
20 Plain Scripture froof of
cat diftingailhing > Or doth he bid them Baptize Aftive Difciples, but not PafTtve cncs ? Where is th3t diftinft ion in the command? 5. But I Ihall be bold to take it for one of Mr. T. his fidior.s, and a mecr fallhood, that Infants arc here called Ser- ▼ants paflTivcly only^ till he have done lomewhat to prove it i to which end he hath not fpokeoncwordj as thinking it fcems that he fpokc to men that will take his word. Why may they not b: called Servants from the mccr Intereft of Dominion that God hath to them J and Authority over them? Are Infants the Kings Subjc(fts or Servants in a paflive fence only ? Is it not foundation enough for the Relation of a Servant, if God will own them fo, and number them with his Family of mccr grace, though he fhould make noufeof them at all ? Or if there mult be more : May they not be fo called, as being deftinated to his fervice for the future ? And fo they may have the Relation be- fore the Service ; which is common with thofe men that buy Children with their Parents for their future fervice. So EccUi.y. read it. 6. But the grofltft is yet behind : ( as the vrorit of Error is fiill at lall j and the further a man goes that is out of his way, the fnrthci he goes amifs. ) Would any man think that fuch a man as Mr. T. can pof- fibly believe that Infants are called Gods Servants in no other fenfe then the Heavens and Earth are ? Let me a little reafcn this cafe : i. Are the Heavens only paffivc Scr. vantsof God? 1$ that good Fhilofophy ? ^. What if the Earth and Infants were both calledScrvantsonlyina Paflive fenfe, bccaufe God makethufe of them ? Is it there- fore in the fame fenfe ? Is it the fame ufc that God makcthof both> What if Chrift were called Gods Servant for his fufTcring ? Shall we fay it were in no other fenfe then the Earth is fo called , when the ufe and fufFetings are fo unlike ? Whatiflprove (as methinks with M,:T. I might eafily do) that the Heavens are Gods fcrvants Adively, and Chrift alfo is called hisfervant Actively ? Doth it follow that they are fcrvants in the fame fenfCj when the Adion is fo unlike ? j. Hath not God prevented all thefe CaviiSjby joyning Parents and Childten together in the fame title? He faith of Parents and Children both together, They arc my Servants : where it is evident that both there- fore have the fame kind of Relation. And will he fay that the Parents arc only Pafljvely Servants ? 4. Or if all this be not enough, yet look further, where God himfelf tels you the reafon why he cals them his Servants ( who knows better then M,:T. ) They are Piy Servants rvhich J brought out ofE:yH,&c. Gods Interefl and morcifull choice of them, and ffparation to himfelf is the Reafon. When God calleth us his ScrvantSjitoftner (ig- nificth the honor and priviledges of that Relation which in mercy he calls us to, thtn any fervice we do him therein. Arc the Heavens Gods fervants becaufc he brought them out of Egyptjand feparated them to himfelf as a peculiar people ? 5. Yet if all this be not enoughjhe that will fee,may be convinced from this; the Jews and their Infants arc called Gods fervants in a fenfe peculiar, as chofen and feparated from all others. The Gentiles at age were not fo Gods fervants as the Jews Infants were. 1 f God call thcle Infants his Servants in no other fenfe then the Heavens and the Earth, then ic fccmsinthc ycarof Jubilemen maft rcleafe the Earth from it fervice to them ; But Hr.T. knows that even rhe Gentile fervants, that were aftively fo, were not to be re- ieafcd in the year of Jubilc : And therefore the Jews and their Infants arc called Gods fervants in another fence then the Heavens, or the Heathens either j even as the choftn feparated people of God, and members of his family. Orclfc how could it be a Rea- fon for relealing them in the year cf Jubilc, any more then for rcleafing any other ? BwtnoScriptarecanbefoplainj but a naan iha: hath a mind fo difpofed, may find foaji? words of contradi^ion,
,Thac.
Infants Church-memberjhi^ and Baptifm. 2 1
k
i.'X'Hat Infims are capable of being Difclples of Chrift,! prove thas. If Infants are capable of being Subjids of Chrfts Kingdom, then they are capable of being hU Difciplesj But th«y arc capable of being his SubjedsiTherefore of being Difciples. The reafon of the ccnftquen^c lieth here ; in that Chrifls Church is at leaft as proper- ly called his Kingdomns his School j and therefore every member of it is under him both as King and Propiitt. I fpeak not here of his Kingdom in the largcfl fenfe, as ic containeth all the wo U \ nor yet in the flridcfl, as It containeth only his Eled : but in the middle fence, a* ?r containeth his Church vi(ible,as it is moft commonly ufed. To aflfirm that Chrift is their King, and they his $ubjeds,and yet that tliey are none of his Difciples, would be very grofsTet becaufc we muft exped the groffefV from thefe men, I will prove It by one Scriptuie Argument, that All Chrills Subjedsare Difciples j thus. If all that are Subjeds of Chrift In his vifible Kingdom (or Church) be Chrl» fllans, and all Chriftians be Chrifts Difciple J then all fuch SubJedsof Chrift are Difciples ; But all fuch Subjeds are Chriftians, and All Chriftians are Difciples j Therefore all fuch Subjeds are Difciples. See Epbef.$.i'^. The Confequcnce is be- yondqucftion. The Antecedent hath two parts. Thefirftis [That all fuch Subjeds of Chrift are Chriftians.] I f any will be fo impudent as to deny this, I think them noc worth the Confuting ; For if Chrift be King in that fpccial fenfe over thofe that are no Chriftians j and if men may be fo his Subjeds and members of his Church, and yet be no Chriftians, then I know not what a Chriftian is. The fecond parts Is this [That A!l Chriftians are Chrifts Difciples.] This Is It that more neerly concerns the cauie j For then certainly if I prove Infants Subjeds, I prove them Chriftians j and if I prove them Chriftians, I prove them Difciples ; And this the Holy Ghoft hath done in cx- prcfs words, Afl, ii. i6. The DHciples were called Chriftians firft at Antioch ; So that Difciples and Chriftjans in the Unguage of the Holy Ghoft is all one.
Now for the Antecedent In my Argument [That Infants are capable of being Chrifts Subjeds] i. It is evident that they arc capable of being Subjeds In any Kingdom on Earth; and therefore why not of the Kingdom of Chrift ? r.Nothing can be Ihewed to prove them uncapable. 3. They were adually Subjeds of Chrifts King- dom before his coming in the flcih;ind therefore they are capable of being fo afterward. That they were adually Subj.ds before, needs no proof with thofe who grant ihtfe two things i i.That they were men-;lier$ of the Jevvifii Church(at Icaftjbcforc 2. 1 hat the JcwIlh Church was partof Chiifts Kingdom ; And he that will deny cither of thefe is far gone. 1 (hail (uitha prove to the full th:t that iliey were Subjeds of Chrift, when 1 come the Argument drawn from vifible Church-memberfhip.
Thus I have proved that it cannot be for want of capacity in them, if Infants be not Difciples.
1 Afn next to prove [That it cannot be beciufe God v/ill not fiiew them fuch mercy] and then there can be nothing elfe to hinder Infants from being Chrifts Difciples. As for thofe that fay, it is no mercy to Infants to be Difciples ofChiift, crChii. ftlans, I fliall deal vvirirnhcni ancn, under the Argument from Churchmcmbcrfliip ; Though one would think that no man fliou'd ever affirm fuch a thing , that were not s:v Infidel or encn"./ to Chriti. I therefore argue thus, Iflnfants inihejews Church ^vc;c Servants and Difciples of Chrift, and God fliewetk as great and greater oiercy •
D z . to
2 1 Plain Scripture proof of
to his Church nowjthen kcannot be bccaufcGod will not fhew them fuch mcrcy,if In- fants now be not DifciplesjEut Infants In the JewsChurch were Servants and Difciples of Chriftj and God lliewcrh as great and grcuer mercy to hi> Church now} Therefore it cannot be becaufe he will not ihew them Inch mercy, if they arc not now Difciples. I hope I need not ftand to prove. That the Jews Cliurch was Chrifts Church,and that they were his Difciples j ( though not lo fully and explicitly as now ) Chrift was then the King as Mediator, upon undertaking to pay our debt ; he that prefervcd, juftified, Tanftified, &c. /^/'^•jA'^wfawhisday and rejoyced, John S. ^6, It was the reproach of Chrift which Afo/« fuffered in Egypt^Hc^ 1 1.16. Mofcs himfelf was a Cervant of Chrift and fubordinate to him : No man tver performed any acceptable fetvJce to God fincc the fall, but in Chrift : Therefore all that fcrvice then was under him. Nomanevcc received any mercy from God(efpicially faving)iince the fall, but for and from Chrift. 1 proved before that tteir Infants are called Gods fervants as a peculiar People, Lev. 15.41,41. And then they muft needs be Chrifts Servants, and that is all one as to be his Difciples. The Jews fay, ire a;'t Mofts Difciples^ in oppofition to their bcinp Jefus Difciples, /(?/;« 9,18. Therefore it is evident they took the word [Difciple] In the fame fenfe in both. But Infants alfo were ^fo/^i Difciples ('and fo Chrifts, to whom Mofes was fubordinatej But all this will be yet fullyer proved anon.
j.V/iY Third Argument to prove that fome Infants are Difciples, UtHs, from Chrifts own words. If Chrift would hire fome Children recilved as Difci- ples, then they arc Difciples } But Chrifts would hare fome fuch received as Difciples; Therefore fome fuch are Difciples. All the Queftlon is of the Antecedent i and that is plain in L/</^c 2. 47, 4'. compared with Afar. 19.5. andMay. 9. 41. He that rcceivetbthii chHdint?ry?iame, receivcthme. Here obferve, 1. It was the Child him- felf that Chrift would have received. 1- He would have him received [in his name] now that can mean no lefs then as a Difciple; When they are baptized, it is into his name = And that which In Lul;e is called [receiving In Chlftsname] is exprefled in Mayl( [one that belongeth to Chrift] ^ndin Matthcrv [in the name of a Difciple.] Though fome of thefe places fpcak of Infantsj and fome of others : yet compared, they plainly tell you this j That to receive [in Chrifts name] and [as belonging to Chrift] and [as a Difciple of Chrift] in Chrifts language is all one j for they plain- ly exprefs the fame thing intended in all. $0 that Chrift hath encouraged me to re- ceive Children [in his name] Litl^c 9.47. And he expoundcth it to me, that this is to receive them [as belonging] to him, and as [Difciples,] I know fome frivolous an- fwersaremade tothis J but they are not worth the ftanding on. Mr. Sl.il^cs Argu- ment hence remaineth as good as unanfwcred.
•yHus I have proved to you, that Infants are Chrifts Difciples, and Chrift faith in ray Text, Difciple me all Nations, Baptizing them ; fo that being Difciples, we are commanded to baptize them. .Me thinks this is plain to thofe that can fee.
And now, v/hat is their common objcftion worth ? They fay they cannot learn,and therefore cannot be Difciples. Anfiv. But 1 have fully anfwered this already,and (hall :add this much more. i. They can' partake of the protefiion and provKJon of their Matter ( as the children of thofe that the Jfraditcs bought ) and enjoy the priviledges
fo
Infants Church- member fluff and Baptijm, 23
of che Family and School, and be under his charge and dominion, and that is enougft to make them capable of being Difciples. z. They are devoted to learning if they live i howfoever, they .ire confecrated to him as their Malier, who can teach them hereafter j and that is yet more. 3. 1 wonder you (hould be more rigorous with Chrift in this cafe then you are with men. Is it not common to call the whole Nation of the Turks both old and yong, by the name of Mahometans or Difciples of Mahomet ? and why not wc and our children then by the name of Chriftians and Difciples of Chrift ? And when a man hired a Philofopher to teach him and all his children, were they not all then Difciples of that Philofopher ? They that are entered under him as their Mafter for future teaching, are at prefent in the relation of Difciples. 4. And traly I wonder alfo that it fhould go fo currant that Infants ate not capable of learning j there is more ways of teaching then by preaching in a I'ulpit, The Mother Js the fiift Preacher to the Infant ( inftrumentally ; ) Do we not fee that they do teach them partly by aftion and gefture^ and partly by voice ? That they can diflieartcn and take off from vices, is evident 3 and teach them obedience 3 Me thinks we fhould not make an Infant lefs docible then fome brutes. Nutfcs will tell you more in this then I can. And what if they cannot at fiift learn to know Chrift ? Even with men of years, that is not the fiift leffon j If they may be taught any of the duty of a rational creature, It is fomewhat. And if they can learn nothing of the Parents either by aftion or voice ; yet Chtift hath other ways of teaching then by men ; even by the Immediate inward working of his Spirit: Though yet It is not needfuU to prove any of this', it is enough that they are taken by Chrift into his School and Kingdom. But feeing an Infant can fo quickly learn to know Father and Mother, and what they mean in their fpeeches and adions, Ifeenoreafon that we fl\ould take it for granted, that they can learn nothing ef God, till weareablc toprove it. Sure I am. Scripture rcquireth to teach children tJie trade of their life in the time of their youth ; (as eaily no doubt as they are able to unJerftand) and to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; arkl fure this nurture belongs to them as Schollers of Chrift.
Moreover I might argue thus. All thofc that are juftified and faved by Chrift, are k's Difci^cs 5 (for he faveth none butfuch.)liut Chrift juIUfieth and favethfomc infantsj therefore fome Infants are his EWfciples. But becaufe the proof of the Minor Propofitioii of the next argument will prove this too, I will fay no more of this.
CHAP. IV.
Argument I f .
JyjY Second Argument, andthe-chicfl flull make tifeof, is this. All thatoughtto
be admitted viliblc Church-members, ordinarily ought to be baptiied j But fome
Infants ought to be admitted vif^ble Church members j therefore fome Infants ordi:;
narily ought to be baptized.
Mr.r. hath gone over and over the terms of this Argument focfc, as if he could 't poffibly find out :ny meaning in them ; when they are as plain as I well kncAV w to exprefs my felf. A great while he fain would have dcnyed the major propofi- non.j bucatlaftheis cententto deny oncly theminor : And indeed that is the very heart of thsvomrcvcrrxe ; The Q^^ftion between us is not fo much whether infants
not how
2^ Plain Scripture froofcf
may be Bapiixed, as,Whethe: they are in the number of Chriftians, and tc be added ss members to the vUible Church. \i Mr-T. did grant the Minor, and not deny cur chil- dren Chriftianity and to be members of the Church, I ibou.d Tr my part, think his error (though foul) yet of lelsccnfcquence in denying them B-ptifm. Cut itisthcit Church. mcmberll\lp that he denycth, and yevldvth that all thit ought to be admit- ted members i ibould be Baptized. But bccaufe it is a murable wtrld , Iwerebeft prote it , though hjc do now yeeld it , left he (hould upon fccond thoughts deny u a- gain.
By [a vifible Church-member] I mean plainly one that is a membar of the vifibic ChurchjCr of the Church as vifible And by [admitting] I mcin ftlcmn admitting. As I before diftinguKhed between Difciples incompleat and comp'.e.u; fo here I do of Church-members. As a Soldier before lifting, and as a King before Crowning and ta, king hisOath/o arc we and Infants Church members before BapnfmjBut as every one that muft be admitted Solemnly into the Army, muft be admitted by lifting, as the folcmn engaging fign } So every one that hath riy^ht to be folemnly admitted into the vifible Church, muft ordinarily be admitted by Baptifm. So much to make that plain which was plain before ; becaufe fome men are loth to underftand any thing that is agatnft their minds.
And 1. As to Mr T. Hisownconceflion is proof enough till he change his mind. He faith in the 54 p/igc oihis Apology [I grant that Baptifm is the way and manner of folemn admiffion into the Church j I mean the Regular way.] So there Is enough for bim.
For others, I prove it thus, i . If we have neither precept nor example In fcripture (jnce Chrift ordained Baptifm , of any other way of admitting vifible members but onely by Baptifm^ then all that muft be admitted vifible membcis, muft ordinarily be - Baptiied. Bu: (ince Baptifm was inftituted (or eftablilhed^ we have no precept or ex- ample of admitting vifible members any other way, (but conftant precept and example for admitting this way 5 ) therefore all that muft be admitted vifible members,muft be Baptized.
Iknownotwhat inany (hewof Reafoncanbefaid tothis, by thofe that renounce not Scripture. For what man dare go in a way which hath neither precept nor example to warrant it, from a way that hath a full current of both ? Yet they that will admit members into the vifible Church without Baptifm, do fo.
z. Either members muft be baptized at their admifTion, or elfe after they are fta- ted in the Church, or elfe never: But the two later are falfej therefore it muft be the former way, ^'iq;^. at their admlflion.
I. That they fliould never be Baptized, none wil affirm but the Seekers, and they that are above Ordinance (that is^above obedience to God^ and fo Gods.^
a. If they fay. They maft be Baptized afv6r they are fta.ed in the Church ( and that many years as they would have it >) lanfwer. 1. Shew any Scriptu-e for that if you can. i. It is contrary to all Scripture example. Acl i. Ihc three thoufand were prefently Baptized, and*the Jay lor at the fame hour of the ntght> and fo of all the reft. And if you could fliew any that did delay it, (fincc Chrifts command, ^^u. i8. 10. ) it would appear to have been finfull, as through ignorance or negligence j fo that it muft needs then be done at their firft adiftittance according to the conftant courfe of Scripture.
J. It Is evident alfo from the very nature and end of Baptifm, which is to be Chrifts lifting engaging fign j and therefore muft be applycd when we firft enter Ws Army. ""^v
" If
Infants Church member fhif ai^)i Baptifm. ^12:5
4. If we are (Jews and Gcncilfs, S<c.) Baptized inco one Body, then wc arenutio delay it till we have been ftated in the body : But we arc all baptized Into one body. So faith the Holy Ohoft, i Cor. ^^,^1- (I Ili3ilh?.ve occalion toprove hcreafterjthac thlsbody isthevifible Church, if any doubt of it) = therefore we mult not dcUy our Baptlfm (or others) till we are ftated in the boclyj for if it be the ufe of Daptilm to engraff and enter us Into the bod y or Churchy ( and into Chrift as R^r/i-d 5. .) Uhen fure it muftbc ufedat our engvatJing and ent< ranee. Shall a Souldier be 1 fled twok»r three year afttv he hath been in the Ai my , or at the fi: ft entrance, v\ hethcr !* ' :
y. If all Chu;ch members aieChrifls Dii'cipleSjandall Difciplis nnift b? Baptized /at their admiftionAhcn all Church- members muft bebiptizfd at their adnuiiion.-Bu: all Church members are Dii'ciplcs and all Difciplcsmuli be Baptized atthcivadniiffi- on (ordinarilyj therefore ail Church members mull be Baptized at their adniiiiion.
I. fhat Ddciplcs mu'i be Baptized at ihcir admilVion is plan, 3/.//. iB . Tp,tc. Difciplc .11 Nations, Baptizing.thcm, and by couilant cxamile. t. That ail Church, membeis arc Dil'cipLs . I prove thus. 1. If it be the Church which is Chriils School then all the member* ofthe Church are his Schollers or Difciplcs, or N'.em- beis'of his School : liut it is ontly the Chu *a which is called Chiilis ^choo! ; thevf:- fore all Church- members are t^chool members or Diiciples. i. And thus; ifaii Church mcmberi ate Chriftians, and all Chriftlans arc Chriits Diicip'cs, then ail Church- members are Chrilh Dii'ciplcs : But all C' unh- members arc Chuflians, ana all Chriftians are Chrifts Difcples , therefore all Church members are Chiilt? Dil'ciples. I- That all Church members (true ones) are Chrttians, that is, retain- ers to Chrift. or luch as belon;; to Chrift ('as his own ^hrafe is) is beyond doubt. 2. That all Chriftians arc Dilciples^ I proved before ; it being the plain words of the Holy dhoft, /iSl. 11. i6 where they areniade all one. The Difciplcs were ca'ledCh.ift iiii'^fi'.ftat Ant'ioib y fo that all Church niwinbcrs being Difciples, they muft Regularly be Baptized at their admillion, accoroint to the courfc of ScripturCjand my Text, M.d. i8. 19, *o.
6. Another Argument may be plainlv fetcht from Eph> J. z6. that he might findifie it andcieam'eic (his Church) by the walhing of water through the word; Ifthewhold ChuJi muft be fandified by the wafhing of water, then Infants and all others that arc partis ularly members of the Church, muft be fo fanftified. But the whole Church muft b. io fanftified ; therefore the individual members- Mr. T. in his cxcicit. tbjedethj i. That then the Thief on the Crols, Sec- were no Church- members. Anf. 1 1 followeth not from [He that is Baptized Ihall be faved] that therefore he that is not baptized lliall not be faved ; fo here 5 for the former fpeaks but ad dibit iini, and the later dc Evc-.lu j it will follow, that Ic is a duty to baptize all Church-membcrs where it may be done j but not that Tt Hiall certainly come to pafs.
1. Hecbjedcth, thar therefore it muft be undeiftood of the more famous part of the Church, or that purification is to be undcrftood of that which Is for themoft parr. AnJ. The Apoftle fpeaks plainly of the whole Church > and to take it for part, Js to Crofsthe Text, except you Ihew a neceflity for it. u it fpeaks of all, ^sl^Mdquoad Evmtum, in regard of real purifying. ?. And of all qunad dcbititm, in regard of the jneansofit which they are capable of 4 And ufuaily quoad Evci/tum of the fait! mc?ns too • Obj. Bur fome may fay, that [by the word] is here a^ded, which -Infants are not cap. ble of. Ai{. i. Infantsare fandified by the word (Jf promifeand precebt ♦0 parents to dedicate them to God, though not by the word preached to Infants.
2, The means is to each member as they are ca; ble i walhing by water to thofe thac j^^ re capable of that, and by the word to thofe that arc capbabie of that, which blind and
E deaf
26 Pldin Scripture proof cf
deaf men are not any more then Infants. 06/ But it is the Inrifiblc Church that Chrlft is faid thus to clcanfe. Anf. i. Certainly, thofc that arc walhed with water, and hear- ing the word, or cither, are all vifible membtrs z. ThwVifible Church hath outward priviledges and titles of the invifiblc, becaufe as to us they muft in prob.ibili y be judg- ed to belong to borh. 1 herefore Paul frequently cals them all Saints, and fonj oi'jod by faith, &c. fo that it is plain in the Teit, that the Church and fo all the members of the Church ought to be baptizcdj where it may be done ; And I lliall fully prove anon that Infants are Chuich- members.
And thus I have proved the Major of my main Argument, vi^. That all that muft be admitted vifible Church-members muft be baptized. Yet remember ihzt Mr.T. denieth not this ; All therefore that 1 have to prove for deciding the whole controverGc is now but this, That fome Infants ought to be admitted vifible Churckmembers : So that you muft ftill remember, it is no more their baptifm, but onely their raemberdilp that hereafter I muft treat on: prove that, and 1 prove all in /Wi^.T. his own judge- ment j I fay it again, leftyoumiftake in your expedations : 1 pray remember that I have nothing more to prove now, but this, that fome Infants ought to be admitted Church- members ('vifible:) it being already granted me, that all vifibleChurch. members muft be admitted by baptifm. And this I (hall by Gods help prove to you piaixily and fully.
CHAP. V.
Argument I. To prove Infants church-membct [hip.
T Hough I have many and clear Arguments from the New Tcftament to prove Iik fants to be members of the vifible Church, as I (h^l let you fee, God willing, when I come to them ; Yet becaufe I think it moft orderly to take them before us from the beginning, I will fi ft fetch one from the Old Teftament,and that Rich as is fully con- firmed from the New : For I hope you are none of thofe that have wiped out all the Old Teftament from your Bibles,orihat prefently lock upon a Text as no Text if you hear it come fro the Old Teftament : I therefore argue thus, FIrft j
If by the mercifuU gift and appointment of God| not yet repealed, fome Infants were once to be admiited members of the vifible Church, then fome Infants are to be fo admitted ftill ; But by the mercifull gift and appointment of God, not yet repealed, fome Infants were once to be admitted members of the vifible Church = theforc they are fo to be admitted ftill.
The Antecedent harh two parts, i. That by Gods mercifull gift and appointment, fomelnfants were once to be admitted members of the vifible Church J This is as far beyond all doubt as you can exped. i. Af/. IT. granted it in his publike difpute^ And fohe doth in his Apology ,f.7^.<6. where he faith [I acknowledge that in the vifible Church of the JewSj the Infants were reckoned to the Church] yet left any fliould be fo impudent as to deny it, I briefly prove it thus. i. If Infants were part of them tbac entered into Covenant with the Lord God, and into his Oathj that he might ftablifh them for a people to himfelfj and he might be to them a God ; then Infants were pare o£the Church; But the former is plain, inZ>f/|^^9. xo, 11,12. to any that wUi read ir. Thefore In£u)(S were part of the Church*
Infants church' memherjhif and Bapifm. tj
2. If Infants were engaged to God by the feal of his Covenant(CIrcumclfion)tlicn they were members of his Church ; But fome Infants were fo engaged » therefore they were Churck^members ; this Is all undeniable. I never yet met with any that denye^ either.
J. If Infants were part of thofe that were Taptlzedto ^a/^j in the Cloud and Sea, and drank the fplritual drink, evenof chat rock which was Chrift, then fure they were part of the vifible Church ; But the Antecedent is plain in i Cor.io. i,i j . They All were Baptized, Sec
4 The Martyr Stephen calleth that Affembly w'lereof they were members [the Church in the wildernefs] Afl 7.g8. Therefore they were Church- members.
But I will fpend no more words in proving that which no body that I know of de- nyeth.
Theonely thing which JWr.T.denieth, and which the whole weight of this argument Ileth on, is [that this merciful! gift of God to Infants,and ordinance for their Church- member ibip is not repealed.] And here you fee I have the negative, and the proof doth not lie upon me. They that fay it is i e^ealcd,muft prove it. I will here firft therefore examine Mr.T. his proof, and then I will prove the negative to you [thatthis is not repealed] by a multitude of evident Arguments from Scripture ; and then leave it to you impartially to judge.Whecher he better prove that Infants Church- memberlhip be repealed, or I that i: is not.
I have fliewed you Scripture which is not qiiftioned, that God once bellowed this mercy upon Infants; and may I not now juifly exped. that he who faith God hath taken It from them again^and repealed that Law, /hould bring fome plain Scripture or Argument to prove it ? I will not conceal the leaft part of the ftiength of hJs Argu- ment, but will add what ever elfe I conceive he might fay,and then anfwer all.
ANd firfl I confefs, I expeded feme plain Scripture, i. Becaufe It muft be a ■^^plain word of God onely that can prove the repeal of any part of his word; and mens reafonlngs may as likely prove vain in this as any thing If they be not grounded upon plain Scripture. And i. Becaufe I deal with thofe men that call for plain Scripture proof of Infant Bapiifm from us ; therefore did I over, and over, and over, defire Mr.T' to bring fome word of God to prove the repeal of Infants Church-mem- berfliip. Butwhat Tixt do you think he brought? In his publike difpute he never once offered to name one Text j Nay , in his Sermon which he preached after upon deliberation , he never offered to name one Text in all the Bible, to prove that God hath repealed Infants Church- memberOiip. Is not this enough to make his caufe fufpicious ? Nay, I am confident he cannot bring one Text for it. What If Mr.T, Ihould ofe Magiflrates as he doth Infants (as former Anabaptlfts have done ) hath he not as good ground ? and would they take it well? May he not as well (ay when I fliew him Scripture in the Old-Tcff ament for Magiflrares in the Church , and being Gods people; [that it was from the peculiar Church State of the Jews: God hath fee up no Magiftrates of Chriftians in the Church -ow] would not our Maglftratcs bid him bring fome Scripture to prove the repeal, o . they (hall they take their Old Teftament Commiflion for currancjand let him b- ^ nc any more Scripture to prove the repeal of infants Church mcmberfliip, then is brought to prove the repeal of Magi- ftrates IntheChHtchifhecan; (Ohow juft is it with God, that thofe Magiftrates who favour, countenance and cheri/h hofe men that would keep all Chriftians Infants out
£ 2 of
,a8 ,<.sv.- fUin Scripture Proof of
oftheCburchi (lAOuldby thcfamc men bcpmouc thtmfelvcs, both of Church and .ftate?) .
, Yet in priritel'confcfs he cited two Texts to prove the Repeal of Godj ordinance ih'd mcrctfull glftj that Infants fliould be Church- members i and I will rcadthetwo places to you ( which private conference I would not mention , but left it Jhould be thought a wrong to him to overpafs his only proofs.) The firft was G.1/4.1 2,?. Now 1 fay that the heir as long as he is a chlldjdifFcrcth nothing from a fervant, though he be Lord of ail, but is under Tutors and Governors till thetiirc appointed of ihe Father} Even To we when we were children were iu bondage under the Elements of the world 5 But when the fulnefs of time wascomCjGod fcnt forth his Son made ofa woman^made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the A- doption of Sons.
When I confidered that fuch a man fliould deny all Infants Church- member- fliip , and affirm that God hath repealed that his ordinance and mercifull gift , and have no more Scriptwre for It then fuch as this , and yet be fo confident , it maketh me amazed. Haih not he a good wit, that can prove that Chrift hath repealed his naercifull gift , bccaufe he hath redeemed us from under cur bondage and tutorage ? or that he hair, fhut out alllnfants from his Church , becaufc he hath delivered them from the iMConveniences of their minority? If 1 hid no better proof then this for Infant-r . '...-, I Ihould be aQiamed once to open my mou:h for it. Nay, 1 pray you do but confider whether his own proof be not fufficlent ag.ui.it him ? Doth not this Text plainly tell uSj that the heir in his minority is Lord ot all ? and fo approve of the natural birth-priviledgeof our children in civil rhings ? .And will God then deny children to be heirs of any <hing, and bereave them of their fpiritual or Church^privi- ledge, and neither cell us why he doth it, nor that he doth i: f Again more plainly j if Chrift came to free the heir f om his bond.-?, and tutorage oncly,.and from chefetvitude ot his minority} is it likely that he came to tree thi-m from their Church membcrlhip ? Can any man think , that this was any part of the bondage ? 1 n quire thofe whofe confciences arc not wholly enflivcd to their fancies and conceits, to judge of this foberly , Whether they can polfibiy think it a bondage to be a member both of the univerfal vidble Church , and of a particular ? Let them not here tell me that Circumcilion was a bondjgc , or that the Law was a i utor ; 1-or I fpeak of none of thefe , but of their being members of the Church of God. 3, Yet further, when this Text te!s us, that Chrift came to redeem us from under the Law, and the bondage of minority, is it not a clear proof that he hath brought us into a far bettev ftatc then we were in befoie > and hath advanced us in his family, as the heir at age is advanced ? And can any maji of common fenfe and confcience expound this of his cafting all their Infants out of his family > Chrifts Church is his family } and doth the heir ufe to be fic-d by being caii: out of the family i' Why may he not as well fay that all the body of the J cwilh Nation are now delivered by being caft out of the Church or Family of Chrift ? 5s it no more agreeable to the fcopc of the Apoftle here to ftffitm , that certainly they arc fo far from being turned nut of the family or Ghurch'of Chrift, that by Chrift they are now brought into a far higher ftate, and snadc fficmbers of a fat better Chiuch, then that particular Church of the Jews was ? 4. And if any yet fay , that i: is not ihclnfants , but only the parents that are thus advanced by Chrift to a bctte: f^tare , is not this Text plain againft him ? For the A- poftleexccndeth redemption hcje to thofe that were under the Latv ; and whoknow. cnh not rhit Infants w.erc under the Law ? And if it did aot belong to each individu- aiVihdcr the Law , yetiuannocinanytck-rablc fenfc be cienyed to belong to each
fpecies
Infants Church tnemberfl^ip andBaptijm, 29
fpecies or age j (yet I can prove,that ccnditionally this d:!iv€rance was for each indivl-. daal pcrfon in the fence as God feht his ben Jefss to rtlrft every one of them from their iniquity. AH.lAo,^) And now H>d^e ! pray whether thi-; be noia pittifuU ground for men to prove the repeal of Gods mercifull gift and oidinance of Infants Church Mcm- beifhip. /
DUc one Text more was named, and that is my Text, A/tM 8,19^10. ( -o difclpleall Nationsj&c. Is not this brave proring the repeal before mentioned ? what faith this Text to any fuch matter ? Nay, l^m confident -the contta»'yv«i;l be proved from this Text alfo •■ For if i: be Nations that miift be difcipled and Baptized, certainly all In- fants can never be excluded, but muft needs fomeof them at leall be included! do not believe that men were to be made Difciples by force ; nor that all were Difcip'es when the Kin" or greater part were fo : But that the Apoftlcs Ccmmiflion was to Difciple Nations ; this is their work which they Ihouid cnder.voiir to rtccomplillv'; and therefo e this was a thing buth pofl'ible and delirablc : therefore when the Parents are by teach, ing made Difciples, the Children are thereby Difcipled alfo ; As if a woman efcape drowning the child in her body cfcapes thereby •, yet this is not by any natural caufe, but by force of Gods grant or covenant. When all that dwelt at Lydda and Saren \sc\t turned to the Lord, the whole Cities, Infants and all^ were Di(ciplcd. How can Chrift bid them <-'o and Difciple all Nations, if Infants^ and fo all the Nation are utterly uncapabletsf being Difciples ? Orjhnw will M-.T- expound the woild All Nations > Heoftfaith, It is here one, and there one out of a City or Nation that God wil call : I fliall fay more to the (hame of this fpeech afterwards; yet let me fay this much at prefcnt. If it be but fome few, or here and there one, yea, or but the molt that Chrift commindcth to difciple, then wc muft endeavour to make but thofe few or moft Dif- ciples f for our endeav' ur muft not go beyond our Command and Commifiion. ^ But this is molt horrid Daftrinc, and notorloufly falfe, [that Apoftles and Minifters ought not to endeavour "the Difcipling of all, butoffomct] (For Paul oft profeffeth his longing and endeavour to the contrary j ) therefore it is as falfe that the Command is not for the Difcipling of all. But more of this afterv/ard ; And thus I have truly related every Text of Scripture that ever I could get from Af/.T.to prove that God had repealed his mercifull gift and ordinance for Infants Church-Memoerfhip. If this be dot to feign God to fay what we would have him} yea,contrary to what he doth fay^thcn I amquiteraiftaken. Soyou feenow how far I have carryed on the wotk. i. That all ought to be baptized who lliould be admitted Members of the vifible Church : this Mr.T. dcnyethnot. ;. That fome Infants were once to be admitted Members, and that by Gods ordnance and mercifull giftj this he doth not deny ; I have put both to him over and over, and he doth not deny them. 3. And that this was ever repealed, you hearhowweU from Scripture he can prove 3 Though I defired bim again and again to bring fome Scripture for it if he had any.
nUt let us hear vyhether hfs Arguments be any dearer then thefe Texts for him ? And here I fliall take but the ftrength of them, becaufeyou (hallhave^ if needful), a particular anfwer to his Sermon where they are. The fum of all his Arguments that I can hear, is this j If the Church-conftitution, whereof they were Members,be taken down, thea their Mcmberfliip Is taken down 5 but the Chvn(rb,&c. therefore; &c. To
E 3 prove
30 Plain Scripture frcof of
prove the Antecedent, this Is added .- If their Church-Call be altered , then thelt Church. Conftitutlon is altered; bat their Church- Call is altered, therefore, &c. To prove the Minor, he {hews the different Calls then and now. i. Then they were called by Mofes OT Abraham^ the Magiftrate ; hot now by Minifters. i. Then all the Na- tion was called in one day, even Servants and all j but now God calls here one and there one. Befidcshefhcws that the Temple, Priefthood, Sacrifices are taken down, and therefore the Church.conftitution. This is the very ftrength of all that JUr. T. hath to fay to prove the repeal of Gods mercifuU Ordinance for Infants Church-Mem* berfhip. And I cannot cbufc but fay, They arc filly fouls, and tradable to novelty, aod eafily feduced from the truth of God, and far irdm the {lability of judicious tender confcienc't Chriftlans, who will be drawn by fuch mifty, cloudy arguing, without one Scripture proof j yea, and againft fo much Scripture.
Seeing therefore all his ftrength Ueth hcrSj I . illfirft lay yoH down fome neccffary Diftlndions to ditpell the clouds of arr.biguity; ami then Anfwer thefe rea(onongs of his : And alfo what more 1 can imagine c::ay be objeded^ to the utmofl.
ANd firft you muft diftinguifli between the particular Church of the Jews, and the Unlverfalyifible Church. And here Hay down thefe three Propofiticns. i. The Jews Church was not the whole Univcrfal vifible Church that God had then in the world. Though many learned men think otherwife In thisjyet Mr. T. doth not, but confelleth It true. <jrotma Frant^Hs^ and many others have proved this ; (though I know not what Clappenburgiiu and others fay againft them, which were vain now to trouble you with) But left any Other deny it, though 3//-. T. do not, I prove it thus. i. God promifeth to blefs Abrahams children in general, and foretelleth thus, Ge». i8. 19. I know Abraham that he will teach his children after him, and they fhall keep my Law, &c. Mark, God faiih not, [his child] asof //tfdconly, but his children wholly, that ihey ihould keep Gods Law: Now Abraham had many Children by I^cturah } and they were all Church, members, and Circumcifedj And if they kept the Law, no doubt they would teach It their Children Again, Sem lived 40 years odfaac's time ; and who dare fay that Semzadhis Family were no Members of the vifible Church? And is it ncer to pro- bable, that when there werefo many thoufands of 5fWi Poftcrity then living, that- none of thefe were of the true Qkatchhat Abrcbam F were Scms Tents fo eftranged from God ? And what were the Family of Bctku:l that Icbccca came from ? were they none of the Church ? Yet plainer ; 1 remember whu Jiijiin Mrayr'mhis Dialogue yNkhT^yphon faith of Melchifedech : He was King of S.i/c/w, and a Piieftofthe moft high God ; And could there be a Righteous King, and a King of Righteoufnefs, and a Pwcftfo excellent as to be the Type of Chrift; and had this King no Righteous Subjeds,and this Prieft no Righteous People ? It feems by Job and his Family,and by the language of his three friends and Elih:i , that God was not fo ftrange to the world then, nor the Church fo narrow as many do imagine • The like may be faid of Canduct Queen of the Ethiopians fwho yet derive their Church from her and Solomon) So of H/z-dOT Kingof Tyrf, ofi^.'«.'W, and many other, Alas, that the Jews Priviledges muft needs unchurch all the reft of the world I 1. Propof. Ifthe Jewifh Church had been the whole vifible Church, yet it would have b.en confiderable in bothrcfpedi; both as the Jewllh Church, and astheuniverfal. j. 1 here is no Member ofanv mrricutar Church who is not alfo a Member of the Univetfal
Church :
Infants Church-memherjhip and Baptifm, 3 1
Church i ihaefore Infants were Members of the Univerfal vifible Church as well as of the Jews particular Church ; So that if it could be proved that their Memberrtiip in that particular Church is overthrown^ yet that is nothing to prove that they have loft their {landing in the Univerfcil Church. But this I fhall fullyer improve and vindicate hereafter.
i. You muft diftinguifh between the Efflntials and fome Accidentals ofthe Jewifh Church j fhPricfthood, Temple, Sacrifice. &c, were meerly Accidental, and might be repealed without the repeal of the Efl'entials, or the Ordinance eftablilhing the Church |[ fe f.
3. You muft diftinguifli between their Church confidered in it felf, and confidered comparatively as to others, The Jews were a peculiar People and Church of God-, no other had he like priviledges. Now if they had believed, they Hiould have kept all their Priviledges abfolutely confidered j ( except it be a lofing them, to change them for greater) but comparatively confidered. they (houldnot have kept fome relative Priviledges } For they fhould nn longer have been a lingular peculiar people, feeing others fliould have enjoyed as great Priviledges as they ; Yet this would have been without any lofs of theirs i much more without wholly un Churching themorth.Ir Children J when a man hath but one fon, he hath the priviledge of being his fathers only fon 3 But when his father hath many more , he hath loft ihac priviledge, and yet is not therefore turn'd out of the family ; nay , the adding of more brethren in our cafe is an encreafc of the happinefs of each particular j for this is the very cafe of the Jews: Theaddineof the Gentiles would have made the Jews no more to be fo pecuUar as to be fit^ular in their Priviledges jand yet th:y (hould have enjoyed never the lefs. Therefore, mark it, the Scripture fpeaking of taking In the Gentiles, It exprclleth it as by taking down the partition-Wall, and making of both one Church j but it fpeaksnot ofun-Chorchingthe Jewsfirft, and their children , or bereaving them of their Priviledges. And when in his Vifion Peter was taught the Dodrinc of the Gentiles reception into the Church, A£l. 10. it was not by making the Jews unclean, butby cleanfing tiie Gentiles to be clean as the Jews. So that if the Jews would have bclievcdj they fliould have loft only their comparative Priviledges con- fifting In the fingularity of their enjoyments, which is nolofs to them, to have the Gentiles enjoy them as well as they j but their Priviledges in themfelves confidered would not have been diminlflied, bat fome lefl'er turned into greater j And therefore certainly God would never have turned their Children all out of the Vifible Churth.
4. \o when we call the Jews [a National Church] and when Mr- T. faith God took the whole Nation to be his Church, It may be meant either In regard of the appropriation and reftridion to that Nation only, as if God had not called any othet whole Nations and fo it may be true, that the Jews only were a Nationall Church ( though yet it is doubtful! , as what is faid of Mekh'ifedcli before flieweth } ) and alfo In regard of their National and Church Unity C which yetis the excellency and ftrcngth of all other Churches ; ) Or elfe by a National Church may be meant, as If all were Charch-membersthat were of that Nation , and no more were required to the being a Church-member but to be of that Nation ^ And thus I perceive it is by many underftood. But this is notorioufly falfe ; For it was then as well as now, tlie Covenant of God, (wherein he tooKthem for his peculiar People, and they took him for their only God, the Parents engaging fer themfelves and their Children^ which made them Members ofthe Church. For i. No aged perfon, no not fervants, much lefs ordinary Profelytcs , were Members , except they cmcred the Covenant i
thoug,h
J 2 PUin Scripture f roof of
tkougb they are commanded to Circumcifc all in their Houfe, yjt it is Tuppofrd that by their In:ercft and Authority, they caufcd them firft to enter the Covenant ; there- fore they were to Circumcife the Servants bGUj;,h. wi.h money, as being ablblutely their owHj whom they hadmoft Intcreft in J but not the hiied Servants, whom they hid no luch Authority over ( except they becanrc Proklytcs veluntiiily ) 2 And though they were taken into the Church in Infmcy, yet if thvy afterward forfook or i e. r^ounccd the Covenant, they were to be cut eft" from the Church, yea to lie put to death. 51 And in many cafes their children were to be put to dearh with thcm.All which I fhall fpeikmore oi afterward. And therefore their Church was not fo National as that any in the Nation fliould be a Member of it who forfook the Coveixanr. Indeed Gjd chofe the Seed oiAbrahainin a fpecial manneributnotto be Churchmembors immediately but lirft to enter into his Covenant, and take him for their God, and fo to be C hurch- nieflnbers . -t
.5. You muft diftinguiili betwixt Breaking cfFthat particular Individual Church, or fome Members of it, and the Repealing or Breaking oft'ihe Species or tflential nature of the Church.
6. And fo you muft diftinguifh between the Repealing of the Law or Grant upon which the very Species or nature of the Church is grounded and the txecutiortof the Thteatning of the Law upon particular perfons or Churches offending. The RfpcAl of the Law or Ordinance doth takeaway all Right to the Mercy granted ISy thftt Law or Ordiriance, even the remote conditional Right (f;/i ad rem cmd\tio7iate rerrioluni :'^ And that from all men, one as well as another, to whom that Law gave that Right. But the punitive execution of the Threatning doth only take away tlje Abfolute Ri^ht to the Mercy, and the Right in it (,]:!i ad icvi abfoluiiif}>^& jus in re i) and that from none bur the particular cflftnders. This punitive execution of the Law ( or the Cuif,{ of the Covenant, as itjs called Dtut, -9. zo,i i. V -ji fo far hont being 3 Kdpeal of. thj Law, that ;it certainiy.provcch it is hot re^peaied : ^ot ^'Repealed tlw is;<it .qoft^vn^^c, and fo cannot be executed. •' .' _ ' .*• "^^ ''.
And upon thefe two laft Diftindions,! add this fot Apf licarton o{"thcm:The I'ridJ- vidual Jewilh '^ hiirch is ^for the moft p3rt)brcke oft* for their fin bVpimitivc execijtion of thcCurfe of the Covenanr orLaw upon themi& fo they that .irt fj b.'ol^e oft'are now no Church,and confequcmly have loit all their 1 i-ivitedges r ^m ihc Law or Covenant en whichitheSpccics or tflential form of their Church' ( and many of its !»\ccidenrsj was groUi^ded, is ^not changed or Repealed. So the Church of i'//;j;7/<7j Tljy'.Uiraj Laodicca, and the reft of Aft-i (for the moft part) are now un- Churched ; Bu't. this is but by a punitiv.e execution of the Law foriheir fin, and no change in the La»v or in th'e nature of the Church J And fo it is with the Jews alio in their un.Chu;c,h'ing. Though '.hey are caft off",yet the Law and nature of Churches is ftill the fame ; andprly the Laws about Ceremonial Worfhip, -and' iomc other Accidents of the Church ^f ft Repealed $0 that the ca.fting oft" of them artd their chil^enj is tio pr6of that the wljojfi Spedesoflnfams is caft o^t of the Church vifiblc. .'' "■ ' h
7. Again you muft diftinguiili betwixt Breaking eft primarily and Morally only by Covenant breaking and Meritf'as aii adulterous worhan doth break theMariag£B9_nd,^ and Co cart nut her felf ) or elfe Breaking cff in a following id: by puni;iin;icTit,,( ,bptj»: Morally antd l^hyficillyj J ( asa nim tharbuttcth away his adultcious VVi^e^j Intijj former iVrtfe-all the Jews that were ijn'Chtlrchcd did iiti- Church themfKves and theirrJ children j ' And iGod only'iffti-Churched them in th.- latter fence ; And therefore the children of believing Jews {' who did not adultcroufly violate the Covenant, ^ were nevef an-Chu'.ched i God cifterh out none bufthofc that firft catt out thcmftlves. .
Having
Infants Church- memberjhif and B apifm, 5 j
TTaving thus (hewed you in what fenfc the Jews Church is taken down, and in what ■■■ ■•^not, let us review now Mr. T's Arguments* i. He fairh. The Ctarch. conftitution istakcn down J and therefore their Memberfliip. Yo which I AnTwer^ I. i^y [Conftitution] is meant cither the Ellentiall nature, or feme Ccremoniall Accident ; And by [taking down] is meant either [by repealing the Law^ which takes down the whole Species] or [by meer punitive Execution, taking down that in- dividual! Church ;] in the tirft fenfe of [Conftitution and Taking down] I utteily deny the Antecedent , and may ftay long enough 1 perceive before he prove it, I.. By [their Memberlhip] either he means the individuall Infants of unbelieving un-churched Jews (which i grantj or ellc the whole Species of Infants (which I deny) g. BelideSj the Argument concludeth not for what he (liould bring it : That which it Hiould conclude is [that the mercifull gift and ordinance of God, that tome Infants Ihould be Church members^ is repealed •] Ihis is another thing from what he con- cludeth.
Heprovcththat [their Church'conftitution is altered, becaufe their Churcb-CaH Isalteied.] To which I Aiifwer ; i. llcreis ftill nothing but the darknefsof am- biguity, and troubled waters to filh in. As wc know not what he means by [Confti- tution] as is faid before ; fo who knows what he mcaneth by [ their Church-Call ? ] Is it meant tir It of Gods Law or Coven,! nt enading, making, and conftituting them a Church ? t. And, if fo, then is it meant firft of the Effential parts of that Covenant or Law. giving them the I {fence of a Church , [I will be to theea God, and thou (halt be tome a People, Drut. 29.11,12 ] Or is it meant of the leffer additionall parts of the Law or Covenant, g'ving them fomc accidentals of their Church, as the Lind oi Canaaji^ the Pricflhood, the baci ifice, &c. j. Or is it mc.int of Gods im. mediate Call from Heaven to Abraham or any others to bring them into this Co. venant ? 4 Or is it meant of the Minifterial Call of man to bring them into the Covenant? 5. Andiffo, Whether of ^/^nsfe.?/;; only ? or Mofa only .' or 6oth? or whether ^aron and ill other becxc/uded, or not ? And what he means by a Church- Call to Infants that cannot underlland, I know not ; except by a Call, he meaneth circumcifing them. And^ 6. whether he mean that Call by which particularly they were at firft made a Church? or that alfo by which in every General ion their Pofte- rity was fo made , or entered Members ? 7. And if fo, Whether that whicft was proper to the Jews Pofterity ? or that which was proper to converted ptofelyted Members ? or fome Call common to both ? and what that was ? when I can poflibly nndeiftand which of all thefe Cals he means that is altered, then it may be worth the labour to Anfwer him. In the mean time briefly thus. I Anfwer j i. The additional IcfTer parts of the Covenant giving them the Ceremonial Accidents of their Church is oeafed,and fo are the Ceremonies built thereon, z. I he Effential part of the Law or Covenant is not ccafed J God yet offers the Jews to be their God, and them to be his people J If they will heartily confent, it may yet be done ; only the World is taken into this Covenant with them, and neiihcr jew nor Gentile excluded, that exclude not themfelvcs. 5. Gods immediate individuall Call of Abrah*/» ind. ^ofes did quickly reafe^ when yet the Church ceafcd not. 4. And for the Minifteriall Call j 1. That which was by the perfon oi JhrahamAod /►fo/fj numerically did ceafe when their aft was performed ; yet the tfFeft ccafed not ; nor did the Jews ceafc"*beinga Church when Abraham and Mofes were dead and gone. z. If he mean it of that Species or fort of Minifteriall Call, then what fort is that ? And Indeed for ought I can poftibly
F learn
^
34 Pi^if^ Scripture Proof cf
\earnby his fpecches, this is It that he drives at ; [God then called 6y Magiftratcs , but now by Miniftersi And fccondly. then he called all the Nations in one day, but now he cals here one and there one.] Let us therefore fee what ftrcngthliesin thefc words- 1. What if all this were true ? is th.re the leaft colour for the confcquencc from hence? It is as goodaconfcquence to fay, that when God judged J/Mf/by I)fZ;fl;ja woman, which before was judged by men , that then ;//-<«/ ceafed to be a Common weaUhj or the conftitutlonof the Common-wealth was altered. Orwhen the Government was changed from Judges to Kings^ that then the Eflentiall confti' tu.lonof the Common- wealth was chinged, and fo all Infants loft their ftandlng in the Common- wealth. V\ hat if the King inviting the Guefts to the Marriage Feaft, did firft fend one kinde of Officer and then another i firft a man, and then a woman, doth it follow that the Feaft is therefore altered ? If fiift a man, and then a chtlde, and then a woman be fent to call you to dinner, or to aay imployment or company , doth this change the nature of the company or imployment? what it aBifliop call one man to the Miniftry, and a Presbytery another, and the People a third, is not the Minifterial work and Office ft ill the fame ? what if a Magiftrate convert one man now, and a Minilter another, and a woman a third, doth ic follow that the Church or State that they arc converted to, is therefore not the fame ? what a powerfull Argument is here for a min to venture upon to un»church all the Infants in the world ? I he efficient caufe ent.rino: theEffence ; or if it did, yet not every lefs principal inferiour caufe, fuch as the Meffcnger or Minifler of cur CsU is j If you had proved that Gcd had repealed his Law which is the char;er of Church membeilhip, then you had fald fomethingj elfc you fay nothing to the purpofe.
1, I utterly deny that there is any more truth in the Antecedent than in the Con- frquent. God hath not altered the nature of the Call in any fubftantial point , but in meet circumftjnces ; It is faid, It was then by Magiftrates, and now by Minifterf, I anfwer i i. What was by Magiftrates ? the fi'fi Call ? or all after ? For the firft, I know not which or when it was j Let him that can tell, fee that he prove it. I findc when Circumcificn was fiift Ir^ftituted in/^i'/'/'fc^w.f lamily; But never when theic Church-memberfliipbegun J Shall! dare to think that tieher Abraham or his Family were no Church-members till they were Circumcifed i Rom. 4. would confute nie.
2. Suppofe it were true that Abraham* s Family began then to be a Church j ( which will i»ever be proved ) yet did not God call them to Clrcumcifion immediately ? what is this to a Minifterial Call ?
3., Are you fure that ythlch Abraham ^\^ in it, was as a Magiftrate ? and not as a Prophet ? nor Mafter of Family ? prove that if you can.
4 What was it that Abraham did i He circumcifed them when God had command-ed him ; And was circumcifing the Call ? then the Infants in the Wil- derncfs., nor the whole Campalmoft had no Church Call ; and then the women had never any Church Call. What was i: then that Abraham did more then may now be done? If you fiy, He compelled them to be circumcifed by violence wthout th?irconfent, I deny it as a forgery; And if h had done fo by thofe at age, it had been no making them Church-members, for their confent is abfolutely neceflary thereto.. Ifyoufay, Abr aham by h'xs'mxtxt^^ authority and perl'wafion didwinallat age in hjs Family to confent J dare you fay, that every Mafter of a Family and Ma- giftrate owght not to d© fo now ? So that I cannot finds any more that Abraham did in.th's Call, then may now be done. And then i^x Mofes, what more did he ? Did few' piake them Members without their confent? No.i He fets before them Life and
Death
Infants Church-memberfhip attdBa^tifm. jj
Death, Blefling and Carfing, and bids them chufe which thty wculd, Ccut. i8, zp, and 30. Chapters. Doth he clrcumcifethem ? No. not hii own Son, Nor the Ir.« fjnts forty ycarsi nor the women at all. Dothhe command them to obey the Con> niandsof God ? And Hiould not every King and Rhgiltratc do the like ? Dcthheper- fwadethem? V\hy, you know he was a Prophet ■" and if he had not, yetfurehemuft doicas a King, and as a fervant of God. Where then lies this peculiar Call by the Magiftrate ? 1 think by tha: time we have fearcht this to the qiiick^ welhall finde the Magiftracie lefs beholding to M/-. T. thenwas imagined. In'o wonder that he tod the people in his Pulpit that it was Dodrine of a dangerous confLqaence which I de- livered [That Magilhates had their power from Chrilt the Mediator, and not cn.ly from God as Creator] I doubt by this arguing of his. that he will not allow the Magiftrate to call all his people togcthe •, and propound th; Covenant of God to them, and command them to obey God. Yon finde not M'lfcs by Prilcn or Fiie forcing any man to confcnt ; And if he had, you muft have a little further work to prove that it was that which made them a Church, 0 that Magiftrates may not ftill do as much as was done herein th, n. 5. This Argunient ^ ii good, would help the Seekers to prove thac we have no Chu'-ch on earth, becaufenot called by Apolilcs, and io the C hurch- Coiiftitution taken down, and none by God fubftitutcd. Let them that have b:ttcr cyv-'s then I finde out this peculiar Chu.ch making Call, for I cannor. Well , But may itnot lie inthe fecond" Point, [That they were all taken in to be a Church In one day' ] Ar.fw i. What day was that? I would 3/r. T, could tell me. He faith Mo'cs did irj but ihats no truer then the reft. For furc they were a Church before Mofcs time Did ihey begin to be a Church in the Wildernefs i* Or did 3ftf/fj onely cxprefs the Coveiian to>them more fully, and caufe them oft to renew the Covenant, and fo onely confirm them a Church ? Was not the circumcifed feed o( Abraham a Church In E^ypt ? and was the uncircumcifed Hoft onely in the Wilderncfi the Church ? This is cxce Icnr ai^uing.
Bui: Ah'-.ihwi took all his Family to be a Church In one day, you will fay. I An- fwer, Fiift, It: 15 not povvd when they began to be a Church. Secondly, And would nor A/.. T. now hive a whole Family made a Church in a day ? Is that his charity ? Thirdly And what if It had been true of the whole Kingdom? Either It was with their confeni or wirhcut: without their confent they could not be made Church- Members } for thi.y cculd not enter into Covenant with God. And never was any fuch thiiig attcmptd. Even /i://7;«ii treads in .)fiy/^j fteps, and bids them chufe wfie- thcr they wi;l fcrve the Lord or net, /o/. 24, And it being with their confent thac the Nation were Church-Members, may not the like be done now ? What may not any or all the Nations in the world be added to the Church if they will confent and enter the Covenant ? What then, is this making them a Church in one day that Hr. t, fo cloudily ta:ks of? If he fay it is that then the Infants were taken In .- I Aafwer, That it ij to prove the lame by the fame, or elfe to argue circularly. As to fay their Church-Calldid take In Infants^ therefore the taking in of Infants was peculiar to their Chuich-Call ; this begs the Queftion j or to fay their Church-corfti:uclon isceafed, bccaufe thur Church- Call is ceafedj or their Church-Call conliftrng in the taking in of Infants is ceafed, therefore their Curch-conftitutlon isceafed ; and that Chuichcon- ftltution isceafed, therefore the taking in of Infants isceafed. This arguing is like thcic Cauic. I canno: further imagine what Mr. T. means by taking in All in a day, except he Ih uld not (peak of any ad by Law, Covenant, or Miniftty : but by [Call] (hould mem ^'ods providential gratious fucceedingthtfe Dc Event U) bowing the hearts of the whole Nation to confent co cake the Lotd for their God,and To to become his Church
Fa and
5 6 PlAin Scripture profif of
aod people But as I hope he doth not envy the extent of the Churchy fohe knows fure that the convt rting or taking in more or lefs, raikes no fuch alteration in the narure of the Church-Call, or Conftitution. And iflt did,yet do not all Prophefies fpeakof the Inlarging of the Church by C hrilt, and multiplying it ? Hath not the barren more chil- dren then flic that had an husband ? And what means Mi'- T. to talk of here one, and there cnc ? To fpcak focontemptucuflv, in fuch difpataging language of the Kingdom and Gci'pcl of Chrift ? Is not the wonderful fucccfs of the Golpel one of our Itrong Arguments for the truth of the Gofpcl and our Chriftian Religion < And it feems Mr, T. will give this away to the Pag.ws, rather then admit Infants to be members of the Churchjwas li but here one and there onc,when three thoufind were converted at once, and five thoufand afterward? > and many Myriadcs or ten thoufandSjeven ofihe Jnri that continued zealous of the Law did believe ? ^(^; i. 41. and q. 4- and -i. 10, be- fides all GciH-ihi ? was it but here and there one, when all that dwelt at l.ydd.i and Saron turned to the Lord both men and women > ARs^. J5- and all thatdwelt ut S<7wj>7(1, ACli 8. Let him llitw m: when three thoufand Jnvs were made Church-members in a day if he can before Chrifts time; I fuy^ if hecan^let him Ihew it me. Sure ever fincc Abiahams time, fajid I d"; ubt not but before too)they were added to the Church by one and one as they were born. And I have lliewed you before, hat Chrift fendcth his Melfengers to Difciple all Nations; Ic is a bafe Bxpofition th.u ihall fay he means onely, Go and Difciple me here one and there one out of all Nations, and no more. And what meaneth that In Revel, n. i^» The Kingdoms of the world are become the Kingdoms of the Lord,and of his ChriftrArc not thefe Kingdoms added to theChurch, as well as Ifracl^ And are not all ProftflTors of Chriftianity In Englandy as truly in the Church as all in I'^y.ul were ? I challenge any to anfwer mc herein, and undertake to make it good againft them (as far as will ftand with modcfty to challenge) whatfocvcr any Separatifts (commonly called Independents jor Anabnptifts may fay to i he contra- ry (for I have pretty well tried the l^rength of the!:- Arguing in this.) — — Yet a little further. Either My,T. by [Church.Call] means that which was the means of entering Infants, or men at age, or fomewhat common to both. The ^cws did all enter into the Church as members In Infancy, even they that deferred Circumcifion till forty years old, and the women that were not circumcifed- And what Call had thefe Infants that cannot underftand a Call ? The Profelytes, who were made Church Members at age, were firft converted to God, and profcffed the tiuc Religion, and fo brought in their children with them J They were converted not all in a day, but by times ,i not onely by Mofc: or fucceeding Magiftratcs,but chiefly by Piiefts or Levites, or zealous people, or by what way or means God was pleafed to ufe for that end. I did intreatMr.T. tolhew. me any material difference between the Call of thefe Profelytes into the Church in all ages till Chrift, and the Call of us Gcnti'cs Into the Church j And truly he gave me an anfwer of meer words for a put off/wherein he hath a notable laculiyj which I can find no weight nor I nee in, nor ani I able to tell you what he wpuld fay to it '■> nor can I conceive what poflibly can be faid of any moment.
And a* Camcio well noteth, lUr^liieiv is now ufcd in tho Churchy as it were In the placeof (i»e^5(r};/us/H» } Difcipiingnowto us, Isas Profclyting was tothem. So that you fee now what this Church Call Is which he layeth fo great a weight on, and how a^nch la the main ic diffcrctb from ours.
Bat
-Infants Church-fftemberjhif tend Baptifm, 3 7
BUt yet one other Argument Mi. T- hitk to prove the Church- confticution altered, and confequently Infants now caft oucjor their Church- membcrfhip repealed; And that is this ; i hey were to go up three times a year to the Temple ; they had their Sanc- drim> and High-Prieft; now he appealeth to all whether thefe be not altered : And therefore the Church-conftitution muft needs be altered 5 and fo Infants put out.
AlaSj miferablc Caufe that hath no better Arguments ", Are any of thcfc Eircntiall to their Church-conftitution ? I!ow came there to be fo ftrida conftitHtion between Pricfthood,Tcmple,Sanedrim,&c. as that the Church inuft needs fall when they fall ? May it not be a Church without ihcfe ? I would intreat IM,: T or any ChrilUan who bath the leaft good will totisth left in him,confiderately to Anfwer me to thefe; i.Was not the JewiHi People a Chuich before they had either temple^ or Sancdrim, or High Pricft, or any of all the Ceremonks or Laws of Mofcs ? were they not a Church In Egypt, 2nd in the Families oi Abraha'ry jfaac and Jacob ? a. Did the adding of thefe Laws and Ceremonies take down any former part of the Church ? Or dideveiynew Ceremony that was added, make a new Church or Conftitution of the Church ? j. If the adding of all thefe Ceremonies did not make a new Church or overthrow the old, why fhould the taking of them away overthrow it ? 4. If the Jews Church-conftitution before Mo'fJ time was fuch as took in Infants, why not after !Mafcs I'lme ? Or if In- fants were Church-members long before either Temple, or Sanedrim, or High Priefl, &c. Why may they not be fo when thefe are down ? Why muft they needs fall with them) when they did not rife with them ? 5 And if the very fpecifical nature of their Church be taken down^ then men are caft outj and wotnen too as well as children. If it be faid, that Chrift hath appointed men and women to be Church membes anew. I anfwer: What man can imagine that Chrift fi;ft repealed the Ordinance that men and women fliould be Members of the Church, and then fet It up a new > I will waftc no more time In confuting fuch flender Arguments, hut (hall willingly leave it to the judgement of any underftanding unbyafled man, whether Mr.T, have well proved, that God repealed his Ordinance, and revoked bis mcrcifuU gifc, that feme Infants Ihall be Chntch- members.
ANd now, by Gods help j I iTiall try whether I can any better prove that it is not Repealed ; Though I muft tell you that it is no ncceffary part of my task feeing the the proof lieth on him that affirmcth the Repeal, and not on me that deny it. If I bring anyScripture to prove any truth.it is an eafie matter to fay it is repealed, if that may fcrve turn ; So the Antinomians will put by much of the Scripture, and the Anti-Scripturift will deay it all.
Vi CHAP.
J8
Plai?7 Scripture proof of
CHAP. VI.
Y fiift Argument is this. If God have Rfpcaled this Ordinance^ and revoked this mercifull gift of Infants Church-memberfhip, then it is either in Mercy or in Juftice,eiiherfor their Good or for their Hurt : But he hath neither Repealed it in Mercy for their Goodjncr in Juftice for iheic Hurt i therefore he hath not at all repealed it.
I will hide nothing from you thit Mr.T. hith faid againft this Argumenc,either in our publike Difpute or in his Sermon. The fuflSciency of the enumeration in the Major propofition, he never offered to deny.* nor Indeed is there any ground to deny it. It mull needs be for the Good or Hutt of [n- fants that they are put out J and fo muft needsbe inMercy or Jullicc -. for God ma- kcth not fuch great alterations in his Chu.ch and Laws to no end, and of no momenr, but in meer indifFercncy.
The Minor I prove in both parts 1 i. That God hath not Repealed this to their hurt in JuflicCj I prove thus : If God never Revoke his Mercies, nor Repeal his Or» dinances In Juftice to the Parties hurt, till they firit break Covenant with him, andfo procure it by their own defcrtj thenhehaih not in ]dftice revoked this Mercy to the hurt of thofe that never broke Covenant with him •• But it is certain that God never re- voketh a Mercy in Juftice to the nurt of any that never broke Covenant with him j therefore to fuch he hatli not fo revoked it.
That this is a Mercv,and of the Covenantjis plainjDe««.i9 10,11^12. and freqjently paft denyall. 1. That God doth not in Juftice revoke fuch to any but Cove nant^ iSreakerSj I prove briefly thus ,* i. From the mercifulU nature and ccnftant dealings of God, who never caftethoffthofc that caft not off him : 1. From his Truth and Faithfulnefs ; forelfe welhould makeGodthe Covenant- Breaker, and not manj which is horrid blafphemy. 3 From the iminutability and conftancy of God ; His gifts and calling are without repentance. 4. Scripture frequently laycth all the Caufeof all evil of fuffcring upon mans finning i Fur the iniquity of Jacob n allthii^ and for the fm of iff ad ^ M ic. 1 . 5 . Thy dcflriiCiion ii oftl'jy /elf 0 Jfrae/, but of me u thy bdp^ Hof. 1 3 ^.Hc that will deny this, is not worthy the name of a Chriftiin.
Now you know there were many Jews rhat did believe, and didnot forfake the Covenant of God, even moft of the Apoftles themfelves, and many thoufands more j Now how then can thefe or their Infants be put out of the Church in Juftice to their hurt, who did not firft break Covenant with Ged ?
I am brief in this, becatifc Af/.T. doth not deny it. But that which he Anf^vcrctb, is, that [It is in Mercy for their Good] I prove the contrary plainly thusj It can be no Mercy to take away a Mercy , except it be to give a greater in rhe fttad of it 5 But here is no greater Mercy given to Infants in the ftcad of Chutch- mcmberfhipj therefore it can be no Mercy to them that it be revoked-
The Major, My.T. doth not deny j and I will fuHy tell you all that he faith to the Minor; i. In his Difpute he anfwercd, that Church mc.Tiberfhip of Infants was revoked in Mercy for tlieir Good", and that thty had a greater Mjrcy in ftead of it J And what do you think is that greater Mercy ? Why, it is Chrift come in the flefh.
I confefs
Infants Church member fhip and Baptifm, 39
~1 confcfs it amaz :h me to fee the power of crror^ how It can both at once bereave thjunderftmiiingof ordinary Light, and the Confcience of tendemefs 5 or one of thefc at leaft. ' s it poflib'.e that the juc'gemf nt of fuch a man as M'.T. can take this for afatJjfaftory Anfwer, oihis Confcience give him leave to deny Church-menabcrlhip, to all Infants in the World, and to raife a Schifin in a poor diftrcfled Church, and to charge their own blood on the heads of his people that ycild not to him, and all upon fuch lamentable grounds as thtfe ?
1. Was it ever heard before from the mouth of man, that Chrift fucceeded Church- membcrlhlp^ as a thing that was to give place for him ? Doth Chrift caft any out of the Church only, that he may facceed them ? Can he prove that their Church membcrfhip was a type of Chrift, that muft ceafe when he was come? Why doth he not prove it then from fome Scripture or reafonfCannot we have a room In the boJy, without being caft out at the coming of the head ? Ate the Head and Members at fuch odds^ that one muft give place and hi gone when the other comes ? Why then Is not the Church mcm- berdiip of men and women to give place to Chrifts coming in the flc(h>Sure the nature of Church memberfhip Is the lame in both. Why did the Apoftlcs never fpcakofthis among the Types of Chrift that did ceafe, thac all Infants are put cut of the Church or Family of God, that Chrift may fuccced 3$ a greater Mercy to them then ihcirroom In his Chorch and Family ? Is not here comfort (' but by a filly comforter ) to all the ]ews themf.'lvei ? though they are broken cfFfiom the Churchj yetChiift Is a greater mercy to them in ftead oi it.
But let us confider a lirtle what is the Church ? Is i: not the body of Chrift ? even all the Church fince /fi/i/w'i fall, and the making of the New Covenant, is one body of Chrift.- even the vilible Church Is his viliblc body, as 1 Cor. 1 1. and many Scriptures fully flicw j therefore even the Branches not bearing Fruit are faid to be In him, that is in hU vifiblc body, Job. 14.1,2,3. Now doth Chrift break off all Infants from his body , that he may come in the fl.'ih to be a greater Mercy to them ? Whit's that, but to be a greater Mercy then himfelf, who is the life and welfare of the body?
Again It feems by thi<!, M^.T. thinks that Excommunication Is a great Mercy ; If all the Jews Infants had been Excommunicate or caft out of the Church by God him- felf, It were no more then Chrift did in Mercy , never bringing them into any other Church inftead. Againft this ftrange fiSion I argued thus : If ordinarily God Ihew not fo great Metcy to thofe out of the Church as to thofe in It, then it is not a greater Mercy, or for the parties greater Good, to be put out, then to be In i But ordinarily God Ihcweth not lb great Mercy to thofe ou: of the Church as ro thofe in It j Therefore It is not for their greater Gosd^nor In greater Mercy to be put out. To this Mr .T. an- fwered nothing.
1 argued aUo thus j If thofe that are Out of the Church fince Chrift, have no fuch PromifeorAffurance of Mercy from him, as thofe In the Chutch had before Chrift} then it is not To tljcm a greater Mercy to be Out of the Church j But thofe Out of the Church fince Chrift, hare no fuch Promifeor Affuranceof Mercy from him, as thofe In the Church had before Chrift ; Therefore it cannot be to them a greater Mercy. To this Mr. T. anfwered. That it is a greater Mercy to Infants (ince Chrift to be Out of the Church, then before to be In it j and that they have asmuchafiu- rance of Mercy from Chrift now, as then (he (houldfay, more j ; To which I Replyed thus ;
If thofe Infants which were in the Church before Chrift^ iad God engaged In an Oath and Covenant to be their God, and to take ihcm for ftis peculiar People, and
thofe
^O fi^^f^ Scripture proof of
tHoic Infants out of the Church iince Chrift have no fuch thing j then they before Chrlft in the Chuich had more affurancc of mercy then thofe out of the Church fince Chrift : But the former is true, as 1 proved out of Dcvr. 19. 10, n, n. Upon which Texti what vain altercations there were, and what words were ufed againft the exprcfi letter of the Text, you (hall fee in the Relation ol the Difpute, if I be called to publidi it.
I further add out of £pfc/] i. 1 1. Thofe that were aliens to the Common-wealth of ifi-acl , were Grangers to the Covenant of Promifes, and without hope, and without God in the world : and there is no Scripture fpeaketh of delivering any from this fad ftate bat Church-members i therefore fure it can be no mercy to be put out of the Church.
Again, God added to the Church fuch as (hould be faved : therefore to be caft or put out of the Church is no known way of mercy.
Again, The Church is the Family of Chrift, fevcn the vifible Church is called the HoufeofGod, iri»j.3.i$.) But it is no known way of mercy to be out of Gods Houfe and Family.
Again. The Church is the Pillar and ground of Truth j therefore no mercy to be taken off it.
Again^ The Church vlfible is the vlfible body of Chrift j but ic is no mercy to be feparatcd from Chrifts body.
Again, The Church vlfible is Chrifts vifible Kingdom ; But it Is no mercy to be out of Chrifts Kingdom ; 1 herefoie it is no mercy to be out of the Church,
Laftly, Do but read all thofe hundred glorious things that are fpoken of the City of God, all thofe high praifes.that arc given to the fciv'fh Church, in Dc///.and the Vfalms, and all the Scriptures (/f/^o it lil^c unto thee 0 lfracl,8cc.) And then read all the hr more glorious thinjs that are fpoken of the Gofpel-Church fince Chrift : And if after this you can ftill believe, that God did in mercy caft Infants out of one Church, and nevet take them into the other^ and that Chrift came in the fledi to put them thus out of his Church in mercy, as If he could fitlier fave them out of his Church then in it ^ I fay. If after reading the forefaid paffages you can believe this,for mv part I give you up as for* lorn, and look upon your underftanding in this as forfakcn by God, and not onely void of fpiritual illumination, but common reaion : and pray the Lo'd tofavctheiin- derftandings of all his people from fuch a plague^ and to refcue yours before yo go fur- ther.
DUt let us fee what Mi^. 7*. anfwers to this In his Sermon, which upon deliberation he afterward preached to confute my Arguments, and therefore cannot lay the blame apon his unpreparednefs. And truly in my Judgementhc doth here plainly throw down his weapons, and give up the whole Caufe ( though not dirciftly confeU fing his error ; he is not yet fo happy. ) I were beft give you his own words, left I b« thought to wrong him 5 they are thefe •, [As for thofe petty reafons, If it be done,ii muft be in Mercy or Judgement. 1 fay in Mercy in refpcd of the whole Caiholike Church} now Chrlft being come, and we having a more fpiritual Church State then they had j Their Church-ftate was more cariial and flcfhly, and agreeable to theJ* time of minority J It is in msrcy that is taken away. And as for that exception, le cannot be taken away in mercy, unltl"s (omeprlvilcdge be to them in ftead of itj Me anfwcr. It is in mercy to the whole Churchy ihough no privilcdge be co them] So far Mr. Ts, words.
I con-
Jnfants Church- mefKberf])if and Baptifm.
I confcfs I never heard a caufe more plainly forfaken, except a man fhould fay flitly, I have erredjOr I recant, i . He much altcreth the terms of ray Argument, as you may fee by it before. 1 he Argument is thus j it can be no mercy to any to have a mercy taken away from themjexcep: it be to give a greater in its ttead ; But here is no greater mercy given to Infants in ftead of Church. memberfhip ; therefore it can be no mercy to them, that it be revoked or taken away. To call thefe [Petty Reafons] is the only ftrength of Mr. T. his Anfwcr. For I pray you mark, i. He never denied the Major Propofition, [That it can be no mercy to any to have a mercy taken from them, except that they may have a greater in ftead. ]Hc coold not deny this with any flicw of Rcafon: For othcrwife, if it be a mercy meerly to deprive the creature of mercy, then we ihall turn Hell into Heaven, and make it the greatcfl place of mercies, bccaufe none arc de. privcd of mercy fo much as they j no, nor of this particular mercy ; for noiic arc fur- ther removed from being members of the Church,thcn the damned.
z. And obferve next, That as Mr.r.denleth not the Major,fo here he plair.ly grants the Minor,and fo yicldi the whole Caufe. For the Minor was. [ That here is no gr.'acer mercy given to Infants in ftead of Ghurch-mcmberfhip.] Doth not Mr. T. acknow- ledge this ? when he faith twice over, i. That it is a mercy to the whole Catho'ike Church (to have their Infants put out of the Church.) And fo if the mercy be only to the Catholike Church, that they be none of the Church Cvifiblc) then It Is not to them a mercy : So that he taketh it to be a mercy only to others, but none to them, accord- ing to this anfwer. i. Yea he faith it more plainly the fecond time. That it is in mercy to the whole Church, though no privilcdge ( much lefs a greater mercy ) be to them (to the Infants themfelves.J So that for my part, I think I may well break oftherCjand take the whole caufe as yielded .• For if it be no mercy to any to be deprived of mercy, except that they may have a greater; And if Infants have no greater in ftead of this, but only their Parents have a greater i and both thefe be confeffcd ; then it mud follow, that it is no mercy to Infants to be deprived of this mercy of their Cnurch- memberflilp> and confequcntly God hath not taken it from them in mercy for their good (which is the thing I am proving;) and Mr. T. yieldeth that it is not taken from them in Juftice to their hurt j and therefore it is not taken from them at all- And thus you (ce what is come of the caufe that hath been driven on with fuch confidence.
But yet let us follow it further. And i. What means Mr. T. to talk of mercy to others, when our Queftion is. Whether it be a mercy to themfelves to be unchurched ?
2. By this arguing he may prove any thing almoli in the world a mercy ; Fur all (IjaU worli together for gnpcl to them thai love God, Rom.8. 1 8. And therefore if I lho\i\d ask him, Whether it be in mercy to wicked men, that God givech them over to them- felvcs,3nd at laft dansncth them ? Mr. T. may thus anfwer.that It is ; for it is a mercy to the whole Catholike Church , that is, to other men ? but what is this to the damned ^ So Mr. T. faith,' It is a mercy to the whole Catholike Church : but what is that co Infants who are unchurched ? ,
5. And whata itran^eReafonii thatof Af>-.T. tofay, [It isa mercy, becaufethcir Church ftate \vascarm!jflenily,and agreeable to l^cir minority i but ours is fpiritual.] What is this to tkcm tint are put d^t of that carnal Church-ft jre , and kept out of this fpiritual Church-ft.ite too? If rhcy had been admitted into this better ftate(as no doubt they arej then he had faid fomcwhat. Elfels not this as great a mercy to the poor ofT- cnft Jews ? they are put out of the carnal Church ftate too. But did God give fo many admirable F logics of the Jews Church; and can Mr'.t. yet thi.nk that it is better to be of no vifible Churchjthen 10 be of theirs ?
G 4. And
42 PUin Scripture froof of
4. And where did Mr. T. learn In Scripture to call the ]ewcs Church ftatc [ Carnal ?] Or what doth he mean by Church-rtare ? whether the cfTcntial nature of the Church It ftlf, or any carnal Ordinances of WorChip which were accidental to it ? 1$ not this word [ Chu.ch-Starc ] like hij form of [ Church Call ] devifcd terms to darken the matter with ambiguities , and Signifying what plcafes the fpwker ?
5 And how long might 1 wait before Mr. T. would prorc from ScripturCj that ic is a Mercy to tht whole, a'hol'kf 'hurch to have all Infants put out, or unchurched ? Thc(«. a!C the mcji thit mnkc their Followers bclitve that we have no ScrifKure for our Caufe, whrn themftlvcs eivc us but their Magiftcrial Didates. But I wonJcr whence he iiould f^fch fuch a arc mi. What } arc Jnfants fuch Toads or Vipers in comparifon of men of years, that Ic li a Mercy to the whole Catholike Church ro have them caft out f '-'• re not the A^^d ^vorfc thtn they f And were we not once all Infants ? If this bj true Doftrmr ^ >vhy may we not next cxped to be taught , that Infants muft alfo be ca<^ out cf Heaven , in mercy to the whole Catholike Church ? If it be no carnal Church-ftate to have Infjrts in Heaven , why is i: a carnal Chuich-ftate which conaintih in Ic Infants on Earth > And if it be no benefit tothe Catholike Church to have Infants kept out of Heaven , nor no hurt to the Church to fee them thcie J why (hou'd it be 3 benefit to ths whole Church to have them kept out on Earth, or any huit to the Church to fee them here Members?
Bu: yet let us come a little nearer : whatever ic may be to the encmics,or to Man- haters, ( of which fort the Church hath none ) yet mcthinks to thofe that are Love as God is Love, and that are merciful as their heavtnly Father is merciful, and who are bound to receive little children in Chiifts name, and who arc cjnverted and become as children themfelves } to fuch ic fhnuld feem no fuch Mercy to have all Infants un- churched. But fuch arc are all true Members of the Churchiand therefore to the Chuich it can be no fuch Mercy.
But yet nearer; whatfoever it may be to Strangers, yet methinks to the Parents themfelves it fliould feem no fuch Mercy to have their children put out of the Church. Hath God naturally planted fuch tender rff ftions in I'arcnts to their chi'drcn > and doih Grace incrcale ic. and the Sciipturc encourage it i" anJ ytc nuiR Iiey take i; for a mercy, that their children are put out ; when Mr. T. will not fay ic is a mercy to the children ?
Yet further; why then hath God made fuch promifcs to the Parents for their Seed, as if much of the Parents comfort lay in th: welfare of their children i ifitbeamercy to them that they are kept out of the Church ? may not ;his Dofirine teach P^^ircnts to give their children fuch a blefljng aJ the Jews did,H/.( bUhii be on m and our (hUdrcii! For their Curfe is to be broken cflFfrom the Cljurch ; and if thai be a \'ercy,th^ Jews arc then happier then I take them to be ; And how can we then pray, that they may be grafted in ag.iln i:
6. But what if all this were true ? Suppofc it were a Metcy to the whole i hiirch to have Infants put out ; yet it doth not follow th3t God would do it. He is the God of Infants as well as of the Aged, and is mercifuU to them as well as others •, all fuu's are his ; He can (hew mercy to the whole Church in an eafier way , then by calling out all their Infants ; And his Mercy is over all his works.
I will tell you yet how !Mr.T. followcth this with l^xanjpjes. He faith, [ That the
releafc of the lews fervants, and the confecration oi'Na':^iriies and fiiit born, and the
Land of Canaan^ were all Pri viledges, and yet thefe ai e taken away .] To which 1 an-
>fwcr, There are abundance far greater given in iheir ftead j And what is that then to
thofe
Infants church' memberjhip and Bapifm, 4 j
thofe that have nothing in ftead > Befide, if <»//, T. think that the mercy of Church- mcmberfliip iscfas low a nature as to be Na-^.tiitcs^ ox to hiwt. Canaan ^ he is much miftaken. But he faith^ [ That ic wis a PiiTilf dge to the lews to be owned as Gods People didind from the reft of the World, while others werepair^d by; yet this is repealed in Mercy tons Gentiles.] Acfw. In my diftinftion before you may find this anfweiedi i> Then it was no mercy to the Jews, yon think, but to us Gen- tiles-, But cur Queftion is, whether i: be a mercy to the unchurched Infants ? z. The lews being a Church and People of God, was a Mercy j and this God took not from any ofthcmj but thofe that call it away ; but the refliidion of this to them, andthc exclulion of the Gentiles, was no Meicy to them ; and thij only^ with the Ceremonial Accidents) did God take away by the change of his Laws. It would have been rather an addition to the happintfs of the believing lews, to have the Gentiles taken in, by taking down the I'artition-wall: An^ fo it will be when the lews are graffed in agaln^ and both midc one body. \\ hy die doth the lewilh Church p'-ay for her little Silter that had no Breafts > and Noah pray that God would perfwade Japhct to dwell in the Tents oi Scm ? Though the rcftridion thciefore, and the txclufion, ^which are no Mercies to the lews) be taken away yet no Mercy is taken frrm them, but what is fupplied with a far greater in Chrift : And though they partake not of thefe, yet that is becaufe of their unbelief who rcjcft it , and not becaule the new Law doth exclude them : For God hath in his new Law or Covenant made a Deed of Gift of Chrift and all his benefits, to All that Will receive him, whether lew or Gentile, without excluding or excepting any. And for his denying to particular perfons the Grace cf Converfion, that is nothing to our prefcnt bulincfs , as belonging to Decree, and mt any change in the Laws : and it was denied to many before Chrift, and granted to many thcufand Lws fincc Chrilt j and (lull be at laft to far more.
And thus you have heard all that Mr. T. upon deliberation hath fald to this Argu- ment. And yet (would any man think it ' ) he condudeth that [this is abundant clear anfwer toail alledged from the vilible Church. memberlhip ofthe children of the lews] O never let my foul be tainted with this error, which foftrangely bereaves men of common Ingenuity !
CHAP. VII.
Thcfccond Argument topr-ove that Infants Church'mcnibcr{hip U net repealed f and conlcquent/y they arc jiiU to be Members of the vifible ChnyCh.
Come now to my fecond Aigument to prove [ That the merciful Gift and Ordinance^that fonie Infants fliouU be Church- members, is not repealed.] And it is from Ron/. 1 1.17. ( And if fomt branches be brol^cn "ff,&c,) Whence I atgue thus ;
If it be onlv fo,;;f that weic broken rff from the Church then to the reft that were ft!ll/« //j the mtrcitul Gift of Church memb«ijh«pto them and their children is not rev. kcd : But it is only •« cmr that were broken off from the Church j ihercfure to the reft that remained In t tht Gift was not repealed.
The Antecedent is the plain words of the Text* The ftrcngth of the Confe-
G 1 qucnce
44 -P^^'^ Scr/ptnre troof of
qucncc licth here : i. For the parties not brck:n cff ; The breaking c ft' from the Church is an unavoidable confcqiisnce of the revoking of the gift of Church- membcrlhip, and the repealing of the Ojuinancc : 'I hcrcfore where there is no breaking ofl'from the Church, there is no fuch revoking or repealing. 1 his is nioft evident j and yet Mi.T» denied this Confcquencc.
1. If any lay, that :hc Sotne that were broken off were [all the InfantSjarnong others] as the whole Chapter will confute them, (o fpccially conhdcr, that the ApoiHc faith ic oftheJewiiTi Church whereof Infants were Members with their Parents^ thatltwas but Soine that were broken ofTfrom this Churchy fo far is the whole Church then from being diflblvcd.
AUo confider,th3C as the Infants conie In with their Parents, fo they arc not caft out while the Parents continue In : Except when they are grown up, they caft out them- felves by their perfonal fins. Who can imagine: that God lliould caft out the Infant ('that came in f.r the Fathers fake ) while the Parents remain in the fame Church ? But the Anfwer that is here given, is, that this place fpeaketh of the invifible Church j which I fliall reply to when'I have laid down my next Argument, becaufe it is from the fame Chapter.
CHAP. VIII.
y*^2iS^^^^^ Y third Argument to prove that this is not rcpealcdjis from Rum. i r io, " '' " [_ucll : -bccaiifc of unbelief they Tverc biol^enoff^'] Whence 1 argue thus : If none of the Jews were broken of but for unbelief , then believing Jews and their Seed were not broken cfFj and confecjuently the Gift of Church-memberfhip was not to them revoked : But none of the Jews were broken off but for unbelief: Therefore Believers and theiE Seed were not broken off j and coniet^uently the Gift to them is noc repealed.
The Minor er Antecedent is plain in the words of the Text ; The confcquence is, I think undeniable ; For 1 hope none will allirm that God broke off all the Infants of believing Jews for the fms or unbelief of other men. He that will not punifh the chil. dren for the Fathers fins,will much lefs punlfli them for a Strangers.
I have one other Argument from the fame Chapter j but I will anfwer the Objeftl- ons againft altogether here, before I come to that.
All that I know that ^>-.r.faith to all thefe^is^that they fpeak of the Invifible Church.
But I pray you mark •, He doth not fay of the invifible onely j Nay, he confeffed
i.iour Difpute, that itfpokeofthc vlfible.ilfo '• And that is as much a. I need, and
indeed a yielding of the caufe. But he faith^ it fpeaks not of the viliblc Church , as
vlfible. How then ? Doth it fpeak of the vifible Church as not vihble ? This Is
ananlVver like the reft. He brings many Reafons in his yipologie , to ihcw that the
invifible Church is here meant; but not offeree, though nothing to thej'urpofe.
The truth Is, It Is the fame Church in feveral refpcfts , that ufually is called vthble
■ or invifible. It is fpecially for the fake of true believers , that all fceming Believers
■^st£ called the ChuVch: And to fay therefore, that the Jews are broken cfT from the
'' Church invifible only, and we planted in their fiead, is vain. It is the fame Corn.
field, that comaineth the corn, and the chaffe, and ftraw5 but the corn telifg
Itlje'^niore cscdknc , ihoagh the lefs difcancd pare, doih give ihe name to the.
wbolsa .
Infants Church-wemberjhi^ and Baptifm, 45
whole. Now if you reap the Corn, and more grew up in the fame Field, will you fay that it grows up in the place of the Corn onely, or of the Straw or ChafFe onely ; Neither ; But as before Corn and Straw and Chaffe grow up together and make one vifible Corn- Field , fo Com and Straw and Chaiii do fpring and grow u^ together In the place of the former, and make one Corn- Field as the former did. So is it with the Church vifible and invifible, of the Jews and Gentiles. Bur I will give you di- vers plain Arguments from the Text, to prove that Paul fpeaketh here of the vifible Church.
And 1. 1 argued from vcr.iA* Foi- ifthoti rvert cut out of the O'.ivc tree which Is ivild by ?iature, and wen gr^cd contrary to nature into a good Olive tree ; Horv much wore (hall thcfe which be the natural branches^ be graff'ed into their own Olive tret f Hence I argued thus. That Church whereof the Jews were natural branches , was the vifible Church: But the Church that P<z«/ fpcaks of, was that whereof the Jews were natural branches: Therefore it was the vifible Church. Here an ordinary man would think theie were nothing to be denied. But Mr.T, denied the Major : whether according to his confcience, or againft it, he beft knows. For can any man believe that the Jews arc called natural biaiiches of the invifible Church onely ? I prove the M.^jor therefore thus : If Paul here fpeak of the main body of the Jewilh Nation^ and that body were all Members of the vifiblCjbutnot of the invifible Churchjthen It Is the vifible Church, and that moft dircftly, that P^;// here fpeaks of ; But P.2«/ hire I'peaks of the main body of thejcwilh Nation, who were all Members of the vifible Church, but notall of the invifible ; Therefore it is the vifible Church, and that moft diredly, that Faul here fpcaks of.
Me thinks this is plain. Can any man imagine that P.7«/fpeaksonly ofthc Eleft Jews, who only are members of the invifible Church.Hhat they are cut off^that we might be graft into the invifible Church in their place }
This Argument might prove the main by it felf. Further thus : If there be none known to us to be of the invifible Church immediately, but by firfl knowing them to be of the vifible ; then it muft be principally or fiift the vifible Church where- of Pd«/ faith the Jews were natural branches = But the former is true; therefore the latter.
Who dare fay that Paul fpoke here from fome Revelation extraordinary^ when he calleth the Jews natural branches ? But if it had been of the invifible Church dired- \yy Paul could have known no man to be a member of that, but by extraordinary Revelation.
Further, I argued thus : ("but chkRy Aihsmlncm^ becaufe A//'. T. ftandsfo much onRom.<).7.) If the Jews were not natural branches of the invifible Church dircdly, but only of [he vifible, then it is the vifible Church that P.t«/ here cils them natural branches of: But the Jews were not natural branches of the invifible Church diredly; Therefore it is the vifible that Paul here fpeiks of. Mr- T. denied the Minor, which I proved out oiKnm.^. ^,7^^- They are not all ijracl which arc of Ifrael (but they were all natural branches ) Neither becaufe they arc the feed of Abraham arc iky childreTTy but in ifi.K (hall thy feed be called, that is, They which arc the children nf the /?/?;, thcfc are 7iot the children of God, ( Therefore not natural branches of the invifible Church^ but the children of the Prom'ifc an accounted [or the Seed. To this Mr. T. anfsvered by a learned diftindion, [ That they wcrethc Mnturalbroiaches of the invifi- ble Church but not By nature j ] To which I replied, That the very exprcfs words of the Tcxt^v i4,of 7(pw.ii. confu;cthhls diitindion^ ufing bo'.Ii terms [Natural] and [By nature]
G J He-
^5 PUin Scripture prcofcf
He then added, [That as mcn,'hfy were of /jbrah.wi^^nd (o were natural j but not as branches.] Ah, what a pack of poor (liifts are here ? i. I he Apoftle fpeaks ofnatural branches, and not natural men, i. He oppofcih them to the Gentiles, who were natural men as well as the lews, but not natural branches. The : eit of the heap of words that were here uied.hid no fenfe in them that Icobld under ftand j and ycuftiall find them in the DifputCjif publilhed.
How well Af/./. agrees with hlmftlf, I dcfirc ycu to judge \\h:n you hive read thefc vords in his Ex.irr7.ip. 108. The phrifes (fai:h he) Rnm.ii.zi. [^ul iki: NMiital branches, 1'. 14. of the Wild O'.i-jc by nature j Thou Vfifl Z,'aj]':d in bi fides nUuyr^ theje accordng to vaturc] do feem to me to import, not that the lews were in the Ccv.nant of grace by nature, but that they had this priviledge to be rcikoncd in the outward admlniltration asbranchesof the Olive by their birth, by vertue of Godi appointment , which the Gentiles had nor.
And is not this then to be vifible Members of the Church ? But Mr T. his wit will find a Ihift to reconcile thefe, as contradiftory as they are.
Furthei more I add, Thofe that were nnt branches of the Invifiblc Church r.t all. were neither Naturally.^ nor iy ATa/wrc branches of it. But many thcul'cnd lews weiC no branches of that Church at all ,• And thol'e that Vaul. fai'h, Raw 9 8. [Th.it tht:y were not the children of God, becaufe the feed of Abralojnj'] rhen they were not mf mbers cf the invifible Church,either naturally, or by narure j but yet they were members or ni. tural branches of the vifible Church as ihe feed oi Abraham ^cauie. the Ccvenant made over that priviledge to his feed. »
1. I further prove that Paul here fpeaks of the vifible Church thus. If the hcalf'tig rff hzv fij'.cjihtn it muft needs be from the vifible Church; (yea, and direftly from it alone) liuc the b,eal(ing offoi the lews was vijiblc > therefore it muft needs be from the vilible Church.
The Antecedent ( that It was a vifible breaking cfF) T prove thus.
I. ^:om Rom. II. 2.^. Behold th-'goodacfs 3'id fevcrity of ihi L'lrd; tin them vohkh fell . fcvcyity^Scc. That breaking oflfwherein Gods ft.ve;iry was to be beheld by the Gentiles, was fure vifible ; But this was fuch a breaking i ft" wherein the ttveri y of God w.is to be beheld by the Gentiles; therefore it was vifible. P.;«/ would not cail them to bcbold that which could not be feen.
1. 1 hat byc.il^jr^ of which the Gentiles were in fuch danger of boafling of againft the lewsjuruft needs be vifible, (for they W( uld not boaft of that which was uudilcern- able.) But this was fuch, as appear^ xi. i8.zo. Boa[l twt ag.vnft the branches j licmt h!gh-minded,but fear.
Yea J T<2«/ himfclf could not elfc have known that the lews were broken cff,but by Revelation cxtr3ordinary,exccpt it had been a vifible breaking ofl ; therefore certainly the breaking cfF was vifible.
X And then the confequence is evident, (that if the breaking off be vifible, then it muft needs be from the vifible C hurcH.) Fo]^,to be vifibly broken cff, is robe vifibly removed from the Terminus a quo, (or Church from which they are broken ) lut there can be no vifible removal, or diftance from an invifiblc Tawinus : therefore thare can be no vifible removal from an invifible Churchy and confequently it is the vifible Church, which they are diredly vifibly brckni fF from- T lOUgh it is true, thattheir breaking off from the invifible Church may from thence in the fecond place be rati- onally concluded.
3. Again, The Conclufion before faid 1 prove thus , (' i^;^. That Pj«/ here fpeaks pf iht'u breaking off from the vifible Church.^ If every vifible breaking off from the
invifible
Infants Church-memberjhif and Baptifm, 47
invifiblc Church be alfo a vifible breaking off from the vifible Church j then the break- ing oft" which Pi7«/ here mentioncthmuft be from both^ ( if i: be from the invifible.) Bur the former ii certain, therefore the latter.
The Ancecedent I prove thus. To be vifibly broken cfFfrom the inyifible Ch"jch, Is to be vilibly out of Covenant with God, out of his favour, and in a known,^fteof damnation J (1 fpeaknot here of caftingour of one particular Church oncly- or with Ilmitition^ or of meer Non-commun'on.) But all that are vifibly out of Corcnant with God,and out of bis favour in a ftare of damnation, are vifibly broken eft" alfo from the vifible Church ; (I will not now difpute, whether DcfjRopx only Dcjurr', whether m fc^ot a\{o quoad noi.) Therefore breaking eft" vifibly from the vifible Church, is Infeparable from vifible breaking eft' from the invifible J (Nay, it is the fame thing in another notion.)
Further, If God ftiould break cft'men from the invifible Church onely and direftly, then it would be by an invifible ad j But this was by a vifible ad j therefore it was from the vifible Church.
4 Again, You heard before fiom the 17. vcrfc'-i That God broke oft" but fome of the lews, and fo the reft remained in the Church. Now if fome remain in the invifible Churciijthen much more in the vifible : for if God fhou'.d b.cak cftall from the vifible Church and but fome from the invifible; then he fliould take thofe for his true fervants, andina Ihtcof falvation, who do neither profefs to be his fervants, nor are in covenant with him. 'nu the Conft qucnce is abfuid, therefore fo is the Antecedent.
That this abfurd Coiiltquence would follow , appears thus > from the nature and properties of both forts of Church members j For vifible being in Covenant, or prr.fcfling true Religion ( expicicely or implicitely ) maketh a vifible member j and finccricy in the Covenant makes a member as invifible- and all thefe arc in the ftite cf falvation. New to fay that one is a member of the invifible Chuich , and not of >he vifible, is to fjy, he is linccic in a Covenant which he is not known to be in at all ; and that he is i.i a fiate cf falvnion , before he be in a fiate of common profeflion, or any thing equivalent, which is abfurd. And I fliall flievv you after - ward, that without this ablti dity Mr. T. cannot in his way affirm that any Infant is faved.
5. A^ain, You heard before, that they were broken eff only for unbelief : Now if unbelief only break eft" from the invifible <- hurch, then it only breaks tft"fiom the vi- fible ; and therefore it muft needs follow, both that the vifible Church is alfo here meant, and that none but for unbelief are broke fft" from one (rightly) any nvjre then from the other. (I run over thefe haftily, bccaufe 1 would have done with this which is fo plain already.)
6. Laftly, I argue thus. 7hat Church which men may be, and are broken ofFfromj is the vifible Church ( f;)i Mr. T will confefs that no man is broken oftfom the in. vifible Church ; ^ liu. this Church is it that men (the lews) were beoken oft from i thcrefoie this is the vifible ChUiCh. M- . T. hich two anfwers to this. i. That they arc broken tft"in appearance, asth )fe btanches in fob. 15. 2. are faid to be in Chrift inappearancc But this is to addecrror to erroi. It is bold expounding to fay, that when Chrift fath, J hey were b.r.nchcs in him , the meaning was, they were not in him, but only fcemed fo. They w if really in Chufts vifible body. But 2. This Anfwcr in hh ^pnlogic he after difl.kes, upon the difcovery of one that he thinks better, z/i^. That it is the Colledive body of the lews, not taken as at that one i"mc } but as the river that runs to day, is the fame river that ran long ago, though not the fame water. But this ftiifi will never fcrve his turn, j. For if the Church be con-
ilicuced
4S
Plain Scripture proof cf
Itltuted of individual pcrfois, 'hen if rcne of thofc individual cerfons were broken off, the Church was not broken cii ', Bur the Church is conftitated or compoied of indivi- dual pcrfcns ; Therefore if none of them be broken ofFjthen the Church is not broken olF^'' but that is falfe.)
^'■"^^gain, if they were broken eft" for unbelief, then for the unbelief of Tome parrf- CUlar p'erfons , and confcquently it was feme individual perfons that for that unbelief were broken off 5 Now furc God would not break off the Church for the unbelief of any foregoing Age, without their own.
:?• Again, if but /owe were broken off, then thofe /d;;?;;? muft needs be individual perfonSj and not all the Nation in a fenfe containing no individual perfon,
4. According to Mr.T. his conceit, they muft be in breaking offa long time, at Icaft an Age, zi/^. by the death of all the true Believers, and the fucceffion of Unbe- lievers. But this was not fo: There was a time when the fame Church, (for the greater part) which was a Church before, did immediately ceafe to befo, vi^, when Chrift added a new fundamental Article to their Creed, without which they might before have been faved, but after could not, [ ifyc bd'uvc not thiit I am he, yc (ball die inyotir fins.'] They that were of the Church before, immediately upon the rejefting of this Article were all unchurched ; this beiQ| now made iffcntial to their Sonrtiip, or C hurchmcmbeifliip, and of abfolute neceflicy to their falvation, which was not lb before to the fame individual perfons ; their unbelief which was but negative, was now privative.
Either they were a Church immediately before this breakingoff, or not. If they were not, then they were broken off before this breaking offjand fo this could be no breaking off; If they were a Church, then it was individual perfons that were broken off_»*-and confcquently it muft needs be from the vifible Churchy feeing from the invifible there is no breaking of in Mr.Ts. own judgment.
And thus, I dare confidently affirm, that I have fully proved, that the Apoftle in Rom. 11. doth fpcak of the Church vifible ; from which it is but fome that he faith are broken off, and thofe but for unbelief j and therefore all the believing Jews and their children are yet in that Church, as being never yet broken off. I defire you to re- member this too , the rather becaufe I fiiall make further ufe of fome Texts in this Chapter.
CHAP. IX.
Y fourth Afgument to prove that Gods Ordinance for Infants Chuichmembeifliip'is not repealed, is from Rom. 11. t^. iHoiv much itmc [h.iU thcfcivhich he natural branches heg^aff- ed into their own Olive tree ? ] Whence I argue thus. It it be into their own Olive, ( even the Olive which they were broke ofl from, and of which they were natural branches ) that the Jews fliall be reingraftcd at their recovery ; ,then Gods Or- dinance for their Infants Church mcmberdiip is not re- pealed. But they dial 1. be reins^r3ff<:d into thck awn Olive;, therefore the fald Ordinance is not repealed. The Antecedent is the words of the Text.The rcafon of the Confequcnce lleth here-, m that their ow»0/i-ye is their own Charch : Jlcnowfiot any that denieth that ; And
their
Infants Chnrch'jnembcrjhi^ dfidBaptifm,
49
their ow« C^U'Cb did ever contain Infanrs as members ; tliereforc when they are re ingrafFed into their own Church, their Infants muft needs be reingratfed with them.
I know nothing that can be faid againft this, but the old objeftion of Mr. T. CI hat it is the invifible Church that is here meant i ] To which 1 dare [rfl have given aa anfwer fiafficient to prove that it is the Church vifiblc.
And one more Argamcnt to that end let mc add from the Text.
That Church which Is called the Jews own, muft needs be the vifiblc Church : Buc this Church which Pan! fpcaks of was the Jews own i therefore it was the vifible. If I thought any would deny that the vifible Church was more properly called [the Jews own] then the invifible, I would wafte fomc time to prove It j in the mean time I take it for granted.
CHAP. X.
>Y fifth Argument to prove the Ordinance for Infants Church-mcmbcrfliip not repealed , is from the fame verfc, with the two following. [Thcyfhall be gfajfcd Into tbe'ir own
Olive Blindnefs In part is hapned to Ifracl y till the ful-
nefs of the Gentiles be come in, and fo AH ifrad fliall be favcd] with a multitude of the like places in Scripture w<»ichi fpeak of the calling of the Jewipj Nation.
From whence 1 argue thus. U All J/r^jf/ (hall be graffed again into their own OlIve,and AU he faved from their Off- broken ftate, then Infants fliall be graffcd in and faved witb the Parents : But the Text faith, that All Ifracl (hall be grafied in again , and ravcd[ from their Off-broken ftate : Therefore Infants alfo fliall be graffed in and faved.
I know but two things that can be faid againft this. Firft, Somo may fay, that by, 'Alt //Mf/ is meant fomeonely, excluding all Infants. To which I anfwer,
I . I had rather fay as God faithj then as they that thus contradlft him. Upon fuclii expofitioni you may contradid any thing in the Bible as well as this. If God fay AU, at leaft I think it the fafcfi way to believe It Is All. But methinks thofe men fliould noc rejed the plain leuer of Scripture , that fo exclaim againft us for want of plain Scripture.
r. PdultdXi^ not All hetievtis, bm [ AU ifracl ; J (hewing fully tliat It will be a National recovery. Now If you can prove that any are excepted } yet if it be National, certainly Infants are a part of the Nation $ and It Is not the Nation, If all the Infants be excluded.
Secondly, If the old objeftlon ( That it I? the invifible Church) be brought in by Mrn:. befides what it faid againft it already, f yet further add from the Texr this ftrong Argument. That Church which jrf// 7/ V^jc/ Qiall be faved into, or re-ingr.'ffed, or re- covered iato,isthe vifible, and not the invifible Church ; But this Church which Pant fpealts of, is it which All ifracl (lull be faved or re Ingraffcd into ; Thereferc it is tlie vifible , and not the inviiible Church.
I can hardly imagine Mr.T. fo charitable, as to fay that AU ifrael, men,wonKn,and children fliall be certainly faved eternally, as they muft be if they be faved into the in. -vi fible Church. Tf he ftiould fo judge, yet at leaft this will hold. That if the whole Nacionj Infants and all , be fo vifibly Caved into the Church invifible, then they are
H mucb
50
Plain Scripture preof cf
much more faved into the Church viable. But according to M,.T. All I'r.icl flnll be favcd into the Church i/ivifibld therefore much more into the Church v'lfblc.
I would ^^^ To would chew a little uponthcfc plain Arguments. I believe if he knew that All the Jews Infants at their recovery (lull be faved , he dare not fure deny themto be menr.bers of the vifible Church (except he be grown fo bold, that he dare deny almoft any thing that is againft his way- )
CHAP. XL
Y fixth Argument Is alfofrom the fame Tcxt^vcr. 17; 1 9 ^4. [if fome of the branches be brol^en off\ and thou 'jcing a mid Olive tree wcit graced in amongft them^ and with them paital{cft of the root and fatnefs of the Olivz t/'Cf, &c.] The branches were broken off that I mlghc be graft in, &c. fo verf' 24.
Whence I argue thus j If It were the fame Church- that the Jews were broken oft" from, which we Gentiles begrafifedin, then our Infants have right of member- fhip as theirs had : ( and confequently the Ordinance that fome Infants Ihould be Church members is not repealed 5 ) But it is the fame Olive or Church which they were broken off from, that we Gentiles are graft"«;d in j therefore our Infants have the fame right of memberfhip, &(c. If their Church admitted Infanc-members, and our Church be the fame, then ours muft admit of Infant-members.
This Argument coodudeth not only that the gift and Ordinance Is not repealed to believing Jews, but alfo that it continueth to the Gentiles j what may be faid againft ir, is anfwered before.I purpofely omit thofc other Arguments which Mr.CcW^^jand others ufe, to prove that the Apoftle fpeaks of the vifible Church, becaufc I will not ftand to fay much of that which is fufficiently faid by others already In print.
Another Argument I might bring here from the fame Text ; in that it maketh the Olive, that is, the Church it felt to remain ftill, and only fome branches broken oft^and others of the Gentiles ingraffed in their ftead : And If the Church it felf were not bro- ken, but only fome branches, then it is not taken down, except only the Ceremonial Accidentals : therefore the Apoftle faith, Blindnefs in p.trt is happened to Ifracl j that Is^- to part of IfraeU Buc this Text I /hall difmifSj and go to anothet.
CH.AP^
Infants Church- tncmberjlnf and Baptifm^ 5 1
CHAP. XII.
\Y feventh Argument fliali be drawn from that of Mat, 13.37, 3^ J 3 9 • {.O JcrnCalcm^ Jc,-ufalc»ij)ow oft would I hwc gather" cd thy children together as a Hc» gatbcreth her chicl^^cns under her wings, andycrvouldaotJ Behold your bonfe is left mito ' you defo!ate^&c.^ From hence I argue thus : If Chrift were ' fo tender over Jenijalem that he would have gathered them asaHengathereth herchickens,then fuiehc would not have put them or their Infants out of the Church: (or repealed the merciful gifc and ordinance of their Church-memberlhip) But Chrift was fo tender of them, that he would have fo ga- thcted JcrufatemiSx.c. Therefore fure he would not have un-churchcd their Infants.1 he antecedent is the words of the Lord ]efus= The reafon and ftrength of the confequence licth here. i. It 1% not fome particular Jews that Ghrift would have gathered to him- felf(fand fo into his Church as accomplilhed with higher piivilcdges then bcfore.-^but ic was Jerufalcm, whole Jerufxlsm^ (which is ufually put for all Juddx and the Jewilh Na« tion.) Now if /fr«/^/f»; were gathered J then Infants muft needs be gathered. I know nothing of any moment that can be faid againft this j but leave it to any tender confci- ence to judgejwhcther it be likely that Chrift would have unchurched all their Infants, when be would have gathered to himfelf the whole Nation^ or whole Jcrufalcm I
If ihat contemptible anfwerfliould here be again returned, [that Chrift would have gathered them only into the invifible Church ; ] I have anfwered it before ; They that are vidbly or apparently gathered Into the invifible Church, are gathered alfo thereby into the vlfible. And if all /a/z/Iz/fw? had been gathered, ithad beendoubtlefs a vifible gathering. O that I could fee as clear evidence for many other controverted truths,as I fee in thefe words of the Lord Jefus, to convince me, that he would have gathered all Jcrujaiem into his vifible Church, and consequently not have unchurched all their In- fants: I fliould tremble to think of refifting fo plain ttftimonicsof God. If Chrifts own words will not ferve, I know not what will. If any fay, that by "fcnifalem is meant only theagcdof J(.Y«/"rt/?«jiIanfwer ; Ic is vain tocallforScripture,if they dare con- tradift it at pleafure, or to make it fpcak only what they lift, Ic is not fully a Nation, or City without the Infants.
Befii.ies,/m</^^/c;;jhad un.churched infants when Chrift fo fpake^therefore how could his words be otherwife underflood by them, unlefs he had excepted Infants 3
2. Yet further , Chrift doth not in vain ufe the fimilitudeof a Hen gathering her Chickens J The Hen gathereth the youngeft moft tenderly ; Yea, how long will llie fit the very Eggs ? Now who dare expound this thus ? As a Hen gathereth heryong ones under her wings,fo i would have gathered the aged of you, but none of your yong onesvilibly.
3. And doth not the leaving of their hcuie defolare, mean the Temple, and fo the unchurching them, till they fay, Bkjfid U hcth.it cemtth in ihc Namcoftbc Lord i And then jcrulalcm{%nA therefore infanrsjIluU be inchurched again ? So Chnft jefus him- felf hath made mc believe that he would have gathered all ^crtffaUf^i but un- churched none of them.
H »
CHAP.
52
PUirt Scripture proof of
CHAP. XIII.
! Y eighth Argument is from Rev, 1 1. 1 j.If the Kingdoms of this Worlds cicher arc or Ihall be the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Chrtft j. ^ then Infants alfo muft bcMembcrs of his Klngdon^ i ( & conle^ucntly ^ the Gift and Ordinance for their Church- membcrfliip isnotrepeal- ^ ed ) But the Antecedent is the words of the Text. What can be fald againft this that is fenfe or reafon ? If they fay, that by [Kingdoms] is meant [fomepart of the Kingdoms] excluding all Infants j 1 fay, foch men need not look into Scripture for their faith 5 they may make their own Creed on thefe terms, let Scripture fay what it will j I know fomeplaces of Scripture may be produced where the word KjngdofmnA JerufalemfSccis taken for a- part j. but Jf we muft take words-always improperly, becaufc they arc fo taken fometimcj then wefhallnot know how to underftand any Scripture, and humane language will become ufclefsj and by this any man may put by any Teftimony of Scripture, though it were to prove the moft fundamental Truth 3 As the Arriam^w o^Fall Teilimonics for the Godhead of Ghrifl, becaufc Maglftrates are called Gods.
But the circumftances of this Text and the former do fully evince to us, that Chrlft fpeaketh properly of whole /<?>-«/d/ew, and whole Kingdoms, and not improperly of any p.artonly^
„»c If They fay, tlat by [Kingdons of Chrift] is not meant the Church of Chiift,they then fpeak againft the conftantphrafc of Scripture, which calls Chrifts Kingdom his Churchjd'' converfim : Chrift is King and Saviour of the fame fociety. What is Chrlfts Kingdom, but his Church ? I know the Kingdom of Chrift Is more large, and more fpecial 5 but here it cannot be meant of his Kingdom in the larger fenfe,3s he is dcjitrc^ only King ( in regard of voluntary obedient fubjeds, ) nor as he overruleth common focietics and things \ For fo the Kingdoms of the world were ever the Kingdoms of the Lord and his Chrift', and Ic could not be faid that now they are become fo. $0 that for any thing I can fee, this Text alone were fufficient to decide the whok controverfic, whether Infants muft be Church mcntbers, .
CHAP. XIV.
Yninth Argument is this J Iftliibelicving Jews children (and confequently the Parents in point of comfort ) be not in .1 worfi condition. finceChi'ift, then they were before, then their chil- dren ought ftiU to be Church-members. ( And conffquently the Gift and, Ordinance is not repealed.; But certainly the believing Jews children { and confequently the Parents in point of comfort^ are not in a wo rfe condition fiiiceCh.ift then they
were before; Therefore tficir children ou^t ftHl to be Church-
■members. The Antecedent I fcarcc take him for a Chriftian that will deny. Chrifl* di4 not come to make Believers or their children miferabk, or to uodo tiicipyor brii-ig
" ' ' " " ■ them.'t
Infants Church-piemherjhif and B aptifht, 5 j
rfiem into aworfe condition. This were to make Chrlft adtftroyer, and not a SayU our 5 He that came not to deftroy mens litres but to fave them, came not to deftroy mens happinefs, but to recover them. He that would not accufe the adulterous wo- man, will not caft out all Infants without acctfation.
2. The confequcnce a man would think fliould be out of doubt } If it be not,I prove kthus: It is afar worfe condition 10 be out of the vifible Church then to be in it ; Therefore if the believing Jew;, children be caft out ofthe Church, then they are ina far worfe condition then they were before j (and fo ChriH and Faith fliould do them a mifchief, which were blafphemy to Imagine.)
Can you imagine what (hift is left againfl this plain truth ? I will tell you all thac My. T. could ray'(before many thoufand witneites I think) and that is this j He faith plainly. That it is a better condition to Infants to be out of the Church now, thenco be in it then. Which I thought a Chriilian qould fcarce have believed.
I. Arc all thofe glorious things fpoken of the City of God? and is It now better eo be out of any Church, then ta it ?
X. Then the Gentiles, Pagans Infants now are happycr then the Jews were then' j for the Pagans and their Infants are out ofthe Church.
But I were beft argue it a little further, j . If if be a better condition to be in that Covenant with vJod wherein he bindeth himfclf to bt their God, and taketh them to be his peculiar people, then to be out of that Covenant, then itis a better condition to be in the Church as It was then, then to be out of that and this to j but it is a bet. ter condition to be in the aforefaid Covenant with God, then out of it; Therefore it is better to be in the Church as then, then to be in neither.
The Antecedent is undeniable j The confequence is clear In thefe two Condufions"; ' XiThat the unchurched Jews were then all in fuch a [ Covenant with God. This I proved, Dewr.ip.i i,ii. Te Jia-nd all before the Lordyour God j your Caftams^EldcUy Officer Sy voith all the men of Ifracly your iittle ones, your wives ^ &c. Ikifthoupjouldefl enter into the- Covenant with the Lordthy God^ and into his o.uh which he mai(eth with th;e thisdiiy, that he may efiabUfh ihcc to d.iy for a people unto himfclf^ and-'thdthc KJybe to thee a God) SccWtat Mr. T. vainly faith againfl the plain words' of this Text, you may fee In the end.
i. There is to thofe that are now out of the Church no fuch Covenant, aflurancc, or mercy aniwerable. Iftherebe, let fome bodylhcw it, which Icould never get Mr. T. to do. Nay, he feemeth to confefs in his IJcmonj that Infants nowhave no priviledgcatallinfteadoftheir Charch membcifhip.
4 I argue from iJo/w.g. i, irhat advantage hath thc^eov, mdwhAt profit the circitm- clfion} Much every way, &c. If the Jewscircumcifed un.churched Infants had much advantage every way, and thofi without the Church have none j then it is better be In their Church then without the Church j Euc the former is plain in the Text j there- fore the latter is certain.
'i. Again, from /?(?OT. 9 4. I argue thus; If then to the Jews pertained the Adcp. tlon, the Covenants J the Promiles , &c. Init no fuch thing to- them without the. Church : then it is wo.Tc to be out ofthe Church, then to be In it as they were j But the former is the words ofthe holy Ghoft ; therefore the confcqucnt is certain
6. If it be better to be In Gods Hcufe and Family then out, and in his vifible Kingdom then cut ; then it is better to be in the Church (though but as the Jews were) ; then out J Bat the former is evidenr^ therefore the latter.
7. If it be better to be a fanftjficd peculiar people to God then to-be nonefuch-^ (^ut an excluded, common, unclean people ; ) then it is better to be in the Churcli^i
H •? . (tHoi\oh.:i
54 ^Ui» Scripure proof of
(chough bar as the Jews were) then out of the Church j but the former is moft cer- tain j therefore the latter. The confcqucncc is plain, in that all the Church, bo:h jlews and Gentiles arc properly a pcculur people feparated or [andified to God j and (oaretheyftiil called in the Old Tcftamcntand New j and therefore thoic wiihouc the Church muft needs be an excluded people ('even as titftion of I'oaie impiyjth pifTinp by or reje&ing of others 3 ) and chcrctorc are called common and andean fre- quintfy.
8. If God do not nfuaiiy beftow fo many or greater mercies outofhis Church as as he doth in It j then it is worfe to be cut of the Church, then to be in it (though bu: a; the Jews were.) But certainly God ufcth not to beftow fo many or greater mercies out of the Church as in tc 5 therefore it is worfe to be out then in (though buc as the Jews.;
9. If Chrift have made larger promifes tohis Church vlfible then to any in the world that are not of his Church, (nay, if there be no fpecial promife at all, nor fcarce common to any without the Church, bu: the conditional, upon their coming \nj then it is worfe to be out of the Churchy then to be fo initj But the former is true, therefore the latter.
10. If Chrifl hive promifed his prefence to his Church to the end of the world, and do walk among the golden Candlettlcks, and take pleafure in her ; but not fo to thofe without the Church, 5 then it is better being within (though but as the ]ews^ then without. But the former is true ; therefore the latter. Did 1 not relolve on bre- vity, it were eafier to cite multitudes of Texts for all thefe.
But upon this much I fay to the contrrary.minded, as fopjuah la another cafe^ choofe you what Society you will be of, but as for me and my houdiold, we will be oftheChuich of God f and had I children, Ifliouldbe loth God iliould lliut them Gutj^ For without are dogs, extortioners, lyars, &c. Even Chrift calls the woman of Canaan that was wirhout, a dog, though when he had admitted her into his Churchy Hie became a daughter. I fay therefore as Fcter, whether Jhali we gOy if we forfake the Church ^ Uis good for us to be here j Thofe that will needs think it better to be out of the Church, then in it,let them go ; they need no Anathema, nor Excommunicati- on, feeing they think it fuch a mercy to be without the Church j I vrill not fay of it, as Pj«/of his Ihip, Except ye abide in it^ yc cannot befaved,
Andfol conclude^ Chrift did not come to Believers hurt, by unchurching thcic chiMren.
CHAP.^
Ififants church- memberjhi^ and B apt if m.
55
CHAP. XV
Y tenth Argument is this, from Hcb-^. 6. \_Jefui it the iMediaior of a bcuer Covenant (lablifhci on bate,- promilcsj Heb. 7« i~- And the Author of a better Tcjiamcnt. Rom. j. 14, ly, lo. jrhoefin Moui:d:di grace much more abounded. Ephef. 19.20. That je mty comprehend the height, and breadth, and lengthy and depth, and I;ncw the love of Cbrijlwhich pajfeth \nprvkdge \ ] with a hundred the like places, from whence I argue thus. If the c'.?;/rc/;of Chrift be nor in a tvorfe (later\oyi(\n. regard of their childrens happinefs, and their Parents comfort therein ) then it was before Chrills comings then our chil- dren ought to be Church-.«nembers j ( and confequently that Ordinance and merciful Gift is not repealed. ) But all the faij Texts and many more iTicw, that the Church ot' Chrift is not in a werfc condirion now then it was then ( bu: unconceivably better : ) therefore our children ought to be Church-members^ as well as theirs were then.
I have before proved that it is vvorfe to be out of the Church then in it 3 and thea nothing elfe can be faid agalnft this ArgumenrJ that I know of
Furiherjl might prove it out of Ei/;-;/.!. 12. They that are out of the Church are fi id to be ftrangers to the Covenant, and wi.hout hope, and without God in the world, in comparifonwith thofe within the Church, O how little then do they aprrehend the height and depth ! &c. Or know that Love of Chrift that paflech knowledge, who think that Chrift will un-church all the Infants of Believers now, that took them in lo tenderly in the time of Mofcs ? How infenfible do they appear to btof the glorious riches of the Gofpel, and the free abundant grace of Chrift, who have fuch unworthy thoughts of him, as if he would put all cur children out of his Church ? How little know they the difference between Chrift and f^n^cs, that think they might then be Church- memberSjind not now ? And yet ( oh the blindnefs ) thefe men do this under pretence of magnifying the fpirituality of theGcfpcl priviledges'. As if to be a member of Chrifts Church, were a carnal thing j or as if the vifible Church were not the ob- jcd and recipient of fpiritual as well as common mercies ! The Apcftle in ^el. faith, Thedcfolatc or barren hath more children then llie that had an husband ; ar.d:hefe men make all her children caft out. The Apofile faich, God had provided better things for us, (then for them, ) that they without us (hould no: be made perfeft. Heb. 1 1.40. and thefe men make us info much woife a condition then they. The Apoftlc faith, Chrift hach taken down the partition Wall, and made both one, &c. Eph-ii^. by let- ting the Gentiles into the Chwrch-ptiviledges of the lews fand much morej ; and thefe men think the partition Wall Is fo far ftandingftill as to keep out our children, yeaj and to un church theirs that were in before i 1 his is not to tike down the partition Uall between Church and Heathens, Tew and Gentile but to p'uck up the Wall of the Church or Vineyard it felf, and as to our children, to lay all wafte to the Wildernefs ; except Mr. T. will yet again bethink him, and lliew us that the mercies without the Chu-^ch are greater then wichin, and that Infants have forr.e gtcace: mercy inftead ci their teing in lie Church and Family and Kbgdca of God 3 which he wUl never
CHAP.
$6 Plain Scripture provf of
CHAP. XVI.
Y eleventh Arguraenc is this .• If ihe childrcriGf Believers be now ptjt outof the Church, then they are Imivoife condition then the very children of the Gentiles were before the coming of Chrift • Buc that weremoii abfurd and falfe j therefore fo is he Antecedent.
Tilt Confcquent would plainly follow, if the Antecedent were true, as it is evident thus ,} Before Chrffts coming any Gentile in the world without exception, if he would, might havj his children to be Members of the vifible Church } But now ('according to Mr.T.) no Gentile may have hii child a Member of the Church i Therefore according to this Doftiine thtvery Gentiles, as wtU as the Jervs.itc in a worfe condition now ; and Chriftfliould come to be a dcftroyer,and do hurt to all the world, (which is moft vile dodiine.)
That the Gentiles might have their children Church, members before, if. tbey would comt.in themfclves, Is not denied, nor indeed can be j For it is^the exf rcfc letter of Gods Law, that any ftranger that would come in might bring his children, «nd all be circumcifed and admitted Members of the Jews Churcb3 T*"S was the cafe of any that would be full Profelytes ; God in providence did deny to give the knowledge ef his Laws to the Gentiles, as he did to the Jews j but he excepted no man out of the mercy of his Covenant that would come in, and talte it, ^except fome few that were deftinated to wrath for the height of their wickednef $, whom he commanded them prefently utter* iy to deftroy) If any fay, that the Gentiles were admitted with their Infants faito no Church but the particular Church of the Jews } I (hall anfwer him > i- That it is falfe ; for they were admitted Into the vifible unlverfal Church, as 1 (hall fiiew more, fully afterward. "^
%. If It were fo, yet the Church of the Jews was a happy Church of God, In « thon^ fand.fold better ftate then thofe without. So that he that will be of the faith of our Oppofers, you fee, mutt believe that Chrift hath come to deny the very Gentiles that priviledge which for their children they had before.
Yea, that you may fee it was not tyed to the Jews only,or the Seed o(Abraham» even when Abrab*Mi own Family was Circumcifed ('and as Mr.T. thinks then firll admitied all into the Church j ) there was but one of the Seed of /ibraham Circumcifed at thac cime j( for he had no Son but iftjmael ) but of Servants that were not of his Seed there were admitted or Circumcifed many hundred, Gen.i^. 14. He had three hundred and eighteen trailed men Servants that fought for him j and how many hundred women and children, and 3ll,you may then conjedure. And all thefe were then of the Cburcli, and but one ai Abraham's Seed, and that one, iflmael j Therefore certainty though the greateft priviledges were referved for //<Jaf and his Seedj of whom Chrift was to come^yet notthepriviledgcoffole Church-memberfliip j for the very children of ^. k'iiiimii Sertants were Church-members* And fo I think this Is plain enough.
CHAP*
Infants Church-memhcrfbip and Sapttfm,
57
CHAP. XVII.
Y twelfth Argument is from the forementioned Text lH Dc«M9^o,ii,ii. Where all the Jews, with all their Utile ones were entered into Covenant with God. From whence I argue thus; If the Covenant which ihofe Infants who were then Church- members were entered into with God, was a Covenant of Grace (or a Gofpel Covcnantj) then it is not Rcpealed,(and confcquently theiiChurch-memberrtiip is not repealed, as being built on the Covenant , or infcparably coujunfti) But the faid Covenant which the Infants who were then Church- members did pafs into,was a Covenant of Gi3ce(asdiftindfromtheLaw, which was repealed j ) therefore neither it, nor their Churchmcmbeifhip is repealed. Here I fhall prove, i. Thit all the Infants did pafs into this Covenant, z. That they were Church-members that did fo. 3. That it was fuch a Covenant of Grace. 4, And then it will follow that it is not repealed.
1. A/r. T. denied long together in the face of many thoufand people, that thcln- fants were entered into any fuch Covenant, againft the plain letter of the Text j yet he perfifted to deny it, without any reafon ( as you may fee in the Difpute, if out. ^ It plain Scripture will not fatis;fie thefe men, why then dothey call for Scripture ? The words are. Ye (land thu day all of you before tnc Lor^ your God, yourC.ipcaif/s of your Tribes f your Officer s. Elder s, and aH the men of ifrael, you,- ittllc ones, your wives, and the (iranger tb.it is in thy Camp, from the hewer of tky wood unto the drawer of thy w.i- tc/j that thou (houlde(i enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God , and into 'hu Oalb tvhuh the Lord thy God mallet h with thee this d.ty , that he may eflabl'Jh thee to day j^r x people unto himfclf^ and that he may be to thee a God^ &c. He thlt faith Infantr dii/jot pafs into this Covenanr,I queltion whether he believe ttiis to be the Word ofC^i Aoi: how (hould it pofTibly be fpoken plainer ? ' '^^ ■ ' ' '^
a. CMr. T. denied in our Difpute, That thefe Infants were vlfible Church-Mem* bers; for when he had maintained th3t[none were Church members but thofe th.it wire Circumcifed] and that [Church-memberfhip was not then without Circumcifion] I told him, thatthelnfams'for forty yean in the Wildernefs were not Circumcifed, and yet were Church- members, and proved it from this Covenant •, yet d id he refolutcly deny It, that the Infants were Church-members j whereupon feeing he waffed time in ■ vvrangling, I was bold to fay, I did verily believe th.it (contrary to cur firft agreemenrj he difputcd againft his owniconfcicnce, feeing he could not believe himfclf, That the "Infants then were no Ghurch-mejnbers, and that none but the circa ncifed were Church. members • But he took it ill that I fliould fo charge him to go againft Confc(« cnce i and yet when I told him that women were Chu:ch'mcmbers, thoug'i not cir- cumcifed, he conftlTed all, andyielded that the lnf.;nt$ were. fo too. And indeed, clfe God hid no Church, or almoft none in the WiUernefs, when all but c<i'd) and /- fhux were dead of the old Itock } and all of forty years old were unciicumcifed ; yet Steven cals it The Church in ihe Wildernefs ACls 7.38 But I think I: vain to prove that thofe v»ere Church-members that entered fuch a Covenant. He that will deny this, is fcarce fit to be difj^med with. ^
I ?. Thar
M
5 8 Bla'w Scripture freof of
I, That th:s was a Covenant cf Grace ii all the Qucftion. And That 1 ihal! quickly pat out of qutftion thus. i. That which proaiifcth [To ciraitncifc the hearty and the heart of their feed, to love the Lord God with all their heart, and wiih all their foul, that they may live] muft needs be a Covenant of Grace : But this was fuch, afr is evident, t>cut. ;o. 6. That this Is a Covenant of'Giacc, the Apoille ihcws, Hcb. 10, i6j 17 Hercisno violence but the plain words of Scripurre for borh.
1. Yet more plain. The Apoftle in ^fiw 105,6,7, 8,9 ftirws it in txprcls words • For when he had itewed, 1 hat the righteoufnils ofrhc Law licxh inperfeft cbedU ence [He that doth thcfe things mill live in them] he then llitweth the difFercnce thus, [But the righteoufntfs which Is of faith fpcaketh on this wife, S.iy not in ihj heart, li'ha (hall afcend up mo hejvea ? (that is to biing Chdfl doivnfiom abo'jc^ 0, rvhofjill dcjccnd into the dccf} (that iitobrixg Chnfl again from the dead) But rehat faith it ? The tvord a nigh thect cum in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is tbe'w.r/d of F .uth whicbit'e preach.'] Nowthefe words of faith the Apoftlccitcth out orchis vciyCo. Tenant, Dcui. 30. 11,11,13^14,
Mr.T. faith, That it is ufual with the Apoftlc to alladc to Scriptures thas. But whic Text fo plain that he may not fo put off if he will? When the Apoltle plainly faith Thu lithe tvo/d of Faith j and fpcaketh thrice in way of expounding the Texr.
When you have read my anfwer to Mr. T. his Defcant on this Texr, I am pcr- fwadcd you will wonderat the vanity and wilftt'oefs of his exceptions.
GHAP. XVIII.
Y thirteenth Argument is from Rom. 4. almoft all the Chapter. ; wherein the Apoltle fully Hieweth, that the Promife ('upon which his Priviledgcs were grounded/ was not. nude to Abiaham M^or\. Legal grounds^ but upon rhe ground of Faith ; From ivhcncc I might draw many Argument$,but for brevity I dc(ire you to ptr- ufe the ^ha^icr t ont\)' komx\\f^ VI vcifc {.A/idhc received the the {ign of Cyrciimcifmij a feat of the R'/ghtcoufntfs.fifihe Faiih rrhich he hadyet kir;g uncircutticifcd , th.U he might be the {aih:r of all4h;m that believe y though they be not circuwcifed, &c.] From whence Lthus argue. If Infants then ufually were entered and engaged Chiir;;h-membcr$ by that Circunicifi- on which wasafealofthcrightcoufnefsofFaithj.and w-is n;>t given on Legal grrnnds ; then that Church- mcmberfliip of Infants is not Repealed.: (as being built en grounds of Gofpcl, and.not Law, and fealed with a durable feal, that «, thaScal.of the rlghtf- cufnefs of Faith. CBut the Antecedent is pialn in the Text,^
I tu-gcd this on Af>-. T. many years ago; and all his anCwcrwis, Thtt .Sraham ^ Ciicumcifion wasafealto others that rtiould come after, ofthc Righteoufnefs oi A" D/<j/wwi faith, bucnoothcrwife. A ftrange Anfwer, and very bold 1 1 hear that liAce he anfweietbi that ic was onely fnch-a feal of Akrahims right^eoufnefs of iai^ but not of others afterward. But i. The Text feemsro fpcakof the nature and ufcof Cir- cutncifion^ and the ejid of its inftJtutioR j iS being or^dainc t at fi.ft olv God to (ImI oneiya-Gofptl-Ri^Htcoufnefs of faith; and not a legal Righ^eoulnefs -of Worksv^r
Qjrepaoniej.- . ^ ,
z.: DiotJti
M
Infants Church- Tnewberjhif and Baftifm,
59
z. Doth God ln{litute a ftanding Church-Ordlaancc to endure tUl Chrlft, to have one end for him to whom it was firft given,and another to all others ? Is not the nature, end, and ufe of Sacraments, or holy engaging Signs and Seals, the fame to all ? though tfce fiuitbe not alway the fame.
Thcfearc poor (hiftsagainft a manifeft truth, which defcrvc not anfwer.
CHAP. XIX.
Y fourteenth Argument J$ this : If the Law of Infants ChurcEi^' mcmbcrfhip were no part of the Ceremonial, or mecrly Judici- al Law, nor yet of the Law of Works, then it is not repealed. Buc ic was no part of the Ceremonial Law, nor meeely Judicial, nor part oi the Law of Works ( as fuch '• ) therefore it is not re- pealed.
The confequence is evident,fccing no other Laws arc repealed.' The Antecedent I prove in its parts, i. None will fay It was pare of the Law of Works j for that knows no mercy to thofc who have once offended j ButChurch-mcmberfhip wasa mercy.
1. If it were part of the Cerejhonial Law,then i. Let them fliew what it was a Type of» and what is the Antitype that hath fuccecded it, and prove it to be fo If they can. ^. If the very materials of the Church were a Ceremony, then the Church It fclf fhould be but a Ceremony. And fo the Church in Abrahams F amily flioald be more vile then the Church in the Family of Noa^Jy Melchi':{edecl[i Scm, fob, Lot^ &C. which were more then Ceremonies.
I. And that it was no part of the meerly Judicial Law, appears thus. i. As was laft faid, then alfo the Church in Abrahams Family (hould be more vile then the afore- faid ; For their Church-memberlhip was not a piece of meer policy, aswecalltfae Judicials.
z. It cannot be (hewen that it hath any thing of the nature of a meer Judicial Law In It ( except as we may call the Moral Laws, or Gofpcl Promlfes Judicial, upon which meer Judicials are built : J Why, Is itnot as much of the Judicial Law to have women Church-members as children ? Yet who dare fay that this is meerly judicial ^
5. It Is of the very Law of Nature to have Infants to be part of a Klngdom,and the Kings fubjeds. And Mr. T. bath told me his judgement, thit the ]cyis Chn/th <i»d Commnn-Tvcaltb rvas all one : therefore according to Mr. T. his grounds^ it muft needs be re quifite even naturally, that Infants (liould then be Church members. I think this ipaft denial.
4- The P.omifc that took them in, and the Seal, were both grounded on tho, rlghteoufnefs of faith, as is proved before/ therefore not ameer judicial.
S Infants were Church- members long before the time of Afo/ej.; w»<J> the Jews were formed Into a Commmon.wealth, and the Judicial Laws given them. And as the Apoftle argues, the Law which was many hundred years after, could' norTl'l'^ void the Promife, and fo it could not be that this was part of the meerly Judic!4 Law. '
6, That it is neither a meet ludidal, nor proper ro the lews, appearetb ihu5, Tha?
1 » wtkh
^o . • Plain Scripture proof of
which vtas prop«r to the Jews, was piven to them one!y .- that is, only to If/iac and hi$ fccdjOn whom the Jew4lh pi ivilcilgcs were cntailcJ. I'^ut many hundreds were circum- clfcd as Church members^ (and among them many Infants j in Atrahim<> Family, be- fore ever //<TdC was born; And all the Frofeiytcs with chtir Infants afterward that would come in. The children of Kfti/rab and their childrcnj and the children oilfhmaely 5cc. wcte once all Church-members J let any fliew when they were unchurched, exctpc when thry un-churched thcmfclvcs by their wickcdnel's j or Ice any thew that the fame fonj oil\ciiirah,f<ho muft circumcifc their fons as Church-membcr $ while they were in /ibr^bi'/is Family, mnft leave them uncircumdfed, and unchurched when they were re. nioved from that Family. Did God change Laws, and revoke fuch mercies and privi- Icdges to the feed of ^i'Tj/ww, meerly becaufcof their removing from his houfc, and change of place ? Who dare tellevc fuch fancies without one word of Scripture ? Re- member therefore, th.it i: Is here plainly proved. That Infants Church-ciembcrniip was not proper to the Jen's.
And thus I think I have made It evidenr^ that it was not a Ceremony^ not a meer [IcwiOi jadicialpointofpollcy, much lefs any part of the Law as a Covenant of worlrs, that Infants muft be Church- memberSj but that it is partly natural, and partly ground* ed on the Law of Grace and Faith.
CHAP. XX.
^Y fifteenth Argument is this ; [f all Infants who were members of any payticiilar Church, were alfo members of the univcrfa! v.fible church ( which was never taken down ) then certainly their Church- memberfhip is not repealed J but all Infants that were members of any particitUr Church , were alfo members of the unlvcrfd vifible church 3 thcrefbrctheir Church.membcr(hip is not repealed.
T he Confcquence is beyond difpute^becaufe theuniverlal Church- never ceafeth here. And in my judgement the whole Argiunent is fo clear, that were jhcre no more, it were fufficlenr.
I. That there is an univerfal vifible Church, Mr. Rutherford and others have largely- ttrovcd; They oiNevo EngUnd Indeed deny an imiverfal vifible Governing -m Political Church ; but not this that I fpeak of (as you may fee in Mr.5k/;k^>Y/,and Mr. Al/ens Anfwer to Mr. Ball.) Butleaftany fliculd deny it, I will bring one proof,or rather many in one. i Cor.it. i^. if-e arc all b.tpti-^d by one Spirit into one bodj/j whether ^eiTs or Gentiles. Here you fee it Is one and the fame body that all are baptised into j Now that this is the vifible Chnrch, I prove thus.
1. That one body which hath difiind vifible members, with variety ofgIfts,i$ the vifible body i But this is fuch.
2. That one body which is vifible in fnffering and rejoycJng, is the vifible body j Butthisis^wda.'yfr.i5,a6. i . r
3. "^ aat body which is capable of Schifm, and muft be admonl(hed not to admit ofv i«J^" the vifible body} But this is fuch, x^cy.z 5. . . , , o
"4: Thatbody which had the vifible Seals of Baptifm and the Lords Supppr, was l\iZ vifible body i but this was fuch, ver. 1 3. .
5, That one body which had vifible univerfal Officers 3 vras thc Yjfible univerfal ; Qijichur bodx j But this was fuch. Therefore, &(' ^ y^-
Jnfmts Church-memberfhtf andBaftifm. 6i
z. That the Jews Infants were Members of this UnJverfal vifible Church, I prove thus j There is but oneylfible Univcrfal Church or Body \ Therefore they muft needs be of this one, orbcun-churched. Sec G^/. j. i6. Epbcf. 4- 4. 1 ^o/-.
12. 12-.
z. Every one that is a Member of the particular, muft needs be a Member of the Univerfal i elfe one might be a part of thepart_, and yet not a part of the whole : which is abfurd.
This is all beyond difpirte ; and Mr.T. denyed none of it when I urged it on him ; he confcffeih, i. That there is an Univcrfal Church vifible- 2. That the Jews Church was not the whole Univerfal, g. That every one that is a Member of a particular Church, igalfoaMemberof the Univerfal. 4. And that the Jews Infants were members of the Univerfal. $. And that this Univerfal Church Is not dilTolved. What then remains to be denied? Why, this is all that he faith to the whole: t^^hat their Memberlliip in the Univcrfal Church was only by reafon of their Mcmberfliip in the particular i and there* fore ceafed with it.] And how Is this proved ? Why Mr.T. faith it is fo^ and that is the belt proof, and all that I couUl get.
But let me try whether I can difprovc tc any better.
1, I think I have fufficiently proved, that even the nature of the lews Church was not repealed, but only the Accidental Ceremonies j and the individual Church tha: then was, is broken cfffor unbelief j but the Olive Itill remained.
z. Ifihe lews Church were repealed j yet he that will aiSrra that the whole Species of Infants are caft out of the Univerfal vifible Church, muft prove it well : For if I finde that they were once in It, I need no more proof that they remain in till fome onelhcw me where it is revokedj which is not yet done by any that I know of.
^. The Univerfal Church Is more excellent far then any p3rticular,2nd fo our ftand-- Ing In the Univcrfal Church is a far higher priviledge then our ftanding or Memberlliip in any particular : Therefore it will not follow, that Infants lofe the greater, becaufe they lofe the leffer j and tliat they arc caft out oftheUniverfal, becaufe they are caft out of the particular.
4. Perfons are firft C in order of nature, or time, or both ) members of the Univer- fal Church before they arc Members of any particular .- So was Noahy Lot, Ab>ah.im» , and all men before Clirift, and fo are all flnce Chrift. The Eunuch in /4(^. 8. was bnptizcd into the Univerul vKible Church, and not into any particular. Itisfowl.h all others : It is the general ufe and nature of Baptifm ; They arc baptized into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, and fo into the Catholike Church j but not into any p-irticular Church j If any fuch thing be^ it isfecondary, and accidental, »nd addltion:»l, and no proper end of baptifrr. So that It beinj^ firft in order that we are entred into the vifible Univerfal Church, it is likely to be of more durable continuance.
5. It is no good confequence that is fetcht from the removal of a particular Church, or of the lews particular Church ro breaking off from the Univerfal ; There- fore this mil not prove that Infanrs are broke ofr. If a lew had been forced into a; ftrange Country j yet there, both he and his cliildren had been Church-members of the Univerfal Church. When all ihc lews were fcattercd abroad in Captivity , io that they had neither Templcjnor Altar, nor Prieft, but perhaps one live in one Town and another in another, as they do at this day 5 you could not fay that thefe were of the vifible particular Church of the lews ; though you might fay ftill that they were A'n.^hdnliSKi^ and they and ihcir children were Members of the vilibcUoivcifal; Chutch.
3.?, Sfti
62 PUih Scripture proof of
So when I{;(!pnhs children lefc the Churrb of Abrahum'i Family, yet they continued Members ot the Univerfal vifible Church Hill.
If a lew then^ or a Chrillian now. were cad upon the Coafts of America where he fhould never be a Member of a particular Church more, yet he Hiould be a Member of the Univerfal ftill. Neither Jofcph, Mary^ nor JcOn in his Infancy were unchu.chcd bccaufc they lived in Egypt. ( Though I confefs it is difputable whether Chrift were ever a Church' member properly ; but I pafsthat by )
6. Agiin, to lofcthelr ftandiogin the viiJble Univerfal Church, is to lofc their place In the vilible body, (' i Co>- i i.i j. ) and in the houfe of the living God, i Tim. 7. 15 . the pillar and ground of truth j But to be removed from one partictilar Church or fom every particular Church, is no cafting oat of Chrifts bodyof Gods houfrj There- fore it will not follow upon the removal from a particular ChuKh,that they are remo- ved from the Univerfal. Ef^eclaily,when we are not fpeaking of •individual Infants but of the whole Species. So that I think this Argument is unanfwerablc j Infants were Members of the Univerfal vifiblc Church ( as Mr.T. confdTcth. J J-his is the Church that we are now baptiied into ; and this Church.conftltutK>n is net altered or taken down '■> Therefore Infants Membership ef this ChucchJsnot' taken down, what ever k bcofth? Jews particular Church.
THtis far my Arguments have chiefly tended.to prove that Gods mercifull Gift and Ordinance, that fome Infants (hould be Church-members, Is not repealed ; Thouofc many of them will alfo dtreSly prove the Church-memberfhip of ail other Believers children, as well as the Jews. Yet if any (hould be hereby convinced, that the believing ycvps children dre flill Church-members, and yet deny that ihe GemUes childrcH zrc ioi I fuppofe ( if it were worth the labour to Difpute with men fo weak ) we might quickly bring them Arguments enough from plain Texts of Scripture to confute them • As where the partition Wall is fald to be taken down, Epbef. i» 14. and both Jews and Gentiles made one,and reconciled by removing the enmity, verf,i6.Aad the GentUes tobe cleanfed-as the Jews were before,/<(J?.io. And that there is butoncBody,oneLord, one Faith, one Baptifm, &c, Ephef. 4. f , 6. And where it is fald,that there is neither Circumcifion nor unclrcumcifion In Chrift Jefus, Gat. 6. 1 5. with multitudes of fuch places ; Indeed it is much of the fubftance ofPanls Epiftlts to prove the taking in of ihe Gentiles, and grafting them into the Olive which the Jews were of. And Chrift commanding now the Difcipling of Nations, and the Kingdoms of the world being now become his Kingdoms, (of which 1 have fpokc before ) it proves the famcprivi- Icdge herein to the Gentiles as to the Jcws.feeing Infants are part of our Kingdoms as well as theirs.
Yet the reft of the Arguments which I fhall now add.ftiall dircftly prove that Infants of Church- members In general, muft bt Church, members j or that this was no ptivl. ledge proper to the Jews.j Though I think it is proved fufficicntly already. .
CHAP.
Infants ChHrch-rmmhcrfljip andSaptifm.
65
CHAP. XXI.
He fixtcenth Argament then is this • ffrom the fecond Com- mandment) v'lfitivg the (ins of the Fathers upon the children t9 the third and fourth Generation of them that hatcr7:c, and [_(hcT0 mercy to thoufands of them that Love me and keep my CcmtTiand^ pients ; ] From hence I argue thus j If God have made over this Mercy (oi Chnrch-n.embetfliip^ in the Moral Law, to the chil- dren of all that Love and obey him, then it is not proper to the Fews children, nor is it ceafed j But God hath made over this mercy in his Moral Law, to the children of alLth.1t love and obey him; Ther> fore'ic!is not proper to the Jews children! nor is it ceafed.
N( thing but the Antecedent here needeth proof: t very man I think among us will confefs.that the Moral Law was not proper to the Jews, and that it is not cc afed. Even the moft of the Antinomians confcfs the Ten Commandments are in force as the Law of Chrift, though not as the Law of Mofes. However, if they be againft the preceptive part of the Law, yet fure they will not be againft the prcmifTory part. Though there be fame claufes that were futcd to the Jews peculiarly, yet I never yet met with man that would fay^ this wasfo. If the Ten Commandments be not currant proof, there is no difpacing witli them out of Scripture. Let me try therefore whether this fcconj Commandment iu the word* cited do not prove the Minor : To which end I argue thus.
If God have here affurcd his Mercy by promir.- to the children of all them thu Love and cbcy him, then he would have them be taken for Members of his Chuich. But he hath heie afllired his Mercy by promife tothc childien of them that Loveind obey him : Thereforche'v^ouUi h.ivc thi.c» betaken for Church members. The Minor ■ is plain in the Text- The conUquence of the Major I prove thus ; (vi\ That ill thofe muft be taken for Chuah- members on whom God hath thus ftattd or affurcd bis Mercy by pron-iife) (the word [Mcicy] I (hall cxpbip anon:) HGod h.avc cftju:d and alTured his Mercy by prvmilc 10 noothcr fucitty of men inihe vi-oild but the C huich : then allthofeare Mtmb».rs of the Chu oh on whom his Meicy is thus eihtsd and iffured J But God hath dbtedandifiULcdJiisMetxy onno oiher fociety ; The.tfloie.. &c.
Here let me alittle explai:! my meaning,. vSorrurrimc when God prom ifeth Mercy, , it is fiill to fonx p^irticular perfon or l-amily > Sometime to a whole Species or fort ot' perfons. z. Sometime it is fome particular named Mercy, jnd fometime Mercy in theoeneal, naming no fort or individual Mevc]''. j- Sometime it is upon a fpecijl ' ground, prope- to feme one pcrfon, or to few j and fom'time ic is upon a coiniwon ground. 4. When the Mercy is fp.ecified, . it is fometime meetly corporal ; and fomc- t 'TIC fpliirual. $. And offpiiituU Mercies, foinctsme ic is common tootheis be- lides the Cjvtd^j.and fjai time rpeci;il, and proper to ths laved. 6. Sometime it is Mercy limited ;oa fiwrt or ccrtainctirac J anu Ibinctnme tilittda'ndairuied for coa- tinuance. while the Law Ihndeth.
Now you muft undaliind fiift, th.it God mgy beftow on fome particular pcrfoa otFjimily ^ ou tKct^rouud of foate fpccialfcivice wLichthcy cr their Fathers have .
ddjne, ,
^A PUin Script ur4 Proof of
done, orof mecr mercy j fome fpccial corporal bit fling op privilcdgCj cfpecially li- mited lo fomc fhort or certain time : And that his common prcfcrving, fuftaining mercies arc over all his works i and yet none of this will prove men Church-members.
2. But when God do h not name any particalar perfon or Family for his Mercies but tftates them on aSpecics or fort of pcrfors J and when it is not a mecr corporal Mercy that is fo ftatcd, but cither a fpiritual Mercy (common or fpticiilj or elfe Mercy in the general without fpccification j and when this is not on any ground of any particular adion or fervice done by any particular man, bu: upon a ground (or condition ) common to others not named 5 and all this not limited to any fliort or certain tim.*, bu: ftated to continuince, and thatbyaiegil promife afluring it, and not only a mecr offer of it ? in this cafe it will certainly prove thera Members of the Church.
Now that It is the priviledge of the Church only to have God thus engaged to be mercifull to them, /'and that in a way of diftindion from others, as it is in this Com* mandment-promlfe) is to me a truth beycnd difpu;e. And if any do doubt of it, I ague with them thus. i. Ifnofuch Promife of fuch Mercy to any fort of men out of the Church can be Hiewen in the Scripturti then we muft takcit as p"foYfd,th3t there is none : But no fuch Promife can be Ihewen , cftating fuch Mercy on any others. Therefore^ &c. 1 hey that canlLew any fuch Promife, let them pro- duce it.
2, Briefly confider to the contrary ; i. Thofe without the Church are faid to be with- out Hope, without God, ftrangers tothe Covenant of Promifes, Ephcf.z.ii.
2. The Promifes are all Yea and Amen in Chrift, 2 Cor. I. 20. And Chrift J$ the Head over all(mdced bur only) tothe Church, E^hef.i.^^, To his called hegiVvth the precious promifes, 2 Vcc. i. 4.
3. By Faith it is tha: Promifes were obtained, Hfi»ii.3J.
4. To Abraham zn^h\% Seed were the Promifes made, Gil. l- 16. both common and fpecial : The children of the Promife are accounted for the Seed, Rom. 9. 8. Therefore if thofe without the Church were children of the Promife, then they (hould be the Seed. The Promife is fure to all the Sced> Rom.i^. 16. The promife is co you and your children, and as many as the Lord ilull call, Acl.i.^p, The Seed are heirs of the promife.
5. The Church is the Houfe and Family of God, and the Promifes are his Trca- fare, and Chrifts Legacies, and the Word of Promife is his Teftament ; Therefore not for thofe without. The Church is the pillar and ground of Truth, and the Word is the Truth. In themiddcft of the Church are Gods praifes, Hcb 2.12. Therefore in the Church are his Merciesand Promifes. It is by the Church that the manifold wif- dom of God is known, Ephrf.i-io. The Church only is that Body, whereof the Lord of the PromifcsisHead. C0/.1.18.
6. They that are not in Covenant, are not under the Promifes of this Mercy, or hive not this Mercy ftatedon them by Promife ; But thofe that are without the Church, are not in Coveninr.
This Argument is paft contradiftion. No man dare fay but thefe are Covenant- Mercies in this Promife mentioned. Wicked men in the Church arc witfcin the Co- venant, as I have proved in the Appendix of my Aphorifms j but thofe without are not in Covenant, though they may have fome conditional Promifes offered. The Covenant and fuch Promifes as thefe go together -. 1 hercfore it is called The Cove- nant of Pi omi/es, Ephef.uii Rom.^.i^z. fo is Mercy only affured by the Covenant. f^f«^7^,«i.and that to the Church only, i J^mg. 8,23 2\rf^. 1.5. &p. 3 i.iJW/f . 7 ^o.
Infants Church-memberfhip and Baptifm, 6$
tuhc 1. 50-7 i- ^ Vet.^.'i^o. Many more Scriptures (hew the conjimaion between Gods Mercy and Covenant J and moft certainly they are all out of Covenant, that arc out of the vifiblc Church.
If any objed. That this Promife Is to the Children of them onely that Love him and keep his commandments; and we know not who thofc be. I anfwer. It is true; buc thou^^h God make the Promife oncly to fuch, yet quoad nos it belongcth to others i that is we are bound to deal with all that profcfs Love and Obedience by a fcrious probable profeffion, as if they were truly what they profefs. IhisI (hall fully prove
afterward.
He that hath the face to fay, that Godeftateth here his Mercy on the children of thofe that Love and Obey him^ and yet taketh them not for fo much as Members of the vilible Church , hath too hard a forehead for me to Difputc it with any further.
Some may objeft, i- That they know not what Mercy it is that is here promifed, whether common or fpecial. To which I anfwer. What if they know not ? yet it is Mercy and more then corporal, if not fpecial: What if God promife onely in generall to be to them a merciful God ? Sure it affordeth us ground of confidence and comfortj As it would do to a poor man, to have a Prince promife to be merciful to him and his children.
2. They may objeft That it is uncertain what istneant by a thoufand Generations; whether it b;; the rmiotc, or th>j nearefl progenie.
To which 1 anlwci-; i. I judge it to be onely to the Immediate children of godly or ungodly l^arenrs, that the Promife and Thieat in this Commandment is made to; elfe there would be a conirauK-tion between them. For if the third Generation of a wicked man fliovld have godiy Parents between, then the Promife would belong to them J and cont'equi.n:ly noc the Vhreac ; and fo on the other fide. The meaning feems plainly to me to be this, that God will incrcafe the punifhment of the children of un- godly Parents, according as they fucceed their Parents, remembring the fins of Grand* farhcrs in puniihing their children, (they being ftill the children only of the wicked.) And that he will multiply mercies on the pofterity of the Righteous, the more fli'il becauft they had righteous Progenitors j fuppofing ftill that they are the children of fuch.
i. But I further anfwer. What if this were not underftood > muft we therefore re- jeft that which may be underftood ? There is fomewhat doubtful in the Text, vix. what Mcicy it is particularly ? and to how many generations. If ungodly Progeni- tors intervene ? And there is fomewhat beyond doubt in the Text, that is, that God eftateth his Mercy on the immediate off.fpring of his people. Now muft 1 throw away that which is paft doubt, becaufe of that which Is doubtful ? So we may throw away all the Scriptures.
K CHAP.
\
66
Plain Scnpture preof of
CHAP. XXII.
He fcventcenth Argumrm is drawn fiomPfal.^7,i6.lHis feed IS b.'cjfcci] that is,the righteons mans feed ; whence I argue as before ;If God by his unchangeable Law and Promife,have pronoonced the feed of the Righteous blefled, then certainly they are members of his vifible Church, Cut he here pro- nounceth them blcffedi therefore,c<rM.I have proved before that he hath fo done by no fociety out of the Ch«rch ; They that fay he hath pronounced any other fociety Bkjfed^let thtm fliew it. But It is abfard once to imagine that God fhould pronounce a fociety bltflld, and yet take them for none of his villble Church.
1, That this Promife is an unchangeable Promife, 1 take for paft doubt, till M.T. fliew me where it is repealed a little better then he kath flawed me the repeal of Infants Church- memberdiip. It is made to the Righteous and their feed in general , and not to the yiivs onely : It is written in the Book ofPJalms, from whence Chrift and his A- pofvles fcetch many Text? for confirmation of their Doftrine. And iflt had been fpoke buttothe Jfwjj yeaj or to one particular perfon, yet if it cannot be proved to be re- ftrained to them as being from a reafon proper to them, the Scripture teacheth us to ap- ply it to all the people of God, Hcb. il-')' The Apoftleapplieth that to all believers which was fpeken onely to Jopouayi rvikncvcr f^l thee tnor for forfal^i: theCfSo Hcb. 1 3 .6. fxom Pfa'., iiSt Hcb.io. 16,17. Rom,io.6i
GHAP. XXIII.
^Heeigteenth Argument in this j If Infants w^re Chufch- members before ever Circumcifion wax Inftituted, then cer- tainly it was not proper to the ^cws,aad confequently is noi ceafed,according to Mr-T. hisowndoftrine : But Infants were Church members before Circumcifion was inftitu- ted ; thecefore it was not proper to the Jcvds, nor is ceafed. Here at cur difpute Mr. T. lermed to yield all, if I would prove Infants were Church-members before Circumcifion: liut in his Sermon fince, among much of the fame ftuft', he made the poor deluded people believe ( I meanthofethat will believe him ^ that by Infants being Church- members , I mean nothing elfe bi): that they fuck of the brefts of godly Parents, and are brought up in the Family •f godly Papents ; jufi as in our Difpwte he would have faced me down before ihoufands of peop'le, that by Church-memberfliip 1 mean nothing but Circumci. fion i I told him I did not, and he told the people l^ill that I did. Is it any inten.- perance or harflincfs upon fuch dealing* to ("ay, that it is fad that (I will not fay eminent holinefs, but) a very little tendernefs of confciencc, and fcirofGod, and !o,';(e of Truth, or charity to a Fi-oihcf^ yea^ or common modcfty (hould not rcftrain-
th-is
Infants Church' memherjhif and Baptifm, ^J
this 1 kit that Mr T. dui ft, firft, Take on him to fearch the heart, and know a mans thouehtstote contrary to his piofeflion ; fecondly, And contrary to the plain fcnfc of his terms offpeech j thirdly, And perfwadc multitudes of people that it is fo. What hope can I have that ever Mr.T. Iliouid be brought to the truth, when he hath not abilitv enough to underftand what is the meaning of [a memberof the vihble Church] and that after I had fo fully told him ? I was long before I could get him to con- ftfs that Circumcifion and C hurch-mcmberfliip were two thmgs and feparable^ till I gave him an Inftance in women. And now Auft I be fain tolhew him,that Church- memberfliip is neither fucking the breaft of a godly woman , nor being brought up in the Family ? What a hard word is this [Church-member ? ] when 1 knew not poflibly how to fpeak it plainer. Why Sir, where is the difficulty ? Is it in the word Church ? I fuppofe we are agreed what a Church- vifible is? at leafl you undcrfiand it? Or is it in the term [Member ? ] Why, do you not know what a [Member] is ? How underftand you Pauls difcourfc about the members and body ? Do you undcrftand what is Toium aggyegatum & pars totiiu ? Do you underftand what it it to be a mem- ber of a City, or of a Family, and why not of a Church > If I fay children are mem-* bers of this Kingdom ( or (to pleafe you) Commonwealth ) or if I fay children arc members of every City in the Land, and of every Family where they are j this is all true } and raethinks a man of your parts Ihould underftand ir. And why not when I fay, that Infants are members of the Church ? But if you will not underftandj there is no remedy.
I come to prove that Infants were Church- members before Circumcifion. i. From Md, i.i 5. -^id wherefore one ? that he may fcd^ a godly feed, or a feed of God. Thofe that arc a feed of God,are Church-members.'But fome Infants before the inftitution of Circumcifion were a feed of God, therefore they were Church- members,That the term £f(?ed of God] doth comprizclnfants, Mr. T. confefleth , and 1 need not wafte time to prove. That to be a feed of God, is to be members of his Church, ( and fo to be a known feed, is to be known or vilible members j this is the thing which is denied- Now I find but two Interpretations which our Divines make of the phrafe [ feed of God] ( for that third of the Ltvs, is allowed onely oipfigandm and a very few more.) The one is that which I fuppofe to be the plain truth, and which the words themfelves jnoft divedly fignifie ; that Is, [to be a feed belonging to God in a peculiar fpecial manner, asdiftind from the reft of mankind :] and that is plainly [to be of his Church] and fo the Sons of God , were in thofe times diftinft from the fons and daughters of men J which clearly flieweth that there were then two diftinft focieties j one which was the Church, called the Sons of God ; the other which had forfaken God ( for almoft all flefli had even then corrupted their wayes ) and fo were out of the Church, and called the fons of men \ ( For I hope few will entertain that old do- tage which Pc?mK4 and other Papifts are alhamed of, vi'\. that b*y the Sons of God is meant the Angels , who fell in love with the daughters of men.) Now doth not this phrafe plainly agree with the former, v'i\. [Seed of God, and Sons of God ] ( as Drufiui and others who incline to the other Interpretation acknowledge ) I think tTiercforc I ihall fufficiently cftabliHi this Interpretation, if I do buttefides this prove the falQiood of the other.
Now the other Interpretation is this, That by a feed of God is meant a legitimate feed, and fuch as are not baftards : This Mr.T. chufeth. Now that this cannot be the meaning , I prove thus: If by [a feed of God ] be meant fuch as are no baftards, then it would follow, that if any then had more wives then one, that the ■children of the fccond were all baftards ,• But that Confequencc ij falfej therefore
K i ' thac
^8 PUh Scripture proof of
that cannot be the meaning. Jofeph, Benjamin^ or any other born of PolygamiCj were not baftards j even before tke Hood they had more wives then one, as appears in Lantech.
5. THat fome Infants vrercCharch- members before inftitution of Circumcifion, I
further prove thus. If the Infants in Abrahms^^mWy were members of the vifible Church before Cir- cumcifion, then fome Infants were Church-members before Circumcifion ; Rut the Infant! in Abrahams Family were Church- members before Circumcifion : Therefore, &c All the doubt is oftheMinori Now that the Infants born in Abl\^h3^nsY3ml\y were Church -members before Circumcifion, is proved thus. i. I hey were Church- members (by Af'.'/.his own confeflion^ after Circumcifion j and Circumcifion did not make them fuch ; therefore we are to judge them fuch before.
That Circumcifion maketh not mtmberSj is evident, i- Ab.aham was a Church- member long before he was Circumciled ; as is plain, i. In that he was a true wor- fliipper of God before i i And was juftified by faith j 3 . And had the Covenant made and renewed again and again.
2. It is but a fign of the Covenant, yea, and not chiefly of that Covenant which maketh Church-memberSj but which promifed Abraham the extraordinary priviledges after his believing, *
z. Circumcifion prefuppofcth Church -memberfliip } therefore the Circumcifed were fuch before. The Apoftlc fht ws this in Abrah.ims own cafe, Rom. 4. If the Pro- mife went b;fore Circnmcifion, then Church- memberfliip went before it.
Befides, The Infants not C ircumcifcd were to be cu: oft' as breakers of the Core- nantfrom their people^Ge^.i?- thereforethey wersof that people, and in the Covenant before ; elfe how could chey break it ?
15. The Scripture fpeaketh not a word fo much as intimating that Abrahams Family was then firft made a Churchy or Infants then firft admitted members ; therefore we have nogroimd to believe it was fo .• But it fpeaketh of giving them the fame fign of the Covenant ihcn renewed, wkkh Abraham himfelf fan ancient Church. member ) did receive; therefore it gives us ground to judge that they were before Church- members. I do net think that any confiderate fober man will think, thaty^/;/'^^,?^ and his Family v/ere not as much Church-members before Circumcifion as after.
J. Thar Infants were Church-members before Circumcifion , I prove moft likely thus. If God had before the fame tender love to the faithful and their (eed, as he had after, and there be no mention in Scripture when the Church-memberfhip of Infants did begin (fince the firft Infa-nts) then we are to judge that it did not begin at the In. ftitution of Circumcifion ( but rather with the firft Infant of faithful Adnm, though he after fell c& ) becaufe Gods love to the faithful and their feed; was as great before as after; But the Antecedent is true, therefore the Confequent.
He that will prove a beginning of Infants Chu'ch.memberfhip fince the firft In- fants, let him bring any Scripture, or good Rcafon for ir, and I will believe him> (which I never exp:A to fee done, j
4 Laftly, I leave it to the judgment of any confiderate Chriftian, whether there
b. a ly likelihood that God lliould deny that mercy to the children oiScthy Enochs
, No.ih, ( whom he would preferve fo wondroufly when all the world was drowned )
which yet he granted to the children of the pooreft Servant in Ab-ab.ims Family, and
IQ tbepooitft i/?<it/<fe tUl Chrifts time, and to any Heathen in all the world that
would
Infants Chiirch-memberfhip and Baptifm.
6<,
would become a Profelyte J what man of common fenfc can believe this? efpecially "i , When there is not a word in Scripture tending that way. 2. And Gods love was as great to Uooh, Scr/i^Scc, and their Seed, as to others, and manifefted by that famous deliverance from the Dtluge, 3. And when all thefe Church-mercies are beftowed upon the ftanding Gofpel-grounds of the Covenant of Grace^entred with our fiift Pa- rents prcf.ndy tapon the fall. 4. And when the very terms of that Covenant are to [thcSi.ed of the woman ] which comprifeth Infants as well as others ; And we fee in the Serpent (who was the Devils inftrument, and fo partaked in the Cu:fe) that there is an cnmlcy, even between them and Infants, as well as the aged j the very nature of man being averfe to them,fhough they have not power fo to exprefs it as men. Yea, and Satans enmity is againll; the whole Seed of the woman (^s R^v. 12. 17J againft our InfantSj no doubt ; And therefore it is evident that even Infants were comptifed in that firft Covenant of GracCj in the term [the Seed of the womin.J
I have not leifure to fland upon thefe fo largely as to improre them as they dej ferve.
CHAP. XXIV.
He nineteenth Argument. If God be not more prone to fe-
f^i verity th.n to mercy, then he will admit of Infants to be
Members of the vifible Church, But God is not more prone
to feveritv then to mercy.-Therefore he will admit ol Infants
to be vifible Church.mcmbers.
All that needs proof here, is the confequence of the Major Propofitionj which is made evident thus : God hath cut off. multitudes of Infants of wicked men, both from the Church and from life (for the fins of their Progenitors : ) Therefore if he fhould not admit fome Infants of faithful men.fo much as into the vifible Church, then he iTiould be more prone to feverity then to mercy ; ( except it be proved that God giveth them fome greater Mercy out of the Church , which is not yet proved J All the children of Dathan and Ah'-iwn and their Accormiliccs, were fwallowed up with • them for their Rebellion, and fo cut off both from th« Church and life. Achans Sons and Daughters were all fioned and burned for his fin , and fo cut off from the Church and life, ^<7A 7.1 5,: 6. Yea, It was the flajslifhed Law of God concerning any City that fhould ferve other gods ^by the feducement of whomfoever) that is, if they fliould break the Covenant ( for the Covenant is, that they take God onely for their God^ then that City fliould wholly be deftroyed , and not fo much as the Infants fpared, j)cHt 15.12,13,14 &c. And God concludeth it in his Moral Law, That hewillv'tfit the iwefiiity of the Fathers on the children to the third and fan; th Gc?icrat!on of th.m that hate him. "All the Infants of ^wtf/«^ are {lain with the Parents, by Gods command. So are all the Males among the little Ones of the Mid'ianites , and that by Gods com- mandilV/zw-ji,!?. They that dafh the children of B/j/))/o« againft the ftones arc bleflfed, Pfal. 17,7.^. The children of 7^(J/;i(/5 Ac.uferi are caft unto the Lions- Dan 6.24. Yea, God commanded Jfrac,' to fave the life of no one Infant of all the Nations that were given them for inheritance ; the Hhtilts, Jmoriics, Canaanites, Pcrc^ites^ the HittUcs Aaii LbufueSi Deut.io.i6,i7.
K 3 rHow
70
Plain Scripture proof of
( How all this is reconciled with that of £^f('. [ The Son (hjll not bear the iniquity of the Father ] is ("hewed by our Divines that write on the fecond Ccmmandmenr ) And if God will not admit the Infants of Believers fo much as to be Members of his Tifible Church or Kingdom, then he Ihould not only (hew more feverity to the Seed of the wicked, then Mercy to the Seed of the faithful! j hn: Hiould even caft out all Infants in the World from being in any vifible ftate of Church. Mercies. And how that will ftand with the tendcrntfs of his CompafTions to the Godly and their Seed, and the many promifes to them, and the enlargement of Grace in Gofpel times, I know not.
CHAP. XXV.
He twentieth Argument I draw from Dcut. 18.4, 18, 3 t^4i. Thofc that keep the Covcnaat are [ Bleffed in the fruit of their body ] and of the Covenant, breakers it is faid, [_Cuifed (halt thou be in the fruit of thy body ; Thy fons ani thy daughters {halt be given to another people^ and thy eyes (hall loo\ and f Ml with longrng for thei»yS(c. Thoujhalt beget fons and daughters, but then fljalt not enjoy them, for they (hall go into Captivity.
The Argument that I fetch hence, is this. That Doftrinc which maketh the children of the faithful to be in a worfe condition (ox as bad)Jthen the Cmfc In Deut.iS. doth make the children of Covenant- breakers to be in ; is falfe Dodrine : But that Do- ftrlne wkich denieth the Infants of the faithful to be vifible Lhurch..Members , doth make them to be in as bad or a worfe condition then is thrcatned by that Curfe, Deut.iB. Therefore it is falfe Doftrine.
The M.ijor Is undeniable. The Minor I prove thus^ The Curfe on thp children; Veut.ii. 1$, that they go into Captivity ; Now to be put out of the whole vifible Church of Chrift, is a forer Curfe then to go into Captivity ; Therefore that Dodrlne which puts Infants out of the Church, doth make them in a more accurfed ftate then thofe in Df«M8, They might be Church-members In Captivity, as their Parents were 5 or if they were not, yet it was no worfe then this ; To be in Captlvity,Is but a fcodily judgment diredly } but to be out of the Church, is diredly a fpiritual judg- ment ; Therefore to be out of the Church, is a greater punifliment ('which I mufi cake for granted^ having before proved that it is far better to be in the vifible Church then out J
Another Argument this Text would afford, in that the judgment on the children is part of the Curfe upon the Parents, [_Curp:^ (halt thou be in the fruit of thy body."] Now God doth not Curfe the faithful } but hath taken offthe Curfe by Chrift ('though cor^ ^ralaffli^ionsarclefr.) But I mufi haile.
CHAP*
Infants Church- member fhip and Baptifm. 7 1
CHAP. XXVI.
.Hconeandtwentletli Argument : ThatDoftrine which maketh all Infants to be Members of the vlfible Kingdom of the Devil, is falfe Doftrlne. But that Doftrine which denyeth any Infants to be members of the vifible Church, doth make them all Mem- bers of the vifible Kingdom of the Devil. Therefore it is falfc Dodrine.
^/(■.r.taketh the like reafonlnghainoufly from M;:\Mai(hal^ as if it were injurious fo to charge him; Andhefaith, i. con- fcqucnces remote muft not be faftened on men when they deny them. z. Many un- bapcized are not in the vifible Kingdom of the Devil ; andasketh, whether children be in, or out of that Kingdom before Baptifm. If out, then by not baptiring he leaves ihem not in it, &c.
To this lanrwcr: i. He that faith, Infants are all (hut out of Heaven, may well be charged for teaching that they go to Hell, becaufc the confcquence is not rcmoiCj but dire^, among thofe that acknowledge not a third place.
2. I will only lay a true charge on the Doftrine,and not the perfons ; The Doftrine. fure may be charged with the confequences, though the perfon may not.
3. It is not your denyal of Baptifm diredly,that leaveth Infants In the vifible King- dom of the Devil, but your denyal of their Church.memberlliip : Therefore to thofe vain paflages, I anfwer, That its true, that many unbaptizcd are In the Kingdom of Chrift.and fo many Infants alfo j and fo not in the vifible Kingdom of the Devil; But that no man who is known to be out of Chrlfts vifible Church ordinarily, can be out of Satans vifible Kingdom,! fhall now prove ; and fo that your Dodrine is guilty of mak- ing; (I mean not really, but doftrinaliy making) all Infants to be Members of Satans ■vifible Kingdom, in that you deny any Infants to be Members of the vifible Churchy For it i: be certain.^as you fay)th3t no Infants are Members of the vifible Church, then they are out of it : And then 1 argue thus.
If there be no third ihte on Earth, but all the world are either in the vifible Church, of ChriftjOr in the vifible Kingdom of the Devil ; then that Doftrine which puts them' out of the vifible Church of Chrift, doth leave them in that vifibleKingdom of the- Devil. But that there Is no third ftate_,bur that all the world is in one of the two king-j. dcms, I prove thus.
The common definition of the Church affirmeth them to be a people called out of tiie world i and Chrift faith, he hath chofen them out of the world, and that rhty are not of the world, and in the fame place divers times calls the Devil \_thc Pyiwccof ibis wor'd]yohM.li.8c i^.^o.di. i6.ii. & 15. 19. & li. ^6.5^-17 61,6. And the Apo- file calleth him the Gad of the ivo/idy 2 Cor. 4. 4. bo then. If the Devil be ihe Prince and God of the world as it is diftind from the Church, and out of which the Church is tak-n : then all thofe thi: are not taken our of the world.withthe Church^are ftill of the woild, where Satan is Piince : But the Antecedent is before proved ; Therefore the CGnfcriiient is true. The world and the Church contain all mankind according to the ordini'V Scripture diftiiburioii.
Ifitbcfaidj thKyct they are net vifibly in Satan^ Kingdom : lanfwr, Tf noln^
fints
7*
Plai?i Scripture Proof of
{ancs be of Chrifts vifiblc Charch,3nd this be a known thing,then they arc vidbly out of it: And if they bevilibly out of that Church, then they are vifibly of the world,which is Satans Kingdom j I'ecing the World and the Church contain all.
If it he faid, They may b^of theinviliblc Chmxh, and vet not ofthevirible,nor of Sacans Kingdom i I aflfwer, i. It is vifibly, and not invilibly that the forefaid diftri- bLtion is to be undcrflood. z. I flull anon prove, that the vifiblc Church is wider then the invil'iblc, and that ordinarily we may not judge any to be of the invilible Church, who are not of the vifiblc,
z. Again, It appears that Infants generally were of Satans kingdom vifibly , till Chrift fetcheth them out ; Therefore thofe that are not fetcht out, are in ic ftill / And no man can fay they are fetcht out , except by fome means or other it be vilible or dif. cernablc. Hc^.i. 14. Chrifl icftreyca by death bm that bid the purvey of death, th it h^ the Devil. Satan had this power of death vifibly over Infants as well as others- There- fore feeing Mr.T. buildeth fo much on this, Apel p. 66. That Infants are neither in the Kingdomof Chrift J nor Satan vifibly,till profeflion J either he muft pmve that God hath left it wholly in the dark, and not revealed either that any Infants are of Satans vifible Kingdom, or of Chrifts^ (the contrary whereof is abundantly proved) or he muft find out fome third Kingdom or Society, and fo find out lome third King befides the King of the Church, and the Prince of this world j and its like he will be put to find out a third place for them hereafter b:fides heaven and hell.
3. Sure the Apoftle calls the world [them that are wi'hout^ as diftinft from the Church vifiblcwho are within^ Col. 4, 5. i Thcf4. 1 2. And he fpeaks it as the dread- full mifery of them, Thefe that are without Godjudgcth, i Cor 5.1 2,13. Now Infants arc either within or withouf ; and to be without^ is to be of the world, which the Devil is by Chrift faid to be Prince of.
CHAP. XXVII.
He two and twentieth Argumenr. That Doftrine which leaveth us no found grounded hope of the Juftification or Salvation of any dying infants in the world, is certainly falfe Dodrine. but that Dodrine which dcniethany Infants to be Members of the vilible Church, doth leave us no found grounded hope of the juftification or falvation of any dying Infants in the world j therefore it is certainly falfe Do- diine.
No rcafonab/e temperate Chriftian will deny the Ma;or, I think. The Minor I know will be paflionately denied. Mr.T, takes it hainoufly at Mr. CMaifbal and Mr. Blaise, that they pinch him a little in this point, as if it were but to raife an odium upon him : And yet when he hath done all for the mitigation of the edium ( which he faith was his end, Apol. pag 62.) yet he doth fo little towards the Vindication of bis Dodrine , that be confcffeth, [ Ic fufpendeth any judgment of Infants j wc can neither fay they are in ( the Covenant of Graced nor out, ^pol. pag,6i.'] He labours to prove that there is no fuch Promife or Covenant in Scripture as afllues falvation to the Infants of Believers; but that God would have u> to fufpcnd our judgment of this matter , or reft on the A- poftlcs determination, Rom.9.1^, HemUhave mercy en whom he mil have mercy i
Ycc
Irffants Church'tntmberfhip and Baptijm. j^
Yet that there is a hope, though not certain, yet ptobable and comfortablcj taken fronx fome general indefinite promifes of the favour of God to the Parents, and experience that in all Ages hath been had of his merciful dealing witH che children of his (ervants. ^pol.pa?^ 111.1 I will firftprofecutemy Argument, and then confider of thefc- words. Underiiand therefore, that, i. I do not charge their Doftrine with a Pofitive affir. matlon that All Infants do certainly perifh; but with the taking away of all politivc Chrlftian well-grounded hope of their falvarion.
2. That the Qucflion now is not of particular Infants of Believers, but of the Spe- cies or nbole fort that fo die ; Not whether this or that Infant be certainly favcd, or we have any fuch hope of it ? but the qucftion is, V\hcther there be a certainty, or any fuch hope that God will jullifie and fave any Infants in the world, or any Infants of Believers at all ? Nowlaffirm^ i. That there is a ground of Chriltian hrpelcftusin this, that God doth fave fome Infants ('yea, and pifticularones, though that be not now the queftion.) x. That they that put them all ou't of the vifible Church,le3ve us no fucb hope. I will begin with the latter, which is the Minor in the Argument.
And I . I take it for granted, that to be a vifible merHber ot the Church, and to be a member of ihe vifible Church, is all one. He that denieth that.wllllhew but his vanity; And that the invifible Church. or the (incere part is moft properly and primarily called the Church and the body of Chrift j and the Church as vifible, containing alfo the un- finccrc part, is called the Church ; fecondarily, and for the fake of the invifible, and fo it is called the body J bccaufe men (eem to be of the invifible Church, therefore they truly are of the rilible ; If we were fully certain by his own cxtetnal difcoveries, thac any man were not of the invifible Church, that man Hiould not be taken to be of the vifible. Therefore the properties and privilrdges of the invifible Church, are ufually in Scripture given to the vifible, ( as to be Saints, holy, a',1 the children of God by faltb^ (/.i/.j.id. robe Chrift J body, I Co/. 12 15. to be branches in Chrift , /c^. i j. «. &c.) bccaufe as the fincere are among them, lo all wfible members feem in the eflentials of ChiiftianJfy to be fincere .- tfierefore If any jjrfffverted Jew or Pagan were to be taken Into the Church upon his prof.-ffion/we.otight nut to admit him>except his profefiion feem to be ferious, and fo lincere j for who dui ft admit him, if we knew he came buc in )eft,or to make a fcorn of Chrift and Bap t fm ? So that to be a member of the vifible Church, orofthc Churc|»-as viliblc, or a vifible member of the Church, are all one, and is no more but toiiem to be a true member of the Church of Chrift ( commonly called Invifilplc ).oi' of the trucmyftical Body of Chrift. Therefore even Cardinal Cufmus czUcihiht vifible Church f «/.//:« corijcfluialu , as receiving Its members on conjedural figns. And our Divinfs generally make the unfound hypocrites to be buc to the Church as a wooden I' g to the bociy or at btftas the hifr and nails, &c. and as the ftraw and chafFto the Corn ; And fo doih Bcll^irmifichimkli- and even many other whom he citeth of the Papifts (^AjuinaS: Pctr.a SotOy Joh.dc Turre Crcmata^ Hi'gOyAlcx. AUnfs, Ciifius.) /^nd when BcUarmnic ftigntih Calvi/i zud otheri to make two Mili- tant Churches, our Divines rejeft it is a Calunany,, and manifeft fiftlon, and fay, thac the Church is not divided Into two forts, but it is a twofold refped of one and the fame Church j one as to the internal Eflcnce , the other as to the external manner of ezil^< ing, as Amef. fpeaks.
Again, You muft underftand, that to be a member of the vifible Church, is not to be a member of any particular or Political Body or Society, as Rome would have ir. And to be 2 vifible member , doth not necelfirily import that he is adually known to be a member ; for he may live among the blind, that cannot fe€ thac vrhlch is vifible :
L Bui
74 Pi^iff Scripture proof of
But that he is one Co qualified, as that he ought to be efteemed In the judgment of men to belong to the Church of Chrift. Therefore a man living alone in America^ may yet be a Member of :he vifible Church j tor he hath that which conOitutcth him a vifiblc Member, though there be none to difcern it.
Thefe things explained, I proceed, and prove my Minor thus.
They that are not fo much as feemingly (or vifibly ) in a flate of falvation, ef thera fodying, we can have no true ground of Chriftianhope, that they fliall be faved : But they :hat are not fo much as feemingly or vifibly of the Church, they are not fo much as feemingly or vifibly in a ftate of falvation ; Therefore of them fo dying, we can have no true ground of Chriftian hope, that they Hull be faved.
The Major is evident,3nd confirmed thus, i, Sound Hope is guided by judgment, and that judgment muft have fome evidence to proceed on: But where there is not fo niuchasafeemingor vifibility , there is no evidence : And therefore there can be no right judgment, and fo no grounded Hope- z.Again/o judge a thing to be what it doth not any way feem or appear to be, is ('likely afluilly, bur alway^ virtually and interprc- tativeiy a falfe judgment; But fuch a judgment can be no ground for found Hope.
1. 1 he Minor is as evident, t/ic^. [ 1 hat they that are not feemingly or vifibly of the Church, arc not feemingly or vifibly in a ftate of falvation.] For, i. If they that arc not of the true Church, are not in a ftate of falvation; then they thit fcem not to be of that Church, do not fo much as feem to be in a ftate of falvation ; tut the Antecedent is true } '1 herefore the confequent.
The Antecedent might be proved from a hundred texts of Scripture. It is the body that Chrift is the Saviour o*^, and his people that ho rcdcemeih from their fins, and his flicep to whom he giveth eternal life, and thofe that fl:ep in Jefus that God fliall bring with himi and the Dead in Chrift that (hall rife to falvation , and thofe that die in the Lord that reft from their labours , and the Church that Chrift will prefent pure and unfpottedj &c. He that denieth this, is fcarce fit to be difputed with as a Chriftian j Even they that thought All fhould at laft be brought out of Hell and faved, did think they fliould become the Church, and fo be faved. The Confcquence is beyond que- ftioning.
2. 1 next argue thus .• If there be no fure ground for Faith concerning the falvation of any out of the Church, then there is no fure ground of Hope \ (iox Faith and Hope are conjunft j we may not hope with a Chriftian Hope, for that we may not believe J But there is no fure ground for fuch Faith i ( They that fay there is, let them (hew it if they can^ Therefore there is no fure ground of Hope.
3. Again, If there be nopromifein Gods Word forthe falvation of any without the vifible Church , then there is no ground of true Chriftian Hope that they (hall be laved : But there is no fuch promife, (' as I think they will confefs ; ) Therefore there is no groand for any fuch Hope. That Chriftian Hope muft reft upon a word of promife, methinks fliould not be denied : It i? plain, Ror/i. 1J.4. 13. Ephcf. 1.18. & 4.4. Co/. 1. 5, 13, 2-7. ^The|f.z.i6. iTm.i.i. Hci). 6. 18, 19. Hcb.7.\9. 1 Pct.i. 3,21. Sc^.iSi Rom.^.i^'. & 5.2. Tir. I. I, 2. Hcbin^Scc, i^M up- 43) 74» ^47, &c. In natural things we may have a common natural Hope upon natural grounds J But in fupernatural things, as are juftification and falvation, we muft have the ground of a Divine Revelation to fupport all true Chriftian Theological Hope.
4. Again, If God do add to the Church fuch oifljuU be faved, then we can have no «uc ground of Chriftian Hope oftbe lalvation of any chat are n9t, adiU to the Churcfn
Infants Church- memberjhi^ and Baptifm, y j
But that God doth add to the Church fuch as fiiall be faved, is the plain words of Scri- pture, W(5?.i.laft. Therefore wehave no true ground of fuch Hope of the falvation of ' thofe th It are not fo added to it.
If any fay, that the Text fpeaks of the Invifiblc Church. I anfwer, i.Then It would hold of the vifiblc much more j for the vjfible is far larger then the inrifible; and con- tains the invifible in it.
a.But the Text cxprcfly fpeaks of the ylfible Churchi For it was fuch a Church, i.As were baptized , 2. And as the three thoufand fouls were in one day added to i 3 . And as continued in the ApolUes Doftrine, Fellowfliip, breaking of biead, and prayers 5 4. And were together, and had all things common ; 5. And fol ' their poflefllons and goodSj and parted them to them that needed i 6. And continued daily in the Temple, and breaking bread from houfe to houfc , did eat with gladnefs.&c. 7. And as did praifc God 5 and had favour with all the people. And doubtltfs this was the vifiblc Church. To this, fuch as iTiould be faved were added , yet not only fuch j for many falfe Teachers and others did after go out from them 3 and fuch as Simofi Magtu wttc baptized ; and falfe brethren was one caufe of their fufierings.
So that I doubt not but it is clear,that they that deny any Infants to be Members of the vifible Churchy do leave us no true ground for any Chriftian Hope of their fal- vation.
Next let us confider how far their own Arguments will exclude all Hope of the falvation of any Infant. If it were true which i5^>'.r. fo much ftandeth on, That the only way now appointed by Chrift to make Church-Members, is by teaching the per- fons thcmfelvcs j and that none dfe may be Members of the vifible Church, but thofe that have learnt : Then i. It will much more follow, that they are not of the invifible Church, as I have (hewed j or at Icall that we arc not to judge them to be of the invi- fible Church at all,
t. And if from ^/jr. 18. 10. they may argue, that none but thofe that are taught arc DifcipleSj and are to be baptized j why may tney not as well argue from Mar. 16.16. [jrhoJocvcrbciicvcthnotfljaUocdammd'] that alllnfants are certainly damned ? where-- In lieth the difference in thefe two Arguments ? Sure the latter feems to me to have more fliew from Scripture, though but little. I dare invite Mr. T. to prove to me from Scripture, that any Infants inthe world are juftified and fanftified, and try if I fliall not in the lame way prove that fome infants are Members of the vifible Church ? Or let him anfwer the Argument from !M.ti: 16. 16. that is brought for their damnation, and fee if it will not afford him alfo an anfwer to that from Mai.iZ. againft their being Difciplcs, and to be baptized ?
But why do I cxpeft this, when he fufpendeth his judgment ? If he mean it of par- ticular Infants It is not home to the Queftion j for fo he muft fufpcnd his judgment concerningthcfalvationof every particular perfon, as certain, feeing he is uncertain of the finceiity of any : And yet I hope he will not conclude it uncertain, whether any man be faved f But if he mean it of all the Species of Infants, then I muft fay, he fufpendeth much of his Faith , Hope and Charity 5 and that Dodrine which fu- fpendeth our belief of God ^ and Charity to cur own Children , (hall be none of my Creed-
And where he thinks we muft take up with that, Rom. 9. 18. He will have Mercy on whom he will Live Mercy . I anfwer, i. This is no other ground of Hope, then of any Heathen in America we may entertain, i. It is no ground of Hope for Infants at all : for It neither diredly nor indiredly proraifeth any Mercy to them, nor faith any more of Mercy ,then of hardening 5 and rather would afford fuch Difputcrs an Ar-
L £ gumcnc
»j6 Plain Scr/pture proof of
gument agalnft Mercy to any Infants, becaufc ic is Mercy puc in oppoficion to harden- in j, which Infants in that fenfc arc nof capable of.
Yet i3fr. T. tels us [:hcre is hope fov al! this, though nor certain^ yet probable and comfortable,] and he fbcweth as three grounds for it. If this be fpoken of the S'^ccics of Infants, as if ihere were no certainty, bur a probability, that any of them Ihall be fa^cdj then I wi'.i prove it falfc and vile inoi. If it be fpcken of particular individual Infants, then i. It is as much ascanbefaid of any men at age 5 for no other man hath any certain, but a probable Hope of their falvarion,
z, Ic is as much as I defire j for if their fa!v.niou be probable^ then they are vifibly or feemingly, or to our judgment in a ftate of falvation } and fo muft needs be vlfible members of the Church. How dare 31/-. T. refufe to take thofe for vifible Church- members, whofe falvation is probable , when he hath no more but probability of the falvation of the bcfl man In the world ?
3. But doth not this contradift what went before? And I wiftihcdonotcontradift it again in his proofs. His firflpioof of the probability, is from fome general indefinite proraifes •, but what thefe promifes are, he tels us; Aoolp.6^. by general and indefinite promifes he means fuch as determine not the kind of the good promifed, nor the par- ticular ptrfon ; and therefore are true, if peiformed ro any perfon in any fort of good 5 and conditional^ upon condition of»F3ith and Obedience.
Anfvp.i, If it determine not the kind of good formally, nor virtually, nor contain it generically } then how doth ic make it probable ? 2. And if Ic neither determine the perfon, nor give us ground to determine, how then doth it become probable to that perfon ? 3 And how :h'n can that promife give hopes to the faithful of the falvation of their Infants, which is verified, if performed to any perf.n in any fort of good? as if it were but to one Infant in a Nation, in reprieving him a day from damnation .? If it intend more then this, then i: is not verified or fulfilled in thus much ; If it intend no more, then how doth it make their falvation pre bable ? 4. And furc the conditional proraifes which he mentioneth requiring Faith and Repentance, are little to the benefit of Infants, if thefe conditions are required of themfclves in thei' Inf.incic.
And for his other two grounds of Hope, vi\. The favour of God to the Parents, and experience, they are comfortable helps to fecond the promife ^ but of themftlves with- out a wordjWould give us no ground of Chriftian Hope in fuch matters as juftification and Salvation are.
ANd now let me proceed to the next thing promifed, and fliew you, that we have grounds of hope in Scripture concerning the falvation of fome Infants : And I will ftand tbe more on it, becauie Mr. T. calls on us fo oft,to (hew what wc have to fay for their falvation more then they j which I (hall here fluw him once for all.
And, I. We have a ftronger probability then he mentioneth, of the falvation of all the Infants of the FaithfuU fo dying , and a certainty of the falvation of fome, in that God admitteth them vifible Members of his Church. For Chrifl Is the Saviour of his Bodyjand he will prefent his Church cleanfed and unfpotted to the Father ; and if God will have them to be vifible Members of this Church , then he wctild h;ive us take or judge them to be Members of it ; And withall there is lefs danger of miflake In them, then in men at years ; becaufetheydonot diflemble, nor hide any hypocritical intents under the vizor of profeffion,a$ they may do, And it is certain alfo,That if God would have fome acd many to be of the true body of Chrift, and fo be favcd, then he would
not
Infants Church *7n ember [h ip and B aptifm . n n
not have all to be vifibly out of that body. That he would have them Church- member* is proved, and (hill be, God willing, yet more. If God add to the Church fuch as Ihall be faved , then there is a ftrong probability of their falvation whom he addeth to the Church.
X. A nd the promifes to them are fuller then Mf. T. exprefleth, and give us ftronger ground of Hope. i.God hath^ as I have provedjaflured that he will be merciful to thtm in ;hc general, and that in oppofition to the feed of the wicked, on whom he will vifie their Fathers fins. Now this giveth a ftrong ground of Hope that he will fave them. For if the Judge o; King by, I will hang fuch a Traltorj but I will be merciful .0 fuch a one, it is an intimation that he meancth not to hang him. If your friend promifc to be good to you and merciful , you dare confidently Hope that he means not to de- ftroy you.
1. (jod filth (as I have (hewed) that the Seed of the Righteous is blcJTed. Now is not that a fttong ground of Hope, that fo dying ^ they fliill not be damned ? It is not likely rhit God would call them Blcffcd, whom he will damn eternally, after a few dayes or houres life in a ftate of Infancie , which is capable of little fenfe of Bklfed- nd's here.
3. God entereth Covenant to be their God , and to take them for a peculiar peo- ple tohimfelf. Dc:n. 29. II, 12, 1;. And this giveth ftrong Hope of their falva: Ion. For as if the King promife to be your King, and take you for his Subjcd^ It is likely he intcndsall the benefits of Kingly Government to you J Or, if a man promfea woman to be her husband, it is likely that he intendeth to do the office of a husband ; And fo when God promifeth to be their God-
4- And Paul, i Thcl)' ^. 15. would not have the faithful moutn for the Dead , as thnfe that are without Hope. Now what Dead arc thefe ? and what Hope is it ? 1. H{ faitii the Dead in genera!, which will not Hand with the excluficn of the whole Species of Infants, a. He fpeaks of thofc Dead for whom they were apt to mourn ; And will not Parents mourn for their Children ?
2. And for Hope ; it is evidently the Hope of RefurreAion to Life ; for Rc- furredion to Damnation is not a thing to be Hoped for. This feemis plain to me.
5. D.?wrfcomfortethhimfclf concerniug his Dead Childj becaufe he fliculdgoto the Child, but the Child (hould not return to him. To fay this was meeriy that he fliould be burled with it , is to make Divid too like a Pagan, rather then a Chriilian : However, it feems he was confident that he Ihould not be damned j or elfe he would notfay, I (hail gotohim. And to fay David knew his {alvation as a Prophet, is a groundlefs fidion that caanot be p.oved j Prophets knew not all things , nor ordi- narily things of another wo -id by fuch a revelation. Therefore whatever ground of Hope Djvidhtdj other faithful Parents have the like.
6- Again J U there were not far more Hope of their Salvation, tlien fear of their Damnation, it would never be faid, Thzt CbiM en arc anHcrkcge of the Lord, and ' the fruit of the ivomb his rcrv-rrd. And the man blcjfcd that hath his quiver full of them. -
P/ij/.i 17.3,4,5.
7. And why (hould Children be joyned in (landing Church -Ordinances, as Praycr,FaftIng.&c. if there were not ftrong Hope of the Bleffing of thefe Ordinances to them ? 2 Chron.io i j, ^ h^ Children that fuck the brcaft, were to be gathered to thcfolcmnFaft, Jocl.i.i6' ( '^his will prove them alfo ftanding Church. members, feeing they muft joyn in ftaadlng Ordinances j ) fo, why received they Circumci- fion, a feal of the Rlghtcoufnefs of talih, if there were noc ftrong probability that they
L 3 had
7 8 Plain Scripture preihf of
had the thing feale J and fignified ? God will no: fa-ll his own Ordinance, where men fail nor.
8. Why elfc doth God fo oft compare his Love to that of a mother or father to the child f I lljcf.i'ij. Kiim,ii.ii.l(a.^9 x5. P/^/.ioj.ij.
9. We have L.hrift encouraging us to receive Children in his Name, and hioifelf taking them up in his Arms and B'.cfling them , and angiy wich them that kept them
-from hin, bccaufe of fuch is the Kingdom of God / And certainly, thofe that Chrift BlelfcJ arc bleffed , and (hall be faved ; and if your felves interpret the Kingdom of God of the Kingdom of glory, you put it paft doubt .• And we are fure it was not men at age that Chriil took up in his arms and bleHed j and therefore have caufe to believe it is Infants that belong to the Kingdom alfo.
And that this was no extraordinary cafe , nor flAOuld have been unknown to the Di" fciples, is evident, in tha: ChriH was offended with them for keeping them from him j which proves that they fhould have known that It^as their duty to admit them j which they could not know of thofe Infants, as having more ri^ht to this bleffing then others that (hould be fo brought.
10. VVe read of fome that have been fanftified from the womb, and therefore were in a ftate of falvation ; and Jacob was loved before he was born, and therefore before he had done good or evil, was in the like ftate of falvation.
1 1. VVe find promifes of falvation to whole hcudiolds, where it is probable there were Infants, Act,\6,i^.
11. God cals them Holy, i C(Ja7.I4. Which I (hall prove is by reparation to God as a peculiar people. No\v it is exceeding probable, that where God himfelf hath fe- parated any to himfelf fo from the world, that he will not afterv/ard rejed them, exapt they rejeft his grace afrefh, which Infants do not.
It cannot be laid that tbefe promifes are verified according to their fenfe, if any Mcr. cy be given to any Infant. Here the perfons arc determined, that is, All ihe feed of the ■ faitbfiiUy^n^ we have large ground given probably to conclude, that it is eternal ^Iercy that is intended to all that living to age do not again rejcft it , but that either at age keep CovenantjOr die in Infancie before they break it : And we hive certain ground to conclude that this falvation belongcth to fome Infants, and vilible Church member- fhip to all the Seed of the faithful. And I think this is more then Mr, T. doth acknow- ledge them.
lithztMat. i8, lo. be well confidered, it may make another Argument full to the point. If little cues have their Angels beholding ihe Faca uf God in Heaven, then they Ihall be favcd : For that is a Mercy proper to the people of God. And that the Text fpeaks of InfantSj others have fully proved.
If any will go further, and fayj that Gods affuring Mercy to them, and calling them lilulTed, and Covenanting to be their bod, with the reft of the ArgumentSj will pove more then a probability, even a full certainty of the falvation of all believers Infants fo dying ; though I dare not fay fo my fdf, yet I profefs to think this Opinion far better grounded then M, ■ Ts. that would (hut them all out of the Church, And I thi'ik it ten times ealier to give vtiy pb.u.ibe, probable grounds for this Opinion then for his ; And it is not meerly .i ulind ctiaciry that draws me to this, which makes men apt to judge the beit ; bur, 1 mean, there is far mor>; fliew of proof for ic in Scripture, that all believers Infants are of the true body of Chrift, then tha: none are of the vidble body : and if I r/^uft turn to one of thefe Opinions , 1 would far foonet turn to the former.
I
IfilAnts church memherjhip andBaftifm.
19
I woullurge another Argument here from the Univerfality of Redemption, Chrift dying for all, for every man, for the fins of the whole world, as the Scripture fpeaketh j but that it would require more time to explain myfelfin it, rhen I can here Ipare : However, methinks no man (hould deny that Chiift dyed for every fort of men, and every agci and fo for fome Infants.
CHAP. XXVIII.
>Y twenty third Argument is probable: If an Infant were head of the vifibie Church, then Infants may be members • But Chrift an Infant was Head of the Church : Therefore Infants may be Members.
That Chrift was Head of the Church according to his humane nature in his Infancie, I hope is not queftioned. What acclamations of Angels, and Travel and Wor/hip from the Wife men, with many other glorious providences^ did honour Chrift in his Infancic, more then we read of for many years afterward 1 The confcqucnce of the Major de- pendeth on thefe two grounds ; i. This proves that the nonage of Infants makes them not uncapablc, fuppofing Gods Will ; z. And then it (hews God would have It fo,thus; becaufe Chrift piiTed through each age, to fandifie it to UJ. This Lcraus fpeaks in cxDrefs words, (an Author that lived neer the Apoftles times^ Idco per otniicm vcn'ic Atatcm, & Infanlihiis liifam faClus, fan^ificans Irif antes jhtparvulis purvulus (anClificans hancipfatn habcntcs atatcm, fimul & cxemplum il/is pictatis cffeHus, & juflltite & fub. je£lionu. That is j Therefore he (Chrift) went through every age, and for Infants he was made an Infant, fanftifying Infants j in little Children, he being a little Child, fandifyingthem that have this very age ; and withall being made to them an example of piety, and Righreoufnefs, and fubjedion. Is not here clear proof enough from An- tiquity of Infants Church- Memberfliip ? If they are fandified by Chrift, and he him- felf became an Infant to fanftifie Infants , then doubtlefs they are Church members. ( For I hope Mr.-T. will not interpret Ircnaus Sanftifying, as he doth S. Paul of Legi- timation.) Now let any judge whether it be probable, that if Chrift the Head of the Church were an Infant, whether it be his will that no Infants fliould be Members. For my part, when / confider that I nfant-ftate of Chrift our Head, and the honour done to hina therein, It ftrongly pcrfwades me that they know not his Will, who fay
he will not have Infants to be vinbly his Members.
CHAP.
8o PUin Scripture proof of
CHAP. XXIX.
Y twenty fourth Argument, Is from that full plain Text, i cor 7.14. againft which men (iofo wilfully cavil in vain, aslftkey were forry that God fpeaks it fo plainly, and were relclved to yicd neither to dark exprefllons nor to p'ain. [£'/!' mre yonr children unclean, but 7iorv are ihcy holy ] _ It is andeniablc, i. Ihat it it oncly Believers to whom P.ml giveth this comfort, and of whom he falih, that their children , , ,, „ ,. ^^1:^"°^. i. And that Jt was fpoken as a common Privi-
Icdge to all Believers children, and not as proper to the children of thcie Co- rmhiam. All this is confelTcd ; But what is meant by Holinefs here , we arc not agreed.
. '^^^f, ^xpofit'ons are commonly given of it. i. Some, very few thinkjt means that Hollners which is the true Image of God on the foul, and condfteth in its inter. nal fpiritual Life and reditude^and accompanieth falvation infeparably.
2. I he common and (I doubt not) true Expofition is, T hat it is meant of a ftate ot reparation to God, as a peculiar people from the world, as the <.hurch is Itparated : wherein bccaufe the Covenantor Promifcof God is the chief caufc, therefore they oft call it [federal Holincfs.] '
J. Mr. r thinks that It is taken for Legitimate, ihat is. [no Baflards 1 ] as l^paul mould fay The unbelieving Husband is fanft'ified to the Wife, &c. Elfe were your Children baitards, but now are they Legitimate.
Moreover, we are not agreed what is the meaning of [the unbelieving Husband being fa-n6lified to the Wife, and the unbelieving Wife to the Hu band ] Mr T. faith itislpokenCatachrtftically, by an abufeof Spe.ch, and by [ Saodified ] is meant [asifhcwereSanaificdJ that is, [he 01 Hie m.ay be lawfully enjoyed ] 1 Again he thinks that it is no Privlledge proper to the Believer which the Apoftie here mention- cth, in the fanftifymg of the unbeliever to them j but rhat he tcls them cncly of a common Priviledge of all Heathens married, that they nuy lawfully live tot'ether be caufe they are Husband and Wife ; and that in mentioning the unb.'lierer tandifiid, the Apoftie means but this, [ Though he be an unbeliever , yet he is lawfully ufed or enjoyed.] '
Now on the contrary we affirm, 1. That by [the Unbeliever being fanftified] the Apoftie means properly as he fpeaks, and as Scripture ufcth the word San^ificd {viTi. tor a feparation from common, to God ) and not abufivcly. 2 And that it IS fpoken as a peculiar priviledge of the Believer, and is not common to Heathens,
For the ftiller opening of thefe to you, let me give ycu the true meaning of the word [Holy] andjomc diflindions of it, to avoid confufion
Whether a>of,^Holy, come from £(0, to Worlhip,' as /.infcnius would have It : or trom ^771 th c/.yny^ as ^rciius improbably in his Iroblems -, or from the He- brew word fignifying a Feaft, as Pafor ; or. from dyii , as Bed.: and the moft judge, IS not worth the ftanding on now ; The laft is received by moft : However, It is generally agreed, that the moft common ufe of the word [Holy] (If not the
only)
Infants Chtirch-memberlljip And Baftifm. Si
only) bo;h in Scripmce and Prophane Writers is to fignifie [a thing fepa.atcd to God :] and to fandific any thing, is to feparate i: to God. Omncjan^umcfi Deo fanCl.tm j whatfoever is Holy, is Holy to God. This thereforebeing the proper fence and ordinary uCe of the Word, I take my fclf bound to receive it as the meaning here^ till I know more reafon to the contrary. For it is a general Rule among all found Divines in expounding Scriptures, that you are to take words in the ordinary fenfe wherein God in Sccripture ufcth them, except there be a palpaple unavoidable neceflicy of undeiftanding them ctherwile. And if men will not ftick to Gods ordinary fenfe of words, but ralhly venture upon fingular Interpretations, and pin a fenfe upon Gods Word contrary to his own ordinary ufe of them , it Is no wonder if fuch mea abound in ciiour, and be uncapablc of any fatisfadion from Scrip- ture: For they will believe God means as they iOf let him fpeak what, and how, he will.
Now as [Holincfs] thus fignifieth [a reparation to God] fo it may be diftlngu'lh- ed thus j 1 A Pcrfon or Thing may be Holy, or feparatcd to God, either in ftate and ftanding Relation. Or elfe only for fome particular Aftorufci whether for iliorter time or longer. In this latter fenfe, a wicked man, yea a Heathen maybe fandificj or feparatcd, when It is to a common, and not to a fpecial work. But this cannot be the HoHnefs that is here afcribed to Infants, while they arc Infants; For they be no: capable of any fuch work foe God. Therefore it is a Holinefs of ftate which is afcri- bed to them.
2 Thofc that arc Holy or feparatcd to God thus in flate, are either Holy by meet reparation and Relation; or clfe they are alfo qualified with endowmenns futable to the flate which they are feparatcd to } In the former fence all the Infants of the Faith, ful are fandified, and perhaps fome of them alfo qualified by renewing Grace for their future fervice of God ; In the latter fenfe every true Believer is fandlfied.
I There isafanftifying or feparating to Godj ckhci dircflly and immediately i fo every Believer,and fo their children are fandified j And there is a feparating or fandi- fylng to God Remotely andfecondarily^ when a thing is fepirated for his ufc who is fepa^ rated to God, and will (or is bound by his profefllon to^ ufc it for God, and fandi- fie the fruit of it dlredly to him J i hus ail our meat, drink, and enjoyments are fandl- fied, becaufc whether we eat or drink, or whatever we do, it muft be all to his glory .^ Thusthe unbelieving Hustandor Wife isfandified to the Bclierer : both as being feparatcd to one that is feparatcd to God, and alfo who will ufe all for God } Yea, as a Husbandor Wife they make up that conjugal ftate which Is more diredly for God j And if they beget a holy Seed, it is one of the ufes that they were fandified toj Thou^li I will not ftick to the common term of [Inftrumental Sandification] which Mr. r. takes fo much ad\'antageag3inft, becaufe it implycth but one of the ends of this fcpa- latlonjind that not conftant neitherj for I doubt not but In fome cafes it may be lawful for thofc tomafry that arc paft child-bearing.
4. Again, fometimepcrfons or things are fandified Adively, that is, feparatcd to fome Adion for God ; As the Priefts, Levites, &c. And fometime paflively, that Is^ feparatcd to be ufed for God, as the Temple, Altar, Sacrifice^ &c. The unbelieving; Husband or Wife is both ways fandified.
Allthcfedlftinfl ions arc but from fe vera 1 ends and degrees of fcparation • The common nature of Holincfs is one and the fame in all ; that is , a feparatlon to God 5 And fo both children of Believers, and alfo unbelieving y oak- fellows are hcrcfaid to be Holy and Sandified.
And now I come to my Argument.
M If
S2 Plain Scripture freof of
I
F the children ofBclicvcrj are holy in ftate, th:n they ought to be admitted vlfible
■Church-membcrs.-Bur the childrenof Believers arc holy in ftate.-Tkcreforethey oughc to be admitted vifible Church-members.
The confcqaence of the Major I prove thus : If Holinefs of ftare here be a ftated reparation of the perfon from the world, ro God ; and the Church vifible be a Society of pirfons (o feparatedj then thofe that are holy in ftate^are to be vifible Church-Members : But the Antecedent is true : Therefore the confequenr. Whether the Greek word 6/./.?.»?72:^ were before ufed for any Affembly, as Camco thinks ; or whether it be fpo- ken krw Tti kKKctKH p zi Mufcuhu on Kom.u 7. it much matters not. For certainly all Divines in their definition of the Church are agreed, that it is a Society of pcrfons feparated fromtheWorld^to God, or called out of the World, &c.
2. 1 prove it further thus If this Holinefs of ftated feparation to God, be the conftant attribute of the Church, but never of any perfon without the Churth, then all that are fo holy, muft be admitted Church-Members x But the former is true : Therefore the latter.
3. Again, Ifihofethatarcthusholy by ftarec'l feparation to God, didnot belong to the Church as Members, then there were a holy Society, or Generation without the Church : But the confequent is abfurd i for there is no holy Generation without the Church : Therefore the Antecedent is unfound.
4' If God argue fromfuch holinefs of the Jews to the inchurching of them, then thefo holy maft be inchurched J Bu: the holy Ghoft doth fo argue, Rom, 11. 16. &c. So the Confequent is proved.
The Antecedent is plain in the Text, [that Children are holy by ftated feparation to God;] And for the vindicating of chefenfeof theTtxtagainft iWr.T. hisfenfc of Legitimation, I argue thus.
I. If the conftant meaning of the word [Holy] be for a feparation to Godi then wemuftfoundeiftand ithere, except there be a palpable neceflTuy of underftanding itotherwifej but the conftant fcnfc of the word [HoJy] is for a feparation to God i and here is no palpable neceffity of underftanding it otherwife > Thefore w« muft fo underftand it here.
To this Mr.T. anfwered thus j i,' He denied not that the conftant meaning of the word [Holy] was as I fald j z. But he affirmed that there was a palpable ncceflity of nnderftinding it otherwife here j but what that palpable neceffity was he ftiswed not. He faid alfo that the word kE.<i<^iA Is taken by the Apoftleini Co^.ii.i^fora womans Vail, asafignoffubjedion to her husband, when yet i: is nowhere clfefoufed. To which I anfwered j 1. It is ufual to take the fign for the thing fignified ; i. If it were not, yet once ufing that word out of the ordinary fenfe, will no: warrant us to do fo by this, without as palpable neceffity. Otherwife we might pervert all Scripture,and none of it would be underftandable.
I applied this my Argument for my felf and others thus i If he have a better defence for his judgement and praftife before the Judgement-Seat of Chrift, who groundeth them on Scripture exprefs words underftood in that fenfe as they are ufed neer fix hun- dred times by the holy Ghoft. then he that grondcth them on Scripture underftood in fiach a fenfe as it is nowhere ufed, but neer fix hundred times otherwife ; then we have a better defence for the judgement and praftife of Infant-Baptifm, then Mr. T. hath for ;he contrary i but the former is true 3 therefore the latter.
Here
Infants Church- wewherjhif and Baptifm, 85
Here Mr.T. denied not but that the word was taken fo oft in my fence, and never In his and yet denied the confequence. I do therefore here require al men that are not of
Churchj I grounded my judgement and pradife on thy Word, in the fame fenfe as it is ufedneetfix hundred times in the Scripture.] I fay, will not this man have a bettec plea then he that fhmteth Infants cut of the Church, upon the Expofition of Scripture in a fenfe as It is never elfe ufed in, but ncer fix hundred times otherwife ? ( yea, and and I warrant you I (liall preve it is ufed otherwife here. )
a. Whether now it be not evident how injuricufly thefe men deal with usj in making the deluded people that follow them, believe, that we have no plain Scripture for our judgements) butfar fetcht confequcnces, and that they have the plain Scripture on their lide ? Is it not here apparent how how falfe this is^ and that the cafe is.ckan coa- trary ?
MY fecond Argument is thk ; If Infants of the Faithful were Church- members before Chrii^s time, and fo Holy ; then ic is utterly improbable, that the Apo- ftlefiiould fpeak of nootherHolinefs here but Legitimation (which is common to the children of Pagans ) and mofl probable that he fpeaks of the fame kinde of Ho- linefs which was the ordinary priviledge of the Seed of the Faithfull before. But that fuch Infants were vifible Church members before Chrlfts comraing, is confelfcd, ( and fully proved before-) Therefore, See. They are alfo called the Holy Secdj
The Antecedent ftands on thefe two groands ; i. If the Apoftle by [Holy] fhould have meant [that they were not Baftards] then he fhould havefpoke in a phrafe which they were unlikely to undeiftand • and fo his fpeech might tend to draw them Into milbkcs, and nor to Edifie them. For If the word [Holy] were conflantly ufed ("even neet fix hundred times In the Biblej for a feparationto God, and never ufed for Legi. timation ( all which Mi\T- denieth not, ) then what likelihood was there that the A- polUe fliould n»ean it for Legitimation, or the people fo underftand him ? If I (hould writead Epiftletoa ChriftianCongrfgatlonnow, and therein tell them, that their children are all by nature [unholy,] would they ever conjefture that I meant that they were all Baftards ? Or, if I told them, that by Grace they were HoIyjOr that they were Church-members, would they think that either of thefe words did mean only that they were lawfully begotten ? If when you fpeak of Bread you meanaStone, orif by a Fifh you mean a Scorpion,who is like to know what you mean? If the people Ihould miftake you in fuch a way of fpeech, are they not more excufablcchen you ? But certainly it was the intent ofP^ulzo Edifie, and not to fednce the people, i. Alfo would not the Chri- ftians think it utterly improbable, that Pii/.'/ lilt, uld here tell Believers of that as a glo- rious Priviledge, which every Pagan had ? and which themfelves had while they were Pagans ? and knew they had Jt ? g
3. And might they not wclf cxped that the priviledge of their children (hould be as great as thofc before Chrift ? feeing l\iul had told them, that the Jews were branches broken oft", that they might be engrafted ? and that the partition Wall was taken dowBj and the two made one body ? and the Gentiles become fellow. Citizens
Mi and
$4 PLv?t Scripture proof of
andof ihehcfTifhold of Gcd .- f)("\Yhi.h City and Hoiifc Infants were bcfoic Members, and therefore called Holy ? This being all fo, would not the Chriftians think that furc ^4«/ did fpeak of no other HoiincrSjand no lower privilcJge then others before had ?
3 TF to be Holy in Vauls fenfe here, be no more then to be lawfully begotten, then ■l-we may call all pcrfons Holy that arc not Baftards : But that would be abfurd i Therefore the Antecedent Is fo.
The Minor I prove thus $ If it be not the plirafe of Scripture to call all Pagans Holy that are not Baftards, or any other, becaufe they are not Baftards, then it Isab- furd for us to call them fo > (' for it is a contradifting of the conftant ufe of the Scrip- ture words^ But the Scripture doth nowhere call Pagans Holy,or any other, meerly be- caufe they are not Baftards : Therefore we muft net do fo. For my part I had rather Tpeak according to Scripture, then according to the fancies of men. If Mr.T- his fenfc be right, not only alnoft all our Congiegatlons are Holy (in a fenfe not known in the word ) but we may lay, I think^ that almoft all the World is Holy j for I hope that Ca- ftards are a Imall part of the World.
Two things Mr. T. pleadcth for himfeif here j i. They are called in Mai 2. 1 5. a Seed of God,and that he thinks is meant,that they are no Baftards.To which I anfwer ; 1. This is nothing to the word [Holy.] 2. He will never prove the one or the other. I have proved before that by a Seed of God,ls not meant Legitimate ; for then ^ojeph, Jierjumin ^Solomon ^ and a great part of the Holy Seed Ihould be baftards^ and fo /hut out ofthe Congregation J wnichis aknown fallhood. But why (houldnot Gods Word be underftood as he fpcaks it ? and a Seed of God be underftood properly ? For God will fooner choofe and blefs the Seed of the temperate, then of wandering, infatiate, licentious luft j the temperate and fober will alio fooner educate them for God. And this fcemeth the plain fcope of the place i Though fome other I know do otherwife Ex- pound it.
But Afy.T. objeftcth for his fence thus i The dired end of Marriage is Legitimation of iffue ; Therefore this is here meant. To which I anfwer ; i. There are o:hcr ends asdiredj as that the man might have a help meet for him, &c. 2. Theconfequence is denied ; For it is not proved that the Prophet fpeikshcrc of that dired end. 3. If by the direS end, he mean the ultimate end, which is fi: ft intended j Then i. Either the iiltimate end of God inftituting Marriage(but then his AfTertion is manifeftly falie^foc Gods glory in his ultimate end j and many other greater there are then Legitimation) or elfe he means the ultimate end of Man in Marrying, ( but that is nothlng.to the Text, and is alfo plainly falfe. ) Or if by the dired cndhe mean the next cftcft^ this &s neither true, nor any thing to the matter;
i. HisfecondObjedion jsthls J If baftards be called mck.in ^ then byconfe- quent the Legitimate may be czWcA Holy. To which I Anfwer: The confcquencc is ungrounded 3 All nnclcannefs is oppofitc to dcanncfs^ but not a.l to Holiiufs ; 1 be beafts that chewed the Cud, and had cloven feet were clean bcafts, and yet every Ox or Sheep was not Holy. Again, you muft diftinguifa of uncleanncfs j 1, Either it jl^ was Ceremonial 5 i- Or Moral. The uncleannefs of baftards then was only or chiefly Ceremonial or Typical, God did deprive them of thcjewinipviviledges, as thofc were for a time that had touched thedeadj which yet was no fin. Goddoth Tiot now fliut fuchout of his Church to fo many Generations as he did then out of ihatCongre^nicn in ibm- raeafurc. So that baftards are not now fo unclean as then
Infants Church- member fb:f andBaptifm. 85
tUty were,and therefore the Legitimate not fo Holy jwhen Legal or Jewiili Ceremonial cleannefs and uncleannefs are ceafed ; Therefore this could be none of the Apoftles meaning here. And If God did yet call Baftards unclean, as he did then, it vyIU not follow that we may call all them that are no Baftards, Holy j till God have warranted us fo to do. But fee how thefc men will truft to groundiefsj far fetcht eonfequences when it fits their turn I
I Proceed to my fourth Argament for my fence of the Text againft Mr-T. his. If the fanftifying of the unbelieving Husband or Wife, be not meant of making or continuing the Marriage lawful, in cppofiton to Adultery, then by Holincfs of the children cannot be meant their Legitimation in oppofition to Baftardy. But the fanfti- fyingof the unbelieving Hujband or Wife cannot be meant of making or continuing the Marriage lawful, in oppofition to Adultery (or fcortarion) Therefore by HolinerB of children cannot be meant their Legitimation, in oppofition to Baftardy. To this Mr. 7. anfwerethby denying the Minor. Which I proved thus j ( vi\,Th2t by fandi- fying, is not meant fo making lawfull. ) If God do nowhere in all the Scripture call the meet making of a thing lawful!, [the fanfiifying of it i ] (bat many hundred times ufe the word In another fence ) then we muft not fo call it, nor fo interpret him here ; But God doth nowhere In Scripture call the meer making of a thing lawfull £the fanSifying of it j 3 Therefore we muft not do fo, nor here fo interpret it.
TothlsM-.r. In our Difpute anfwered ; i. Granting the Antecedent ; i' But denying the Confequence,faid that though God did not fo ufe the vvord,yet we m ight j and though he ufe it five hundred times otherwifej yet v;e muft fo interpret him here.
To which I rcplyed ; i, I am tcfolved to learn of God how to fj-cak, rather then of you^and to follow Scripture phrafe as nccr as 1 can left I be drawn fromScrlpture fence. 2. You muft fliew feme palpable necefllty then for leaving the conftant ufe of the Word-, which hcfaid he could do; and I will believe it when I hear i:.But atlaft Mr.T.denycd alfo my Antecedent, and affirmed that the word fanftifying wasufed for [making law- ful] and proved It (as he ufeth) out of i TimA $. All things aie fandified by the Word and Prayer.
To which I replyed ; That the Text could not mean it of a meet making a thing lawfulliwhich I provedthuSiif it were lawfull before, (even to Pagans to eat and drink, though they fin in the manner and ends, ) then this cannot be meant of making It meerly bwfu! ; bu: it w-as lawful! before i Therefore^ &c.
To which he gave not fo much as any denyal, but yielded all ; whereupon I could not but defire the people to obferve, that when as thefc men would make the world believe, that we have no Scripture for us, but they have all ; now Mr.T confeffeth be- fore them, that the Scripture fpeaks many hundred things In that fenfe I alledged ir, and he could bring but on-: place which he would fay did favour his fenfe, and now he pilainly giveth up that one alfo. He that will follow fuch Difputers.and build his Faith on fuch proofjj is fure led by mens intercft in him, more then by God) or the evidence of truth.
1. I proved my Antecedent further thus (that [by fandifylng the unbelievers] is not meant the making orconcinuing them lawfull in oppofition to Aduheryj) If by finftifying be meant [;naking or continuing lawfull] then btththis and all other lawfull Relarions of Pagans are fanfiified ; But the confequcnt is abfurd ■> Therefore the Atuecedcnt.
M J M.\n.
86 Plai^ Scrijfture proof cf
Mr. T. anfwcrcd to this, That their Relations may be faid to be fanftified in this fenfej but when Scripturt faith fo, I will believe him.
3. I further argue thus : That which is common to all Pagans bwfully married, cannot be mentioned as a priviledge proper to Believers j But Paul mentloneth fan&i- fication of the llHbelicver tothcm ^ as a priviledge proper to Believers j Therefore this is nothing common to Pagans (or which they enjoyed whileft they were Pagj^ns, as that lawfulnefs of ufe is which AT, . T. mcntioneth.) AL\ T. in his Book denieth the Minorof this, and faith it is not proper to Believers to have the Unbeliever fanftificd to them ; but that the Apof^lc fpcaksof itas a common thing which they enjoyed while both were Unbelievers. But ihe fccpe of the Apcftle fully fatisfieth me of the fallhood of this j And againft it I argue thus :
If neither in this nor any other text , the Holy Ghoft do ever fpcak of fandifying to the Unbeliever , but to Believers only , then It is not to be underftood of a thing common to every Pagan that is lawfully married: But the Antecedent is undeny- able. For here Paul faith only to the Believers, that the Unbeliever is fandified to them , and not to any other. And no other Text can be produced that faith other- wife.
Whence another Argument may be added ; 4. That cannot be faid to be done to the Believer as his proper priviledge which he enjoyed before while he was an Unbe- liever j ButthelawfuUufeof his unbelieving Wife he enjoyed before 5 Therefore it is not his priviledge as a Believer ; and confequently not the thing here meant jn the Text. If it be faid that it is not the making, but the continuing lawful that is here meant; I anfwer, That which firfl made it lawful! j will continue it fo 5 If both had continued Unbelieveis, their marriage would have continued lawfuU.
5. My next Argument is this; If by fanftifying were meant making lawfull, then the Apoftle could not argue as a Notorie ( from a thing more known ) from the chil- drensHolinefs to the Unbelievers being fo fandifiedj But the Apofllcdoth argue a Notiore 3 So faith Mr-T. ftill, and Jl>ol. p. 120. he faith they were certain their chil- dren were Legitimate.
1 do tjnfeignedly admire how 3f/*. T. can fatisfiehis own confcicnce in the Anfwer he givcth to this A-gument, or how hecan make himfelf believe that it is cither fatif. fadory or rational. But I will hide none of his Anfwer from you ; a;> it is, you (hall have Itj and fo judge of it. I confirmed my M.ijor propofnion thus ( for the Minor is hisown.^ I. If no man can rationally know that his children are Legitimate,tillhefirft know that his Marriage is lawful! ( as in oppofition to Adultery^ ) then the childrens Legitimation is not a thing better known then the faid lawfulness of marriage. But no man can rationally know that his children are Legitima:ej till he know firft that his Maniagels fo lawful! ; Therefore the childrens Legitimation is not a thing better Icnown then the lawfulnefs of the Marriage.
The Minor I prove thus i If the childrens Legitimation be a meer confcqiient of the faid lawfulnefs of the Marriage, receiving all its ftrcngth from it, then no man can rationally know that his children are Legitimate till he firft know that his Marriage is f J hwfu 1 ; But the Antecedent is certain Cand confcllcd by Mi'-T. /Ipol.o i i3,)Thcrc- fore fo is the confequent.
z. Or thus J If every man that doubteth of thelawfi;! .efs of his Marriage, ^as be- ing Adulterc us) m«fl needs rationally doubt alfo of the Lcgicimationof his children, t'lat the faid Legitimation is not a thing btt;er known. But tv.ry man that doubteth whether his M.iiriagebe Adulterous, muft needs rationally doubt alfowhethcr his chil- dren are Legitimate j Therefore the faid Legitimation is not b:tter known*
Now
Ivfants church' member fhip and B aptifm. 8 7
Nowwha: faitk Mr. T. to all this? why incur difputc he faith, over and over, that the Corinth'uns were certain that their children were no Baftards,and yet they were not certain whether their continuing together were not Fornication. And this njagifterially he affirmed without any reafon ; To which I reply, i. Then were the Cerinihlins certainly mad, even fta; k mad men, if they doubted that they Vk^ed in For- nication, and yet were fure that their children were lawfully begotten in that ftate. Cue M'.T. hath no ground in Reafon and Confcience, to make fucha Church as this of Corifith to confift of mad men : nor will I believe him, that they were fo befides ihem- felves in this, who had fo much wifdom in other things.
z. I reply further ; He feigncth them to know a thing not knowable, and fo an im- poflibility } for it is not knowable that the child of an A dulterous or Fornicating Red is lawfully begotten j and if they were in doubt of their living in Fornication, though It were not fo, yet it would afford to them no moreaflurance of their children? Legi- timation, then if it were fo indeed : For who can raife a Conclufion from unknown prcmifes ? Indeed, if there were any other piemifes to raife it from, then it were fomething ; but there is no other ground in the world on which a man can know that his Childc is lawfully begotten, but onclytoknow that he was no Fornicator or A- dulteier.
Therefore I would !M T. would tell me, upon what ground they were certain that their children were lawfully begotten, while they doubted whether their living together were not fornication. Doth he think they knew it by Enthufiafm or Revelation from Heaven ? If nor, then it muft be rationally by deducing it from fome premifesr And what are thofepremifes ? If he will reach an incontinent perfon, how to be fure that his children are lawfully begotten, he will deferveafee j efpedally fome greac men, that would fain make their Baftards their Heirs ; fliould not all men do as they would be done by ? And would Af^.T.take it well to be fo cenfured himfelf, as he cen- fureth thefe Corintbivii ? Can Mr- T, be fure that his children are lawfully begotten,- when he is not fure whether he live in Fornication, or no, that is, whether he lawfully begot them ? Why fhculd not I thinkthe Corinthians is rational as-5W/'. T. ? I am fure they had better Teachers then he among them,and lived in better timesj (Though fome think that many now know more then P<j«/ ; and I think fo too •, but with fuch a knowledge as /^W.-wgot by his Fall.)
But 1. Afz-.T. faith in his Sermon on deliberation, that this Is not abfurd to imagine of underftandingpcrfons, feeing even learned men do not at all times fee the confe-; cjiiences of things at the prefent.
To which I anfwer ( if it need any -J i. Farfetchtor difficult confequences they may not fee ; but fuch as this, I dare fay, he is neer mad, 'if not ftark mad, that cannoc fee. i. Then Mr. T- being a learned man will take it for no wrong it feems, ifa man tell him he is not able at prefent to fee this confequence, that his children are lawfully begotten J therefore he did lawfully beget them, or he did not beget them in Forni- cation
3. But if fuch a learned mm fhouid not fee the confequence ofthefaiJ antecedent; yet I would fain know how he comes to know the confequent, without firft know- ing any premifes or antecedent. This is the Quefiionthat Mr. T. lliould have an- fwered. How they came to be fo certain, that their children were lawfully begotten, when at the fame time they knew not whethfr they begot them lawfully, or in Forni- cation. Did not foablea man as Mr. T. know, and that after fo much Difpute, that this was the Qucflion which he Hiould have anfwered ? And yet he faith nothing to it ; And yet he faith, Uc hath abundantly anfwered all. VVhatdiould a man fay :o fuch
dealing ?
88 PUin Stripture Proof of
dealing * and that from a man of Laming and piety ? and that dare on ihefc grounds deny Church-membcrfliip to all ChiiiUans Infanrs in the world ? Ihall I accufe his undcrftanding ? Why he thinks his c^ufc fo plain, that he fmiles and wond>.*rs at all the learned men in the world that d flent from him j ("hall 1 accufe his Confcience, and fay, he doth thefe things wilfully ? No; but Heave it to God the righteous judge. Only I amftillmore confirmed, that a vifiblc judgement of God doth ftlll follow Anabaptiftry wherecver ic comes.
g. But one thing more i>/^. T, hath both in his Difpute and Sermon; and that is c]iifdcmf.if:na^ ofthefamenature with the reft. He fpcaks as if it weretheir children begotten before converfion of the Believer, that they were certain to be Legitimate^ and their Marriage-ftate afterward which they doubted to be unlawful j (Though in his fermon he fpeaketh darkly and ambiguoufly.^ But it is ftrange to me. if he believe bimfelf in this j And if he do, I return him this Anfwer. Is it not enough that he feign the Ghriftian Corimhiatiszo be belide themfclycs, burhe muft charge little lefs on S. Fault and on the Holy Ghoft ? As if the Spirit of God by the Apcflle, didprove their continuance in Marriage witb Uubelicvers to be no Fornication, bccaufe their children before the Converfion of the Believer (and fo before the time doubted of) were Legitimate. Is this good difputing, to fay you are certain that your children which you begot before your Converfion arc Legitimate; Therefore the Unbeliever is fant^ificd to you now, and you may now continue the Matrimonial enjoyment of rhem? And fothe Apoftlelhould tellthem nothing of the Legitimation of the children begot fince their Converfion, when yet the doubt was only of the lawfulnefs of their Marriage fince then, arid net before. If one of Af^-. T. his Hearers (hould doubt (as many do) whether he may lawfully thus continue and proceed in the Mlniftry, and whether they may maintain him in this way ; were it any good Arguisent for me toufc, to fay. His Labours before he preached againft Infants Baptlfmand Church- memberfiiip were Orthodox; Therefore he may go on now, and you may maintaia him ? who would not liugh at fnch a foolifli Argument ? And dare you fatten fuch on the Spirit of God ?
Thus I have iTicwed you what MrT. hath to fay againft this Argument, My Cxth Argument is this; If it were not the uxUawfulnefs of their Marriage a$ Fornicating, but as impious or irieligious diredly, which the CoYinthia?}s laCpeGtcd^ then it is not the lawfulnefs Jn oppofitlon to Fornication, that is here called fan dify- Xngj But it was not the unlawfolnefs as Fornicacory,but as impious diredly which they fufpefted ; T herefore it was not the lawfulnefs as oppofite to Fornication, which it here meant by fanftifying.
The Minor only will be denied, which I prove thus j If they doubted not of the Legitimation of their Seed, then they could not rationally doubt of the lawfulncls of their ufe of Marriage, as Fornicatory ; ( but they might doubt of the lawfulnefs of It, as being Impious)But the Antecedent is Mr-TMii own,/:///o/.p. i io. Ihercforc the con- fequent he cannot well deny.
1. Befides, to any unprejudiced man, it will appear f:om thd very fcope of tJie Text, that this was the Corhthians doubt, whether it were not Irreligious to live witb Unbelievers ? and not, whether it were not dlrefily Fornication ?
My feventh Argument is thisj When the proper fenfe of a word may be taken, and alfo that fence wherein it is ufed many hundred times by the Holy Ghoft, and this without any palpable Inconvenience i then it is finful to rejcd that fenfe, and prefer an abufive Catechreflical fenfe ^ and which is difagrceing from all other Scrlptarcufc of that word) But here the proper fenfe of the word [fandified] maybe
taken.
Infants Church-member flnp and Baptifm, Sg
taken wherein Scripture nfeth it many hundred times , and that without any palpable ^yea the leaft) inconvenience j Therefore it is finful to prefer before it an abufive fenfe, wherein Scripture never ufeth the word j ^by bis own conft[fion.)
The Major was not denyed i the Minor was dcnycd (that the proper ufuall fenfe may be here taken withoutinconvcniencc ; ^ i. I dcfired him to Ihew any in- convenience in it i And you (hall ancn hear all that he hath fliewed , then or fincc. 2. I proved the Negative thus ; If the Serif tare fay cxprcfly^ that To the pure aU things nrc pure nndfarMifedi ( and here be nothing againft that fenfe j } then it being a ccr- taintruth wemayfo undcrftand it here. Cut the Scripture faith cxprcfly, that To r/;c furc aU things are pure and fanClificd -, ( in the proper fcnl'c ; ) Ihciefotc it being a certain truth ('and here is nothing againlt that fcnfc, ) we may fotake it here. What Af/. T, Did to this, it is a fliametohear from ihc mouth of a Chriftian j but yoo may fee part of it ( If it be worth the feeing ) afterwards. In brief, he affirmed, and long conttfted , that all things are fan^ihcd to Believers onely \^hile they are ading Vaith j yea^ oncly while they are aQually praying ( in the (enfe of that Text. ) And fo he brings in an old condemned Hercfie (fo called by the Fathers) that nothing is pure to us longer then we are priylng. Then his Dilpute was unfanfiified j and fo is his preaching, though it be againft lnfant-Baptifm» and though he pray before and. after ; yea then his very meat and drink isunfanfiified (which Pi7«/f3id weicfanciifi- cd by the word and prayer j ) and then what good will prayer do as to the fandifying ofany thing when it fanftifieth no longer then we are praying? would any man be- lieve that fuchDoftrinediould fall from /^f/-. 7*. a man of Learning and fuppofed ju- dicioufnefs? If he had not long inliftcd on it, and that before about 50. Miniftersand Schollers^ and fome thoufands of people^ I (hould not expeft that any one fliould be- lieve me. And is it any wonder if he that will or dare plead thus, dare alfo plea.: a- gaintt Infant Baptifm ?
Yea, when I argued againft him thus, [If it be only in the very erercife of Faith and Prayer that things are pure, then fleep is not pure or fanftified to you j ( for you do not exercife Faith and Prayer in your fleep ) but fleep is fanftificd i Therefore it is not only in the very exercife of Faith and Prayer.] Heie Mr- T. denyed that flsrep isfanftifiedi (would any man believe it ?^ which I proved thus; \i All things are pure to the pur €■, then their fleep is ; but the Text fai:h, All things are pun to the purti Tit. 1 . 1 5. < hereforc their fleep is pure to them.
Here Mr»T. anfwered, that by all things were meant /owe things.
And thus you fee, what grounds the moft Learned go on againft our Baptifm J which would make a tender heart even tremble to repeat.
Before 1 come to give you his reafons againft my Expofition of this Text, I will add my eighth and laft Argument , becaafe it is drawn from this fame Text j and it is thus i
If the Holy Ghoft fay cxprefly, that to Unbelievers Nothing ii purc^ then you muft not Qy that theii Husbands or VVives are fandified to them ( nor expound this Text of any fuppofed fand fication common to them ; ) but the Holy Ghoft faith exptefly z\\U Nothing is pure to lifibclicvcrs ', Iherefore it is not a fandification common to them,th.u is here mentioned.
If the Scripture do not only ufe the word Holy 3nd San&i fie miny hundred iimes in another fenfe , and never in your fenfe, bac alio fpeaks the dired contrary, v'":^ that nothirg is^wrcto unMtcvers \ then let Afr. T' fay, ifhcpleafc, that their V\ives are fandifcied to them ; but I will not fay fo.
But I, he faith, ^but Maglfteri^ly without the leaft proof) that the Apoftle fpeaks
N A.u-
r
go Fhin Scnpture proof of
Acurolo^ically and abufivcly 5 and by fanclified , means quaf, as if th cy were fan- aiflcd.
Mf. But befides that.ihis is both unproved, yea, and fully confuted, I would further know what he meancth by [ ^.wy/Ianftified.] Is it [as good as fandified ? ] Then it is apparency fallc j for to be unfanftified, though iawlull, is not as good as though they were fanftified. And if the meaning were only, that it was lawfull that they con. tinue together j then, 1. [t would be but a proving idem per Idem ; as if :he Apoftle flioiild fay, It is lawfull to live together, becaufe it is lawfull ; whereas he argues that they may lawfully live together, becaufe the one is fandificd in or to the other. 5. And why fhould a thing only lawfull be faid to be fanftlfied, or as it were fanftified, when it is not fanSified i Lawfulnefs is a condition prerequifite in the fubjed of fanftifi- cation j for God never fanftifieth fin. It may be long lawfull , and never fandified. 4, Andhow would this refolve their doubt, which it is apparent was, whether it were not diredly Impious or Irreligious to live with Heathens ? would it be any fatisfadion for the Apoftle to anfwer^ that it is not Fornication ? It may be unlawful! as Impious, though lawfull as not Fornication. 5. And who fliould be here believed in their In- terpretation ? ^ir.T. that expoundeth by adding to the Text? Or thofe that fay no more or lefs then the Text faith ? We fay as the Apoftle faith, that the Unbeliever is fandified in, or to the Believer : My. T- faith, He is as it were fandified j that \s^ He is not fandified, but either as good, or fomewhat like it. Who fhall be believed here ? Z.Paiifi or A/i-.T f I believe b. Paul, that the Unbeliever is fandified. Let Mr. T. be, lievethat he is but as it were fandified. He tells us that a Co/-.io,zj. to be baptized in the Cloud and Sea, is ^//djZ baptized. And what of that? What is that to this ? Becaufe in Metaphors, Similitudes, Types, &c. the name may be given from the thing lignified, doth it follow that it is fo here, where Mr. T. doth not fo much as affirm any Type or Similitude ?
I am refolved on (and neccffitatcd to) brevity, elfe I might add more Arguments here. I will only hint one more thus : The Apoftle here argueth from this as a horrid confequence, containing much evil in it, [ Elfe were your children unclean j ] and from the contrary as a happy confequence^ [B«? now they arc holy : ] But according to Mr.T. his Expofition, there is no great good in one, nor evil in the other : Therefore Mr. T. his fenl'e is diffonant from the Apoftles. For the Major^ it is undeniable ; 1 he Minor Mr.T. will confute, when he hath well anfwered rac j what great evil is, accordin^^ tohisopinion, tobeaBaftard ? i. It is no fin (in the child,) that is certain, z. And what evil of fuffering is it ? i. Though the Parents (hould be impenirent, yet according ro Mr. T. it would be no punifliment to the child to be out of the vifible Church 3 For he thinks that eventhe Seed of the Faithful are all without, and yet it is no evil to them. And for the place he urgcth, (He will have mercy on whom he will hjve mrcy,) they may be concerned in it as well as others. So that except meet ftiame amongft men , or the, «ffi.d of humane; Law*, what harm doth he leave ?
-hall now proceed to anfwer all that ever I could know that Mr. T. hath brought againftmy Expoficion of this Text. i. He faith. If I do overthrow his fenfe,
I _ __
and prove not my own it is nothing : for poffibly neither of us may be In- the sight.
ylaf. r. I wonder no^•that he fcetha poffibilfty of his own erring , bur rather that ^f^K?j,not that be certainly crreth. a. 'l have fully proved my Expofition already .•
Infants Church-memberfhip and Baptifm, p i
Is not proof enough that theScripture neerfix hundred times ufeth the word in myfenfe, and never in his? 3. When there is but thcfe three fenfcs urged by any of underftanding, I think the overthrow of his third is the eflablidiing of one of the former j and if cither of them ftand, his caufc muft fall. For the other fenfe of the word[Holy] which is foe Qinlitativc reall HoiinefSj makes againft him more then mine.
And I fay again I had rather fay as they that would have it a Holinefs of feparation, fuch as certainly faveth, then as Hy. T. that it is only to be no Baftards. For I know no one Scripture againfl their JHdgement that fliall affirmj that all Infants of Belie- vers fo dying are certainly faved : nor any Argument, but onelythis, that then the children of the faithful! that prove wicked, do fall away from Grace. And were I nccef- fitared to the one (as I am not) I had rather believe that fuch Grace as confifteth noc inperfonal qualifications, but is merely Relative, grounded on the Covenant, and ha. ving only the Parents Faith for its condition, I fay, that fuch Grace may be loft when they come to age, then tobeleeve with Mr.T. that God ha:h denycd all Infants in the World to be fo much as Members of the vifible Church. For I fee twenty times moic may be faid againft this Opinion of his, then the other.
But In his Papers which he (hewed me againft Mi:M.vfhals Defence, he mentJonctfi fome Scriptures where Holinefs or Sanftifying is not taken forfeparation from com- n-ion to facred ufc, as ^j/^ ao p. i Sam.zi.^. J/Tr.ij.j. jc,\S 1.17,18.
To which I aniwer j M» . MarlJj.il can plead for himfelfj but this Is nothing againft what I have faid. Holinefs is ever a feparation to God , though not ever to a Temple or Religious ufe« i. Sure the Cities of refuge were feparaccd to God, when they were feparated for the fingular exercife of his Mercy, and faving the lives of his ocople, andl for being eminent 1 ypes of Jefus Chrift the great Sanftuary of diftreflcd finners 1, 1« what fenfe foever that in Samuel be taken, that the vcflcls of the young men were holy, it hath no fliew of oppofltion to my Interpretation. :;.Muchlefs//ij.i5 5. It being the fame fenfe evidently as I have pleaded for.
Further Af/-.T. alledgeth i 7V;f/.4.3. This is the will of God^ even your fandifica- tlon, that ye abftain from Fornication. To which I anfwer : i.It is not A'l that arc no Baftards that are here called fandified. 2. Nor is it meer lawfulncfs of Marriage-ufej that is called fandification. j.Nonorthe meerchiftity of any Heathen. 4. But here fandification is plainly taken for the reall purity of their livtS, as becommeth a people feparated to Goa,whercof their Chaftity is a part.
Further, Mr.T. addeth, That Marriage is called Holy by many Divines 5 There- fore Legitimation may be fo. Anfiv. But we are only in queftion how Scripture cais. I had the rather ftick to Scripture with you,becaufe you make men believe we fli; from Scripture. If you would ftand any whit to the juJgcmcnt of either the Ancient or the late Learned and God ly^ we lliould more willingly joyn iflue with you. Befides, the Popilh tftimation of Marriage as a Sacrament, may occafion feme Epithitcs to ir, not yet laidafidc. And yet were ic wcrch the ftandingcn^ I m'ghtfliew more ica^'on why Marriage (hould be called Holy, then meer Legitimation ; iiutl am loth to draw you away from meer Scripture Argument.
T>Ut the great (an<l only Arguments which he urged in private conference) and chief •UA guments which he ufcih in his Confutation Sermon, and in his Anfwer to Mr. Marjhals Defence (as I took it out of his own Manufcript lent me) and it fcems, which he moft trufteth to againft my Expolition of the word Holy jjstnd to prove ic
N i cannot
p 2 PUifi Scripture proof of
cannot be meant as in T/^ I. 15. & iT'm-4.6. arethefetwo. i. He argueth thus : ]f the Fiith of the Parenrs be the caufe of the childrens Holinefs (as he arpueth againft Mr.M'iiP^^U) or the condition or AntcceJcm (' as I affirm ) then ic is cither ihc prefence of Faith, or thecxcrcifc of it ; If ihe prefencCj then either of the reality, ot of the bare prof. ffi;n. If the former, then without Reality of Faith there is no Holl- nefs of the children; If the latter, then falfe faith hath the reallcfFcd of fanftifying. If it be the exercifc of Faiih that is required 5 then it will be uncertain t© the Bap- tixer. If it be faid that in common elUmationhe is fanttificid i then it is common cftimation that fanftifieth ; For it may be without Faith, but not without common cftimation. And if it bethe HoUnefsthat is mentioned T/f. i. 15. 1 T/a* 4 J, 6» then It is onely when one perfon is a crue Believer j andalfo whcntrue Faiik isex- ercifed.
This Is the very ftrength of Mr.T.hh Arguing againfl the plain words of Scripture ? And be not thofc duSile and tradable fouls, that will be drawn from the plain words of God with fuch a maie of words ? But methinks to the judicious, there fliould be no difficulty in the untwifling of all this which M/.T. hath fo ravelled.! give him therefore my Anfwer plainly thus.
1 Faith is no caufe (not fo much as Inflramental properly ^ of'a mans own Juftification or Salvation , but a meer conditiun , ( Mr.T. and 1 are agreed In this, though the moft Divines a* a againft us both: ) Therefore it can be no cauft but a condition (which Is an Antecedent, or Caitfa fine qua. no7i) of childrens Holinefs. Let others plead for its caufality , I plead but for irs conditionality.- a. How Logically he coniradifttnguillieth the Prefence of Faith from the Exercife ot it, Heave to our betters to judge. By the prefence of Faith, he may mean either the prefence of the Habit, orcftheA^: If the latter, it would be a filly queftion : but I think he means the Habit only. 3 If hehad notdiftinguiflied between Prefence andExer- clfCj but between Prefent and Pafl , and fo demanded whether it were the pre- fenc Exercife onely, or thfiPaft, or former Exercifc^ it had been a more ufefuU Qu«e.
4. I anfwer therefore fully : If this bethe Qiieftlon, what Is the Condition on which God in Scripture beftoweth this Infant Holinefs ? It is the Aftuall believing of the Parent : For what Faith It is that hath the Promife of perfonal Bleflings, it is the fame that hath the promife of this priviledge to Infants: Therefore the ptK)mifc to us being on condition of believing, or of A dual Faith, it were vain to fay that the promife to our Fnfants is only to Faith in the Habit : the. Habit is. for theAd- Yet is the Habit of neceffity for the producing of the Aft j Therefore It is both Faith in the Habit ( or potcntin proxima) and in the Aft that Is neceffary j But yet there is no neceflity that the Aft muft be prefent 1^ at the time performed j e'uhtr in J ^11 pro- creandt^ vcl ternpore nativitatis , wl baptifmatis. It is fufficicnt that the Parent be virtually and difpofitively at J refent a believer, and one that ftandsinthat Relftloa to Chrifl as believers do ; to which end It Is rcquifite that he have aftually believed forme rly ( or clfe he hath no Habit of Faith, ) and hath not fallen awav from Chrift, but be ftill in the difpofition of his heart a believer, and then the faid Aft will follow in feafon , and the Relation Is permanent which arifeth from the Aft. and ceaftth not when the Aftof Faith intermltteth. As a man may be your fervant when he intermit- reth his fcrvice j and a Difclple or Schollcr when he is not learning ; or » 1 radefman, or Husbandman , orSouldlcr, whenhelsnot working at his Trade, or '^-sbandry, -or Is not in Fight 5 the Relation (and fot^e Denomination ) from the Aft remai- ajng .wh«nthe A(ft ceafcth for tfeit tim? , and the profelfion alfo remaining. It is
no6;
Infants Church-memherfh'f and Baftifm p?
not therefore the meer bare profeflion of Faich which God hath made the condition of this gift, but the former Aft and prefent difpolition in Reality; Yetthefaid profe[- fion will, and neceffarily mull accompany^ fo far as the patty hath opportunity and a- bilityto profefs.
This Is my plain full Anfwer. Anrl now let's fee what Mr. T. can fay againft itj 1. He faith, then it will follow that without Reality of Faith^ there is no fanftification. which confequence fcems not fo dreadful to me, as that I (liould be afraid to admit it ; nor do I fee any inconvenience that will follow upon it, nor any reafon to avoid it. His fecond confequence about falfe Faich I have nothing to do with j yet (hall anon a little furthet diftlngullh of Faith.
His third is, that if it be Faith in the Exercife, then it is uncertain to the Baptiier j If he mean the prefent Exercife, it Is nothing to me ; If he mean rhe Afts paft or pre- fent, and the difpofition prefent, then I yield that ihefeare ncceffary, and 1 iTiall here a little ftay on the confideration of this confcqucnt.
Mi: T. told me alfo in Conference, that if it were the Reality of Faith that was re-" quiGtc, then the Baptizer coiiM notknow it, and that this was abundantly fufficienr to confute all that I had laid. Wonderful Confidence / whatancalie Faith hath Mr.T? ai\d what a fmall matter fecmstohim abundant fatisfadion ? would a man believe that fuch a (illy contemptible Anfwer ihould feem of fuch weight to fo learned a man ? Who can think hereafter that he fees more then a! moll all the Divines in £«'<?/>? in tbe Dodiine of Baptifm, who is not able to fee the vanity of this Arifwer, but doch foad» jiure any thing that is his own^ though fuch as a young Divine might be alhamed of ? Yet was this Argument almoft-all that he brought againft my Expolition of this TeX5. Let us here then joy n ilFue.
1. I muft tell Mr T. that here are four dlftinft Qneftlons to be Anfwcred : 1. What is the Faich which God hath made the condiion cf Infant Hoi incfs ? a. Whether Infants are holy thereupon, as feparated from the World to God? 5. Whether all that are fo holy or fcparated to God, are to be folemnly admitted. by Baptizing them ? 4. Who they are whom tha Church is to judge Holy , nr to have the conditions of this granted Privlledge ' Now it is only the firftofthefe Qiiefti- cns that I anfwered before- It is only the fecond which the TfXtinhand aflirmctb. The third I proved towards the beginning of my Argument faffirmatively.j The fourth I f^.iall come to nexrg . i-o that let it be uncertain to the Bapiizcr who hath rcall' Faith ; Yet 1. It is certain to him that Beelievets Infants are holy as fepararcd to God from the World, z. It is certain to him that all fuch (liould be baptized. 3. And he hath a ce tain Rale to know whom he is to judge or take to be believers j not a Kule for an infallible judgement of their Faith; butan infallible Rule for his judge- ment. The judgement which he paifcth of the pcrfons Faith may bi fallible j but the Rule is infallible by which he judgeth ; And the judgement whxh he is bctyid to pafs acco-'ding to that Rule, as his duty, is infallible too. The Rule is, 1 hat a ferioas Proftirour ofthe Faith, is to be taken by us for a true believer. Now here are included feveral ^flerriors i. That a fcricu9 proftflion is a probable fign of true Faith J this we may be certain of. 2. 7 hat we are there{ore bound to jixlge fuch Profcflors to be in probability true believers. 3. That we aic bound therefore to rcceiveand admitthem, and ufe them as true believers-. Thefe thtee Ads ("two of the judgement, and one of the whole man) a^c infallible Ads, and are included as • certain, having certain Obje^.s : Sjthatthus far both lUile and Ads arc infallblc. 4.. Butthenthat rrofcf^lon ii an Intal'lblc bvidcnce of linccre Faith : 5. Or that h s . pfrfonhach certaialy and infaililvly allnccrc Faith j the Rule ^iveth us no wairaac
N 5 lhlii.:»
94 PUin Scripture proof of
thus to judge. Wc are not called to any fuch judgement, it is none of our duty j and therefore no wonder if we be here uncertain, anil may be deceived.
So that he which is miftaken in his judgement of :he pe- Ions ftate or true Faith, is yet not miftaken inany one Ad of that judgement which God bindcthhim to, and which his pradicc proceedcth on. He neirher is in danger of believing a Lye, nor of fealing to it. For he is bound to believe thit Profertion is a probable fign, and fo it is; and that a Proftffor is probably a true Believer J and that is true, whether he prove fo or not i and then he is bound to admit him among Beiieveri; and this being matter of meerpradice^ is not faid to be true or falfe j only,that it is our duty fo to do, that is true.
I anuver this Queftion the more fully ^Jaecaufc I finde our own Divines many of th£m a: a lofs in h , whether in admlniftring the Sacraments of Baptifm and the Lords Supper , we arc to go upon judgement of Infallibiliry , or judgement of Chari- ty. I have named feveralAfts of judgement that are infallible J and thcphrafcof [judgcnacnt of Chnity] is ambiguous. A falliblfe judgement we arc not bound to ; yet it may be called a judgement of Charity ; Though indeed Love being an Afte- dion,cannot rightly lead the judgement ; yet we arc to manifeft Love in our judging ( not aggravating failings, but hoping all tilings, and obferving ths beft to inform our judgements^ ) and yet more clearly are we to manifeft Charity in our admitting, receiving, and ufing fuch perfons ; For it may be our duty to receive them as if they were true Believers; and yet none of our duty to judge them certainly true Be- lievers j but only to judge them probably fuch. God bindecb no man to believe a falfliood.
1 know it is ordinary with Divines to fay concerning judgement of Charity, ( and I have oft faid it my I'elf, ) that [It may be a duty to believe that Good of a man which is not in him, and a fin to believe that which is the truth : ] But then the naean- ing is only this ; It is a duty to believe it as probable (and fo it is ; ) but not as cer- tain ( God bindeth none to that ) and then if he prove worfe then he feemed , I was not miftaken in my judging his (IncerJty to be probable. And on the other fide If thelincerity of a man be probable, he that rfiall judge either that he is certainly un- found, or that he is not probably found, he finneth agalnft God, though the man prove unfound j becaufe i .He had no ground for his judgement, it being not a truth therefore to him, which proved true in the iffue. 2. And he is forbidden fuch judging. 3. And the {incerity of the party was probable,which he believed improbable,and fo in that believed falfly.
Well, but Mr. T. thinks, that feeing we are uncertain who arcttue Believers Seed, therefore we may not by Baptifm admit them among the Holy, or into the vifible Church.
ylfifvfi. But is it not enough that we know whom we are to judge in probability to be believers ? and whom we are to admit and receive among believers i though we know not who are infallibly fincere ?
But Mr.T. objefted laftly to me thus, [however ffaiih he) this Text will not war- rant you to admitthem j for it teis you of the Holinefs of none but believers chil- dren, and you know not who thofe be.] To which, and the rtft before, I Anfwcrj 1. I bring not this Text to prove diredly either that Infants muft beba;'tilcd, or that this or that particular Infant is Holy or a Church- Member; But I bring it only to prove that all the Infants of believers are fo Holy ; I hare proved before, that thofe thatare foHoly or feparated to God, muft bebaprized j This I proved from othM Scriptures, and not from this 5 And I am proving now.that ferious Profeifors are to
be
Infants Church-memherpjip and Bapifm. g^
be judged probably to be true BelitverSj and fo their Seed ic Jged .he Seed of Believers, and both received on this judgement, without any judgement of cerrainty about the undoubted fincerity of their Faith. And this Ru.e for oui- judgement , I fetch from Other ScriptureSj and not from this. So that why fhould M-: T. cxpeft t'*rave more proved from this Text then I intend.'' Let him acknowledge but as much, and lex- pefl; no more ; that is, that all believers Infants are Holy, as being feparated from thi world to God ; (in which fcnfe the vlfiblc Church is Holy.) If I prove only my An- tecedent from one Text, will he fay it's in vainj except I prove my confequent from the fame Text ? who would expcd fuch arguing from fuch a man ?
For the concluding the whole therefore, i would dcfire Mr. T- to anfwer me thcfe Qgeftions following : i. How doth he know hirafelf whom he fliould Baptise ? whomdoththe Scripture command him to Baptize ? If he fay as Jpo!.f.s>^\ that it is thofe that make a fober, free, icrious, underftanding profeffion ; I would know whether it be the profcffion it felf, the bare profeflion which God beftoweth this priviledge on? or whether it be the Faith profeffed ? If It be Real Faith, Habitual or Aftual, then without Real Faith there is no vifible Holinefsj Church- member- fiiip, orBaptifm. If it be bareprcfeflion or fas he cals it) falfe Faith, then falfe Faith for profeflion without Faith) hath the real effcft (or Is the condition of) making vifible Saints or Church-members. Again, if it muft be Real Faith, in Habit or Aft, the Baptizer cannot know ir. If it be faid, that in common eftimation they arc Believers, and fo Holy, then common eftimation doth it without Faith.
This is his own arguing ; when he hath anfwered for himfclf, he hath anfwcrcd it for me. Is it notftrangc that he could not fee, that it as much tohimfelf to anfwer it as me ? If fie can tell me how he knows a man hath Faith enough for his own admit- tance or vifible Holincfs, then let him prove it, and his proofs lliall ferve me to prove that the fame Faith is It that is alfo the condition of his Infants admittance and Holi- ncfs.
If hefay, that it Is not on Faith that God giveth to men at age thisvifible Holinefr, but upon a bare profeflion. f. I (hould defirc him to prove It, and then when he hath proved foundly that by Believers are meant Profeffbrs, and that is the dired condition of the gift, he ihall prove it for me alfo, that it is fuch Prcfcffors children that on the fanxe condition are Holy.
2 . But yet I do not believe Ke can prove it. Though he may prove what T am pro- ving, that the Church is to take Proftflbrs for probable btlievers , and fo admit them among believers: yet he v/ill never prove that the l-romife or Grant Is made diiedly or Properly to Profeflion, but to Faith j nor that Profetfion is the Condition, but the fign tous to judgeof thofe that have the Conditions and therefore admitteth not into this vifible ftatc of Holinefs for it felf, but br the Faith which it profcfleth and fignifieth.
Though Mr. T. feemsto deny this, and will fly further from thfc Independents thfn I dare do in this, inh'n Apo'.p. 1^7. where he fecmcth to deny, [that the Holi- ncfs which is the ground for the AdminiftiMtor to baptize^ muft be reall cither indeed, or charitably bclievcdj If by [charitably believed ] he mean [judged as probable] I amagainft him, andwill not mn away from Tnnh ?nd Chriftianity for fear of Ihdefcridehcy J for i'. I would know where itis that the l^romifc or Grant is made diredly toa folfjbare Profcfiion ? 2,- I would know whether he will baptize any man (or give him the Lords Supper', all's one ) upon a Profeflion which hath no %nilica:lon of probable Faith ahd Cncerity .' If he lay no : then it is evident that-
thfl'.
I
g$ Plain Scripture proof of
the Faith JT.uft be probiblci If he fay that he would ; Then i. I fay he wculd make CJiriftlanlty a fcorn, and baptize a man ;har he. knew came Inderifion to makea jtft of Chrift. Who durft baptize llich a man. whole profeflion he knew to be fcornful or counterfeit? Then the Jews that put on himthcuobci and cryed, U.nl i^'v*^ of the Jccviy might have been baptized, i. And then he would contradid his own rule, Apo!» .94. thit Proftffion mult be free, fober, icrious, and undeiftanding. Andwhyfoi" (Utbecaufc there are probable figns ot Faith; 1 herefcrc how to reconcile Air. r. with hlmfelf in ihe two laft cited placeSj Is beyond my skill. Perhaps fomemay think that I arf ue againft my own pradife, in that I admit fo many hundred to the Sacra- ment, bud anfwer : Whether it be that God hath ijivcn me a betcer people then ordi- nary, or whether I take that proftflloB for a fatisfa^ory maik of probable Faith, which fomc others do not (or indeed both together, as lam fureihc Tuith is) yet I adml- nifter to none that I know to be unbelievers ; nay, nor that I judge not to be proba- bly or hopefully believers. For if they openly profefs their Fai'h in Chrift, and conri- did it not by wicked obftinate lives, I yet can frnde no icafon to conclude againft the probability of their Faith. Yet if Afi^. T. or any other fhculd infill on it, that it is bare profeflion, and not Real Faith that hath the Promife, I fliallfatlsfie it in my fe- cond Queftion.
1. I would defire M?-. 7*. ro anfwer his own queftions concerning thefe following ^Texts : How will he do that ? even fo I w ill anfwer him to this.
/ffl. g. 36,j7. irbai doth hinder me to be Bapti\cd} {^hh'.ipdoA not fay. If thou profefe, but) // thou belicvejl rvith all thy heart thou mayji. (Here is that which was the condition cf-hisright to Baptifm before God J And he faid, jbelieve that Jcfm Chrifl ii thtSonofGod: (Here was Philips ground to /udge him a believer.) Now I would ask Af?-. r. is it Real Faith, or a bare profeflion, that was here meant by be- lieving ? If real Faith ( as certainly it was, when it muft be with all the heart) '.hen how could Philip know it ? Even as we may know. (For j hope he will no: plead a Revelation to Philip) All his own Quae'-ics may here be put.
So Ad. v6 3031 Believe in the Lord /f/«i,w<is the condition^ on profeffion whereof the Jaylor was baptized. Now how did P^A/knowhc believed? AsMr.T. anfwer* cthjfo will I to him. So ACls-z.l^i^i' Repent andbe Baptised, every one of yt u in the mm: of the Lord Jejm, &c- They that gladly received the word were bapti/ed, &c, about 3000. fouls. It was not here a bare profeflion that was the condition, but Ke« penting i and Pfi£>" baptized- them becaufe they gladly received the Word. But how knew Pc^fT that they Repented, and gladly received the Word? Mr,T, will fay, the Eaptizer is uncertain-, andfure Peterkncvf not the hearts of 5000 men.
It is not evident then, that true Repentance and Faith is the condition (and not a bare profeflion,) and yet that the Church is warranted by the conftantexatmple of all the Scrlpture,to take a profefTion, but not for i: feii' dire<aly, as if it were the very con. dition^ but as being the difcovery of thofe that prob.ib!y have the condition ; and fo th€ way that Go<l would have all Minifters take in judging and admitting j and therefore no profefTion muft fatislie that doth not probably ligmtie Faith. (Vet we have ex- ample fliU for taking the fi: ft probable proRfliion , without further delay or fearch.)
Yea, even Simon himfelf was baptized bccaufe he bchevcd, and not bccaufc he bartly profcfIed,orat leaftbecaufebyprofcfTnighe feemed tobdieve, '.<4(fZi 8 i^SoA^i. 8. Ii. &■ 11. ,21 & ij.ii.Sc 18.8. All that dvick 21 SamariajZr.d :ii Lydcb J 3r\d SarcTtf believed, and therefore were baptized.
But what fhould I cite more places to Afr. T. who hJmfelf ccnfelTcththatitis Belie- vers that arc Dtjciples^ and Pifciplcs only that muft be bapiizLd, according to
Ififants church' member jhip and Bapifm. 97
u- ' "
JW^/.x8.i9jio. Now here! might run over all his own Queftions i and ask, Is h be- lieving in prefence or in cxcrcife ? is it nail Faith or bare pro! tflion ? V the latter, then falfe Faith maketh Difciples ; If the foimer,then who can knc w UfLct him anfwer thcfe 'for himfelf and me.
Yea/i might refer him to all thofc Scriptures which fpeakin the like langu3ge,or di- reft to perform any Aft towards men on Condition of fome iruernal Ad of theirs j and put Mr.Ts. Qucftion, how (hall we know when they do it (incerely, or at all ? • And that we are not to pi(s any judgement on mens Faih as cei tain, and on ihit to admlnJiter Sacramcnts^but cnly on the aforcfaid judgement of its p; obabilit) } and ihac ferious profclTion is to be taken as fnch a probable fign, not only all the Scriptures be- fore mentioned, but all others that cxprefs or intimate the grounds of Baptizing will fully prove; ^for man knoweth not the heart, ^ MM.i.6.Mar.^.<iMar.l6.i6. A£l.\6, IJJ3.& 18.8. 1 Q)u\i-ii.Gal.i.i(>.i7.(Mat.i%.i9.
But perhaps iiy.T. will fay, that then it is only our judgement of the probability of their Parents Faith which maketh the children holy, or elfe we Baptize the unholy. To whichlanfwcr j Where there is not the condition of this Holinefs, that isi reall Faith, there no judgement of ours can make them holy ; and fuch by birth-prifiledge are not koly ; whether any ohcr having Intereft in them afterwaids may dedicate them to God, and fo help them to the priviledge, is a further Queflion,which I will not now Ibnd to debate. And for our baptizing thofe that are unholy, or that have in themfelves no tighc to it, It is no more our fin then it was the Apoftlcs fin to baptize Simon M-^gm-, who doubtlcfs had no right to Baptifmi and yet the Apoftlc had right to baptize him.
And thus I have anrwcrcd ^r .Ti.great Objeftion according to my own judgement. But now let me add this much here i There is a real undiflemblcd Faith, which yet is not juftlfying or faviog. Who can deny that ? Now fiippofe fuch an Hilf orical. Tempo- rary Faith, that hath not deep rooting, nor prevailed againft the Intcrcfl of the flcfh, (hould be faid to be the condition of thefe common priviledgcs of vifible holinefs; how would SMf.T. confute it ? It is apparent that unfound believers were admitted Church* members, (as Simon Magm) and were partakers of the holy Ghofl, fo far as to work Miracles and caft out Divels in Chrifts Namc,that yet muft depart from him as work- ers of iniquity. Mj/ 7-Hcb 6 And why may they not have this common privilcdge alfo for their children ? Why Mr- T. faith, then a falfe Faith would fanflifie i I anfwcr ; No, it is not properly a falfe, that is, a counterfeit Faith ; but then, an infufHcient temporary Faith which cannot fave, may yet have common priviledges.
Objc^.Hm he falth,that the Apoftle faith. that every creature is fanftlfied by the Word and Prayer to them thatbelitve,
Anfrv. I. How oft arc common unfound Chriftians faid to belicvefas Simon Magus is)and called believers? i.Whether It be only by the Word and Prayer, that Text fpeaks not, efpccially of o;her things bcfides the creatures tor ufe. 3. Nor whether it muft needs be the prayer of the party ufingthem. 4* ^ here is a common praying, as well as common believing, which is no more counterfeit then vI/ai^j humiliation. 5. But for my part I take it in the proper fenfe, and fay h is true Faith and Prayer that is here meant, and fo anfwer it as before 5 where no difficulty ariieth againft it. 6. But I lliall not think as Mr.T. that it muft needs be prefent p.ayer,and that prayer paft will not fervc j for then the eflScacy of prayer Ihould laft no longer then we arc praying.
The
98 PUir) Scripture froof of
THcfccond Objcflion oi Mr. T. why this Text cannot be meant of fuch holincfs 3» T/M.ij. is this^bccaufcihe Apoftlc there faith that nothing is pure to fuch unbe- lievers as yet prcfefs they know God, but deny him in works J and ihcfore the children, ofungodly Pfoftffors by this fhould be unholy.
To which I anfwer : i. This is nothing againft me who fay It is Real Faith that is the condition, z. 1 doubt you are like the Englilh man that KInj; Cbarh mentions ous- of Chiiuery That which he w uld not know, he cannot undeiftind ; Or elfcyou- might fee, that the Apoftle fpeaks there of Jews and Infidels only; For i. heei- prtflcth them of the Circumrilion that is, Jews, vcrf. lO, i. Hecallcth thi Heathen. Poet one of their own Prophets J The thtnghc fpeaksagairft, is Jewifli fables and commands ofmcn that turn from thetruth. 4 Hcexpicfly callcth them unbelieving ) and yoH know who thofe are in the Gofpei phiafe. 5. He faith only, tl»€y profcf^ to. know GQd(a$ the Jews and many Philofophcrsdid,) but not that they profels to know. Chrift.
J. But fuppofc they were profeffed ChrJftians, yet they were fuch whofe profeffion was no probable fign of their Real Faith j nay, it was evident that they had no true Faitlr, and therefore ought to be cafl out , or not reckoned among I rofcflbrs j foe the very cflence of Faith lieth in Affcnting that Chrift is King and Saviour, and con* fcnting that he be fo to us •, Now thefc men were fo far from this, that they denyci even God himfelf by their works, be ng abominable, difobedient, and to every good wo:k reprobate. From a Church compofed of fuch Profeffors, [ will bcaicpa-
I Meet but with one more ObjcAion of Mr.T. againft his Antagonifts, about this 1 ext, that is worth the noting j and that in his Punted Books and his Manufcripc zgi\nik Mr Ma'fh lUy he glorieth in more confidently then all the reft, as tf it were un-; anfwerable ; But to me he never objeded it,as feeing it was of no force (I ccnjedure ) againft my ExpofitjoH. And it is this; He faith, If Holinefs or Sanctifying were the cflfed-orrctultofthe.Fai'hoftheBetfcverjthcn art unbelieving Fornicator njightbefaid to be fan6tified by his bj.lleving Whore, as well as a Husband to his believing Wife, /f/'ii/.pag. 12. And then it would folloW-thty might live together.
To wh! h I anfwer ; i. It is only the free gift or grant ot God in his Law or Co- ven nt which fandificthj Faith is but the condition If Faith, astuch, or from its own nature did caufe or procure this fanSification, then indeed all fuch Faith would fo do i But when Faith is but the condition of it ( or if it wer« a moral caufe ) and fo the procurement dcpcndeth on the Will, Law or Gift of Wm that m:idc this to be the conditien , then it can procure no further then he hath extended its ufe and an- nexed to it his gift. Now God hath not made it a condition for fanftifying For- nicators one to another as fuch , as he hath done of fandifying iawfull Mirriotge. A beli ver may have the Word of Promife, and may pray for the fanAirying of lawfull Marriage, which he cannot do of Fornication. AthJng mufl be fiiftlawfall before It be fanftified ; God fanftifieth not fin In or to any ( th( ugh he may bring good out of it ; ) Whtre All things are faid to be fandified, and pure 10 (he pure, it is meant of A^l things g<.od and lawfullj but not ofiit} . wbicbiis not oi Cod. T hetefore Afi:.T.his
stgalng-
Infants Church- memberjhif and Baptifin, g^
arguing ismoft vain, [whete one party is fanftificd to the other for the begetting of a holy feed, there they may lawfully continue together. Bm the unbelieving Whore is fanftified to the believing Fornicator: Therefore rfiey may lawfully live together.^ To this I anfw^r : i. The Major Propofition ishis own fiftiortj and is not in the Telt. The Text affordeth him only this propoGtion , [where one party ^n law full Marriage is fanftified to the other, there It is no impiety for them to liV€ together.] Jhc reafon of the limitation I (hewed before. Though the faid fanftification be rc^ul- red to make their Marriage to be Pious and Religious j yet It is neither alway not only required to the dired lawfulnefs : Not alway j for Heathens Marriage is lawful to whom nothing is pure ; Not only ; for there muft be other requifitcs to the lawfulncTs before the fandification. which in Fornicators is wanting.
1. His alTuTOption alfo [that the unbelieving Whore is fandified, &c.] I deny,and require his proof. Againftmy Expofition he oflers not to prove it (that (he is fandi- fied to the nfc of the Fornicator, andfotoGod) andagainftMr. Aia/JhaSs fcnfeof luftrumental fandification, he doth as good as nothing, (vi-^. to prove that a Whore Is fandified for the begetting of a holy Seed.) For if he (hould prove that Baftards area aholy Seed as he hath not yet, when himfclf faith, they were fliut cut of the Congre- gation to the third generation, as Dcut.ii.^.) Yet he haih not proved that the fandl- ^ing of one pairy to the other was the caufe.
But fuppofe this be urged yet further, and any fliould argue thus , All the children of thofe Parents whereof the one Is not fandified to the other arc unclean;But the unbe- lieving Whore is not fandified to the Fornicator ; Therefore all their children are un- clean, or unholy. To which I anfwer -. i. Ifthc whole be granted, theabfurdity Is notfuchas Mr.T. his Expofition brings. All Baftards may be unholy in refped of their birth, or as not having any promife to them as fuch a Seed j and yet afterwards either the penitent Parents, or othcis that have full intcreft In them, may hav«; power to bring thena into the Church and Covenant '■ but of this more anon .
2. The Major propofition is a mecr fidion, not to be raifed from the Text J For the Text will afford but this • [All the children of thofe Parents are unclean, whereof one being an unbeliever is not fandified to or in the Believer.] But !Mr.T. will needs face down Mr.Bblie, ^/'o/.pag, iig. That though there be no more then I fay In the Text, yet the propofition :Jiatproveth it muft be as he faith; as if St. Pi««/'i togkk muft needs be the fame with Mr.T. his or elfe it cannot be right. Is it not pof- fiblethatP^iw/may beintherlght, though he reafon not as he ? But ( faith ^■. T. ) fce that will prove that if an Englifhman be noble, he his honorable, muft prove it hj this univerfal, All noble men are honorable : A<ifrv. But it is another matter which S.Pd«/ is proving. He that will prove that an Fr.gliili-mans Wife, though of bafc ct mean Parcntage,is made honorable if he be noble, muft not prove it by fuch an uni- verfal, All Noble mens Wifes are honourable. For where the Law of the Lard doth not alter their Title upon Marriage, this would be falfe . P(j«/fpeaksnot of a fandification that was before and without the Faith of the one party, but which is alatter privilcdge, coming uponhisorher believinp, as Is before proved. Indeed a Holincfsin the Parents, is neceffary to the childrcns being holy as theirs, axidfoa former fanfiification or dedication of the Parents to God is neceffary. But this fandifying of one to the other as a ptiviledge to the Believer, fuppofing the other formerly unfandified, this is not neceffary to the Holinefs of the iffue, in any but where one party was an unbeliever. Jc will not follow, that becaufe a Leapcr muft be cleanfcd , or elfe he will beget a Leaprous iffue, that therefore every man muft be dcaflfcd ; but only that every man muft be no Leapcr^ And fo here j It will not
Ox , follow
100 J^Ui}9 Scripture proof of
follow, thitbecaufe an unbeliever mud befmftified to the other In this jrence , that therefore all muft be fo ; but only that theymuft be no unb lieverSjOreirebcfanftified: fo. Therefor if two Fornicators be bxh b.'lievcrj, though one be not fandified to the other, yet for any thing this Text faith, their children msy be Holy. For being nei- ther of them unbelieverSjthey arc not capable of this fandification. A wounded man may beget a found ifluc, ihouhg a Ltaper cannot.
T>ut I had almof?: forgot one great objefiion which Mr. T. hid in private conference, *-'againft my fence of chls Text (which I mufl mention though it were private, left I I wrong him in leaving out the ftrength of his Arguments. And becaufc there was no Witnefsof it, laverruponthewordof aMinifter and Chriftian that it is true:) It was. this. If the Covenant be the caufe of Infants Holinefs, then they fhould be holy as fooa, a> the Covenant was in being : but that was before they were born.
To this I anfwered, That the confequenee wasunfound. He proved It from the Canon, Fofnd caufd poft'itur cffl'^us. 1 replied, that Moral Caufes, (and fo remote C3ures,>) might have all their being long before theeflfed, fo that when the efFed was produced there Hiould be no alteration in the Caufei though yet it have not produced thetffedbythc Adofcaufing. To this Mr.T. returned fo confident a denial, that he (either in pitty or contempt,) fmiled at my ignorance. Which makes me the lefs wonder at his other miflakes ; I would know of Mr. T. whether Godi eternal Ele. dion of him beany caufe of his Juftification, Sandification or Salvation 5 andiftc were. Whether he were Juftified, Sandlfied, and Glorified, asfoonas God Eleded him? Alfo whether the Will of God be not the caufe of all his good Afiions (at leaft) and of all the Events that befall him ? and whether thefecome topafsas foon as God Willeth them (fpeaking of the time, or rather Eternity of the Ad of Willing, and not oft'jc time when It is his Will that Itfhould cometopafs.) Alfo I would know whether the death of Chrilt be any caufe of the pardon of his fins and falvation ? If it be, then whether were he pardoned and faved thereby as foon as Chrlft died 5 or doth Chrift fuffer again when he is pardoned by it? Alfo whether the Promife or Covenant of Grace be any caufe of mens pardon or Juftification f If it be , are- thcy pardoned and juflified as foon as that Promife or Covenant was made' that J$, before they were born? Then fair fall the AnUnomians. Or, what alteration is there in, or of the Covenant, or Promife, when the efltd is attained ? Is not the Law- of the Land that was made long ago the caufe of a Delinquents condemnation, and the righting of the Juft many years after? and of every mans right in the Tenure of his Eftate i And what change is in the Law ? or what containeth it, more then be- fare ? If a Deed of Gift be made of 1000 1, to you be enjoyed at the end of twenty years; was not this Deed any caufe of your enjoyment .? Or did you enjoy it as foon as the Deed was in being ? Or what alteration was in the Deed a: the pro- dudionofthe efFed ? If the like Deed of Gift be made upon a condition by you to be performed , fo that you fiiall not en3oy the gift, till you have performed the condition j mtift it needs follow, that either this Deed is no caufe of your enjoyment, or elfc you muftenJoy it as foon as the Deed is made? if a man fet the Clock to ftrike two or three hours keijce, ishe nocaufeof it except it ftrikefuddenly ? ordotK. he perform any new Ad after to produce the effed ? It is fure therefore the caufa poxima ai Kcl^eimany that the Canon cfpecially conccrns,(y;/rt pofta po/iitur cfflHnSfZnd 3105 that almys neither without the ufual diftindion, Thit qu.wiim admiiatrm ab-
Infants Church- tnemberjhif and Baptifm. lo i
folutam, & v'm agmd'i, vd in A5lupr'mo, caufa efficicns per fe potcfieffe cffcRu [ho tem- pore prior: etfinonm AUu fecundo effcUim produccnte. But this is no: aficDlfputc for them to whom I intend this Labour; Therefore I refer you to Suarc\^ Difp. i6. Se£l z. pagA'>o. and Schlb/cr.Topic.cap.^. Nnmb.6z.%/^, with othcrs,that I know Mr. T. hath read ; And then leave it to the meaneft Schollerj that is rational, whether it be a goodconfequencCj that if the Covenant be the caufe of Infants Holinefs, they muft then be Holy as foon as the Covenant (or Promlfc ) was made ?
ONe thing more ^ for I am loth to conceal any of JJ/a.T. his flrength ) he hath an Objedion againft Mr. Bla/^c, Apol. pag, 1 24. which may fecm to have more weight with it ; and that is, that in our fcnfe,children may be Holy though born of Infidels ; for he faith, [according to M^.S^w Opinion it 1% falfe,that [unbelieving Parents never beget children by Birth-priviledgc Holy ;] for children born of Infidels brought into Abrahnm's Family had right to Circumcifion^ and fo were by Birthprlviledge Holy in • Mr.BUl^csknk. 0
Anfrv, I am the wlllingcr to take notice of this.that 1 may have opportunity to rcfolvc . the great Queftion, whether only children of Believers ought to be Baptized }
1. 1 anfwer therefore : If a man fay that this was proper to Abraham and the Jews, he may have far more to juftifie it, then Mr.T, hath to prove that the Chur^h-membcrlhip of the whole fort of Infants was proper to the Jews.
2. I anfwer according to my own judgement, thus ; i. I deny it as moft untrue, that the chi-ldren of Infidels brought into Abrnhams Family, were by Birth-priviledge Holyi as Mr. Blake expreffeth it. For thofe children that he means, were either thofc born in Abraham's Houfe, or thofe bought with his money ; For the former, they were no children of Infidels } for Abraham kept no Infidels in his houfe, nor muft do : For the Parents were to enter their Covenant as well as the Child.en,and the Father was co be Circumcifed : And I have fully proved before ( and a multitude of Texts more might be brought to prove it J that men were not to be C ircumcifed, whilli they were profefTed Pagans, but were to enter into Gods Covenant as well as the Jews x even the Hewer of their Wood and the Dawer of Water, Di:;//.!^, 10,11. When God com- mandeth Abraham to Circumcife every Male, it is fuppofed he brings them to enter the Covenant, whereof it was the Seal.
And 1. It he mean the Infants bought wkhmoneyj Ifay^ They were not by Blrth- priviledgc Holy: For then they fliould have been Holy as foon as they were bornjand fo before they came into Abrahams Family*
2. You mult therefore diltinguifli between Infants as born of fuch Parents, and. (b they were unholy ; 3"d as after becoming Atliraham' s own, the Parents having gi. ven up their Title to him ; and fo Abraham had , 'power to bring them into the Cove- nant, and make them Holy by feparating them to God ; But this was by noBiuh^ priviledge.
J. And for my part, I believe that this is a ilanding Rule and Duty to all Chiifti, ans i Only the children of a Believer are Holy dircdly as theirs, or by Birth-privl- ledgc ('infubordination to the Cnyenant j and from the womb; But when wc ei- ther buy Infants, or they are left Orphans wholly to us, fo that they are wholly ours and at our difpofe, ihe {""arents being either dead, or having given up their Intertft to us, I doubt not though they were the children of Jews and Turks, bat it is our duty t© lift them under Chriftj and enter them into his School, Kingdom; or Church by.
O 3 Baptifm ;
r
102
Plaifi Scripture proof of
Baptil'm j <ind that Gods Liw to Abrabam will prove this. Why elfe were the Jews £0 Cjrcumcifc all bought with money, (even meerflsves) but bccaufe they were wholly their own and at their difpofc , but not hired Servants, bccaufc they could not by their Authority fo certainly prevail with thefc , as with the other j but muft ftay till they voluntarily would be Prof lytes. I know fomc will think It iiKredible that even flives or any fhould becorrr cl!ed to enter Gods Covenant ; But I need not tell them that the good King of Jud^h appointed, that whoever of his people would not enter the Coveriant, (liould be pur to death. ("Indeed this Covenant contained not circ«mftintials, but that they Inould lake the Lord oncly for their God, and re- nounce a'l Idols that were dircdly fet up as Gods 3 and he that will not take this Covenant, I think oughc not by any good Prince to befoffcrcd to live in hi* King- dom-^
This is my jadgemcnt ; In which I am the more confident wh:n I confidcr, how freely Chrift invltcth all cotnmers, and that he never rcfufed any that came , or any Infant that was brought •, And that it ill Jiefeemcth Chriitians without plain grounds to flraiten Chrifts Kingdom , oc to keep out any chat he would not have kept onr. ^
So much for the Vindication of i Cor.7. 14.
CHAP. XXX.
( Y twenty fifth Argument Is probable at Icaft, and proceeds thus ; If the Scripture frequently and plainly tell us of the ceafing of Circumcihbn, but never give us the leaft word concerning the ceafing of Infants Church-memberfhip . then though Circum- cifion be ceafed, we are not to judge that Infants Church. mem- berfhip is ceafed i But the Scripture doth frequently and plainly tell us of the ceafing of Circumcifion ; but never fpeaks one wori of the ceafing of Infants Church.membcrfliip i therefore we are not to judge that It is
x^eafed.
He that denyeth theMinor,let him bring one word of Scripture where the ceafing of Infants Church-membcr(hip is mentioned, if he can. The Confequence of the Major is denyed by Mr.T. and he gave me only this reafon : The freeing of Servants in the year of ]Hbile,the Dedication of all the firft born,and thclikearcccafed,and Scripture mcn- tioneth not the ceafing of them.
To which I anfwer ; The year of }ubllc was one of their Sabbaths, which the Apo- ftle faith plainly were (hadows of things to come, and Chrift is the fubftance j The Dedication of the firft born was evidently a Type of Chrift and the Church under him. Of both thtfe many Scriptures arc plain j and therefore we can rtiew that they are done avray. But let It be proved that the admitting of Infants Into the vifiblc Church is a mecr Type, or a meer Judicial Law proper ro the Jewilh Commonwealth, any more then the admitting ofmen or women into the Church. I have examined whatproofs of this they pretend already i and have proved the contrary j Let me add now but this much i
It Is evident tome, that it was not proper to the Jews Commonwealth or Oiurch befidcs the reft , for thefc two rcafons j i. Becaufe it nas a vile and difgracehill
tnmg
Infants Church-Piemberjhip andBaptifm,
103
thing then to the whole Nations about them, and to any patrkular peifon,to be uncir* cumcifedjand confccjuently to be without the Church j I he uncircumcifed were men- tioned then by them as Pagans now by us ; Therefore it is evident that to be ciicum- cifcd, and fo to be Church-members, was a thing that they Judged both delirable and attainable, by all the Nations abour them fif not their flat duty.^
Now if all the Nations about rtiould have become Church- members ( as no doubt
they ought,) then it ftems thty iTiould or might be all Circumcifed \ and if fo,then it
muft be aftet the manner of the Jews, that is, Infants and all Males > for there is no
other rule or manner ofCircumcilin^ mentioned in the Scripture. And then (ure this.
, would not havebem peculiar to tht Jews.
2. And let Example fpejk j, when Jncoh nud his Family were but few in number, ycr he joyned. wJ:h.his Sons in treating with all the Sichctnitesy to have them Circum- cifed, Infants and all, and it was done : ( For it was Jacob and his Sons that they communed with about lt,though J,icob had no hand in the deceit and cruelty,) Gfff.34. Tke thing no qucftion was good, if it hid not had wrong ends. Nownomancai* fay, that the 5'cfef«;i/« were to become fubjvft to /4fo&, and To to be one people, as being under ©ne Government ; But rather ^acob was to take up pofleflions among cliem, ^d joyn to them, as Allies to them at beft ; he being but few in compacilon of them..
So alfo when the Jews in Efibiystims profpcred In Captivity, It is faid that many of thepeopU of the Land beca«e lews ; Now to become Jews, was to be Circumcilcd as the lews werct and fo to b. of rheir Religion : No man can Cure dream that it was to be of the Jews peculiar Commonwealth,and under their Civil Governmcnt,when the Jews were difpcrfed in Ciptivity iaa flrange Land, aider the Goirernmcnt of a Heathen King. It not all (his plain to thofcthac are willing to fee ?
CHAP. XXXI.
Ytwcnty fixth Argument, { which I will but touch, becaufc every one thar treats on the fub eft hath it, ) is drawn from the many plain fpecches of the Lord Jcfus with his own mouth; fully fignJfyinj. that h? isfo far from repealing the privlledge of Infants, -and cafling them out of his Church, that he hath exp'^efly alFued us of the contra' y. Mrr» 9 ^6^ 17. And he 1 00^ a ibili andfct him in the m'ldfi of them, and tvhenhchidi.ilioibimi?3hls Ar^s, he faid unto th'-mi ifhof^ ever jhtili receive nne ef ftuh chldren in my Nimereceiv.tb me i and wkofoever JhiU- receive mj receivcth not me, but him thit (cnt mc,
DcthChrift take them in his Arms, and would he have them all pwt out of his vidblc Church ? would he havf us receive them in his Name? and vet not receive them into Ws Church, noras his Di'"ciples ? Howcan Infant> be received in Chufts Name, if they belong not vilibly to him and h'u Church ? Nay, doth Chr ft account it arcceivingofhimfelf ? and ihall 1 then refufc to receive them or acknowledge th?tn tic Subje^sof his viable Kingdom ? Will it no: follow thcn^ that whofoeycr rcfufetfe .
1 04 Tlain Serf ft me preof of
them, rcfufeth Chrlft, and him thithim ? For my part , feeing ihc Will of Chrift is it that I muft walk by, and his Word that f muft be judged by , and he haih given me fofulla difcovery of his Will in this point, I will boldly adventure to follow his Rule, and had rather anfwcr him ( upon his ovvn encouragement, ) for admitting a hundred Infants Into his Church, then .infy*er for keeping out of one. I do not believe that Chrift wouPd fpeak fuch words to feduce us , or draw us into a fnarc.
And It Is not once , but oft that he hath thus minifefted his will j In the very next Chapter he doth it more fully yet , A/v/^ 10.15,14,14, i J. 16, And they brought yaung children to him that he ^ ok' d touch tbemj Andhu Dt-fcipUi rebit\cd ihofe that b,- ought them i But whence f^ faw it, he vpos much difptejjcdi and [aid to ihcm^ Suffer yc iitilc childien ta come unto me, and forbid them not; for of fuib is the I\jfigdom of Godi Verily, Ifay untoyeuy n'hofotver Jhali not receive the K^ngdome of God m a l.itle chddM fhiU not enter therein ; And be took ^hem up in his Arms, put bU bands on them^ and blef- fed them.
And Is not here enough to fatlsfie us yet , that he doth not caft all Infants In the v.orld out of his vifible Kingdom or Church > but that It is his will they (hould be admitted ? Will any fay that it was not Infants in the former Text and this that Chriil fpeaks of ? Did he take any but Infants into his Atms ? was ic not plainly them, that he bid them receive ( In the former Chapter ? ) and was it not them that he would not have to be kept from him ? And was it not them that he bid fliould be fuficred to come f (that is to be brought^ and was It not them that he Bleffed ?
Hence I argue thus ; i.If Chrlft would have us receive Infants In his Name, then we muft receive them as belonging co him,and his Church.But he would have uc receive them in his Name ; Therefore, &c.
z.Ifhe that receiveth an Infant in Chrlfts Name,receiveth himfelf^then fome Infants are to be received in his Name ; and thofe that refufe themjfin j But the former it true i therefore the latter.
J. If Chrlft was much difpleafed wirh thofe thit k?pt particular Infants from vi- fible accefs to him then^ ( though they could not keep them from his invilible Grace ) then he will be much more difpleafed with thofe that keep all the Infants in the World from vifible accefs to him in his Church now j ( Though they cannot keep them from the inviGble Chu.ch;^ But the former is true ; Therefore the Utter.
4. If Chrift command ds to fuffer them to come, and not to forbid tham , then thofe fin againft his exprefs command that will not fuffer th.m to come, but do for- bid them > ( For it is a iianding command, and fpeaki of the species of Infants, and not of thofe individuals onely j and there is now no other vifible admittance to Chrift^ but by admitting into his Church, and to be his Difciples ; ) but, &c. Therefore, &c.
J. U of fuch be the Kingdom ofOodjchen of fuch is the vifible Church ; But the former Is true j therefore, &c.
Here they have two cavils againft the plain fenfe of the Texr. i By [fuch^ Is meant [fuch for dociblenefs and humility i ] To which I anfwer ; 1 Then it feeras They are fo docible and humble that the Kingdom belongs to them. For if it belong toothers be- caufe they ^rtfucb as tbem^ then it muft needs belong to them alfo.
1. Doth Chrift fay, To fuch 3S thtmin this or ih:it refpcB o>i'yy and not to them ? er faith he not ingeneral. To fuch ? even to fuch as he took in his Arms and Bleffed ?
He
Infants Chtirck'inemberfhif and Baptifm, lOJ
He would not have taken up and bleffed any for a meet Emblem of fuch as were Blef- fed • He would no: have taken up and bleffed a Lamb or a Dove, as Emblems of Hu^ mility an.l Innocency. It Chiift fay^ [Of fuch] is the Kingdom,! am bound to take Scripture in the mott extenfive fcnfe, tiil there be a plain rcafon to neceffitate me to rc- ftrain it. And therefore mnft underftand it, [To fuch] both of that age,or any other age. Who date think tkat the word ] To fuch] is not rather induGve as to them, then ex-
clu(ive ?
If I love humble poor men, and my Servants keep them from my Hoiifc becaufe they arc poor and if f chide them for it, andfay^fuffcr liich tocome to me, and foibid them not, for my delight is in fuch j Who would fo interpret this Specth, as to chink I would exclude them while I command their admittance^ and that I meant other humble onesand not thefe ?
3. When Mr.T. makes their f^oc/We«f/y the thing Intended by Chrift, he forgoC that he judged them uncapable of being oifcipla. Why may not thofe be Difcifks, <vho arc not only Dociblc, but Ex^zmplayy for their Teachablentfs f
Their (econd Objcftion is, that by the [Kingdom of God,] Is meant the King- dom of Heaven. And I think fo too ; But then if the Kingdom of Heaven belong to fuch much more a ftanding as Members fn the viliblc Church : 'For what is it to be 3 Member of the Church vifible, but to be one that in feeming, or appearance, or to the judgement of man doth belong to the inviliblc Church, or the Kingdom of Heaven ? For the C hu ch is but one, and the difference refpeAive , as 1 (hewed before: Ihee- fore both vifible and invifible, both military and tt'iumpkant, are called in Scripture [thcKingdomof Heaven or of God] If a man be ^'jorp« ( or any fort o( men) to belong to the Churcb ilivifible, then they vifibly belong to it : and then they are vifiMe mttnbersoftheChurch.So that this proof is more full for Infants Church membc- Ih'p, then if it had been (aid, They may be vifible Church- members. For it faith much more oi thcns, which includeth that.
6. Hence I" further argue thus: If Chrift were much difpleafed with his DifcJples for keeping Infants from him, then he took it as a part of their revealed duty, that they fliould not forbid them ; But the former Is true, therefore the la:ter.
Whence I further argue J If it were the Difciples known or revealed duty, not to forbid them to come to Chrift, then they mult needs take it alfo for a revealed truth that Infants i?;//)fcic (* and not thefe numerically only^ fliould not be forbidden to come ; ( for they could not know that thofe individuals (hould be admitted, but by knowing that Infants fhould be admitted 5 ) But, &c.
Yet further J 7. Iflt were the Difciples revealed duty, to admit Infants to come to Chrift for this very rcafon, becaufe of fuch is the Kjngdom of Heaven, then it was no fecrct, but a revealed truth. That of fuch rvoj the Kjngdom of Heaven j But the former is true ; For Chrift would not be angry fo much with them for not knowing that which \»as never revealed, or for not admitting them when they had no means to know them to have right of admittance. The conUquencc is evident the- eforc, and fo it followi J That if it were then a revealed tiuth, that of fuch is the K. > '^drm of Heaven^ then they were vifible Mcmbsrs of the Church For that fert of men that aic known to belong vo Heaven, (though it be not known of the individuals )do vifibly belong to the Chutch i ( as I think none dare deny. ^
t. But the chief evidence in the Text lyeth hcrc^ If, becaufe thn of fuch « the l{lngd9mi theieforelt wasthc Difciples fin to keep thembavkj then it nii<ft needs be the very jpniei of Infants tha. Chrift means are of tht Kingdom, ( and not only the Aged bumble.) But thereforelt was the Difciples (in to keep them back {'and their
P duty
io6 PlaifiScripture proof of
duty CO admit them, orcfc Ch-.ift would net have been much difplcafed with them)" becaufe that of (uch u tbc Isjagdom ; Ihcreforc icmult needs hi Infants thqmfiflves that arc of the Kingdom.
The rtafonof the confcqucnce 11. th here j It could be no fin In the Difclples to keep away from Chrift thofethat were but mccr Emblems of the faved j But ic was their fin to keep away P.fmts ; Therefore it was not becaufe they were mcer Emblems of fttch as Ihould l^e fived. For clfe it would have been the Dtfciplcs fin to have forbidden allxhe Sheep or Doves in the Country to have been brought to Chrift, tolay hands on. This is plain and convincing tome.
9. Thofethat C.hiill took np in his arms, l3id4iis hands on, and Blefled,werc vi' fibie Members of his Church, ind not ificc/ nfcmbbtjccs of fuch ; But fome Infants Chrift took in his Ai"^tj- h«d His hands on, and BKfledj 1 hctefore fomc Infant^ were Members of the vifiblc Charch j ('and confequently Chrift hath not re- pealed the Church- mcmberihip of Infants ;) and they were not mecr rcfcmblanccs of fuch.
For would Chrift have Bleflcd fo a Sheep or Dove ; Or, are they bkfled of Chi^ft, and yet not fo much as vifible Members of hi« Church? Sure there are none vifibly bleft without the vifiblc Church. And it was not chele onlyS for I have proved, it wa« the Difciples duty to admit others to the Blefllng,
And it is yet more confiderable, that all the three Former Evangelifls make full mention of thefe paflages of Chrift, and therefore it is evident that th£y were not tak<n forfmall circumltantiais, but D^drines of moment for the Chu.ches mformation. Thty arc recorded alfo in .W.u. 18.2^3,4. &c. Mat, 19,, 13, 14. Lul^. 5^.4^ 5. L«('. 18. 1 6^ 17. I defiie any tender confcienced Chriftian, that is in dowbt whether Infants fliouid be admitted Members of the vifible Church, and would fain know what Is the pleaCure of Chrift in this thing, to read over Texts impartially, and con fi* derately, and then bethink himfelf, whether it be more likely that it will^pleafe Chrift better to bring, oj folemnly admit Infants Into the Church, or tortiat them out j and whether thefe words of Chrift fo plain and carncft., will not be a better Plea at Judg- ment for oul admitting Infants, then any that ever the Anabaptifts brought will be to tbem for refufing them-
But what faith 5M>'. r. againft this ? Why, i. He faith, itwasTome c«raordina:y blefsing to them, that Chrift intended, /^/>o/ p. 149. A/ifw, i. It was a difcovery of their Title to the Kingdom of Heaven; It was fuch an extraordinary blefliag that in- cluded theordinary.lfertraordlnarybleflingjthen much more ordinary. 2. It was (uch as the Difciples ftiouldhave known that theyibouid be admitted to, or clfe Chrift would not have been difplcafed.
But Mr. T. (dihh, pag.Apot. 151. Thar [thcreafon of Chrifts' anger was their hindringhiiainhis Jcfign, not the knowledge they had of their prcfent vilibk Title j this is but adrcamj To which I anfwcr ; 1. -Mr, T. is as bold tofpcakof Chrifls thoughts without Book, andto fearch the heart of the Searcher of hearts, as if he were rcfolved to make Chrifts meaning be what he would ha^e it.
2. What defign was it that. Chrift had ia^hand ? was it any , other then the difcovey of his mercy to the fpccics of infants, and to thoi'e among others ? and the prefenting them as a pattern to his Followers, and to teach his Church humility and renovation^ and to leave them an alfuranceagainft Ambap;ifts, that it is his pleafare that. Infants fllould not be kept from him,.
3. Howdid the Difciples hinder Chrifts defign? not byhindring himiniQ^ediatCi'^ ly ^ but by rebuking thofc thac brought the Infants^ .
4.ilft
\
In f ant s church' member jhip and BA^tifm. 107
4. 1 f tills wci-e no fault in them, why fliould Chrlft be difpleafcd,and much dJfplea- fcd at it f And how could it be their fault to hinder people from bringing Infants to Lhrift, if they might no;i know that they ought to be admitted ? And could they knovt of Chrifts private Jiitcntsand'dcligns ?
Were there but this one confidcration hence to be urged, I durft challenge Mr. T, to anfwer (is far as modefty would petmit a challenge j ) that is. If Chrift had Inten- ded only that humility or dociblencfs (houldbe commended from thefe Infants as an Emblem to his Difciples, then It could be none of their fault to forbid the bringing of them to Chrift j for how could they know what ufc Chrift would make of them ? or by what Emblem he would teach them ? or when he would doit? All the Creatures In the World may be Emblems of fome good ? and muft they therefore permit the bring* ing of all to Chrift ? Chrift had not told them his Defijn before hand to teach them by thefe Emblems > and when they knew his minde they defifted.
f. If it had been only for the prcfent DS\gn, then Chrift would have fpokc but of thole individual Infants, and have faid, Suifcr thefe now to come j But It appears from the Text, i. Thit it was not thofc individuals more then others ihit the Difciples were offended ar^or difliked ftwuld be brought i bu: thi fpecicst or thofc Infants bccaufc Infants.
2. And that Chrift doth not only fpeak againft their hindring thofc individuals, but the fpccics ; and hies them down a Rule and command for the future, as well as for the prefcnt, that they (hould fuiFer little children to come (o him, and not forbid ihem,
4. And he doth not command this upon the rcafon of any private dcfign^but bccaufc of fuch is the Kingdom of Heaven.
7. And where Mr. T. faith, It was not from any knowledge they had of their prc- fent vifible Title i I anfwer. Who faid It was ? did Air. Blaise ? no j but it was a thing that the Difciples ought to have known, that Infants arc welcome to Chrift, and that of fuch is his Kingdom, and therefore becaufc of fuch is his Kingdom, they Ihould not be kept f rota ^iia, God will not be much difpicafcd with men for being ignorant of thac which they ought not to know.
1 blefs the Lord Jefus the King of the Church, for having fo great a tendernefs to the Infants themfelves, and fo gteat a care of the information of his Church concer- ning his Will, as to fpeak it thus plainly, that plain meaning men may well fee his mind j.cven as if he had therefore done this becaufe he forefaw,thar in th«fc latter days fome would arifc that would renew the Difciples miftakc in this point, and think it unfit to bring Infants to Chrift. And for my part, I gladly accept his information, and fubmlt to his difcovcry ; Let them refift it that dare.
And it is not unworthy obfervation, how that totcftifiethat Chrift rcjedeth not this Age from his Chuich, he doth call his Difciples by the name of [little children] as an exprcffion of his tendernefs and love, even as Parents arc tcndereft of the leaft, /ofc.ij.gg. And fo doth the Holy Ghoft by his Apoftlcs very frequently, Gd,^, ip» xjj/,. 1.1,1 i,i8,i8.& 3 7;i8 & 4.4.& f.ai.
P 2 And
I o8 ^^^^f* Scripture proof of
ANd thus I hive fufiiclcntly prored, That Infants ought to be admitted vlfitJe ChtKch- members j having before proved, That All that ought to be lo admitted ought ( ordinarily ^ to be baptized j there being now under the New Teftament,n(>, other revealed way of folemnadmiflTion or enterancc into the viGble Church, but by Bapcifn : Which I had ftood longer and largelyer to prove, but that Mr. T. doih not deny It ; yea, when in private conference 1 urged him again and again to deny it if he *»ould, that I might prove It, yet he would not deny it. Yet left others (liould deny It^I- proved it in the beginning fully, though briefly.
And fo I have done with this fecond Argument, drawn frrm Infants Church-mem- berfhip } which I defirc the Lord to blefs to the Readers Infermacion but according t9 > its trutf^ and plain Scripture ftxengch.
Pam
Infants Church-fnemberfhip andBaftifm.
109
Part. IL
C H Ai». T.
AnfweriMg the Oh'jeBions agAinfl Infant- 'Faptifm, and confuting the Anabaptijis waj^
Intended to hare handled but one other Argument to prove the baptizing of Infants a duty ^ which U drawn from the neceflity of Parents folcmn ingaging their children to God in Covenant ; thus..
If h be the duty of all Chriftian parents folemnly to engage their children to God in Covenant ( whereby they aie engaged to the Lord as their God in Chrift, and God again doth Cove- nant to take them for his people ) then they ought to do v In, baptifm, which is the mutuall engaging fign : But it is the duty of all Ghriftian parents folemnly to engage their children to God in the aforcfaid Covenant Therefore th.y ought to do it in baptilJBi, which is the engaging fign The Antecedent ( that Parents are bound fo to engai?e their childrctij belidesthe cxprefs Text, P.'«r. 29 10,11,11, &- a61 would hare p:oved from many o-her Scripture Arguments The Confequence/'th.u therefore they rr.uft do this by Eapcifm ) I (hould alfo cafily and fully have proved,there being no one example in all the New Teilaaient of doing it without j and baptifm being, as AL.T. confefleth, appointed to that very end ; v.\ to be a mu:uill engaging fign between God and his people. Bu: my painfull ficknrfs commands me to cut ihorc the work J and I know men love not to be tired with large Volumes ; and ic is not the number of Arguments that' muiVdo it, but theftrength. If there be ft (ji^rh but In any one. it is no matter if all the reft be weak or wanting. And befides there is enough > faid already by men more able then my ftlf : Therefore I fhalladd no more of thcfe j but briefly anfwcr themoft common Objedlons.
Objcftion »•
'pHc preat and m- 1 prevailing Objedion which T have heard in Zu??//*?^^ mnfl confidently infi (lea '»inihe Pul^t, and fccn mofturcd in their< printed books, h.tliis •
P.
It
I lo Flain Scrtptttre freofdf
U is faidj Rom^.%. Tl)ey that arc the children of ihc ficjh^ thefe a-ienor the (hitdrenvf Goi'3 but the children of the promifc Arc accounted for the :ici:d. And, Epb. i. j. n'ea,e by nature the children of voralh-
To which 1 anfwcr, : i. There Is no ftiong appearance of contradidion in rhii to whac we have laught, For I willingly acknowleJg, chat all are not J/J^jf/thacareof //^ rael't an<l yet they are //V.:f/rtill. And they arc notthereforc the children of God be- caufe they are the ^czdoi Abr-^bavi, or others that arc godly, but becjule they arc chil- dren of the Pfomifc.
But for this firft Text J pray you obfervc the fe four things.-i.That which the Apoftle hcrepleadeth, is, thac falvition was not by the covenant tycd co all Ab,\ih.tm*sice.i j butyet he denyethnocbut Churcli mcmbe:lhip did forthe time part belong to the ge- nerality of them. Now it is no: the certain filvacion, but the Church-mcmbcrlhip thac vreare difpucingfor in regitd ofche indlvidiiils)
■'-. The Apollle difpute:h not againft the falvation or Chu-ch- mcmberfliip of every one o( Ab/ahitm's Seed (for many cf his feed were afterthis favedj) bucagainlt the falvation of the who'.e feed, or poftrricy conjuncl/m. But nov\' Anabapti-fts difpyce a- gainftthe Church-memb;ifhip vifible ofany Infants.
5. That which the Apoftle mainly drives at, 11, thjt men are not therefore -faved be. caufe th;.y are Airabam'sc2inilkcd, (and confcqucncly, not becaufe they are the car- niU feed of any other }) And I fay fo too with all my heart. But the Apoftle doth not fay or mean, that ^^<:^/zv>'j- feed (liall notbefaved; ('for they (hali again be called, and (0 All ifrarlbc favcd, Rom.^i.) but only chat they are faved, not becaufe they arc ♦ his feed, but becaufe they are children of the Promife ; And fo fay we, Ihat the feed of the faithful are Church-metiibers, and Difciples, and Subiefts of Chrift, not properly ordiJcdly, becaufe they are the teed (for fo they arc no better tTien others;) but be- caufe they arc children ot the promife > God having becnpleafed to make the pro- mife to the FairhfuU and their feed^ and having promifed that the feed of the Righte- ous (hall be blelTed j and that he will be mercifull to them } and will take them to be a people to him , and he will be to them a God ; and hath oronounced them Ho- ly, ifcuc was Abi.7hjm''s , feed and Jacob his j and yet no; Uvcd becaufe his feed ditedly and properly (yet remotely they were ) but becaufe they were children of the promife.
4. And obferve fatther,That Paulhcrc fpcakes not a word againft the pririlcdgc of the Infants whofe Parents deny not God, and violate not his covenant, and fall not a- way. 1 i a man fliould affirm. That all the infants of the faithfull fo dying are certain- ly faved, there is not a fyllable in this Text againft him ; For Pan\ oncly pleads, that" if men fall away, and prove unbelievers, God will not fave them becaufe Abraham ("or any other remote Frogenitor) was faithfull. The covenant never intended this. But yet the children of thofethat fall wonway, or be not broke off for unbelief, do lofc none of their priviledges, but may belong to the vifible, or invlfiblc Church. If any nowfiiould deny Chriil, and yet think to be faved becaufe they are Englilhmcn, cc becaufe their Progenitors long fince were faithfull, I fhouldufeto them Fauh words here. But what is this to thofe that do not deny Chrift, and therefore arc both chil- (^renofthcflerti, and of the promife j Befides thofc that the Apoftle here exdudeth were aged unbelievers. So that this Text hath not any colour, either againft Baptifmi or their Church meraberfhlp.
2. And for that oi Ephef. 1.3, I fay the fame ', What thrV ,h we are by nature the children of wrath ? Doth it follow, that we may not be o|' awifc by Grace ? The ftaccof wraih gocth firft in order of nature, and whether in time alfo, is not fforth
Infants Chtirch'THemberjhi^ and Baptifm,
iiK
the difputing : But may not a flate of Grace immediately fuccccd ? Jeremy that was fandified in the womb, and John Baptift, and the Infants that Chrift blefied, were all by nature the children of wrath j and yet by Grace they were in a better ftate. As they come from old Adam, they are children of wrath ; but as they receive of the Grace procured bythcfecond j4dam, fo they are not children of wrath. If a Prince fliould entail fome Honours upon all your children j you might well fay, that by 7iaturei or as they were your children, they were not Honourable or Noble •, and yet by the Favour of tf^e Prince, they might be all Honourable from the womb. The godly at age may flill fay,Th3t they are yet by nature children of wrath, even when they are lure that they are the children of Ood by Grace : And they ufe in their confefllon, to fay, that by vatuic we arc enemies to God, fire-brands of Hell, &c.
2. Again, they may be Church-members vifible, and yet perhaps children of wrath too. All the children of Church members among both Jews and Profelytes wcreaifo Church members, as will not be denyed. And yet as we arc children of wrath by nature. To were they. So tb*t if you will have anfwer, [How all the Seed of Church- members r/jf/jjCould be both by nature children of wrathjand yet by Grace vipblc church': members ? ] you have anfwcred your fcl£
CHAP. II.
ObjcSlion, i.
^ Ut It is objeaed fuither, That Infants are not capable of the ends of ' Baptifm i For it is an engaging (]gn j and fignifieth alfothe wafliing away of fm in the blocd of Chrift, both euilt and flain j and its very operation is by a motall way nf fignifyin? ; and therefore In. fants being tmcapable of the ufe of Reafisn. are alfo unapable of the cperdt.on of Bjptifm ; and therefore fhou^'d defer it till they know what It fignifieth, and what they do.
h. Ch. -a' f a^^^'V' ' r ^T'^T **•■''" ""^l^'"}^' ^"'^ "f« 'fcen one j Irs firft ufe is to be Ch. .fts hft.ng fign for the admitting of Soldiers under his Colours, or of Difciplcs .nto his School, or bubjeas into his vihble Kingdom ; and this I have fully proVed Infants are capable of. A further ufe of it is to be a mutual engaging fi J Xrcby thcv are by the,,- IVents, or thofe that have full power of them, engaged^togod and God engagcth himfelf ro them 3 And this(with the grounds and nature of it JI (hall prtf ntly ■ niew you that Infants are capable of. And then for the operation on his foal by its fie-
out , though ir be a very great end in thofe that are cipable of it.
',•. .^.L"^*^* ^^ Covenant made betwixDa Land-lord and a child or the T*. muThTsl m"^' r ^-^"^--f'-h'l'l. though he underftand It r^^ tn! n1 111 \ f ''. rn""" '" \ ^^ '"^y =* ^'§^y ""' ^''^ °f Gift made to a child, ft^ndthefignihcattonof thts Leafe, or till he be capable of enjoying tl,e bweTs of
1 1:- w "m?'^^ opwativc by its fignification as foon as he comes to At afe of Reafon Ciwh;ch wiU not be fo long.as AnabaptiUs ufe to defer Baptrfm ; ° He may then be
pughj.
112
Plain Scrfpttire proof of
taught what the duties and benefits of the Covenant arc j what he \% engaged to be and do toward God J and what God h engaged to be, and do towards himl '
4. In the mean tiirc, as his Inrereil is upon the condition of the parents Faith, and as be is received as it were a Member of thern/o the parents fliall have the aaoill com- fort cf it ? As the faith is tkcirs, and the child theirs, fo Gcd would not have them without he comfort. God, that hath implanted fo Itrong a love in the hearts of parents to their chiUren, that they cannot but take the Good or Evil cha: befalls them as if it wcic their own, hathalfo a tender regard of his peoples comfort herein. A parent haih the adual comfort of the Leale thit aH'iireth an Inheritance to his child.
are
. Baptifm may be adminiftred to thofe hit are capable of fofr.c ends, rhoush they r _. uncapablc of other. Chrift himfelf was baptized, wh.n ytt he was nctcipibie of many of the great ends of baptifm : For bapjifm was not to C hrift a (i j^n of the walh. ing away of his (ins ( for he had none: ) nor of purifying his f; u! (which was pcrftd before;) nor of his being buryed with Ch: ift. r,o nor of his err ancc into the viCblc Church nor of any covenant tha: he folemnly erigaged in \'i :h God.
6. And how unapable were the Infants that Chrift bid his hands on,3nd rook up in his arms, of underftanding the meani.ng of what he diu,or receiving any impicflion by the fignifications ofthefe Aaions? And yet (hall we fay, that Chrift fhould have let it alone till afterwards ?
7. But yet more fully ; Tell me what operation Circu-ncifion had on all the In- fants of Church- members formerly ? It was a Seal of the nghteou nefs of Faiih : Rom. 4.1 1. And yet they had no more faich nor knowledge of the (igmficancy then ours have now. It was an engaging fign : and yet they we.e as uncap^blc ot uaik' ft mding either the fignificancy or engagement as ours are ; Yea, Chr.ft himfdf wascccumcifcd in Infancy, when in the coutfe of nature he was uncapable of unaei tianding ns h nds and Ufes. Not that I am now arguing for baptifm from Circumcifi-)n : buc this fully an- fwereth this their Objedicn [that Infants Ihoold not bt baptize d becaufe they are not capable of underttanJing its Ure,and fo being wrought on by it . }' hey are as C3p:ible of Baptifm as they were of Circumcifion and its Ends ; They therefore that wi 1 yet £ay,it were better let it alone till they arc more cap3bIe,do but exalt their reafon3<^3inft Scripture, and fpcak as men that would teach God.* **
CHAP. HI.
Objeclioff. }.
jUtfome Objcd: How can an Infant Covenant with God, or be ' engaged by this fign ? And where doth God require the Parent to engage his cWldren ? or trv promife or Vow any thing in their names? Or, how can it be faid that we made any covenant ot Vow in Baptifm ? Conld we vow o covenant, when we could not undeiftand ?
Jnfwir. I am the more engaged to anfwer this , becaufe
I was once fo Ignorant of ft my felf, that I adventuied in
my Ignorance to tell others, (l6nga|o) that I did not perceive that we could be
bio. CO nuke any Vow la out Infant Baptifm ; therefore I am bound to unfay it
and
Infants Church- member Jhip and Baftifm, 1 1 j
and righc thofc that heard me : ( ycung and unftudied Preachers will be venturing to hy that, which when they have ftudied^they will fee muft be unfaid.)
I. It is agreed on both fides, that Baprifm is ordained to be a mutual engaging fign between God and the baptized ; And that this engagement is a covenanting with Godj and fo Baptifm is called a Seal of the Covenant. Now, that parents have au:hority ta engage their children in this Covenant , and to promife in their names that they feall perform the conditions, that they may enjoy the benefit, is evident thelc two wayes j I. From Nature, z. From Scripture.
I. Parents have naturally fo great an tntereft In their children, that by this ihey are # authorized to make covenants in their behalf. TheLawof Nature is the Law of God. Nay, it is a plain natural duty of parents to covenant for their children when it is for jheir gcod. May not a parent take a Lcafe or other covenant for his child i and en-* gage the child to pay fuch yeerly Rent, or do fuch homage? May he not engage his child to take fuc'i a man for his Landlord , or e'fe to be turned cut of his Houfe ; and to take fuch a man for his King, or be hanged as a Traitor? Nay, were it n ca lin in that parent that would refufe to covenant in behalf of his child, when elfe the child ftiould lofe the benefit of it? Nay, in fome cafes a parent may engage hij child toon inconvenience J m'Jch more may he engage him tor his good. Who buy- eth not Lands for himfclf and his Heirs ? And the Scripture atteficth this natu- ral intereft of parents in their children ; In that a young woman that was not at hec own difpofe, but her Fathers , could not make a binding Vow without his filenc confent.
1. But particularly, Scripture fully ilieWeth.that all the people of ifratl did by Gods Hat appointment enter their children into the covenant of God. For, i. They were to ctrcumcife them, which God callech [his covenant..] and [the fign of this covenant ; J Therefore they were to enter the covenant.
-. It is as plainly fpoken as the mouth of man can fpeak it,in D^Kl.ip. io,ii,iiij. Yea, even for the children that were unborn they were to covenant, (as tnoft expound thofe words, [ and with him chat (lands not hct-e with u* thu day j ] though it may b< meant of any Heaihen that wcu'd be converted : ) And this covenant was , that the Lord would take them for a people to himfclf, and would be to them a God. So Deut, i(5, 17,18. And no qucftion, a parents Intereft in his child is as great now as then j and God as willing to covenant with the children of his people. But this needs no peculiar proof, in that all that I have faid hitherto in proving them holy, and Church- members, doth prove that they arc in covenant with Chrift,tobehlsDifciplcs,andtake him for thtir Lord ; and therefore they mult be encrcd by their Parents* or others that have auihority and intereft in them,
Butltnaay be thenobjefted. That It cannot be lawful! for a man topreml&that which he cannot perform : How can we promife that another ihall take the Lord foe hit God,and Chrift for his Redeemer ? So we may become Covenant-breakers upor^ their default.
To which I anfwer ; There is no ftrength at all in this Objeftion. For we pro* mlfe not in our own names, bur the Infants j nor to perform the duty our felvt-s, but that he fhall do it ( and that we will contribute our beft endeavours thereto 5 ) nor do we promife abfolutely that It (hall come to pA^c ; but we engage him to k m hit duty by covenant, ( which alio would have been his duty, if he had not covenanted . ) and we promife that he (hall perform the conditions as a means to attain ;he benefits of the Covenant ; upon this penalty, That if he perform them not,he (hall lofe tht bene- fits of the Covenant, and bear the punilhmcnt thicauictU So Uut frc only pnomlfc
.0. «ta^
114
Plain Scripture proof of
that he (hall keep the covenant 5 or if he do not, wc leave him liable to the penalty. And if it be not kept, it is he that breaks it, that was bound to perform it, and not wc ihac bound him by our promifc, and not our fdvcs j and it is he that muft bear the punifl\. ment, and not the Parent.
Who doubtcth but a man may lawfully promifc for himfelf and his Heirs, that they (hall pay a fmall yearly rent to a Landlord for the enjoyment of fomc large and com- modious Pcffcftions i and fo bind them to it by Leafe ? V\ Ml he fay, How can I pro- mifc for my Son^when I know net whether he will perform It ; and fo I may break co- venant ? He that Ihould deprive his Heirs of the InherltaiKc for want of fo engaging them, or promifing in their behalf, were both unwifc and unnatural. For nature bind* ( cth him fo to engage his Heirs, when it is fo much for their own benefit •. and if they break the engagement or covenants by not paying the Rent, it is their fault , and not the Fathers j and they fhall be turned out of the Houfe and fuftcr for it , and not he. The Lcafc is made in this tenour , That he fha]l fuffcr that performeth not what he is bound to 3 fo that where the Son was bound to duty or payment^ the Father is in no fault that bound him : And if the covenant be not performed,the Landlord can require no more but the forfeiture and DiiTeiftKe ; and that muft be from him that (hould have performed, and did not. So is it in the prefent cafe : If the Covenant which wc make for Infants be not performed by them when they come to age, God will claim the for- feiture at their hands, and diCTeife them of the benefics, but we are quit.
CHAP. IV.
ObjeClion 4.
\T h yet further objeded thus .• If Infants muft be baptized, vihy may they not as wcl receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper ?
To which I anfwcr , x. It is unmannerly and unfafc to demand a Reafon of Ghrlfts Inftitutions : May not he tfta- blilh this or that Ordinance, without giving us an account of his rcafonsoflt? If I find in Scripture what he hath ordained, I will leave it to others to enquire why he fo or- dained it.
2. I have fully proved that Infants muft be baptlied s let them prove that they muft receive the Lords Suppcr.if they can. If they bring but as goo J proof for this, as I have done for the former, I fhall heartily yield that they oMght to receive both ; Till then, it lies on them,and not on me » they that affirm that IniSnts (hould have the Lords S8ppcr,muft prove it j they cannot cxpcd I fliouid prove the Negative. '
If th.«y fay, that there is the like reafon for both s I deny it : but yet I worlhip not God according to the conjcaures of hOmane reafon, but according to hislnftitution, Ifihey lAy,that there is the like grounds in Scripture for both j let thenaihew as much Ux one as I »Savc done for the other, and I will believe them,
3. Buiifthv^ymuft needs have reafon, methinks Chrift hath fatisfied them in the
xcry external naAure of the fcveral Sacraments ; He hath appointed the firft to be fucb * -' - - - • - ■ a5
Infants C hurch -member fh if and Bdftifm,
iiy
as Infants are capable of j for they may be waihed as well as the aged j they are not to be agents, but mecrly pafllvc in it; but the other is fuch as they are naturally in- capable of in their firft Infancie, t^i^. eating bread,and drinking wine ; and they muft beageri:: iayyha^ they can do i and having not the ufe of reafon^ perhaps will not do it.
4. Moreover, hath not Chrift fully latlsSed us in this by the ends andufcs of the {everal Sacraments ? The fiift Sacrament of Baptlfm being chiefly and primarily buc to enterthem into his Kingdom ( which they are capable of: ) the fecond Sacrament being for the adual doing of homage,and rational acknowledgment and remembrance of the benefits we have from him ( which they are uncapable of.) The firft is to enter them into his School, that hereafter they may learn, and in the mean time be of the number of his Difciples j the later is the wo;k of adual Learners. The firft is but the putting their names in the LeafCjOr enrringthem into covenant with him : the later is the actual recognizing of the covenant, and remembring and acknowledging the mer- cies of it. The former is inftituted plainly for all Difciples as foon as they are Difci- ples J but no Scripture faith fo of the later, t/i^.That all Difciples as fuch, fliould pre- fently receive the Lords Supper j but it is reftralned to thofe that can examine thcm- felvcs firft, and can difcern the Lords body, and keep in remembrance his death. Shew where Scripture faith. Go, difciplemeall Nations^ giving them the Sacrameiic of my Supper. So that this Objcdion is of no force*
C H A P. V.
' Objcflion $.
kUt fomc fay, It is ftrangc,that If it be the will of Chrift that Infants fliould be baptized^ that he hath left it fo dark, and faid no more of It in Scripture then he haih done.
To this 1 anfwer, i. We have not much caufe to complain cf the darkntfs of that which hath fo much plain J-ci ipture at I have here produced to you. It is dark onely to men that are not able to draw thecondufion from Scripture premifes.
That all Church-mcmbets muft be admitted by Baptifm, M'y.' T. denieth not ; and therefore 1 hope that is not dark nor doubtful. That Infants muft be admitted Church-members, I have proved from fo many Scriptures. that I dai e con- fidently fay that Scripture is not dark or fparing in that j and W/T.confeffcth that they were once Church-members, (and how weil he hath ptovcd the repeal, Icr ail jud^e.) So that what difiiculty is here, but in railing thecondufion from thefe premifes ? \tt I confcfs, to the vu'.gar i'ort of ChtiTnans even that is a great difficulty ; but that li noc long of the obt'curity of Gods Word.
Again, that all Difciples fliculd be baptized, is the plain command. M.u 28. 19, lo," and confdfcd by M .7. And that Infants are Difciples, the Scripture is not fo dark, asl hAvc fully proved.
2. I anlwtr further J Scripture dealeth fullieft in the controverfies which in thofe times wcvc agitated. N jw it wis then no controverfie, wijcbcr Injuyits rvcre to be mm- bcfi of the vijibii Qhuuh' The Jsws all knew this,and took it for unqueftioiiable^for all
CL i their
tl6 Tliin Scriftttre profif of
their Infants bad adual pojfcfan ^ and that upon Gods own Grant and Ordination t And what unprejudiced man of common reafon can Imagine, but that if Chrift would have dllpoffcffed ihcm, he fliould fomewhere have dilcovcrcd it ? yea, that Ic would not have had very great difputing and debates j and that the Jews Yiouid not have argued much againftthc parting with this privUe^^:^;yailtnclr Infants ? Is ic likely that they would let it go as eafily 2* !4r. T. do:h •, and fay, It is a benefit to the whole Church, that all our Infan.:; are put cut, or their Church-mcmberlhip repealed ( like a houfc that is aojc: when the children arc put out of doors,) though they have no priviledge in ftead of it. What a filr was there about the repeal of Circumcifion, and ho^ hardly could the many thoufand believing Jews be latisfied in this , that they l2iould not circumclfc their children ? ( for i: was their childrens circumclfiori that the quarrel was about, as Is faid ^ifl.ii.zi. they were infoimcd that Pj«/ taught the difperfed Jews not to circumcife their children j ( And do you think then, thst if P<j«/ had taught them that they were not to cfteem or admit their children Members of the vifibic Church, ( which was a far higher matter then the no: circumcifing them, ) that Paul (hould never have heard of this ; nor the Jews have difputed it ; nor been much more unwilling to acknowledge it ? I conclude thci efore that it is a moft evident truth, that Chrifl did not fpeak about Infants Church-membcrlliip, becaufe/fw^ a {noven iruth^bcyond co}nrover/ic -y nor was there any one man found in ihofe djyfs (that wc read of) that ever deny (dit : and all the Jewsj yea and all other Chitrch-HJcmben rvire in aflua! poffcffion of it, and C'''''fl ''^^'^'^'f q'n^f^'onck their pofj(/lion.
Indeed, the Djfciples did quclHon the bringing of Infants to Chrift perfonally for his fuither adual blefllng : but Chri{l quickly rclolved their doubt even in that , and fatlsfied them of his pleafure by the manifefting of his great difpleafurc agaioft them for hindring ic. And yet can men fay , that Chrift hath left the matter fo uncertain j yea, and take the contrary for certain ?
^. Moreover, what if It were more obfcure then It Is, and the Scriptare had not faid fo much in it as it hath ? May it not be for all this a neccffary truth ? Peter faith, that there are many things in ^auls Epiflles hard to be underftood, which the Igno- lant and unlearned wrcft to their own deflrudion , as they do the other Scriptures : And are they therefore no truths ? is not the New Tcftament as filcnt about Chriftian Kings, or any Chriftian Magiftrates, or about an Oath before a Magiftratc, and about war, and about the degrees of Marriage forbidden, and about the Sabbath, &c and yet who will fay, thatthefc are not revealed ? /t is enough that they are revealed in the Old Teftament } and fo was Infants Church-membtrlhip by Mr. T. his own confeffion. So that here is no fnch difficulty as may caufe us to d(;iibc whetlier it be Chrifts mind iii%i Infants (hould be baptized.
CHAP.
Infants Church-mentherjhif andBapifm,
117
Vy n n X I
Vli
ObjcUion 6,
jUt Mr.T. ftandeth nauci; on this ObjeAIon drawn from the evil confcquences of Infant-baptifm , and the benefit thac would enfue upon deferring baptifm till years of difcretlon. He faith th3t[the grofs ignorance of the people is much oc- fioned by their baptizing afore they know j That If they were not baptized till they knew Chriflian Religion as it was in the fir ft Ages, groffe Ignorance in Chriftian Pro- feflbrs would be almoft wholly reformed : And for ChrL ftian walking , if Baptifm were adminiftred with a folemn abtenunciation^ profcfllonj and promifc by the baptized in his own pcrfonj and upon that were baptized I doubt not but it would have more awe on mens confclences then many other means ufed or devifedj&c. On the other fide, Infant-baptifm is the ground Upon wjjich innumerable people ignorant and profane, harden thcmfelves as if they were good Chriftians, regenerate, and rtiould be faved without holinefs of life, never owning or confidering any profefiion or promifc made for them as theirs ^
To all this I fliall return a plain and full Anfwer.^ I. The Lord Jefus himfclf is the occafionofthe ruineahd damnation of multi- tudes of fouls ; for he is fet for the fall, as well as the rifing of many, Lnl(i.i^. And heisalloneofftumbHngaudrockofoffcnce,&c. But is this long of Chrift ? or mult Chrift therefore be neglcded / or bad it been better the world had been without him ? furely no.
The Gofpt! is to many the favour of death to death , and to the Jews a Rumbling block, and to the Gentiles fooliflmefs : And muft the Gofpel be blamed for this i oc were it better let it alone ? I think not.
What is it that wicked men will not take hurt by> and make an occafion of theh de- flruSJon ? Godly education,and hearing Sermons, and a cuftom of praying occafions many to delude themfclves , and think they are good Chriftians , when it is no fuch matter ; And muft thcfe therefore be cafhicrcd or neglefted ?
I have heard many fay fo about the Education of chlldreni That to teach them words of prayer, or Scripture, when they do not underftand them, is but to make them hypo- crites, and therefore It is better let them alone till they can underftand. But though this be as good an Argument as Mr. T.'Sy yet is it not point-blank againft the will of G«d , that would have children brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord) and taught the trade of their life in the time of their youth, andchargeth meji to tcachhisworddiligently to their children, lying down and rifing up^ at home and a* broad ? 5cc, D?/<r.6 6,7,8.
Mul.itudcs among us do think they arc good Chriftians , meerly becaufc they be- lieve Gods Word 10 be true by a bare aflent, and profefs thcmfelves Chriftians : And (hall we jfay that this is any caufe of their delufion ? Or, becaufe it is an occafion, that it were better caft h off? Or, muft Miniftcrs never perfwade them to believe
Q. i that
I tS Plain Scripture preof of
ihat Gods Word Is true, or to profcfs thcfiifdvcs Chriftians, left ir Ihould tend to thcJC ddulion ? What kind of Doftrinc were this ?
1. Let Mr.T. fhcw if he can.^hat there is in th« natUTC of the fM/«» t'n^j f^Quij i^ hurtfull of it felf to any. If a thJT tha- c:ri rtaa never a lc:ter,be cmrc J into ijl^j^ol that he may Irarn to readj is there any thing in this ihit tenuis to his deludo^^^ftif nc fliould be fo chlldilh as to thir.lr, that notv he is a Scholer fiifficient bccai^H^ig in the School ; would any man therefore think it needfully that they tr.uil be knowing Scholcrs before they come to School, left they llipuld tun into the like miftakc ? A. id why then muft th.y needs be ^(ijww/;;^ before thiy arc Chiifts Difciples ? If a childs name be put in a Leafc, is there any thing in this to do him hurt ? And if aft^l^ard he ihall be fo foolidi as to think , that it is fufficicnt that his name k in theLeafe, and that he needs no more to fecure him the Inhnitance, though he do no ho- mage, nor pay the renr, but forfeit his Lcife by breaking the conditions j Will any man fay , That it is not meet therefore that children ilreuld be put into Covenants and Indentures , tha: they Ihoul J ftay till they can undtrftand what they do ?
What hurt can it be to be in Chrifis Family from our youth, or to be in his School, or to be in his vifible Kingdom as his Sub/eds , any more then h is for all the Inbnts In England to be the Sulijcftsof the King > If they Ihould think that it were enough to be born in a Kingdom, and fo be the bubjrfisot a King, though they never c.-r- dially acknowledg<;d him, nor obeyed him , but atter proved Traitors , would any fobcr man therefore conclude^ that it were better Jet no Infants be the Kings fubjcfts > I think nor.
And I would intreat 3/r. T. to tell me how Baptifm it fclf tends'to hinder know- ledge ' Cannot he be as d^igent to teach the b3pti7cd, as the unbaptizcd, i{ he will? and may they not learn as well ? Except he think that there is no teaching thofe that are in the School, but thofc onely that are out of it ; or that they will learn the better for being out of Chiifts School, and the worfc for being in it. Or, may they not be taught to know their King Chrift , and their duty to him , bccaufe they are born his vifible Subjcds.' How doth that hinder i" v
I. I intreat 3//. T. to tell me, whether Infants being born the vifible 5ubjcA$ of Gods Kingdom ( and of Chrifts, I doubt not) before Chrlfls com'tnf, , and rheir being folemnly cntrcd into the vifible Church and covi nant , were fo great a wrong to them as is here pretended ? Was that the reafon of the deludon and grofs ignorance of the Jews, that they did not ftay till they were at age before they were entered into the Church and Covenant ? How dare he fay fo ? and fo make God the deluder and blinder of the Jcwcs, and accufc his facrc^i Lawes and Inftitutlons of error , and of fo jrcat error as to contradid their own ends } yea , and fo much to hinder the attain- ment of their ends i Was it not rather their hifh privilcdgc to have God fo nccc them, and to be born and bred up in h s School uiider his Dodrine, and in his King- dom among his Lawes ? And if it were an high favcur , and no wrong to them to be entered in Infancie into the Church and Covcnintihow comes it to be a hurt and wrong to us now ? He that can anfwei- this , hath either a better wit, or a worfc then I have.
4 And I wouldt^ladly know alfo of ^U/-.T. whether the cafe of /k Pro/c/j/fj among the Jews were fo much better then the cafe of their c-iV.i children , and the cale of all the Javs and. their children ? The Profelytes were all entered then , as M?-. T. would have all the Difciples now, vi\. at age, when they knew what they did \ and the Jews were no:, not the Profelytes children were not/ And dafc Mr%T, fay, that chefe
Profclyics
Infants Church' memberjhif and Baptifm, 119
— ■ ■ — 1111
Profelyre$,wko were brought over to partake of the Jews mercies,were In a better ftate ? or that their way of covenanting was a better then Gods ordinary eftablifhed Church- way ? and that Gods own people the Jewcs had lefs mercy then thofe that were thus adjoyncd to them? or that their own children had lefs mercy then the Parents ? or that by turning Profelytes, they brought all their children into a more dangerous way then thcmfelves came In by ? or rather would they not fay of themfelves , as Paul of his late knowing Chfifl , that they were as men born out of due time ? VVhac can be faid to this ?
5. And what if Mt' T. had his dedre In this ? and all fliould profefs their Faith in Chrift before they were entred ? were it likely to prove fuch a cure as he Jmagineth > I think it ii but a mecr imagination. For he is fo far from the Ncrv-EngUnd way, that I fuppofe he would require no further profeffion or covenanting, then he hath warrant for In Scripture j fuch as the Apoflles when they baptlxed men did require, and as Chrift warrantcth in the Commiflion, Mat. 18. 19, 10. And were not this as likely to be- come cuftomaryi and formal, and conHfient with Ignorance j as theprefent courfe? How quickly might the multitude learn fuch a Profeffion as Mr. T. could not rejeft upon any Scriptire ground ? They that will make no confdenceof the folemn Pro- mife which their Parents made in their names , will fcarce make ever the more confcienceofitjif they had made it firft in their own names j feeing the violation of either will alike forfeit their falvation. And is it not daily evident how forward the aged are in any licknefs to make promifes to God, or any wicked man when a Minifter (hall deal with them for their (ins convincingly, and yet how ealily and frequently they b.eak them ?
6. And is it not theconftant endeavours of Minifters in England to take men off from fuch formality and feif-delu(ions j and to let them know that their meer Baptifia (whether in Infancie or at age) Is infuf^clent ?
7. [ would fain know a reafon of Mr. T. why that folemn abrenunclatton, and pro- mife which he fpeaks of , may not be as effedual at the Recognizing and pcrfonal renewing of their covenant openly in the face of the Congregation when they come to age, though they are baptized before, as if they had deferred their B.iptifm till then ? For my part, it is my conftant Doftrine, that thoujh Infant-Baptifm is Gods ordinance, and Baptiim not to be reperformed, and though the covenanting with God by Parents may be fufficicnt to Infants, whofe intereft is on the condition of their Parents Faith , and not their own at piclent j yet when they come to the ufe of reafon, as every man is bound to have a pcrfonal explicite Faith of his own, fo is every man bound to enter a perfonal covenant with Chrift , to take him for their Lord and Saviour , and give up themfelves to him, and renounce all other , and to take God for their chief good and their fupream Sovcraign ; and that the very nature of Faith lieth, as in /J^/lyzf partly, fo ch Icily in this Confcnt znd Covenant o( tk& heart} and that as he is not a Chrifiian whofe heart doth not thus confent and covenant, fo he is not to be taken for a Chriftian by the Church, who will not viGbly, by hlm- ftlf, when he comes to age, (as he did by his Parents in Infancie^ publikely profefs both his Affent to the fundamental Articles of Faith , and his Confent that the Lord only (hall be his God, and Chrift only his I^edeemer,and fo his Saviour and Lord, and promife in heart and life to be true to him accordingly ; And I deliver the SacraJ ment to none that will not thus profefs and promife. For as with the heart man bc- lievcthunto righteoufnefs , fo with the moHth Isconfeffion maJe to falvation. Now what ifthls were cveiy where done, that when children come to age, they muftall folemnly in the face of the Congregation ibasperfoijally own and renew their Cove-
naoc.
no PUin Scripture f>rcofcf
nant, why may not this eagagc them, at well as If ihey were baptized then ?
And fome fooc-ftcps of this courfe hare remained in Englmid ; partly in [thepro- feQlonbothof A (Tent to all the Articles of Fai.h , and" the abrenunclition of the World , Flcfh , and Satan , and the engagement of the child to be Chriits faithfull Servant to his lives end; ] which every Parent is to makefor his child in Baptifm . • and partly in the folemn profeflion of the Articles of Faith, wrhich every man at age was bound to fignlfie by his (landing up at the repeating of them ( to avoid the In- convenience of fpeaking in the Congregation-, even as the covenant was taken by lifting op the hand : ) and partly by the old order of Confirmation by Billiops^ which was to bcdoneuponprofelfionofthe Faith J and laftly, by the confeflicns and pro- fcrtions to this end which every one was to make at the reeeiving of the Lords Supper* All which, though by cuftomarinefs of people, and negligence of Minifters they were abufcd, and degenerated into formalities, thecommonbaneoffacred thing-;, andfo had Lft their life j yet were in themfelves fo excellent and neccffary, that it had been far fitter to have renewed and revived them, and reftored them to their Primitive vigor and luftre, then to have laid them down.
And here ( though I have little hope of being heard and regarded in this deaf and felf conceited age ( for it Is only the Anabaptifts that are wilfull, intemperate, preJMiiccd and partiall, ) yet I will fatisfie my own confcience in a word of intreacy DothtotheMagiftracy andMinlftryof England i 1 mean, the ruling and advifing part, [That they would be pleafed In the forementioned particulars torevife the Diredory, and if they know no more Reafon to the contrary then they have made known to the world, that tlicy would Dired and Ordain; i. That the Parent may not only Dcfire that his child may be baptised, and promife to difcharge his own Duty in the Education, but may alfo covenant In the name and befalf of the child ( which is either omitted, or obfcurely iraplyed at moft, in the Diredory ) there be- ing no other known way of engaging a child in covenant with God, that cannct covenant for it felf, and it being the way of the people of God in Scripture to enter their child.en Into the Covenant, Deut.i^. 10^11,12. ( and they being no more guil- ty iftheir child keep not Covenant, then of his forfeiture of a Leafe, or like Covenant Into which they engage him with man : ) And that the Parent may alfo profefs his own belief of the fundamental! points of Faith into which he would have his child baptized ; that fo we may no: baptize the children of Pagans inftead of Chriftians • which we rather defirc , for that to our forrow we know fome that have been former Profeffors of Heliglon ^ that are fallen to that Libertlnlfm and Familifm which is flat Heathenifm; and have given us caufe to fufpeft ftrongly, if not to be flatly cer- tain that they believe not the Creation, or the truth of bcripcure, or Incarnation of Chrift , or his Jiving or being vifibly on Earth ; Who yet for the meer avoyding of obloquy , will fend their children to be baptized , but will not there profefs the Articles of Faith: And we know no: why fuch children (<w thcin ) Ihould be baptized.
z, I further humbly propound, that the ancient prafticc of Confirmation maybe reduced to is primitive nature, (as Cnlv'm earneftly defircth, In^it.l.^cip 19.) and To confirmed, chat all perfons when they come to age may be brought folemnly in the face of the Congregation to enter or renew and own that covenant pcrfonally which they entered by others in their Baptifm, and that in fo doing they may profefs thiit Aflcnt to the Fundamentals of Faith, and their Ccnfent both to the Naturall and Supernaturall parts of the covenant^ w\. [That the Lord only (hall be their God,] and [that they |ake Chrift only for their Redeemer, to fare and ri^lc them}] andcbeir Reroiutionto
be
Infants Church- memberjhi^ and Baptifm» 121
be faithful in this covenant to the end of their IJtcs ; And if chey did enter or fubfcribc their names to it (in a Book containing the names cf all the Members of that Churchj cut of which the dead, the rcmovedj and the excommunicate fliould be wiped) It would be the more engaging, and not want either Scripture or reafon to warrant it.
3. And further, thatthe Church may have power frequently to renew this covenant as therclhall beoccafion, or to call any particular perfcn to the rcnewall of it • i. In cafeofjuft fufpicion that the faid perfon Is fallen Into Herefic or Prophantfsj s. Or, at the icftoring of fuch a perfon after Sufpenfion or Exconimunication. And the whole Church may renew It, i. Afterany publike defeflioni i. Or grounded fufpicion of the defedion of any confiderable part 3 g. and at the receiving the Sjcramcnt of the Lords Supppcr which is a Seal of the covenant j and at what other times (ball be judg- ed neceffaty ; And that this may be folemnly done, that 10 the cuftom of ftanding up at the Creed may alfo be reduced to it's primitive nature and vigor.
4. And lafty, that the cxprcfs words of this covenant (no more then what is of flat neceflltyj may be perfcribed to all Churches, out of Gods Word j and rhat no par- ticular Minifters may have power to Impofc any other covenants upon the Charchcs, nor to alter any word In the covenant, ('iecing fuch alteration may introduce that which will fubverc the wholt ; ) And that no other covenants containing ftnaller and contro- vertible points ('as is that of Epifcopacy in the National covenant,) wherein even God- ly and Learned men may differ, may be ralh'y impofed upon the Churches. But ihic unquefttonable covenant of God may Aand and be renewed.
Yet though this bare profefllon of Fundamentals mufl fufficc In this cafe, yet I in- tend no Inlet to errors thereby: For I conceive that the Church fhould have three diftinft confeflions j The fiift, fuch as I have faid, containing only Fundamentals f like the Apoftlcs Creed) which Is to be Imptfed on all the people as is fald j The fe- cond, containing all points next the Foundation that arc evident In Scripture, and be. yond controveifie among Godly Divines, and of nccefslty for the clearing and main- taining the Fundamentals ; And this to be Impofed on all Minifters. ('And both thcfe former to be in the very words of Scripture.) The third, to contain lower contro- verted points that are fit to be debated} and this to be Impofed for fubfcrlption on none, nor any tycd from a peaceable modeft gain- faying ; But to ftand as tha judge- ment of the Synod, which Ihould fway much with all modefl men, and may be a Rule to the yonger fort of Divines that are nor able to difcern in fuch cafes, and alfo that themoft able may not unpeaceablly or Intempcratcly contradidit.
Farre be It from me to propound thefe thmgs In a way of quarrelling with the Aflfembly fwhom I unfcigncdly reverence and honour j or if as I were wifer then they, and can mend their work ^ far from me be fuch arrogancy. I doubt not but thiy have debated all this among them, and concluded agiintl It, upon reafons that I know not of; And fome may think that they are not bound to give a reafon of their Decrees to others. But yet I remember the cafe of Pjphnutim J And I judge as Catnno and many other Learned Divines, that the Authority of Synods in matters cf FiithlsDoftoralland dcclarativfj and not decifively Judiciall j and therefore they are as cur Teachers -to give us the evidence of Truths, and not to give us Truths on their bare word j and fo to give a reafon of their InjunSions and Di- reftions in all dcubtfull matters , that fo our obedience may be the more rationall , checrfull, and to our felves comfortable ; efpcciaily they (hcu!d thus far condcfccnJ to their Brethren of the Mlniftiy, who muft not only ad in Faith, but alfo fatiific the peoples doubts concerning tbcir Decrees i And yet more efpecially, when It Is in matters of fo high moment as the Covenant of God, andihcvifiblluyofmens ^^^'t-
R " ftianicy
12 2 i*/4'* Scripture proof of
ftianity •, Ancly:t raorc ) when they take from hs what wc were in aduil pi Ifcfllonof j For chc fubrtancc ofchcfc (as i> (nd) >.vas in ihe Common-pnytr Book j And, though I were never a Ccnfoimilt co the old Supcrititious Cc.cmonics, yet I would not have plain duties wiped out, and iht Dircftcry be more defcdive then the Common. P,ayer Book, no: the world made bc'ic vc that it Is fuch things as thtfc that we fcimd fault w ith, and would have changed j Efpecially alio when th re arc fo many Learned and Judi- ci lis Oppofcis obfcrYingou: alterations and oftlndcd at them. ThLrcfoc, I thinK it bu: midell and ratio ul to dcfirc, eiherthc cftablitliment of the fore men:ioncd par- ticularSj or the publication ot fatisfaftory Reasons again them.
BUt to rerttrn to Mr. T- I make no doubt but this courfe woiild as folcmnly engage nen to Chriftjand have as much aw on their conCcicnccSj and be as fufficicnt a cure of grofs I gno: ance,as his deferring of Baptifm^and much more i for God will not blefs men in the contradidion of his Ordinances.
But the great Objedion is, that it feems our Infant Baptifm is dcfedive,or elfe what need we fupply the dtfcft with ihefe Inveulons of our own ? And ic may be others will dcmaau my proof of the need or lawfulnefs of whi: I propound.
1 o both which I anfwer ; i. It was no fign of the dcfeftivcncfs of Infants Church admiflion, and entering into Coveaanc by their Parents <7W»;/g//;c/<:jvjj in that they were to renew the fame Covenant ptrfonally afterward j Indeed, the age and capacity of Infant! Is dcfcdlve, and therefore they cannot do what men of years at Baptifra fliouM do J but the Ordinance is no whit defeftive. You may as well fay^that our Dod;- rine of Infantsjuftificatioriis dcfcdive,bjcaufe their capacity for believing is defedive; or that the pradicc of teaching children as foon as they have ufc of reafon is dcfedive, becaufe their capacity Is not fuch as it will be afterward. This therefore is but like the reft of their arguing.
a. Ajid for the Scripture warrant ihave for requbing a perfonal renewal and owning of the Covenant at age. Ilhall^Ive it you plainly ; ( for I have already proved the nc- ccfljty of the Parents entering the Infant in o Covenant. )
I . It hath been the conftant prad ice of the Church of God in all the beft timet of the Church, to be frequent in publick folcmn renewing their covenant ; (not any poli. tical or controverted covenant, but this Covenant of Fundamentals ) fo that all. the people both old and young did enter it and renew it > How oft did Mofcs caufe them to enter and renew the covenat ? as Dan. x6. 17, i S . Thou hafl avaucbed the Lord thu day to be tfjy Cod, and to wall{ in hu ways and l^ecp his Statutes and. Commandments, and his Judgements^ and to hearl(:n to hu voice 5 And the Lord hath avouched thee this day te be bis peculiar people M he promt fed, &c. So Dcut. 19.11.12,15, &30. ij. ij. &c. And yet all thefe were entered into covenant before in their Infancy, who now folemnly renewed it at age : For Circumcifion was a Seal of the Covenant which they entered. ( And thofe that were difpenfed with in the Wildernefs for Cir- cumcifion, yet were not difpenfed with (or covenanting ) And vihcn Alois viss deadj /(?/?7«/z takes the like courfe with them, ^oflj.i^. and foeff.dually dcaleth with . them J thathebringcth them topromlfc publickely three times together, that Ihcy wpuldfe.ve the Lord only as their God j and fo engaged them in Covenant with him, w//if 16, n, 14^25. Yea, ^n6\izvfrotc itinabeol(, v:r[.i6. And yet thefe had all entered the Covanant in their Infancy before. Good /0/7.1/3 did engage himfclf and all the people publickly and folcmnly In Covenant, and all the people ft.jod to the Qqyenan^. 3-kinis 23. a, 3. And/f/ft inhij bcftdays, afvd asor.tcf Mj beft vyork*v ' ■ ' CAUfijd .
Infants Cht4rch-memberjhip and Baptifm, 1 2 3
caufed afl the peoplcjand ftiangers that fell to them,to enter into a covenant to feck the Lord God of their Fathers with all their heart and with all their foul j And that whofo- ever would not feek the Lord God oflfracU fliould be put to dcath^ whether fmall or great, whether man or woman ; And they fware with aloud voice, and with 'houting, and with TiumpcrSj and with Corners ; And all Jud-ib rejoyced at the Oath ; For they had fworn with all t!ieir heaitj and fought him with their whole define, and he was found of them^ and the Lord gave them reft round about, r Chron- ij. lOjUjii^i J,i4 ly. If our National Covenant had been as fimple as theirs, and contained nothing poli, tical or controverfal, we fliould as well have rejoyced in itj and never had caufe to re- pent it. So did Hc^cliir.!}, z Chron. ^g.io. & 50. So did Jibo}\idah, i I^/h'gs it. tj. z cipon. a J 1 6. And it is faid of Jofiah further, that he caufed the People to ftand to the Covenant, z c/;ro« 3451,51. Da7i 2 1.18, 19,;; 0^3 ijj 2. &c. So upon a def dion they all entered Covenat againj E^ra 10. 3, 5, and whoever would not meet for this bulincfs out of all the Land, all his fubftance was forfeited, and himfclf fcparatcd from the Congregation, rf//.7. 8. (Letthofe markc all thefc places, that are for Liberty of Confcience. ) And in Nchcmiahs time they did not only enter into a fure Covenant, but into a Curfe and an Oath to walk in Gods Law j yea, and they ftibfciibcd andfcalcd tbc Covcmm^ Nckm.g 58. & io,z8, 29. So that you fee even fubfcribing and fealing hath Scripture example : though if it had not, yet it might be done : for though the Covenanting be a duty, yet the particular way of attefting or fignifying confcnt, is left to humahe prudence to determine, as whether by lifting up the hand, or ftanding up or fpeaking, oi fubfcribing, or fealing, &c. 2 chmi. 23.16. And Jthojndah made a Cove nmt between him and between all the People, and between ihe IC'wg, Th:}t they (hould be the Lord^ People, i. Here you fee the fubftance of the Covenant, that they (hould bcthe Lords People ; Not to men but to God did they engagej Not to combine in difpuiable points againft oneanothc- j but to Dedicate thcmfclves to God. 2. 'Vnd this was bac a Renewal of their old Covenant, For they were all in Covenant with God before.
And for particular perfons renewing the Covenant; iF ach particular was contained In the whole in all thefc Examples i 2. The people of G^d are dcfcribed t j be fuch as makea Covenant wiih him by facriiice, Pfal %o,%. So that itfcems they renewed their Covenant in facrificing j j. After Peters treble denyal, Chrift brings him to a tr ble profeffion of his Love to him, which had the nature of an engagement alfo. 4 Conftfli- on with the mouth is made tofalvationj3s well as Believing with the heart to R ighceouf- nefs, Kom. 10. 5. Wemuft bealwayreadytorender areafon of our hope toothers that demand it *, much more to the Miniftersand Church. 6.But muft fully is the duty and n'ceflity evinced thus. Every man in the Apoftles time that was baptized at age was nc- celTirily to profefs that he believed in Chrift with all his heart, fand that containeth the fum of the Covenant,) yea,implicitly or cxprefly, that he believed in Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, (for elfe how could they be baptiZv-d into the name of the Father^ Son and Holy Ghiil > ) And the mcfl'age Chrift fent ro the rebellious^wns^that they would take him for thcJr King to reign over them,3S appears by their refufal^for which they a: c con- demned, £.«('. 19. : 7 Now though Infants cannot perform thefc by themfclves at their BapJCmjet it follows not that they are therefore excufcd from performing them at all. Here are two du'ies that with thcaged wenttogether i i.Baptifm. 2. To engage them, felvcs by folemn Covenant in the expreflion of that Alfcnt and confent whlch(a$ I have fncwed in my Aphorifms of Juft/fictiioft, ) are the two princlpall parts of Faith. Now both are du-ies, -yi^. to be baptized and to Covenant; and both muft be per- formed. They bind not always conjunClim^io that they muft muft needs be performed ioth together ^ but yet they bind, either as conjoyncd or divided. It doth not follow
K. X as
1 24 PUm Scripture proof of
as the Anabaptifts wculd have it, that they muft forbear biptifm till cKey arc capable of that and perfonal covenanting together ; Nordoth it follow, as others would have it* that becaufe they were baptized and entered the Covenant by their Parents in their Infancy, that th<rrcforc they arc crcufcd from pcrfonal engagement and profcnionafcei- wardj. Therefore 1 conclude, that the conftant Liamplc of Scripture In requiring a perfonal profefiion of the Faith in thofc baptized at age, doth bind us fllll dhjunftly or atdilT.rcm times (who by Gods Law are to be baptized In Infancy, ) that we per- form each duty as we are capable of it : In Infancy we arc capable of baptifm, and Church-entcrancCj and coTcnanting by others ; And therefore our Infancy prohibits, not the dutyjBut not till years of difcretion are wc capable of a perfona! open profcffion of the Faith j And therefore then it muft be performed.
7. And indeed without fucli a profeffion and owning the covenant either cxpllcitc or implicite, (yet fo as may be difcerned,) hew fliall we know a Pagan from a Chrlftl- an ? Indeed the vulgar fort of Chriftlans do perform, that In owning the Creed, and Scripture, and conftant fubjcSlng themCcIvcs to the Ordininces ) which 1$ a profeffion peifonalandpublick; but were it performed more folemnly) particularly, and enga- gingly, It would be much bctter,and tend aiich to the klilingofformality^and binding men fafter to Chrift and duty.
And To I have fhewed you Scripture enough for this praSIcc. And what ncccffity then can M,:T. Ihe.v for delaying baptifm ? or what benefit by that delay ?
But yet my anfwer to this Objedion hath two branches more behind. 8. I would fain know of Mr.T.Whcthez his way of baptizing be liketo engage men half fo folemn- ly as this courfc that I I'peak of ? 1- in regard of the place : If he would have It in a River (as the Anabaptifts that I hive knowndo ufe,) then I: will be in a manner pi- vate,and fo notfolcmn, nor fo much engagclng. a. For the manner : IE he will do it on them naked, or neer naked ( as is commonly by them ufed) then people of any mo- defty will be fo taken up with fhame, that they will be the lefs ferious In the bufinefs : and will be willing to be as private as may be, and not to have all the Congregation gaze on their nakcdnefs, and fo it will beno publick engagement.
J. And In regard of the Age ; For according to his own profelTed prInclplei,Afr.T. will likely admit them about five, or fix, or fcven years old. For if he require no more then a free, ferious, fober, undcrflanding profeffion (of Fundamentals only I fuppofc^ which arc very few ) then every diligent Parent will teach their child fuch a profefTun which he is bound to take for fuch, and that likely before they are feven years old. And how will this engage them more then the way mentioned ? or the common way ? yea, if i: were fuppofed that they flayed till nine or ten, or twelve years old ?
^XaftlyJ anfwer to this Objedion,thatl: being but the fpumeof humane rcafon,^ I needed not to have given any other anfwer but this J God would hive Infants to be Church- members and fo entered by Baptifm j And feeing, as I hare proved, God would have it fo, then all thefe Objcdions are againft God, and a carping at his way i and finding cut a fuppofed unreafonablcnefs or inconvcnlency in his Inftitutioas j which, how well it becomes the Creature, let Mr. T. jud^c. My anfwer is, that it is Gods will it Onll be fo ; who needeth none of my reafons to iuftifie his Ordinances ; hi? own Authority and will being fofficient. And yet 1 have fliewed you, that the rea- lopjblencfs of thcpai is evident enough too. And fo much in anfwer to the Obje(2ionsJ
CH A P.
Infants Chnrch'intmbcrjhif andBaptifm.
^^5
CHAP. VIL
Arguments to prove the tAnabaftiJls ^ay ofSaftizwg to be finfull.
Avinf now defended tKc Church- memberfliip and Baptifm of Infants, I (l^all next proceed co examine the contrary pradlce of delaying Baptifm, and fee whether it have as much warrant In Gods Word,as 1 have brought for Infanc- Baptifm.
Where a Church is to be newly gathered among Pa- gans or Infidels that are yet without , there it Is beyond doubt that they muft be baptize^, at age after aftuali converfion i But this Is the QueftJon to be debated , whether the. Infa-nts of vifiblc cbMrd>mcmbcrs under the Cfofpcl ( or ofcbnftians ) (hould have their baptifm deferred till they eome to age ? And here Mr.T. havlnj the affirmative, fhould prove it from Scripture j which yet I find not that he doth any thing towards to anypurpofe, but only by denying Infant- Baptifm, and fo putting us upon the proof. The denying deftruftive way of Difpute is eafie. But feeing h is beyond my hope that they fhould do any thing confidcrablc in proving the affimiattve , Twill bring fome Arj;uments for the Negative, and agalnft the way of Baptifm which they commonly ufe j I will fee whether their wa/ have any more of the Scripture Cbarader of Dirinc approbation upon it then ours hath.
And here! muft Intreat the Reader, if he be willing to know the truth of God, and wotjld not wilfully delude himfeU, that he would not look on one fide only, but on both : and that he will not confideronlythe difficulties that fcem to fhnd in the way of our Baptifm j but alfo confider the proofs of their way, and that we can fay agalnft It } and lay both toghher, and choofc that which is neareft the Scripture; For though there n»ud be farr more faid againil Infant^bapcifm then is j yet if I can fay farr more agalnft their way of Baptifm , which they commend in ftead of it, methinksic fliouli flop men In their changing thoughts. Every wife man will fee a better way be- fore he leave the old ; and not leave one that feemeth weak to take up a farr worfe j nor quit his Opinions upon every difficult ObjeSion J for fo we fhould letgomoft of our Faith for we know not what. Therefore I defire but this, that you lay both to- gether, and take that which feemeth but moft likely to he tiuthi
And fiift , I will argue agalnft the Time of their baptizing -. fecondly, agalnft the Manner,
And to the former,! argue thus ; If there be noonc word of Precept or Example for baptitingthe child of any one Chrift:an at years of difcretlon, then to delay their Bap. tifm till years of difcrctlon,and then to baptize them, Is not the Scrlprure way ; But there is no one word of Precepi or Lxample in all the Scripture for baptizing the child of any one Chriftian at years of difcretion : Therefore to defer it till then, and then to do ic, is not the Scripture way,
R ? Me
1 2 6 Plain Scripture froef of
Methluk? no minfhould qu.ftion the Confcquc'nt that a*.knowlcdgcth the Ante" dcnr. And for the Antecedent, it lyc;h on ihem co pr. ve the A f!i mative. L(t any man (Iievrnic one word of commander I xarnple in all ih: Scrip'u.c for baptizing the child ofaQiriftian at years of difcrc:ion, and I will willint;lv cifi away thi? Ariumenr, And methinks they Ih' uld bring I'omc Scriprure for v^h.u iheydo who require fu^hex- prefs proof for our p'-afticc. Chrifl ntvcr co.nmanded the baptizing of any at age but thofc that were made Difciplcs fi flat age ; Bui the children cfchrilliins aienot made Difciples fiift at age as I have proved ( though ihcy may be regenerate and made fin- cere Difciplcs firit atagc,) therefore Chrilt never commanded the b,iptiring of the childrcnof Chi-iftiansat age, ^except they break his Rule through ncg!it,encc or fome other caufc, in Infancy leaving them nnbaptiztdj^ Il..cakot the Regular ordinary way.
CHAP. VIII.
Second Argument I ufejUtklsi That praAice which is ut.' tetly inconliftent with the obeying of Chrifts Rule for Baptifm is a finfuU pradicc ; But the baptizing of the chil- dren of Chi iHians at years of difcretion ordinarily, is ut- terly inconfiftent with obedience to the Rule i Therefore the baptizing of Cbriilians children oxdinarily at years of difcretion is a (infulU praftice.
1 knownofober man will deny the Major. And if I do bac prove the Minor foundly •, it is fully fulficient againft Ana- baptifmjlf I had never another word againlt it. And if I do not prove i: foundly, I am much miflaken.
And I prove It thus J If Chrifts Rule be, that pcrfons fliall be baptized when they are firfl made Difciples without delay, and if they that baptize the children of ChrN ftians at Age, cannot poffibly do it whcp they are firft made Difciples, then the bapti- zing of fuchat age ^ordinarily) is utterly inconfiftent with obedience to Chrift Rule. I need to fay nothing for the Conft^uent , if I can bur prove the two branches of the Antecedent, which Ihcw the contradidion between Chritt's Rule and their pradice $ And thiSj I doubt not to fay, I fliall evidently do.
And I. [That it is Chrifls Role thatperfonsflnil be baptized without delay , when they are firft made Difciples] I have fully proved aiicady, both from the Com- miffion for baptifing^ and from Scripture Example, explaining that Commifluon,and from the end and ufe of Baptifm. i. In the Commiffion, Af.i;. i8, i^^ lO Chrift adJoyncih Baptizing immediately to Difcipling. Co, Difcipic all Naliofis, Baptf^ng tbcm.
1. If any fliould be fo Impudent as to fay, It Is not the meaning of Chrift that Baj)tizing Ihould immediately without delay follow Difcipling j they are confuted by the conftant Example of Scriptare. For there is no mention that I can find of any one perfon that was Baptized long after rheir Difcipling j or that ever the Apoftlcs of Chrift did delay the baptizing of Difciplcs , John ^. i, x. Jcfus made and baptized more Difciples then Juhn, See how Making and Baptizing Difciples arc conjoyned, ^^Ji. 38, 41, The three ihwfand were prcfemly baptized the fame day that they
were
Infams church merr^bcrjhif and Baptifr», 127
wcie made D.Iclples witheut flaying till the morrow ; Theu^^h one would think the nu.iiber of three thouund might have excufcd the delay, if they had taken longer time to do it in : And fomc would think that their converiion bein^ fo fudJen, the Apo- files would have w.utedfor a tryallof their (inceriry. But this is not the wifdom of God,thoU£^h it kern to aim at the puiiry of the Church^Scriprurc tels us of another wav: jid 8.11. The people of 5J'/wr/.i when they believed, were baptized (without delay.) /ndvcif. i:?, 14- i'^WflwM/^M was prefemly bapti7ed, though yet not brought otic of the gill of bitcernefs or bond; of iniquity, and had no pait or fcllowiliip in that bu- fintfs i Y-'a, the 'itmariLms were generally baptized by Philip, before they had re- ceived the Holy Ghoft j For he was yer fallen upon none of them, only they were bap- tized in the name of the Lord JefuSjVer. 16. feo ^^.8.36,^7,38, The t-unuch was baptized in his Journey as they Went, without delaying one day or hour after he pro- fcfll'dhimfelfa Dlfciple. So was S^i.v/ baptized as foon as he rofe from his blindnefs uponthe words of Analgias- Ad.^ i8 So was Comeliui with his friends baptized imme- diately without delay, the fame day they were Difcipled, A61. 10.4748. So thofe in AU.'i^O 5, i'owas L)vV;/4 and her Hou/hold baptized without delay, Ad.is.'^^ And the Jaylour the fame hour of ihe night that he was Difcipled, Aci.iO.^^. ^oihc Corin^ thiam, /i(5i8. 8. And Ananias language to Pd«/ repeated Ail. zi.i6.is ^Xiin.Andnotv why tarrieft thou ? Arife and be B^pti-zfi, &c. And of the Haulhold of itephanm thac Vaul Baptized jit is implied too. And it is moft obfervablc which is faid in Job,l*i6 of Jefus himfelf, that he baptized, (by his Difciplcs) and All men came unto him. Where It is undeniable, that Jelus baptized without delay, even as faftas they came to him, and profiflkd thcmfelvcs Difciples, And can we htvc a better Example then the Lord Jefus himfelf? Oh 1 that our brethren that are fo indineable to reparation, becaufe of the unfitncfi of our Church-members, and that un.Church whole Pariihes, and gather Churchesout of them, as If they were no Churches, that muft have fuch tryalls and difcovorlcs of the work of mcnsconverfion, before they admit them, would but lay to heart all ihefe Scripture Eaamples, and make more Confclence of obfcrvine their Ruie, and not prefume to be wifera':d Holler then God, when It was mans fill overthrow to dcfirc to be but as God, though he did not attempt to go beyond him. Doubtltfs thofe that Chrift baptized, were Church. members ; for Captifm admit- ted ihem into his Church, and to be his Difciplcs, Job. ^. i. And he that will go beyond Jefus Chtift in ftridnefs, fliall go without me. I do not ihink that he will be offended with me for doing as he did.
And thus you fee that according to all the Examples of baptifm in the Scripture (not to fpvsk of ^o/j/MBaptifin) there was no delaying, no not a day ufually, but they were all baptized as loon as they were Dilcipled. (\i any reafon of neceffity or conve- nience caufe it to be put off a few days, yet this is not properly delaying it, nor put* ting rfl many months and years as the Anabaptills do ; And yet there is no warrant. in Scripture for any delay at all, but asneceflity mayexcufeit (as want of water, or the like. )
3. And I proved this before fiom the end and ufe of Baptifm ; If they are baptized ■ into the nime of chc Father, Son and Hnly Ghoft, and into the body (of the Church vifiblc) /i/j/. 18. ip, 20. 1 Cor. II. 13. then- they are not to delay it till they are firft. ftablilhed in the Church. Put the Antecedent is the words of Scripture. The ufe of Baptiim is to be the fign of their firft covenant with Chrilt and folemn admiffion in- to the Church i and therefore to be ufed at their lit ft admifllon ; fofhat I dare fay that this will be out of doubt with all rational confiderate Impartiall Chrifllans, that lit RulcofChrift^iSjtha: men be bapuzed wkhoAit deUy a focn as. they, axe Difcipled.
New,
128 Plain Scnjfture proof of
Now I (hall fully prove the fecond branch of the Anreccdcnr • [that they who baptise the children of Chrlftians at(Aje as the Anabaptifts dee) cannot pcffltbly do it whcfi they arc hrft dli'cipled ] And that I prove by thefc Arguments ; i. If the children of Chriftians arc Dilclples In their Infancy, then they thst baptize them not till they come to age, cannot poflibly (info doing) baptire them when they are fitft Difci- plcs : But dke children of Chriftians are Difciples in Infancy; Therefore they that baptize them not rill they come to age, cannot do it when they arc firft difciples ; and fo not according to Chriftj Rule. All the doubt here is of the Anteccccnt, which I have fully proved in the beginning of this Difpuce j and therefore will not here re« pear it.
i.But ruppofc this had not been proved, [that Infants are Dif>.'plesj]yct ftill it Is im- pod'ibleforthofethit baptize ihe children of many Cifnotmoft, or all) Chrilliansac age, to do it when they are firft Difciplcd.as I prove thus;
If they cannot poflibly know when fuch children arc firft Difclplcd (except It be in their firft Infancy.) then they cannot baptize them when they arc firft Difci- pled; But they cannot pofl'ibly know when fuch Infants are firft Difciplcd, There- fore they cannot baptize them when they are firft Difciplcd. All that needs any proofherc is theMinor ; For no man can think that they can baptize thofc when they arc firft Difciples , whom they cannot know whether , or when they were fuch,
Nowthatthey cannot know it (at Icaft in very many, it not in moft or all of the godlyes cfi-lpring) is evident thus ; i. If God ufe to work fuch to the acknow- ledgment of Chrift, by fuch degrees that the beginning is uiually unpcrciivablc of their true acknowledgment, then the beginning of their being Difciples is alfo ua- perceivable ; But the former is a certain truth j Therefore the later 's fo.
2. Again, If fuch do not ufually know themfelvcs when they begun to be Difci- ples , then others can much lefs know j Butluch fchlldrcnof the godly) do not u- fually know themfelvcs when they were firft Difciples > therefore much lefs" can others know.
I here take Dlfcipknilp in i>//'. T's. own fenfe, asitfignifieth one that dothferl- oufly, underftandingly, &c. profefs Chriftianiry, laying by at preftnt, the confide, rationof meet Relative Infant- DifciplcfliJp J And I fay, that men ate ufually ("who arc born and brought up of Chriftian Parents^ wrought to this by fuch infenfible degrees, that the true beginning cannot be difccrncd ; i. by others ; 2 no nor theml'elvcs. For I. If you enquire after their fi;ft profefllon without confideration of its fincerity, then it was by degrees as their Parents taught it them, and likely almoft as foon as they could fpeak they would profefs what part thty had learnt; For Parents are commanded to teach them Gods Law from their chililhood, and that diligently, lying down, and ri- iing up, Dcut.6i6,7. & 1 1, and to teach them the trade of their life in the time of their youth, and to bring them up in the nurture and admoniton of the Lord, Ephcf. 6. And godly Parenrs do makcconfcicnce cf this duty ; [lierefore accordingto this Rule they ftiould be baptized almoft as Toon as they can fpcak i but when the time rightly is,. no man could be certain.
But 1 con jedurc that this is noneofAfA Ts. meaning to take their firft profefllon, ifit could be known J 1. becaufe he pleads for adult Baptifm, as folemnly engaging and awing the Confciencej But if he baptize them wlrhin divers years of their firft profcinon.it wil leave no great aw upon the confcienccs of moft children/.or fo ftrong- iy engage, in all likelihood. a. Bccau|[e he requires that the profeflion be fober, fcrious, undecfianding, &c.
" '' ' ^ " ihere-
Infarcts Chare h- member /hip and B aptifm» 1 2 (^
therefore fare he will not take a bare profeflion without thefe qualifications ; And yet I am utterly uncertain of his meaning. For fonaetime he fcemeth earncftly to difclaim an enquirJe after the fincerity of thofe that he would baprite j but he will be content with their proftflion. "But is not a fearch after the finccrity of their profelTion a featch- ing after the (incerity otthe pcrfon ? If his profeffion befincerc,he is fincere j for it h fmcere. becaufc he fincercly makes it. And therefore if Mr. T. will have a fincere pro- feflion before he will baptize, fui ely he will have fitft a fincere profeffour. Now what is an undcrftanding, fe: iuus profeflion^but a fincere profeflion ? fuppofing the matter profeffed to be extenfively fuflicicnt. If a man profefs all the Fundamental Articles of the Faith, and his Will ingnefs to receive Chrift for his Lord and Saviour, and to tiuft and obey him, and do this undciftandlngly and feriouflyj I think it is paft doubt that he doth it fincerely. If I ask a man , Whether he thus believe, and thus conlent j and whether he will ftand to this Covenant to the end of his life, and con- tinue Chrifts faithful fcrvant andfouldicr ? and he ferloufly and undcrftandingly fay that he will, I think he is uiid< ubtedly fincere. For as it is prerequifitc to the (incerity of his profeflion, that it be fober free, underftanding j fo in the fericufnefs I think lies all, or much of the very fincerity. Now if the fincerity be it that is looked after, who knowetb what day or year the child began to be fincere in his profeflion 3 Or, what Chriftian ( not one of many ) knowcth it themfelves ? For my own part< I aver it from my heart, that 1 neither know the day, nor year when I began to be fincere, (no nor the time when I begun to profefs my fdf a Chriftian;^ How then (hould others know it ? And when Mr. T. Wduld have baptized me, I cannot tell. And as large experience as I hive had in my MinilHy of the ftate of fouls, and the •ray of converfion, I dare fay, I have met not with one of very many , that would fay that they knew the time when they were converted ; And of thofe that would f.iy fo, by rcafon that they then felt fo me more remarkable change, yet they difcovcred fuch flirrings and workings before, that many I had caufetoth^nk were themfelves miftaken. And that I may not tell men only of my own experience , and thofe of my acquaintance ; I was once in a meeting of very many Chrlftians moft eminent for zeal and holinefs of moft in the Land,of whom divers were Minifters, ( and fome at thi« day as famous,and as much followed as any I know in E»glar}d)^nd it was there defired that every one (honld give in the raannet of their converfion, that it might be obferred what was Gods ordinary way : And there was but one that I remember of them all, that could coajcSute at the time of their firft converfion ; but all gave In, that it was by degrees,»nd in long time. Now when would Mr, T. have baptized any of thefe ?
But ifby/?/vc«y};f,'>, he mean any thing befide fincerity ; as I would know what i: is, fo I doubt not but it will be uncertain too, as well as fincerity. If he mean a fcemii.'gCc^-'joufncfs. (as I conjedurc he doth) then it is all one with tfecwivg fincerity: AnJ even this fccmirtg underftanding and ferioufnefs comes in children by long and infenfible degrees: It may beat four years old or fooner, there may be fome little fccmingoffcrioufncfsand underftanding J and at five years old alittltmore; and at fix yet mote. But when it will feem to be ferious to the fatisfaftion of the Church, who knoweth ? Chrift himfelf increafed in wifdome and knowledge : but when he was at that degree as SMr- T. would have admitted him into the Church, who could tdl ?
So that to me it is quite beyond doubt , that neither the time of childfens firft profeflion, nor of their feeming ferioufnefs or fincerity can be known by others, nor ufually by ihcmfelveSj nonotthemomthoryear, or perhaps in many years ; And
S their
130
Pldi^i Serf pure proof of
their real finccrity can never be known to others at all by ordinary means ; So that this praSice therefore of bapriiingChnftiins children that are born and bred In the Ckurch, atycers of difcretion, is Hrttrly inconfiftcnt with the Rule of Chrilt j thac would hiV'. all baptized ar their fi.li difcip'ing.
Eut now wi.h I'agans and Intidcls, and their children, it is far oifccrwifc. When the Apoftlcs went to preach aoicng them, it was ealie to know when they begun their pro- fcflion, who had been enemies, or no profcfTors before.
CHAP. IX.
Third Argument drawn from what is already here laid downj is this. Ihat pradice which goes upon meer uncertainty, and hath no Scripture Rule to guide it^ is Hot according to the will ofChrift. But the praftice of baptizing the children of Chri- ftiansatage, goes upon meer uncertainties^ and hath no Rule in Scripture to guide it / therefore h is not according to the will ofChrift. •The Minor only is queftionable j ( for the Major cannot, fuppofing that it fpeaks not of things meerly indifFarent or Civil , but of matters in Religion and that neceflary to be known, as no doubt this will not be dcnyed by them that contend fo much about it j ) and the Minor is clear from what is faid already under the laft Argument, of the uncertainty of the time of Chrlftiansfirft being Di- fciples, if they be not fo in Infancic.
|
M |
T^^T^^^^ |
||
|
G^ |
^E^^W |
||
|
^ |
mi^mS |
||
|
^ |
\- '^NXoteJ |
||
|
it |
M^y^\ |
||
|
*>/W. |
^^ |
C H A P. X.
Fourth Argument from thefamc ground,5s this. This pra- aice which will neceffarily fill the Church with perpetual contentions, ( as Being about a matter that cannot be de- termined by any known Rule) is not according to the mind., of Chrift : But the pradicc of baptizing Chriftians chil- dren at age upon their profeflion, is fuch a» will neceffarily fill the Church with perpetual contentions ', therefore it is- not according to the mind of Chrift.
I hope none will be fo vain as to objcd , that the Gofpel occafioneth contentions, and yet Is ofChrift. For, i. It doth but occafion them, and not ncctffarily caufe them. i. It is againft its own nature, through mans peiverfnels ; fern this doth it naturally. 3. And the contentions that the Gofptl occafioneth, is 6e- tma^ ihc,$e€d of she woman and of the Serpent, between the godly and wicked j but ^ tW5'
Infants Church-memberfhip and Baptifm. 131
this will neccffarily produce it among the Churches, and beft Miniftcrs and Chiiftl- ans. And that is proved from the uncertainty of the time of <^hildrens firft beinc DifcipIeSj whichi have proved before. For Mr. T. faith, the profeflion muft bt iint.er- ftanding , and ferious .* And how fhall it poflibly fee known, or when wiil ever the Churches or Minifters agree upon it , when this anderftanding or fecming ferloufnefs I5 arrived at that degree which muft fatisfie ? or when it is begun fo, that they may no longer delay. Fo-r my own part, I make no doubt, but that it Mi.T\ had his will, and none fliould be baptized but upon ferious profeflion, it would be th([ greateft firebrand of contention In the Church, (to be fatisfied when this profeflion (honld be talccn, and when not,) that ever the Church yet endured ; while the Parents would have their Children baptized fooner, and perhaps the Minifter would flay longer, and one Mini- fter in the Church will be for one time, and another for another time. All the conten' tions about admitting to the Lords Supper, in likelihood would be nothing to this j for there we have a certain Rale to guide us, that All Church-members are to be ad- mitted, except there be juft caufe brought againft theni for to fufpend them while they are under trial.
Moreover, it is evident that it would either turn all into confufion , and make Baptifm contemptible and ufelefs ; or elfe put the greateft power and opportunity for Lordlinefs and Tyrannic into the hands of the Miniftery , that ever did any Do. ftrine in the Church. For either private men mu(i baptize, and be Judge who fliall ba bapti28d,and who notj or elfe Minifters only muft judge and baptize. CMr.T. thinks that they that convert may baptize, whether Minifters or not ; And if To , then where will be the folcmn engagement and awfulncfs of Baptifm* where will be the purity of the Church ? When every man may baptize, no doubt every man that will may be baptized j whether he be an underftanding ferious Profefl"or,or not -, whether he come inearneft orinjeftj whether he come to fubjeft himfelfro Chrift, or to fcorn him. For it will ceftainly be, (as it is now among fome lawlefs Curats in marrying people) every man that will give them iij, may be baptized; and if one will not, an- other will. And many, no doubt, would bapt.Zas many as they could, whether fit or unfit, that they might boaft of the number of their Converts. And would not this be a fearful Reformation , and a doleful ftace for any Chriftian to fee the Church in ?
But if any be in this more judicious and modci ate then Mr. T. and would have none baptize, and judge who fliould be bn.ptizjd, but Miniftcrs j then fee wbar power they put into Minifters hands, even to judge all pcrfens , Noble and Ignoble, Princes or People, whether they Ihall be taken in ar.iong Chrift ians, or not ? and whither they (liall be admitted inro the Church ? or when.? how long thfy fliall be Jkcpt out ? So thnt if the Miniftcrs be not fatisfied and pleafed, neither Prince nor Fcsplc fliall be Chriftians. Did ever any Pope at Roif,e claim fo great a power as this.? The power of F.xcommunication is notliing fo gieat. And yet thefcmcncry down the afpiring and ufuipation of Miniftcrs ; when they would have every Mini- fter, if not every man, to have a power incotnp3ra6!y greater then any Orthodox Minifter doth dcfire. We muft all then ftocp and couch to Minifttis, and give them wl'at they would hive, left wc fliould be no Chriftians^ nor be baptized, if the fable of Fuignory drew fo much Lands and Revenues to the Clergy, how much mo:e would this be like to do it i" What would net dying men give, that ihcy might be
S 2 Chriltlans,
Ui
PUi» Scripture proof cf
Chriftbns, and be baptizcii and admitted into the Church before they go out of the Wo: Id - and how would baptizing Pritfts quickly Jeatn to delay and tefcrre their Pa- tients for fuch an ncivan:a(;e i --
If any lliall f^y, 1 hjt this all mskes as muchagalr.ft the blptlzing of Pagans when convtrttd,at a^c, bccaulc there the Bajrixcr is judge of his profcffion ; I anivrcr j No fuch maitor. Fir where thcie is no doubr, drfiiculty, or controvcrfie, there needs no Judge to decide it. I have fully proved before, that thrifts Rule is, that at their firft profcfliiig thcmklves Difciplcs, and dcliring Baptifm, ihty are lo be baptised; and that is caiily known. If they fliould apparcn:ly do it infcorn, it were eafily difcerned. It is ealily kno»*n to all, and can be no conrroverfie i when a man begins to profefs himfeif a Difciple>that was before a Pagan. But when one is born in the bofom of the Church, and brought up in the profeflion of Chriftianity, and fo ccmes to ic by in- fenfible degrees J and alfo when the Bapti/er muft try and be Judge when ic comes to fuch a degree as fliall be accounted ferious and underttanding,then the cafe is far other- wife. Then Minifters would be indeed as men iKa: carried the Keyes of Heaven and Hell under their ?,trdles.
CHAP. XL
Avlng given you thefc Arguments agalnft the prafiiceof their Bapt'ilm.let mc give you the fifth Argument againft their ground of this pradice. The great Argument that Mr. 7. produceth, and nioft others, \%ixon\ Mat. 28. 19^20. From whence they would infer^ that Chrifi hath taken down Infant Church-mem- bttdiip, and now ordained that none Ihall be baptized, or ad- mitted vifible Church.mcmbers , but thofe that are firft made Difciplcs according to the fenfe of that Text : And withall they deny, that any according to that Text are made Difciples , but thofe that arc t.night j ( whereas the truth is ^ that indircdly and remotely the Difr ipling of the Parent is a Difciplingofhis ^eed.alfo.") Now according to the fenfe of that Text which they urge, this teaching mufi be by Minifters only, whom Ch Ift fendeth to preach th: Gofpel. ForChrift there fcndeth forth his Apoftles, not as private men, but as Minifters^ to preach and baptize: and fo it is only thofe that are made Dilciples by Minifterial teach- ing diredly (according to thetii) that fliould be by this Rule baptiatf d j and in a well ordered godly Church , that would be either few, or none. From whence I argue thus j That Dodrine which would turn the Ordinance of Baptifm out of the Churches of the $aints(or neer turn itout^ is contrary to the Dodrine of Chtift : But this Dodrine of thci:s(that only thofe fliould be baptized that arc diredly made Difciplcs by the preach- ing of men fcnt according to that Text) would turn Bap:ifm(for the moft pa: t}out of the Churches of the Saints : Therefore it is contrary to the Dodrine of Chrift.
The Minor only requires proof j and that I prove thus. If God have appointed an- other primary more ordinary way of Difcipling the children of the godly, then Minifte- rial Preaching • then thofe that would baptize none but thofe that are Difciplcd by Mi- niftctial Teaching, would exclude many (if no: moft) of the Difciples who are children of the godly :Bu^ the Antecedent is truc(that God hath appointed another primary mere c-t;dinary way of making Difciples of thp children of tb? godly .' ) Thercfore.&c. •
Infants Church ^ merKletJhip and B aptifrj, 1 3 j
Bv-fides that I have ptovcd :hat the Covenant makes them Difciples from their firft Infancie j I now prove that even in fT^r.T. s fenfe,3s a Difciple is taken for a Profeiror of Chriftlanity. God hath appointed other means toeffeft it in fuch j And that is the teaching of the Mother and Father by godly education. The Mother is mcft with them, and therefore the chief Teacher at firii. i hey that teach them to fpeakjmuft teach them to be Chriftians. That this is GoiJs firft ordinary means of bringing the Chililrea of Believers to aftual Faith and Profcflion , I prove, i. Erom Scripture, "z. And txperience.
1. God coramandeth the ufe of this means to all Parents, that they teach them the Law of God, and trade of their life, and bring tJiem up in the admonition and nurture of the Lordjfrcm their childhood. So that this is the firft means for Adual Faith, that God hath appointed. Now God will appoint no means to be ufed, from which he will ordinarily withdraw his £race, or deny his bleflingjif it be ufed aright. Certainly , if godly Education be as well his Ordinance as Miniftcrial or publike Preaching, and go before it , then may men exped Gods bUffing on their endeavours in (uch Edu- cationof their children, as well as on the publike Miniftery. God fets none tipon vain and fruitlefs works. [ How (lull thy L'clieve.xvithout a Picachcr .'] is fpoken of Jtws and other Infidels only. Certainly it was not women to Educate their children that Chrift fent, when he faid, Ga Difciple aE Nations, bapti'j^nig ihcm. For the fame that were fcnc to make Difciples, were fent to baptize : but women were not fent to baptise ; there- fore it is not women that are there fent to make Difciples. And yet womens teaching, their children, muft go before the publike or other Minifterial Teaching among thofc that are Chriftians.
2. And experience confirms it, that God doth frequently blefs this means before the publike Miniftery comes. Not to inftance in all thofe in Scripture,that were godly fromiheir childhood, andfom.e from their Mothers pirticularly j it is commonly fecn in our times, that moft (or at leaft many) of the Children of godly Parents, that arc truly fandified, did receive the beginnings of it in their youth. 1 he Affembly, that! told you before, that gave in their experience abotat the time aiyd manner of Gods working grace in them, did moft give in/h,it it began as they thought in ycuth or child* hood J and in very few by the Minifterial Teaching. And for my own part, I think,, that if I yet ever had true Adual Faith, it was by the b:ntht of Education, before ever I heard a Sermon ; For the time v^hcn the potential or habitual feed was infufed,God knows but I do not J So that according to thefe mens Doftrine,! and many thoufands more in the fame cafe Ihculd never hi baptized , becaufe wc were not fiift made Difci-- pies immediately by Teaching, according to the fenfe of that Text, ( which is Mini- fterial Teaching ) See Mr. T. Exocitat. p.z^.. I doubt not, but if Parents did faith- fully di {charge tbar duty to their ehiUnn^ that God ivhoj'it them awork^tvoidd blcfs it, and leave bin few to t^c fii{l ca?ivertcd by the M nific/y rvithra the Church : but the'chief ufe of that iTiould be to Gui^e and Govern the Church , and to build up the Difciples, and. to convert ihofe without,as it was in the Primitive Times,
GHAP
(.•
154
Plain Scripture prevf ef
CHAP. XII.
:Yfixth Argument (hill be agalnft the ufual mir.ner of their baptizing, as it is by dipping over head in a riycr or other cold water, i his is known to be the ordinary way of the Anabaptifts. M' T. refufed to difpute this publikely i but yet he hath publikely preached agalnft our pradicc under the name of [Sprinkling, ]and fince hath publikely preached for Dipping.
For my part, I may fay as Mr.B'al^c, that I never faw child fprinkled i but all that I have fcen baptized had water poured on themjand fo were walhed. Nowj againft their ordinary pradice of dipping In cold water^ as neceffary, I arguft thus :
That which is a plain breach of the fixth Commandment, Thou (hilt not l^ill, is no Ordinanccof God, buta moft hainous fin: But the ordinary praSlce of baptizing by dipping over head in cold water, as neceflary , is a plain breach of the fixtK Com- mandnaent : Therefore it is no Ordinance of God, but an hainous fin; And, as Mr^Cradoe^ in his Book of Gofpel- Liberty (hews, the Magiftrate ought to reftrain it, to fave the lives of his Subjefts ; even according to their principles that will yet allow the Magiftrate no power dircftly in matter of Wor(hlp. That this is flat murder, and no better , being ordinarily and generally ufed, is undeniabletoany undeiftanding man : For, that which direftly tendeth to overthrow mens lives, being wilfully ufed, is plain murder : Bat the ordinary or generall dipping of people overhead in the cold water^ doth tend dircdly to the overthrow of their health and lives j and th.rc* fore it is murder.
Here feveral anfwers arc made^fome vain, and fomc vile. i. Mr.T. faith, that many are appointed the ufe of bathing as a remedy againft difeafcs. To which I reply, I. Though he be no Phyfician, methinks his reafon Ihould tell him that it is no uni- vcrfal remedy. 2. Few ibifeafes have cold Baths appointed them. I have caufe to know a little more then every one in this ; and I dare fay, that in Cities like London, and a- mong Gentlewomen that have been tenderly brought up, and ancient ptople, and weak people, and fliop-kecpers, efpecially women that take but little of the cold air, the dip- ingthem in the cold weather, incold water, in the courfe of nature, would kill hun- dreds and thonfands of them, either fuddcnly, or by calling them into fonie chronical Difeafe. And I know nut what trick a covetous Landlord can find out to get his Te- nants to die apace, that he may have new Fines and Heriots,likeIicr then to encourage fuch Preachers, that he may get them all to turn Anabaptifts. I wilh that this device be not it that countenanceth thefe men.
And covetous Thyficians (me thinks) (hould not be much againft tl^em ; Catarrhes ^nd Obftruftions, which are the two great fountains of moft mortal Difeafes in mans body^ could fcarce have a more notabie means to produce them where they are not, or
to
Infants Church memberjhip ^nd Baptifm, i j 5
to Increafe them where they are; Apoplexies, Lethargies, Palfies, and all Comatous difcafes would be promored by it. S.> would Cephalalgies, Hemicranies, Fhthlfes^ debility of the fto-nack, Crudities and almcft all f-eavers, Dyfenrciies, Diarrhea's, Colicks, Iliak paflijns, ConvuKionsjSpafmes, Tremores,&c. Ail Hepatick, Sple- ncticki Pulinoniack pcrfons, and Hypocondriacks would foon have enough of it. In a word/ it is good for nothing but to difpatch men ouc of the world that are burdenfomj and to rankcn Church-yards,
But Mr. T> will fave all this ; for he faith. There is no neccffity that Jt be in cold water. To which I reply^ i. But then he forfaketh the generality of his Parrners in this opinion, fo far as we can learn, who ufually bapriie in Rivers or Ponds. And' if they can no better agree among themfelves , we have yet no reafon to be hafty in be lievingthem.
i. And his warm Bath would be alfo dangerous to very many perfons. 5. And where fhould this Bath be prepared ? If in private, it will fcarce be a folemn engaging aft. If in the meeting-place of the Church, then i.It will take no fmall room, and re- quire no fmall ftir to have a bathing place, and water wherein to dip people over head. i. And if they do not run home quickly before they arc well engaged , the hot Bath will be turned to a cold one to them, and make them repent this badge of repentance; except they will have ail things ready, and be brought to bed alfo in the Church befora the people.
i. And It will be long before Mr. T, will fliew out of his reading of Antiquities, what Church had fuch a bathing place in it. 4. But methinks they that call for ixri- pture for Infant-baptifm , fliould alfo bring Scripture for their bathing In warm water.
But fome fay, They may ftay till the heat of Summcr^when the water will be warm. To which I reply ; Where have you any Scripture for that ? I have proved before, . that thcconftant Rale and Example of Scripture is clean contrary, and requires that men be baptized when they are firft made Difciples, and not ftay till Summer.
Others fay, that Dipping was the cuftom in the Scripture- times. To which [ reply, i.Tt is not yet proved by any. The Jailor was baptized in the night in his Houfe; therc- foic not likely overhead, in that Country where water was fo fcarce. The Eunuch might well be faid to go down into the water j for the Country was mountainous , and ihe Brooks were down in the bottoms. Even the River ty£/;o;/, where J^/;« baptized, be- caufe thcrj was much water j is found by Travellers to be a fmall Brook that a man may almoft Itcp over. i. The word fignitieth to wa(li, as well as to dip j and fo is taken whenapplied to other things, as /rf.i/-,7-4,8j&c. 5. The thing (ignified is fet forth by the phrafe of walhing or fprinkling j and the fign need not exceed the thing fignified. See I Ce/-'6.ii.T/t 3.5. Hcb.io.iz.jfaA^-SJod 1.18 E'7:^il(.i6.i6.iPct.i.z.H(b.ii.i^. 4. If it were othcrwife, it would be proved but occafional, from a reafon proper to thofc hot Countries. $. Chrift hath not appointed the meafurc of water, nor the manner of wafhing, no more then he haih appointed in the Lords Supper wfeat quantity of J3 read and Wine each muft take. And as it would be but folly for any to think that men mufl needs fili themfelves full of Biead and Wine, bccaufc it beft fignifics the fulnefs of Chrift ; fo it is no better to fay, that we muil needs be vvadied all over, becaufe it beft fignifies ourburial with Ch iftj&c. C hrift told Fctcr^ that the walliing of his feet was enough to cleanfe all. A little may fi^nineas well as much; as a Clod of earth doth in giving poffcffion.of much Lands, and a Corn of pepper ligiifieth our homage for^ much, &C.
2 56
Pla^n Scripture ;rrflfof
But fomt iitipLiiLLiy conclujv, ihi: it ic be Oods way he will faveoui llves^ hov* probable foevcr the danj-cr miy i'ccm. I anfwer, i. But this is co beg the Qiieftion. Nay, I have (h. wed and JmHicwing, that it is not Grds way. God hath appointed no Ordinance c )ntradiftory to his great Metal ciramands. i. God muft not be tempted. This was 'he Devils trick, to have d:awn t-hiift^ under pretence of Scripture and of trurting God,tohavecailhirr.k'if into danger ot death, 5 So you might have faid to the Difciplcs, that if u were Gcds command to keep the Sabboih , then they need not rub the ears of corn ; for God couKl fuftam them without. 4 If it were a duty, yet when it is incondftent with a greater duty, it is nt that time a tin : For it is alwayes a fip to prefer a lefs duty before a greater: But tht. duty of icif prefervation Is a Moral natural duty 5 and baptizing is but I'cfuive, as Mr. Cradocli hath (hewed you j Efpe- c'v.lly the manncr,and quantity ot water in baptifm. lf)OH h-tJ Icarntdwhat ihu meansl J -ivill have Mercy, aninot Sacrifice, yc rvoutd not have condemned the luiUlefs , faid ci r Saviour to thcL m«n$ PredeccflorSjAfijr. 1 1 7. God hath not appointed Ordinances n his Church which will dtftroy them, except ihey be preferved by Miracles ; for then ic were a tying himfelf toa conftant working of Miracles, which he hath not done, except the Doftrineof Tranl'ubftantiation be true.
So that I conclude, If Murder be a fin, then dipping ordinarily in cold water over head, in England^ is a fin : And if thofe that would make it mens Religion to Murther themfdvcs, and urge it on their Confciences a» their duty, arc not to be fuffered in a Commonwealth any more then High-way Murderers; then judge how thcfe Ana- baptifts that teach the ncceflity of fuch dipping, are to be fuffered.
CHAP. XIII.
>Y fevcmfc Argument isalfo againft another wickednefs In their manner of baptizing ^ which is their dipping perfons nakedjas is very ufual with many of themj 01 next to naked, as is ufual with the modeikft that I have heard of. Agiinft which I argue thus : If it be a breach of the feventh Com- mandment, \_Tho:i (JjjU not commit adulte/y.^'] ordinarily to baptize the naked then it is intolerable wickednefs, and not Gods Ordinance : But it is a breach of the fcventh Com- mandment ordinarily to baptize naked ; Therefore it is in- tolerable wickedncT&,and not Gods Ordinance, All the Queftion ts of the Minor j which is evident thus. The fcventh Command- ment forbids all incitements to uncleannefs and all Immodeft aft ions : Buttobiptizc women naked is an immodcft aftion, and an incitement to uncleanncfs ; therefote ic is there forbidden.
To this Mr. T. made me this anfwer in conference ; That in former rimes it was thought no immodcfty. To which I reply ; i. Cuftom in fomc Countries, like BY.fi\ or other parts oi A men city where they ftill go naked, may make it feem no immcdelly there ; but among thofe that are not Savages, mcthinks it ihould.
2. If Mr. T. could baptize naked all the Maids in B'.ivd'yi and think it no immo-
defty^hc hach loft his common ingenuity and modefly with the Tiuih,
3-
U
Infants Charch-wemberjhif and Baptifm. 1 37
3. [s not every g,nod man fenfible of the deccitfulnefs and wickedn efs of his heart ? and that he needs all helps againft it ? and Is it not his daily bufinefs to watch over it? and his prayer and indeavour that he be not lead into temptation > And would it be no {nare or temptation to Mr. T. to be frequently imployed in baptizing Maids naked ? Let him fearch and judge. Mcthinks the very mention of it, could I avoid ir, isimmodcft.
1 1 there were no danger to the baptized, yet mcthinks M inifters fiiould have regard to themfclvcs. For both thefe laft Arguments make more againft the Minifter, then the people; For tlie former, it is evident, that if the Minifttr muft go into the water with the party, ( which is the ufc of moft that I have known of them ) it will certainly tend to his death, though they may fcape that go in but once. For weak Students to make a frequent pradicc of going into the water, will cure theit itch after novelties, and allay the heat of iheir intemperate zeal. And fo in this laft cafe, for a Minifter to be frequently imployed about the naked, will be as bad. And what it may be to all fort of SpedatorSj I will not ftand to exprefs.
Bcfides all this, it is likely to raife jeaioufjes In Miniftcrs VVIvcs^and othcrSjand fo M foment continual diffentionj.
And it will (upon the very probability that it fhould prove a fnarc) no doubt bring aconftant fcandal upon the Miniftiy, and make the people look upon them but as fo many vile incontinent men. If Auricular Confeflion brought that infamy, no wonder if ordinary naked baptizing do it.
Furthermore, It would certainly debauch the people, and bereave them generally of their common modcfty J If it once grew into acuftom to behold each others nakcdnefs, chey would quxkly be like the Indian Savages in this. And fure that pradice is not ot God, which fo direfily tends to bereave men of all common civili'.y,mGdeftyjingenuityi and humanity^
Moicover, Thatprafticc isnotof God, which would turn Gedsworflilp into con- tempt, and make it meerly ridiculous ; But this pradicc would certainly brings Gods worihip into contempt , and make it meerly ridiculous ; Therefore it is not of God. Would not rain young men come to a baptizing to fee the nakedncfs of Maids, and make a meer jcft and Iport of it ? And where then will be the reverence and folemnity of Worftip ?
Moi cover, that pradicc which would bring a general reproach upon the Chriftian Profeffion among all the Enemies of it, and that upon fo probable grounds, is certainly not of God ; But undoubtedly the pradice of baptizing naked would bring a general reproach upon the Chriftian Profeffion among all the Enemies of it j yea among the woft fober and difcrcetjand fo would keep men in their Infidelity ,and hinder the pro- pagation of Chrlfts Kingdom, and theconverfion andfalvationot millions of fouls: For what hinders this more then prejudice, and the difcredit of the truth ? When Chri- ftians have once the repute through the World, as Ad.>mtcs have with us, who will turn Chriftian ? I think there is but few fober men among Chriftians whoa'-c not fo far offended with this praftice, that they would be loth to take a woman to Wife that bath the lajpudency to fhew her felf naked to an Aflembly, and would efteem ic next taking o.« from the Stews.
If they (hall fay to all this, is Afr. T. did in his Sermon, That it is not neceflary that they be naked : I reply: r. If they be next to naked, yet the dificrence Is not great , and the former inconvenience would in great meafurc follow : And I leave it to any fober Chriftian to judge, whether it be likely God will be pleafed with fuch Worfhip , when he would not have men among rhe jeVrs go up on his Altar by
138
Plain Scripture preof cf
fteps, left their nakedncfs (houlJ be difcovcred thereon. Exod.to. and when Cham was curled forbchololng his Fathers nakcdnefSjand not covering it without beholding? and when Ch'ili tcllcth us. that he hath committed Adultery that looketh on a woman to luftaftcrher> And D.:r'ijenmpic will tell you, that looking on them naked is an incitement to !uft;and when theScripturcs even forbid all fiithinefs^and foolirti talking, and j-fling.aj things not comtly^and faidijCha: the very naming of uncleanncfs becom- eth not Saints, as Ephef.^,1.^,^.
2. Thofethit would hive them covered whoUy or moQly when they are dipped, do difF-r from thtir brethren and Partners herein ; whole argum^n-s to the contrary I leave them to anfwer ; and when they are agreed bctrer among themfclves how to bap' tize^then let them try their ft.ength wiih others. 3.T0 d^p them cloatKcd,will overthrow their own Argument for the nectfiity of w.ifliing the whole body : for this will be no wadi ng^ but a foaking or fteeping, (If they ftay in long enough.) It may wa(h the gar- ment, but the body will be but infufed m likelihood.
And fo I leave the mention of this unfavory practice , which were it not necefla: y to confute. Ilhouldnothave medled with. But In both thefc laft Cafes, wedifpute not againft bare words , but experiences and known pradiccs. For theJr naked bap- tizing is a known thing, and the wickednefs that hath followed on fome , and that fome have dyed on it ; and 1 would have others be more wifcjand efcape both danger?. Only let me fay this much more, that it is very fufpitious, and to me unfavoiy that Mr.T, fii^uldfay nomore, but, That it isnot iVcVf//!»>7 that they be baptized naked, and in cold water j as if he took it to be lawful, though not nectflary. Methlnks he flKuld rather have given his tcftimony againft it as finfull^ and exDrefled fomt diflikc, if he do indeed iiflikc and judge itfinfull j and if he donot,l dare boldly fay he is very fap gone.
CHAP. XIV.
iHe laft Argument that I nil ufe, is this : That party and practice w^iich hath been ftill branded and purfued by Gods eminent judgements, but never evidently with his blefling, (incc the firft known appearance of it, is not likely to be of God; But the Anabaptifts party andpiaitice is fuch 5 Therefore not likely to be of God. The ^ii^or only requires proof, which 1 fhall (liew to be true in thcfe pnrti. culars. 1. It ha h never helped on, but hindered the work of God where it comes ; Nor hath God ordinarily blefled the Miniftry of the Anabaptifts to thctruc converfion of fouls, as he hath done other mens; but rather they have been liUlrumcnts of the Churches fcandil and mifery. z. Anabaptiftry hath been the ordinary inlet to moft other vile Opinions j and few ftop at it , but go much further. 5. God hath ufually givenupihefccietiesof Anabaptifts to notoricus fcaadalous wicked [converfations, more then others that profefs godliucfs. 4. And God hath ftill purfued them with
luinating
Infants Church- memberfhif and Baptifm, 139
ruinating Judgments, and never profpcred them fo far as to have any eftabllllicil Churches which (liould credit the Gcfpel. So that ( as Mr Rom faith, In Oyle of Uorp. of our <^oing towards RomCj(o) I may fay of drawing towards Anabaptiftry, that it is to run from God-preferving to God-deftroying.
Whereas Mr.T. would have the world believe, that the primitive Fathers were agalnft Infant. baptifm, the comtary is fully proved, as I (hall briefly Oiew you anon, in the mean time let any find out any fociety of men that were againft Infant.baptifm in any currant Hiftory , that were not branded with all or moft of the forefaid Judgments of God. I know fomc falfly infinuatc , that the Alb/gcf?fes and H'aldttifcs were againft Infant baptifm j which Idiallalfo fpeak of anon.
1. What a hinderancc the AnabaptiRs were to the Gofpel in Germany^ by refilling the moft painful godly Minifters. and reproaching and vilifying them, by their wicked lives, by their hardening the Pjpifts, and fcandalizing the Ignorant, and hindering the converfion of multitiides that begun to have fome liking to the Gofpel , is too evi. dent in the moft of the Writers of thofe times , there being few Divines of note who do not bear witncfs of it frequently in their writings j as Luther, MeLvin/mi, llle- r'lcuii Ziir.gliKf i BuHinier ^ Leo Jud> Calvin, with multitudes more. How they hindered the Gofpel at Limbuige againft Jnm.n , you may read in his life : How they h\nAtitd'K3X Aufpurge 3 and what ftirs and oppofition they made againft Zlibanm, Regiui, and Mufculia afterward, and other Minifters, is to be fcen, as in the Hiftory cfthc lives ofthefaid Divines, fo In many others. Skidms relation of their carriage Is well known : And how they have helped on the Gofpel wherccver they have fincc been entertained, as inthc Lorv-Coww/rw, or anywhere elfe, is commonly known, Thofe few that formerly were in EngUnd j we know did more againft it then for it.
Leo^iida faith of them in his time (in his Epiftle before BuU'mgcrs Dialogue againft them) that although the Herefie of the Catabaptifts was divided into many and divers Seds, yet in this they all unanimoufly agree, that they make work (or difturbancc) for the Preachers of Truth, and may render them to their Auditors fufpcfted as Seducers. And again he faith ; For where- ever Chrift comes, there the Catabaptifts arepre- fently at hand, that they laywafteand cut in pecces the new born and happily in- ftitutcd Churches. So doth the Devil fend boars into the cleer fountains, that they may trouble rhe watetjand infed it with their dirt- At Santgd what ftirs they raifcd.is men • tloned by many. Mdch.Ad'xmusCin v':tis German. Mcdicor in vita f^adtamj fai'h, 1 hat when that excellent, learnedjand godly m'xnV.idjnui was Conful, though be doit not with them by puniAiments, nor by his Authority as Magiftrate, but by Argumenc and Scripture •, yet the Anabaptifts, an unquiet kind of men, did w<:-;iderfully perciub that Church by their contenticn;, and by an unheard of madnefs did raife very much Trou- ble or bulim f$ to the Magiihacie, and to the good Conftil .• And that in that Conflid - Vadianui fir ft knew what Herefie was j though out of old Hiftory he knew the word [Hcrefic] before.
In the life oizii'rr.gfiHS., the fame MiUb./}d.mus, in v't's Thcolog. German, faiih thus : In he mean time, as the Devil alway ufcth to fow his tares , the Herefie of the Cata.baptiftj crept i;-i, (while Zninn^iin was carrying on the work of Reformatio n.) At firft, they forbad the bap- izing of Infant?, and rebaptizcd themfelvcs. After- wards they brought in a puddle of all the Herefics that ever were. Ac firft Zu'-ng'ius dealt with them familiarly , becaufe the Authors wcie both h!i friends, and learueJ, and citizens, and his flock j till they begun to do notiiing but lye, and gather to- gether Difciples^and to feparate from the Church, and to inilicuce a new Church; then
T i Ic
140 Plain Scripture proof of
he was conftralned to refift them with all his ftrength, and had publick difputatlons with ihem, in which being conviiS- of trrors, they foamed againft ihcir Antagonifts with biafphcmics and reproaches : At laft the Senate was fain to deal with them with banilhments, prifon,and dca-h ; not now asa'^ainft Anabaptifts, but ns againft men perjiucd, difobedientandlcdjcious. 1 he head of them was E.f/,7;.i^r>- Hiihmer^Vi\\o was an Apofta e again and again j who being delivered by the benefit of Z'</V^//«4jretU!ncd tk:\t 'hank'; which fhc world ufcth to do. For the knave did not ftick to load the man (that had fo well dcTervcd of him) with fo great reproaches, that he was fain to fatific the b:fihren by an Apology.
When poor Mufculu* was put to fliift for htmfelf,and labour for his liyfnCjhc bound himfelf to an Anabaptift Weaver^who kept a I cacher in his houfij but when Mufcutui would not fiy as thiy, but reprehended the hypocrifie and floth of the fa id Teacher, his Anabaptift Maftcrput him away, quite contrary to Covenant, and left poor Muf. cuius in fuch a ftrait, ihn he knew not what to take to, but was fain 10 hire himfelf tp dig in the Town-ditch, accufing the Anabaptiltical perfidioufnifs, and complainine that he was thus thrufl out contrary to promilV.
Alas poor 5W«/<-«/«d .' But God had provided better things for thee then to be an Anabaptift's Journey- man, or Apprentice, When the fime i»/«/frt/«i was Minifter at Aiignfl.i, and the Anabaptifts had brought thnt Church in'O a troubled and afflidcd ftate (faith the HiRorian) by their fuiy \ who as they ufe to inlinuatc themfelvcs every where like Serpents into the tender (new planted) Churches, fo they had a'.fo crept into that, and in it had both feduced many, and dealt very impudently and railily. For now they taught not privately, but openly; andfofar went the audacicufncfs of fomc of them, that they entered the Temple at the hour the people were wont to meet to hear Gods wordi and went up into the Pulpit, and publickiy proftffLd their errors. And when rhcMagiftrate, to heal the tumult ar)d fcdition, had imprifoned fome, and fome would have had them put to death, yet Mufculm alTwaged the Mjgiftrates rigor, and told them, that was not the way to reduce the erring j and himfelf wen: daily to the pri- fon to vifit them, never fpeaking a word to them of Religion bringing them relief, and fpeaklng kindly to them; yet did rhefe Anabaptiftsfet upon him with reproaches when he came to relieve and vi(it them, calling him the progeny of Vipers, and a falfc Pfophct, that nourifhed a Wolf uniier Ihceps cloathing, and that fought their h\ooA &c. :ill by long patience, and bounty, andkindncfs toward them he had won ih.ir aff^fti- ons, and then they dtfired conference with him, and did patiently hear him ; and one after another forfake their errors; whereof one of them became a Miniftcr j And fo by iheconvidionof thcfcmen, the Church was afterward at more peace from the Anabap- tiftick fury, faith Mckb. Aclamui in vita Mufculi.
Which I the fuliier relate, becaufe Mr.T. boaltcth fomuchof ^«/f«/«j his expo {itl- cnof I Co>-7.i4 that the ffmple people arc ready to think that he bath at Icalt one (obec, godly, learned Divine on his fide.
cWw« hath wrote a treatiCe igalnfl them, which he faith in his Dedication, he did for this reafon , to admor^ifl) all godly men that were not well experienced herein, how mortall a poifon the opihicn of the Catabaptifts is. He begins his Ti eatife thus,; If I would write againft all the errors and falfc opinions of the Anab.iptifts, 1 fii u^d undeitakea long work, and (liould enter into a deep, from whence I llvjuld have no paflage our. For this puddle )ioth herein differ from all other Seds of Hereticks, that they donot only crre infeveral\hings , but arc as it were a valt Sea of ilu[eiidious dotages j fo that ihere can fcar^re be found the head of one Anab.iprift which is not ppffcffcd with fomc opinion diflerem from the reft. Therefore ihere wauld be no end
«f
^ ,
InJAnts church member Jhi^ and B aptifm, ^ 1 41
of my work, if I (hould difcuffe, yea, or but rehearfe all the wicked Doftrines of this Sea, &c So he goes on, and (hews thac they were then divided, efpecially into two St&s. One niore moderate and fimple, that did boaft of Scripture, and plead Scrip- ture with great confi knee for all they held ( which was fiift. that Infants were not to be baptized i. That there fliouU be flrider and popular difcipline In every Church, and the wicked more fcparated from Sacrament and Communion , Sec. ) The other fort were calkd Libertines, who pretend to be fo fpirituall, as to be above Scripture, and had a myftlcal ambiguous way offpeiking.properto themfelves_,confounding good and b.id, G jd and Satan, and dirkning all things, &c. Againft the former and better fort, hefhews the vanicy of their b^aftingof Scripture, and anfwers their arguments ; and among other things to the point in hand, he hath thefe words j The Divel him- felf was armed with the word of God, and girded himfelf with that fword, that he might invade Chrift ; and we have experience, that he daily ufeth this arc by his In- AiumentSj that he may deprave the truth, and fo lead poor fouls to dcfiruaion. As for thofe miftfrable fanatick perfons, thar fo boaft that the word of God is for them, whether that be I'l^, the matter it felf Iheweth plainly. We have been endeavouring this longtime by our daily labours to reftorc the holy word of God ; for which caufe wc bear the oppofitlon of all the world. But how much have thefe men proniored it?or whac help have they afforded us ? Thty have toubled us rather, and vehemently hindred us. So that how they hare prevailed C againft the work ^ cannot be txpnlfcd ■ but thus^ that how much the word of God was by us promoted, or helped on, io much was it by thcfc men retarded.. aiid fo went backward, &c.
If i (hf^uld heap up all the Tcftiraonies that fuch unqueftionab'c witneffes do give us of the Anabaptiljs carriage and maners, I Ihould fill a larger Volume then 1 intend, or am able for j I will therefore add but one more,and that is a witntfs /'as all the rell) for learning godlincfsjand faithfulnefs in his report beyond exception, even H.BuUin, jcr in his Dialogue againft the Anabaptifts.'
He begins his book with a lamentation at Gods Judgements on Chriftians for their not profiting by the word , for which God givf s them up to follow novelties, as if they were given over to a reprobate fcnfc, and all kind of filthinefs and difgrace, the common people being fo blinded , as not to fee how gicat calamities follow , where once the Anabaptifts fetfoo'- A;id when fome were fo blind that they faw no harm in them, as if they were an innocent, z alous, godly people, ( no wonder if fome will deny their wlckedncfs , now fo lor.g after, when the pirtiali did not difcern k then ) £;////?.'^f>- undertakes to (luw what a wicked people they were, from particular Inftances. iu thcfc words. [I will (laiih he) make all .his manifeft to you. This Scdt kath wholly Icbvcrted /;'/j('«^/ib/^/ (where Hitbmer \*n i eacher) they bnnidvrd rainy of the (_ itixens that weregood inenand li Kcrc , and diove them from their poffiflions ( this was their libeity of confcience ) by which means the Gofpel, which did there ex/- cellcn:ly riourilh , was utterly rooted out. ('i his is the fuccefs of their labours. ) The very fame they wanted bu: a little oi dv;ing at n'ofma. A: /trij^iefiayBa/jl^ind in Mnra- V!a, there Wvire An.abapt!ft> that afli'med thrift was (but) a Prophet, and affirmed that the divels aa,l wicked men llnuld be faved. ( J his Is theprogrefs of their Doft;ine.) At Scag'l one cut offhii brothers head, as hcfaid, at his fathers command. \Vhac filthinefs they commit under pretence of /piiituall mairJage , thofe Towns and Cities can teftifie who hav^ often iharply puriiiheo them for thefe wickedncffcs. And this no man can deny, that moft of them do foi fake their wives and children, and laji- ! [? bv all labor^do live idly,and are fe<i by other mens labors j And when they abound with filthy and abominable luft, ihcy fa.y it is the command of their heavenly Father
T i pec?
14* Plai;t Scripture prcofff
perfwadlng women and honcft Matrons, thit it 1$ Impoffiblctficyfhould be partakers of the Kingdom of heaven, unlefs they filthily proftltuteth.i- bodies, alltdgmg that lt4j Trrittcn,that we muft renounce all thofe thin-^s which we love bett,and that all kinds of infamy arc to be fwallowcd by the godly for Chi iih fake, and thit Publicans and Harlots go fiflHnto the Kingdom of heaven. Cfthe 1 rcachery, Lying, and Sedition wherewith thtfe difobcdicnt people do everywhere abound, there is no end or meafurc. And I pray, arc thefe ('and more which in prudence I filence,' thcl vcrtues ? Do you yec think that they dcfign nothing (iiihcneU ? Or can you deny then uth of thcfc things ? Objcd.Suu many things are charged on them falfl^,3nd fame addcth fomewhat. A/ii'iv. What things hare hitherto been m<n:loned, may be all proved by (jgned Lettcis, and by certain Teftlmonies. for my part, I have in prudence filonctd their crimes, and fpokc lefs then they have committed j fo much the more do-.h ic grieve ic me, that men are To blind, that they do no: obfervc thefe things, or hy thc:m to heart > Yc.i, that a great part of men do embrace and follow thefe erroneous men even as though they came down from Heaven, and were. Saints among mo tik, who preached no'hing but whai- is Divine and Heavenly, whereas they far exceed the N/chul.i/t:i>is -itxd yalcntmarts'xa. fiKhincfs. 0&/ffl, I havener found thefe things fo J nor do I ;hink that all are thus de- filed. And if a few among them are fuch, what Is that to .hego<11yt Thtrcwas one jitdiJi among the ApoiUes^ ice. And they teach fo excellently of God, and avoiding fin. that I cannot conceive they are fo bad Wh.nchcy are apprehendid they praile God, and give thankcs ; when they are fliin, they conftamly endure it, and gladly and cheerfully undei go death; This you cannot deny j and therefore I would you had heard them as i have done. Anf. Perhaps I (liould have little to fay againft you, unlefs I had long ago throughlyly known this kind of men. But I am not ignorant how much by guile and deceit, Hypocrifie can do. As to your anfwcr j it is trtic, that the wick- ednefs of a few fhculd be no difparagement to the Innocent J but you have not yet pro- ved the Anabapcitts caufe to be juft and good Nor can youjheiv mc one mm ofthemy vfbo unotblemijijcdvp'ithl'omeoftheforefaidrvicliedne\[cs\ I meafjy Lying^Treachery, Pcrjuryf Bifokdience, ScdUignyldlcnefsy Defertion {oi then y/hes) FiUhincfs. Of thcfc, although all have not all of them, yet every one hath fome ; in the mean time, I fay nothing of their Hereiic and Sefts, their pertinacy and falfe erroneous Doftrinc, And for that which tiiey fpeak rightl v, it is bat the fame that we fay.
Thus Builtftgcf^oes on in his teftimony of them, which I may no: be larger In tran- fcribing. It is not againft their Dodirlne that 1 bi Ing thefe Teftimonies j for that would be but to allcdge one mans judgement againft another. I'ut It is concerning their qua- lities and behaviour, and open wickednefs ; in which cafc(belng about matter of fad) if fo many learned, holy Divmes, who broke the Ice in thevvoik of Reformation, anddidand fuftered fo much toaccomplifli It, and lived in the countries and times where and when thefe things were aftcd ; I fay if thcfc be not to be taken for cre- dible witneftes, 1 know not what Humane Teftimony fcarcc may be credited, and whether all Hiftory benottiKerly vain. And I doubt not that Mr, T. knows, that Peter M-irlyry Z.imhitu, Dana»i, Farellus, Ber^j', Chrmitius, Toffunuiy Gry- na»s, Bucer, Chryt*niSy Arct'ius, Hcmmingiui , Ccnhard , with multitudes n.orc, doall give the like teftimony of the Anabaptifts, giving them commonly the titles of furies, Fanatlcks, Perjured, Filthy, Tumultuous, Seditious, &c. And the'bulinefs of M under I need not relate i Slcidun, Spanhcmifs, and lately Mr. Baily and others have faid enough of it.
$0 that by thii you may eafily perceive how God hath followed them with his judge- ments abroad In all the four foroientioned lefpeds.
I. How
Infants Church-membefjhif andBaptifm. 14^
I. How they have been fo far f''om being prnfperous inthe Miniftry , and fur- therersofihe Gofpel , that they have been the great Icandalj and hindercrs of its fuc- cefs-
2. And that they fcldom flopped at the denyal of Infant-baptifm, but have procee- ded further to the vileft opinions J and feldom any came to notorious Herefies but by this dore.
5 . And that God hath ufually given up their Societies to notorious wickednefs In life, in fo much that BiiUinicr challengeth to name a man that was free.
4. Andhow thsyhave witb-rcdeveiywhere, and come to nought, is too evident to need proof, fo that when the lioht of the Gofpel once broke forth, and the true vrork of Ncformation was fet a foot , <.:'od profpered it fo mightily to the sftoniflimcnt of the very Enentres, that in a Ihort fpacc 1: over fpread a great part of the Chriftian World J But Anabaptiftry , which fet nut nearthe fame time and place wirh Lw/Z^iVi Reformation , did only make a noyfe in the World , and turn Towns and Countrcys into feditions and mifery and fo die in difgrace , and go out with a rtink ; And in what Countrey foever it camc^ after fome (hort ftirs , it had the fame fuccefs j except where a few of them are In fome places tolerated, as Jews and Hereticks are, for mecr Policy or compafllon ; yea, and ftill the moft learned and codly Divines were the in. ilrumenti of fupprefljng ic.
And doth G 0(1 ufc to deal thus by his truth in a time of Reformation ? I deny not , but fome Truth may be long hid before the time of Difcovery ; But this Is r\o New Light ; for it broke out long ago , and hath been put out again and again . And I deny not biiit godly Divines may refift a Truth with much zeal while they think ic an Error ; But then others will maintain it, and it will likely get ground ftill j or ac leaft God Will not fuCr it tobe txtingailhed in a time of Reformation; muchlefs will he follow it With fuchheavie Judgements, ard make it the inlet of fo much Error and wickednefs, and calamity.
AtGcacvi ( a Church that God fo wondcf fully bicft , and where there v»ere able Divines to encounter it, ) It no foonar broke forth, but a few Difputations did filcncc ItsPatroas, and by convincing them did extinguilh the fire. Thofe places that have entertained it ihrouohly, it hath been as hre in the thatch, and proved their ruine.
But alas , what need we look into other Kingdoms to enquire whether rhc fire be hot^ when wcarebuminp in it? or toknow the na.areof that poyfon that Is woiking in our bowels , and whith isftiiving tuexcinguiii the life of Church and Statel EfrJ.md ii now the ftigc where the' d jlefMll Tragedy is ading J . and the eyes of all Reformed Churchej are upon as, as the miferabie objeds of their compaflion. Cer- tainly, he th.u will not know and acknowledge fin in the very time of alBidion , and that when fo many heavie Judgements arc on cur bicb, yea, and when we fmart /'j( that (in for which we fmirt , fj thit it is the means as wc!! as the M.titer of our mife- ry , this m.in ii fearfully blind-cd and huJenjd, To love and olead for the (in for which, and by which w; f.Tiarr, evjn while we fmarr, is no good (ign. I hive had too much opportunity to know ve. y mjny of thefc called An3b-p:ifts , and to be familiar with them, and having fi it cximined my heart . leaft I ("hould wrong them out of any difaffedion through diffjrcnce of judgement, as I clear'y dilcover that I b>:ar no ill will to any one man of th.m. norevtrJid, nor finde any paflion but compaflionmovirg me to fay whit f doj fo I do imoartially and truiy affirm cnnccrning the moft of them that I have converfed with,concerningihc forementiontd pirticilars, as fulloWf «ch; 1. That 1 have knowa-fcw of ihsmXo much as labour after the winning of
I'ouis
PUin Scripture profff cf
fouls from fin to God, and bringing them into lovc with Chrift, and holincfs, and bciven i but the main fcopc of their cnJeaV' urs in pub'ick and privire, is to pro- pagate their Opinions j and if fhey do preach any pliin whjlfom D'ftrinc, it is ufo* ally buc fubfcrvient to i heir great De'ign j that the Truth mny b; as fugar to fwceten tkcir ErrorSj that they may be the eailiicr fwallowcd : And Co ftrangdy nrc they tranf- ported with adcfire to bring men to th:ir opinion, as it thi.y were ntvcr in a happy condition till they arc re- baptized, or as if there were nohopc ot chc falvation ,of the holycft men till then ; and as if there were ii.tlc more th:ii this rcqii'^ed to make men happie ; For thikisch: Doifirin? that they mofteagcily prif> ; and it they can gee the prophaneft pcifons to imbcace th;ir (Opinions, and be rc.bip'iz d, they ufuilly make much of them, and lli^vv more aff.;Aion to them then to the m »ft g idly thac dLfl:":r from them. Nay more , they arc the grcatcft hindcers of the work of G id in the converting of fouls, and reforming the Church, thac f know in the Land i what others have done I will not fay i but I know none, of the m^ft prrphaneor milignanc, that are h.ilffo bitter enemies to the Miniftry, and fo great hinaerers of thijaving of fouls. Alas ! hew oft hath it wounded my fpi' i: wi;h grief, to fee and hear men profcfling to be more godly then others, to mike it the very buiin^fi of thirir lives to difgrace thcMinifters of the Gofpel, and make them vile and Ouious to the people ! If they come into company of the prophane, that hate a godly painfull Minister for feeking their falvation, thefe men will harden them in it, and fay far more againft rhe Minifter thentht- moft notorious fcorners were wont to do; and that not in a bare, fcorn, which is Icfs ftlcking J but in fcrious flanders, perfwading the poor people that their MInifters arc Hypocrites, and belly-gods, and mecrfelf-feetters, that ftudy but to feed their own guts, and to make a prey of the people, and to advance thcmfelvcs, and be maftcrs of all men ; and that they arc cruel blood thirfty perfecutors, Baals priefts, and Antichriftian Seducers, and that they preach falQiood to cur 'people, and tell lyes in the pulpit, with the like accufations. O how this confirmeth men intheic enmity to the Doftrine of the Gofpel and the Preachers of it I When poor people hear thofe defpife the Miniftry, that once were conftant hearers, and hear tkoic deride family duties, and holy walking, and the Lords day, who once fcemcd godly, they may think, that fure thefe men that have tryed thi« ftrift way, fee fome eviU in ir, or el fe they would never fpeakagainft it fo much. Nay, I never heard any of the old fcorners that would fcorn half fo bitterly and reproachfully as fome of thefe men. Read but the book aWed M-o-tin M.vr -p/ie (I s, md then ']ndg. Andufually when they run up. Into a Pulpit, or preach In private, the chief fcope of their Dodrine is to per- fwade the people that the Minifters are Seducers and Lyers, and falfe Prophets, Sec. As if the poor people were in a fure way to falvation, if they could but have bafe thoughts of their Minifters; andasifthe firft thing that they have need to learn to make them happie, were to fcorn their Teachers whom the Holy Ghott commands tliemtoobey, Heb. ij.7_,i7- and highly to eftecm them for their works fake; and know them robe Over themin the Lord, i Thcjf.^. 11,13, How could all the Dlvcls Jn Hell have found out a more eflfeduall means to make all the people difregard and de- fpife the Gofpel, and fo to perifti certainly and fpeedily, then by thus bringing them to vilific the Meflengersof the Gofpel, and think it a yertueto reproach and forl'ake their gaides.
Moreover the mofl of them that I have known, hive made their Dodrine of Anabaptiftry a ground of feparation, and perfwade the people tha- it is a fin to hear our pretended Minifters, fas they call them) bccaufe they were aeyer baptized; And (bus wlKntfaejr can xxiake them believe diat the Minifters arc Reducers, and thac
it
Infants Church- memkrjhip and Bapifm, 1 45
it is a fin to hear them, then judge what good they are Ifljc to receiyc by that Mi- niftry ? and what a cafe the Land were in If all men did believe thefe mens Dodrines ? This is the Papifts only ftrcngth among us ; to make the people believe, it is a fin to hear us, or joyn with us, and then they are out of all wayes of recovery j tkey may make them believe any thing when no body contradideti it. Ani It is not only the vulgar fort of the Anabaptlfts that hence plead a ncceflity of feparation j Butthemoft Learned of their Teachers .- iS M'. Benjamin Cox did at Coventry , whofe firft endea- vours (« hen he had made them believe that Infant- Baptifm was finfuU) were to pet- fwadc them it was finfuU, to hear and joyn with their Teachers, being unbaptlzed men j which cate when I had a while difputed with him, it was agreed that we fliould profe- cuteitby writing, and that the people (houldhear each writing read. But when £' bad fent in my firft» in confirmation of my Arguments, I could never get his reply to this day j At fitft he excufed it by his imprifonment (whereof I was falfly accofed to be Author,when indeed I perfwaded them to releafe him : ) but yet never fince couU he have while to do it.
Moreover, the very fcandal ofthcfc mens Opinions and PraSices have been an unconceivable hinderancc to the fucccfs of the Gofpel , and the falvation of multi- tudesoffouli. Ohhowit ftumbleth and drives oflfthe poor ignorant people from Re- llgion, when they feethofe that have feemed Religious prove fuch ? and when they fee us at fuch difference one with another ? and when they fee fo many Sefts and Par- tics that they know not which to turn to ? They think that all ftriftnefs doth tend to this J and fo that the godly arc but a company of giddy, proud, imfetled, fingularpcr- fons, that know not where CO dop, till they arebefides thcmfclves. Ch how the Pa- pifts alfo are hardened by this ! 1 havefpoke with fomeofthcm that once begun to be moderate, and could fcarce fay any thing for their Churches forbidding the common ufc of the Scripture, and teaching people an implicice Faith 3 whonow upon the ob- fervation of tliefe ^c&s and their mifcarriages , are generally confirmed in their way, and fay to as^ Now you may fee what it is to depart from the unity, and bofom oftlie Church J and what it is to make tlie Scriptures common : and to fo:bld filly people taking their Faith upon truft from the Church j and fct them aJl a fiudy- ing for that which is beyond them, till you are cut into (hrcds, and crumbled to duft 1 The Epifcopal j^arcy are far more confirmed in their way by it , and fay, Now you fee what it is to cue up the hedge , and pluck up the banks of Go- vernment. There was none of this work under the Government of the Bifhops ', yon fee how you have mended the matter, by extirpation of them root and branch ; Yea , thofc ihat were offended at the Prelates cruelty ^ in filencing and fufpend- ing. Sec. do now upon the figh: of thefe Sefts and abufes, think they did vvell, and it was needfull for the quenching of this fire while it was a fpark : And many that begun toftaggcrat the Kings late Caufeand Wars, arc new many thoufands of them peifwaded of the bwfulntfs of it, meerly from the mifcaniagesof thefe men .• Yea, and if report (too probable) do not lie, thoufands and millions of Paj ifts in all Ccnntrcys of E«i'o/'cv\ here they dwell, are confirmed and hardened in thtii Religi- on by theodicus reports that go of the mifcarriages of thefe men in Ergritid : Thefe (fay they) are your Reformers: And this is your Reformation i 0!» that our heads were fcunta'ns of wster, thar we might wetpday and night for this wound t^ the Gofpel, this difivjnor toL.cd, and tliis grievous injury to the fouU of multi:Kdts I J It ma ft needs bt that offence ccnwth, hinxvobeto thnfc men by whom it comcth \ it VfC'C bctici for them tbtt a mUftonc wcic hargrd ,':ljout :hc/r necl(S, and ihty were Cu ft into the depth of the Sea : And hjppy is he that is no: offended in Chrift. Ihis is the
V help
146 Flam Scripture proof of
help that the work of Reformation, and of mens falvation hath received frem chtfe men^ ^
Furthermore, it is evidenthow little they help on the woik, Inihat they bboui-for the moft part to work u»on thofc that areorfcem Religi /U$ already, and not thrfe that have roofl need of inftrudion : (though yet they will welcome thcfc too if they trili be of their way.) They make a great ftir to pervert a few of the weaker unftablc ProfefTorsj but the great woikof converting fouls is little endeavoured by many. How many Sermons do they fpcnd in vcnrjng their own Opinions ? till they have brought poor fouls (which is too cafily done) to place their Religion in holding thefe Opinions, and In being Re-bsptizcd, and then they think they are good Chri- ftians indeed, and of thehighcft form: An cafic Religion, which will prove a de- fperare delufion. IfiJIfr. T. dochallengeme here as being free from this excep- tion himfclf. I Ihouldbeloth to meddle in fuch perfonallapplicariom j but 1. One Swallow makes no Summer, a. 1 (hould have been loth to have fpent fo much time and zeal in the Pulpit for Infanr.bapcifm^ as he hath done againft it, and to have had the names of 1^^. Alarfhal, Mr. B//j(''. and Af/-, Bixter., oftner in fo many Sermons then of DavidyOr Peter, or Pj«/.And j. thoug I unfcignedly acknowledge my felf a mofl unworthy wretch to have been the inftiumen: of converting one foul,' and that I have defervcd God (hould rather blaft all my hbours , and that the fuccefs he hath given me^ hath been meerly of free-mercy, yet I would not for all ch: gold and glory in the V\ o:ld, that I had no better fruit of my Labours tolhcvr then Mr. T. hnh fince hecameamongft us ; and that I could difcern the probable figns of conve. lion (from prophanefs to (incerity) upon no more fouls in my charge lately wrought , then tor ought I can learn is difccrnablc in his, as wrought by his iVIiniilry ; unlcfs the per* verting of five or lix Profcifors, be the woikof their convcrfion ^ Yet I know that better men then either of us, have laboured long with fmall fuccefs j but that is not ufuall; but in my own experience, 1 never knew the Labors of any zealous Ana* baptili, that ever God bltiTcd to thctrue converficn of mjny fouls j but many they raakcmccr talking, cenforious Opinionatidi, and ufually ihc re leave them. Nay, I dcfirc anyfobcr Chriftian but to look impartially thiough all the Land, and tell me where ever any ftich Teachers lived, but the phcc in gene all was much the worfe for them- Where the Gofpel before profpercd, and Chriftians fpent thcit time and conference in the edifying of each others fouls, and in heavenly duties, and mutuall afliftance, and lived together in unity and love^ according to;hc great command of Chrift J they ordinarily turn all this tovain J3nglings,3nd empry, windy^unprofiablc Difputcs, whichhe that is raoit gracious, doth talle the leaA fwectncfs in j and they turn their unity into diviiions, and fadions^ and their amity into jealoufies and conrcntions J one is for this , and another for that i and they fcldom meet but they have jarrings and contendingsj and look on one anorhet with flrangcnefs, if not withfectct heart-burnings and envyingi ; lludying all they can how to undermine each other, and every man to flrengthen hs own party. And thefe arc the ufuall fruitsofthe Doftrincof A nabaptiftry where it comes. It may be they will fay, that Chrift came not to fend peace, and the Gofpel It fdfoccafions divifion. Anfwer. i.It dothoccafion it, but not diredly produce and foment it of its own nature , as this doth. i. TheGolpel occafionsdiviiion between good and bad, the Seed of the woman and of the Serpen: ^ but not between the godly and the godly, as this doth. Chrifls DoStlne and his ways lead all to peace , and to dcareft love among the Bre- thren. He leaves them his peace as one of his chief Legacies, and makes it Jiis new commandment to them , that they love one another, and faith , that by
that
Infants Charch-memberjhif and Baftifm, 147
that (hall all men know that they are his Difclples. But of this before.
a. And as Anabaptiftry hath been no greater a friend to mens falvatlon with us, fo every man knows that it is the ordinary in-let to the moft horrid Opinions. How few did yoH ever know that came to the moft monftrous Doftrines , hot it was by this door ? And how few did you ever know that enired this door , but they wenc onfurthi;rj except they dyed or repented lliortly after? I confefs, of the multitudes of Anabjptifts that 1 have known , at the prefent I cannot call to mind any one that hath ftopt there. Moft that I have met with are Separatifts, Aiminuvis, or AiUinnmiansy or both ( for they have found out a way to joyn thcfe extremes , which a man would think impoflible ) Sotinians, Libertines, Sccl^cySy or F-imiij(is- But becaufc men may refufc to credit my experience of ihcm , ( O that moft parts of England had not ex- perience of them as well as I, tScugh perhaps not fo much ) I appeal to the Writings of all of them that I can lecicmbcr that ever wrote. Whither Mr. Den arrived by this way, his writings (liew, and his late confeflion when he was to be put to death for rebelling with the Lc'jc[!e;s. What horrible things CoUyc-f is come to , his writings againft Ordinances witnels. At,-. SrJimay(h his writings teftifie the like too openly. Paul Hob fon ("oneof the Subfciibers of the Churches Confeflion) publilheth himfelf a Secmim to the world, teaching that God was never at enmity with men, but only men with God ; and that Chnft did not reconcile God to man, but only man to God, and did not purchafe Love, Life and Silvarion •, but was fent tomanifcft them , &:. Ml' Cox (another of the Subfcribersj taught them at Coventry yXh^t our MInifters might none ofthera be heard, as being unbaptiZid men: and that they might not ordinarily preach in the ordinary Aflemblics, nnd that the errors of their Calling and Dodrinc were greater then that of the Pricfts and Pharifccs In Chrifts times ^ when there were two Hig,h-Pticfts , and when they were annually chofen, and that by the Romans, and heldit notby fiKccfllonandforlifc, as they ought j ye« , when they corrupted the very Fundamentals : Alio that the very Office of our Miniftry is not from God, tio more then the Callj and that we are all uncapable of any Office in a Church of Chrift, becaufc we arc unbaprized. All this I hive under his own hand: befide what he taught about Redemption, the Law, Liberty of Confciencc, &c. Whither Mr.DeX is arrived, let his Seimon againft Reformation, and his Treatlfe againft' Uniformity wituefs. How far Mr. Williams in New- England went by this way , that plantation canfadly witnefs j but Bi^lrjidhr more fadly , who giving him kindlier entenain- ment then they, have received far more hart by him, when he became the Father of the Secl{Cis In London. Even Mr. Bksll1vood^^\.\^ as much for his Liberty of Confciencc as for Anabaptiftry. \oz Mr.ErbHYy^ lee the Or/or,;:/ Conference teftifie of him : Whac iliould I tell you of" all thofchldeoas Pamphlets againft Ordinances, and for the Mor- tality of the foul, and that the Soul is God himfelf, and againft the truth of Scripturcj and down-right Familifm, Libertinlfm, and Paganifm, fuch as K.nUll{tnfons, The mad mans dilTedionof the Divinity, &c. wich a multitude more , which all fpring from this root of Anabaptiftry : I remember four years ago, when Anabaptiftry had not been long in the Country, about 3f.:>jj?.W, 7^n<\Tfiibndge , and thofe parts , they maintained that Chrift took our (inslnto his nature , as well as our iitlh , and io had original corruption as well as we; and that mens fouls arc but a beam of God, oc God himfelf appearing in feveral bodies, and when men die the foul Is in Gcd again. I cannot but think how men cryed out againft !Mr. Edrvards his Giuigrcn at firft, as if he had fpoken nothing but lyes > and now how they have juftified it with a fearfull o« verplus. 1 will not ftand to name any more to you, but only one, which being lite, Is frclh in oor memory, and being not far off us, is nearer our knowledge , and being
y i moft
148 TUin Scripture freof &f
moft drcadfull, (hould be heard with trembling, as one of Gods mcft fearfull Judge- ments i and that ts 5 Mi.CoppCy and his Followers, called by fomc the Ranttis by others, the High-atu'mtiS. This mao was a zealous Anabaptift j when I was preacher- to the Garrifon of Covcntty , he was Preacher to the Garrifon of Compton-HouCe in the fame Countrey, and I heard of no opinion that he vented or held, but, theNcccfllty of RC'baptizing, and Independancy, and was a (harp Reproachcr of the Mtniftrj', ( which is the common Charaficr of all fchifmatlcall Subvercers of the Church ; T^:y fmitc the Shepherds, that they may fcatter and devour the (heep the more eafily. ) This man continued a mott zealous Re baptizcr many years,and re baptized more then any one man that ever I heard of in the Countrey, witnefs ii'aysvrliffjircy Oxfordih're^ part of irorc£[ia(lnrc. Sec. ( So far was his fucccfs beyond Mr. Vs. in this woik. ) Till at laft God gavehim overtoafpiritof delufion, that he fell Into a Trance, and profef* feth himftlf that he continued in it three or four dayes, and that he was in Hell, and that he received thofe Revelations which he hath publiftied in his Book, in which he blafphemoufly arrogates to himfelf thefacred Name and Titles of God, and crys down Duties and godly Life, bythenamcof [plaguy hoi Inefs,] and fweartth moft vilely J and profdfeth that it doth him more good to run on men , and rear them by the hair, andcurfelike aDivel, andmakc them fwear by God, thentojoyn in Family Duties, and in plaguy holinefs ; And that he can fwear a full mouth'd oath, andean kifs his Neighbours wife in Majcfty and Honour, which if a PrecJIian do,that knoweth (in , he (hill be damned for it : He pleads for Community , and againft Propriety •, and faith he went up and down London Streets with hisHatcockc. his Teeth goafliing, his eyes hxed, charging the great ones to obey his Majefty within him ; This and abundance more fuch hideous Blafphemies his own Book contains* And his praiSicc isanfwerable tohis profcfllon : For he went up and down teaching this to the poor Profcffors in the Countrey, and fwcareth moft hidcoully in his .Conference and Preaching; and curfing, and filthy lafcivious praftices, not tcbe named, arc his Re- ligion. 1 1 naay be fome will fay that he is a mad rran : But it is otherwife, asmaybs known by thofe that will fpeak with him , f he is now in Coventry Gaol, where he was once before upon his re baptizing, for which they were taken to be Perfecuters by thole that now are approvers of hisfuflfcring, ^ but doubclefshe is worle then mad in his delufion ; Bu: O the dreadfulnefs of Gods Judgements ! Would any Chriftian ever have believed that fach a man Ihould have any Followers ? and that men and women profcfling the zealous fear of God , fhould ever be brought to place their Religion in levelling, roaring, drinking , whoring, open full mojrhedfwearing or- dinarily bythe Wounds and hlood of God , and the fearfulleil Curfing that hath been heard, as if they wereall pofleffcd wirh Divels, ( as for my part , I think they are ? ) Yet fo it is : .'vianv of his people fall into Trances as well as he, and go about like walking Divtls in this language and carriage. Some were fet in the flocks at Scnfa-idM^on Avon for their Oaths, which came :o a great number : About Soiitham and Compton fide among thofe that were Anabapnfts before , dive;s , as I am moft credibly informed, arc brought to this feirfull *tate : And fome moderate hopeful! Anabaptifts nearer us, are inclined to it Onefaid, that when ihc firft hea:dhim Xwtar, her ftcih trembled, but when ihe heard him fpeak for hioifclf, (he faw that he had ground for it for to that fcnfe : ^ ATii\n Union it is by, impartial reftimony re- ported that he hath abundance of Followers ; whereof one w iman was lately Carted through the Streets for ordinary whordom , and gloried in it , who was formerly }jijdged godly and modcft. And is not the plague of blindncfs upon his undei ft >ndlng thai will not fee the hand of God ia ihss? The Lord ii known by the Judgements which ' . " ' he.
JnfanPs church member fhip and B aptifm . 1 49
fit executeth , Pfat. 9. ^6. And Is not that man a ftcond Phayaob that yet will not fee norftoop to God ? Is nbt the name of the fm legible in the judgement? and doch not God teftifie from Heaven againft Anabaptlfm plainly by all thefe ? Are they not even as vlfible Charaders of Gods difpleafuie j as the Monftcrs itiNcxv E'lil^nd were ? The Lord grant that neither 1, nor any friend of mine may be ever fo blinded or bardncd , as to run upon the face of fuch vifible judgements , and fo over look the apparent finger of God , and to ftop our ears when he thus fpeaks from Heaven, Opoor England \ what Vermine are bred In the carcafs of thy glory ? Did we ever think when we were reproached by the Enemies, as having our party compofed of Anabaptlfts and Separatifts , that fo many of them would have proved fo much worfc , and made their Accufations true as Prophetical, which were then falfe as Hlftorlcal, and de fi^efcntc } And Is this it that cur eyes muft behold inftead of our fo much, defired and hoped for Reformation ? O what , heart Is fo hard in any true Chriftians bread , that doth not rend and relent to think of the dolefuU cafe of Enijlar.d\ How miny thoufand Profelfors of Religion are cjultc ruined in their fouls , and turned into Monfters rather then Saints ? How many fad, diftrafted^ divided Congregations ? Minifters lamenting their people , and people reproaching their Minifters / what dividing, and fubdividingj and fub-divl- dlng again, and running from Church to Church, and froitJ Opinion to Opinion, till • fome are at fuch a lofs, that they at!vm that Chrift hath no Church, norMinlftryon Earth, nor any currant Sc ipture j nor Ihall have till he fend new Apoftles or Miracles toreftorethem j and others placing their Religion in curfing, fwcaringand blafphem- Ing ? Howmany a diftraded Family Is there In Eng'xndi\\n were wont to worfhip God in unity and joyfulnefs ? One will pray , and the other wmU not pray with him, bccaufe he l> unbaptizfd } and a third faith, thit Family" Duticis are nit commanded in Sci ipture } One will fing prayles to God, and another fcorncth it, as if he were fing- inga Jig, andathird wl'lfing Pfalms from the diftateof the Spirit only. One will crave Gods blcllingcn his meat, and return him thanks 5 and another deri 'es him for ir. Ont will devote the Lords day to facred imploymenr, and the other thinks the ob- fervationof it Isfuperftirious. One will be of one Church, and another of another 3 envying ami! ftrifchith taken place, whileunity and love are laid alide j bccaufe that truth ii j ■){] d out by error,
3, And tor the judgement of a wicked life, to which God ufualiy gives up the grcflf erroneous, and ipccialiy this Seft ; i. We hive made it evident from unqu.ftiombie witnelTes, how this hath ft ill followed them in other Ages and Countreys. 2. And for thcfe now living , we have not fccn ihelrend, and therefore know not yet how rhey will proTC •• Moit perfons thuend worft of thefe forts do begin fairly. It is the end of wicked men that miift give ui the true elliimteof their condition. When Chrift faid. [b^ their jntitsyc ffj. II i^noiv them,'] he doth not fay [by the fruits of the firft year, or fecund, or feventh ] I heartily wi:h they do not grow worfe and worfe, de- ceiving and being deceived. I. I donot fay or think that every particular perlon of them is fo vile in their lives ; Chrift did not tie himfcif to give every man of thenv up to fuch a convc; fi; ion, when he faith, \_by thcif fi<it\ ye {Jf.il/ ^}i0rv them.'] It is fuf- ficicm that it is fawith them ufualiy j b yen as, when he falthy [The feed of the rigbteoiu are b't-^id,] he doth not tie himfelf^ to make every one bicffcd with his fpecial blcfling, tliou-^h he do it ordinarily We may know an Orchard by the fruit ; Thou^h^ fome one "r tw^j Trees. may have none, yet if the generality be Ciab- Trees, the rule will hold- W^e may know a Hock of Ihcep to be fuch a mans by his mark, though two or three amoiig ikcm may have no mark, 4. But for the moft part of tlwm 1 know, this
I JO pUin Scripture froof of
is the moft difccrnablc iudgemcnt upon them of all the reft : What a multitude do I know that are moft notorious for pride , thinking thcmfelves wifer then ihe ableft
Icachcrs, when they have need to be catechifcd ? fomcofthem run up Inte the Pulpits to preach, and challenge the ableft Miniltcis to difpute, and openly concradift what Minifters preach , when they neither underftand themfclvcs nor others i an l no man can perfwadethem that they are ignorant, though it be as palpable as the E^yp ian daiknefs, to all knowing men that know them. Others thit will not come In publick, are conftant Teachers in private, where they vilifie the Minirt;y, and nuke poor fouls believe, that the Minifters arc ignorant of the Truths of God in compa.ifonof them. As if the moft learned and godly were all but fools , and there were a fl»t ne- ccfluy that thefe men muft take on them the Inftrudlng and guiding of thi. f -:^>ple, or they were in apparent danger of being mif-Ied and of perilhing : when, 3! .», the filly wretchers hive need to be taught the very principles themfelres ; Famil*, duties, and the Lords Day^ and many other duties they negled : All the Hercfies iu Jic La^ J rhey make themfelves guilty of by their Dodrine of Liberty for all. Inaword, /c-.thofe that have tryed them judge how many of Pniih Charaders appear upon them, i Tim.i, I, 1,5. Jh the later days [hall come peri UoiM times; for men (h.U be lover': ff thcmfelves^ covetouSjboafiers, proudj blaphemers, d'fobedient to parents, unthMil^futt uaholj ^mtbout naturaU affeStion^ truce-breakers, falfe accufers^ incontinent, fie; cc, deipifcrs ofthofe that are good, traytors^ beady ^ high-minded, lovers of pleafure more then lovers of God; ha- ving a form ofgodlinefs , but denying the povoer thereof : from fuch turn arviy. O that England were cleer from the guilt of thelc fins : and thefe kind of men had not brought this infamy upon us 1 Formy own part , all the afflidlons that iver I endu- red from the wicked in my body , ftateor name , and all the fufferings and dangers that I have gone through in thefe evil times, are nothing to me in comparifon of 1. The doleful! fcandal that thefe men have brought upon Religion. *. And .he fruftrating of our expcdations hitherto of the fo much defired Reformation, and the power, and plenty, and pu'ity, andpeaceableenjoyment of the Ordinances of God. Had they brought me and all the friends I have into fervitude, to be their boncfl ives, it would have been nothing to me , if I know my own heart , in comparifon of thefe. Had they brought the whole Kingdom into a far greater flweiy or povert)^henevcr was before endeavoured , it would have been nothing to thefe. Had our Taxes and opprcftions been as great as the Ifraelites in Egypt, yet it would have been comforta- ble, had it not been for thefe. But O the wound that Gods caufe hath received ! O the horrible fcandal that hath been caft on our Religion ! tlve hardening of Papiftsand Atheifts ! the opening the mouthes of all the Lords enemies , and caufing them to blafpheme, and to reproach his Truth 1 What heart can hold to think of thefe ? To fee the powder-plot buried in oblivion by their mifcarrhgesjand to hear the Proteftant Religion charged with perjury, perfidioufncfs, prevarication, and fins that mayn^t be named. It makes mealmoft ready with Jeremy to lament the day of my birthjand to fay. Wo Is me that my mother brought me forth to be a man of forrows j and did I think to have lived to hear thefe reproaches caft on the people and ways of the Lord ? The pre- fent times may palliate them with vain diftinftionsjand cover them with filcncing ail that openly may mention them ; But truth is the daughter of time j when we are dead, Chronicles will fpcak plain, and other Count: ies fpcak plain now.
O that God would find out Tome way to vindicate his own honour , and dear his caufe 3 and then no matter what becomes of us fo much. Why, the vindication is at hand , and that moft true and unfeigned , and I do charge all men that look upon the adions of thefe cimes^ to take notice of it; and in the name of the moft high God 1 re.
quire
Infants church' memberjhi^ and Bapifm, 151
qairc thcnij tbac they mif-imcrprec not his proridences, and impute not the fins of
men to him or his truth. And thofe that fliall write the Hiftory of this Age to Pofte-
rity if thefe lines fall into their hands , I adjure them to confider and declare this
truth 5 [Tint it rv^s not the Orthodox godly Pyotcjlants, that vpcrc the Authors or Appro-
vers of the horrible wi(((edi3ej[fes of thcfe times, but ihc Anabaptifls, and other the iii^e Set
Claries y whom the Orthodox more '::^calou [If and conftantly oppofcd thin anf other did, rvho
(Imdcr them as guilty } yea, and how far they have gone tojufrrwg in ih'eir oppofn:On,the
ivorldis judge: And though all be not Anabapcifts that hayebeenguilty of thefe fins^
yet the leading aftive party are > and the reft are but drawn or driven By them / So
that Gods Caufe and People arc hereby fully vindicated .• And Blcffed be the Lord
that hath kept his Orthodox people from the guilt, that his Caufe may be fo vindicated.
What are Anabapiiftstous? and why Ihould wc be charged with their mifcaniages,
any more then with the Papifts ? If Papifts were Covenanr-brcakcrs, and dcftroycrs
of Authority, andSelf-exalters, and Captiratcrs of the beft of their Brethren, and
Abettors , or Connivers at the vilcft Herefies and tendings of the Church ; what
were all this to us ? what were the ftirs oi Mu,n(ler to the Prottftants oi^ermany ? Did
not the Proteftants there do more againft them then all the Papifts ? Yea, did not the
Papilh tirft occaGon all by their pollutions and cruelty ? And did not the Prelates by
their Superftitions, Innovations^ and Perftcutions ocafion all this among us? which
methinks ll^ould make them filent and blulli for ever. ]
And for thedifappointingof our hopes in point of Ordinances and Reformation, it is a moft heavie burden and griet to our hearts : The divilions and havock of the Church is our calamity : we intended not to digg down the banks, or to pull up thehcdg:, and lay all waft and common} when we delned the Prelates Tyranny might ceafe , wc prayed for Reformation and peace, and the progrcfsofthc Gofpel j we fafted , and moui ned, and cryed to God j we waited^ and long'd for it more then for any worldly poffeflion ; Indeed, we oTer- valued it, and had too fweet thought's of it, as if it had been our Heaven and Reft : Therefore it Is juft with God to fufFer thefe men to dcftroy our hopes : And if they do root ouc the Gofpel quite out of Eng. land, ( as BuUmger faith the Anabaptlfts did from ifaldjJwt where Hubmer was Tea- cher, ) it is juft with God: But yet we hope that they Ihall be but our fcourges , and not our utter deftroyers J and that God is but teaching us the evil of their Do- drines and Schlfms by this experience , which all the teaching elfe In the world would J»3rdly have convinced us of. I have wondred formerly why Pri«/ fpeaks fo much agalnft Herefies and Schifms; and what made even all the primitive Fathers ipend moft of theltzeal and painful writings agalnft Herefies and Errors ? as doth Jg?i uiiu, Clemens Alexand. Ircnte.u , Jiijiin MartyryTertuUtanyCyprian , and aim. ft all J Wh' n --.e in thefe days were ready to think thefe to be fcarce finsj But now wc be^in to know :helr mean- ing i and I can fay as good Vadianm (before mentioned) I never knew what Heicfie orbchifmwai till now.
I conclade this with a folemn adjuring of every foberChriftian that reads this i to confider, and again confider, u'hether it be anyivhUlilfCly that God rvould reveal hit truth to fuch men as thefe , and hide it rvholly from all the mi'i holy, -x^'alotti, jndiciout Reformers ? even fromZuingVms and Luther to this very day ? vea, and fuffet thofe moft Learned, Godly Divines to be the chief Inftrumems in all tlmev* (oopv>ieCs and ex- tlnguidiitj if it had been his Truth ? I do not fay thac al thiseviU followeth only the Anabaptlfts : for other Seds (ef;i:cially tht Afitifiomifts , ) have alio their ftiare i but ufuilly Anabaptiftry is the door co all , and the companion of all. Mr. T". faith others have mifcarrycd as well as they, To which J anfwer j Ic is too true. But thea-
confider
15*
PUtH Scripture proof of
confiderjthat the rulgar will be carnal,who are of that Religion which is mod in credit; indthatfomcfewofthe 7caloushavebtcnalway fcandalous : But for fo great a pare of the t;;alous Profcflbrs of Religion to mil'carry, and that avowing It, as thcfc before mentioned, Is a thing that the moft malicious Turk or Paplft could never yet make good of the Orthodox Party. The Lord grant that men may fee how judgement purfu. cth the dividing Church- diftroying Sefts of chcfe timej,that they may not run in blind- oefs like Balaam, on the drawn Swor J>
CHAP. XV.
Will conclude with a little tryal of the ftrength of Mt. T'j. caufe in point of Antiquity^ which indeed in this cafe is of fome moment, not direftly to teach us, whether Infants fhould be baptized ; but rfe/i(f2o, whether In the times next after the Apoftics they were baptized or noj which will much help us to know whether the Apoftles did baptize them. And 1 alfo build the more on this, becaufe God hath promifcd that he will never fail us or forfake us ; and Chrift hath prayed that his Church may be fanftified by the truth, Jvh. 17. 17. and promifed that hewlil be with them alway to the end of the world^ Mat, 28. ao. And God will teach the meek his way, and reveal his fecrets to them that fear him, Pfd. i^.^^^^ix. AndtheApofile faith, If fo far as we have attained, we mind the fame things, and walk by the fame Rule, then If in any thing we be otherwife minded, God (hall reveal even this unto us Pfcif.3.1 f .' And God faith, T hat furely he will do nothing, but he revealeth his fecrets to his fcrvants the Prophets, Amos 17. And that we need not that any teach us, but as the fame anoynting teachcth us of all things, and even as it hath taught us we Qiall abide inhim, i ^oh.^.^7. And we Hull be all taught of God, Hcb. 8.11 j/^.j^ 20, 21. And Chrift promifeth to fend the Spirit toteach them all things, /ofc. 14. 26 And promifethj That when the Spirit of truth is come, hcfhalJ guide them into all truth,/oj^. 16. ij.
Now, how all thefe Promifes can be fulfilled , If God have given up hlsChu.cfecs ever fincc the Apoflles days into Errors in this point ( cfpcciaily if it beof fo great moment and confcquence as many make it, ) I cannot unde. ftand. Now that In- fants were baptized ever fince the Apoftles days, as far as the Church hath any currant Hiftory left for her Information , llhall prove , i. By producing the Tcftimonies j S" And then require Mf.T to (hew where^or when the Church fpokc againft it ? or when there was ever an Anibap'.itt in the Church uncondemned ? or when Infant-baptifm had Its beginning ? Yea, or how many he can prove that ever denyed Infant-baptifm, till the late Rcforraatl'jn in Gcrnixr.y i
And 1 . for chclattr Fathers, as Aujlin HieTom^fj/if^iht Gregmcs^ &c. I need not mention th<:m,/«r.r. will n^t ckny but they weie for Infam.baptifm; and it was then
pra^ifed :
Infants Church'Tnemyerjhif and Baptifm. 1 5 5
praftifed : All the weight lies on the TciUmonies of their Prcdeceflbrs. And for Lnilaniius thzt lived as Bullingcr faith, jio. years after Chrift, (though Bnromus affd HclvicusCsy he wrote his Inftitiuions in excrcam old age, about the year {17. and fo was likely 10 live within about zoo. years of Chrift,) he is known to be tor us, ia inflitut. iib. 4. cap.^. And for Cyprian ^who liTed,3s BuUinger, about ijf.or rather as HdvicKS faith, he read TcrtuUiafiy being himfelf then B ifliop of Carthage about the ycac 347. and fo was likely to live within zoo. years of Chrilt; he in his £/>///. "ipadFi- dnrr), ii known to be openly for it , and a whole Couiicel in his time. Andthty d» not mention it as a thing newly begun, but as a granted cafe. And is it likely thic the Church in that perfecuted time , when they f*er«fo tenacious of the Apuftlcs ways, niould within ico. years after S. John's dath, (otovily forget the Apoltolicall praftice > Yea in TcrtuUJati's time Mr. T. confcffeth it was in pradice, (tor he told mc Tf^?'</^J» vras the ancienteft thit we could alledgcfor it.) And do we need any more ? TcrtuUuin, as Hclvictn placcth him, wrote his Book of Prcfuriptions about the year i95.which was about y 7 years after the dcathofS. John, and we cannot imagine that himfelfcould be lefs then thirty or forty: So that by this account he lived about fixiy or fevcnty after S. ^(;/;« ("though f^wf/i^xfayheflourilhed about 200. an. Dom. And could ihe Apoftlcs praAice in fo remarkable a thing be unknown wiihin ftventy or eighty, or an hundred years after their death ? Is it not eafie to know whethci Infant* were baptized in £?7giiJ«d or no, a hundred or two hundred years ago - And here it was ,^
as eafie. Asfor Oz/gf^, others have fliewed our of his Comment on Rom.& Levit. ^^ ' l^irrlf That it was then taken as delivered from the Apoftles. But it is needlefs to infifl oa ff^^^^h^*^.? fiim, as being fomcwhat later then TcrtuUian. Now for A/y. T. toexpeSany a!H- >n,tn ^a,/j^^ tienter Record, is ftrange, when he cannot but know that there are but very few fmall :za n)\ n-^>^" Books, which are of unquefUonable credit before TerttiUian ; and thofe few arc upon A-'j Qvia'- C£-l^ other theams. And yet we (hall find fomewhat even from them. And becaufc M/. T"./ a^ 'f^tn^'- ^'^ feems In his Apology to put by Tm«i7/<27j'j Teftimon , 1 fhail make it evident chacowiJ l^u tt^e^ Infant-baptifm was pradifed in his time, and that his judgement was for it. And'i(rr*f ^^ /^ ' fi\ftjif it had not been then praftifed, why fhould he pcrfwade them not to make haftc ? lib de }i.tf.cap.^.Cun^^ti» utilior, pucipue circa parvulost ficc i. Why fliould he fpeak oifpenfores elfe rather thcnjufccptores ? ? . He evidently excepteth the cafe of neccffiry, rtiat Is, when they were endanger of death, when he faith l(i non tam neceff'i'] asP^wi-- lius trulvexpoundcth bim. $0 that de fado (which is all that we enquire after now) It is evident that Infant- Baptifm was then praftifed : And for the queftiou dc jure ibout delay. 1 doubt not Tf>Y«//itf« erred, i. Not confideting that io Scrlp-ure it was evtr adminiftred at the firft entrance without dclay,and yet TertuUian would have even the adult to delay, when himfelf and other Fathers call Baptifm [Intiation.] 2. And the w tikncfs of his reafons are erident.i . ^ddcnim nccc[jc eftfpofiforcs pincu'.o ifigeri, qni & ipfi per merinlitatcm dcjiitucrc prowijjioncs lut»po(J'iwtf ^ provcntu wait ind: In fuUi ? J» ^u'dfijhnit Innocms^etoi ad remiljio'iem pcccatorutr, ? 3. duitius agtur in[ccuhinh:is ut cm fubjlamia teiycna. rwn crcditury divma ctcdatur ? Bl* not thefc poor realbns * And yet I believe PjmeHus , and many others, that it were only Heathens children that TermUian here (peaks of, becaufc he fpeaks only de (ponfoi thus, et non dc panntibus j aod how could the Sponfors be endangered while there were Parents* But further, it is evident that TrtuUian was for Infant B>^ptifm in that he argues for the ncceffiiy of baptifm to Salvation, And anfwercth Agumentsto the conu ixy, lib, d( Rapt. cap. 12. ^lum verb pnefcribitur nemini fine Biptifmo competerc falutcM, Sec N iw he oft exprcfl'cih hfftifelf for the Salvation of Infants 5 and there- fore mult needibe for tlieix Baptifm, (The grounds we now ftick not on, but the
X matter
1 54 Plain Scripture prsof of
niatter of fadj anii that it was then inufe ) So Lb. 4. advi f Ma,cio?i.cap. ij, S^d ccce Chriflitidtiign parvulosy iales cfjc doccm dibi/e qui fcmper majorts veliHi cjfe, Sec. ^.ta. 'vcrobonm (^V^ut) ad:od:l>gil pjrvulos , ut apudi^gyptum bcwe fcccm ob[Iit,}cibu4 p,o:cgcntibut partm Hxb.cns pcidna^Ucs cdMjThu,auii/si Ua&hncaQ ll.o Cbii(li cum creator e cfl. Immo nunc Dctu Td.ricionU qui comimum avcijatur^ quomodo vuleri fotcfl parvulorum di'u (l>iy, &c. J^ti (cmrn odii, fi-u^um quoqiie cxccrctur ncciffc eft. Nie iU.ftevio, h.tbffiJm t/fiyptiorcgCy &c. Hence I gather, i. That he took Infants to be Church-members which with Mr.T. will Infer their Biptifm. Orelfe how could God and ChrUl be faid fo to love them ? i. That he concludeth the falvation of Infants, and conlcquemly their Baptifm , feeing that he tock baptifm to be of flat ncccflr.y to falvation. As forthat ///>. deanlmay v/htieheaWsfidclium/iliosfifjilttauscaudidutos &fan£loi lam ex feminis prarogativaj &c. Others have fully (hewed his opinion from it.
And whereas Mr.T. is rather confirnacd_,he faith, becaufe Cyprian and others allcdge fuch weak grounds for Infant-baptifm. I anfwcr :'i.I care not mwch for their grounds, as to ourp'.efent Difpuce, biit whether the thing v/ere then in ufc ; And certainly, that a Councel of 66. Bilhops lliould determine aboa: it^noc mentioning it as any new thing ) who lived within fomc 1 10. or 1 20. years of i.John ( for fo it will appear ) is no fmall confirmation to any impartiall man , that it wasthe Apoftles pradice. i. And 1 may better argue againft d<lay of baptifm from the weaknefs of Tcrtullians rcafons. 5 . And Cypri.ins reafons are not fo liily as is pretended, if well weighed 3 buc 1 will not ftand on that.
And though the Books before TertuUlm be' fmall, and few that are currant , and meddle not direfily to this Queftion , yet their judgement may be gathered plain enough. //f?;*«j wholivcd a Biihop inF//J«£e in the year 170. according to Hr/titja and others , and fo wasa Bilhop within 7 J. yeais of S, John^ and confcquently muft needs live within 4 j. or there about of S, ^nhn (for it is like he would not be a Bilhop much before 30. years old ) his Teflimony in that commonly alledged place feems plain to me: Lib^ 2. advcr. harcf. cap, 39. Maqiflcrergo exiftens, magiji,i quoque babebat autcmt nm reprobans mcfupeigi-ediais homincmf neque fulvcm fuam legem in ft bumanl generis , /« d omnem utatemfmCli ^cans per illam ff«« ad ipflim crat fmUiudi- mm. Omncs enim vcait per femctlpfum falvare, omncs Inquam qui per eiim remfcuJUur in 'Deu'^yi'jfafitesy& parvul{js,& pn(ros,& juvcnc5y& feniores.Jdeo per omncm venit xtaieni^ ^ u/fantibn* Infam f.idn4jai!£l ficans Infanta j inpaivulu parvulosjmilificiins banc ip. jam ijabentes tetatcni.8ic,)rrom thefe words of Ircnteiu it is evident, i.Thac Infants were then taken for Members of the vifible Church- For if that Agebefandified, and ihe Infants fandified, and ifChriftdid of purpofe become an Infant that he might fandifie Infants and fave them, then furc there is nothing in the Age to hinder them from being vifibie Church-Jhembers ; Nay, they are adually fuch : tor what can be faid more of any , but that they are fandified, and that Chrift became of the fame Age to faudlfie theirs? Ifanyfiy, that ihi> is meant of incernall reall fandification only i I anfwerr 1. ihat cannot be j for he fpejks of Chritts fandifying the very Species or ^\ge , by becomingof that Age J Aud a. T^hen according to th.:ir Expolition of /itv,',z/c««r«rs itfhould be but a tautologi ,g i/. [he f^ndifiethall that arefandificd, or newborn] 3. And the word [fand fi ] will be fcldum ^ if at all) found to bcufed foi a mcer Infufion of the Sc.dof G jcc without any adaall holinefs ; Hue for a Relative reparation ro God, it is iia.) it frequently ufcd. 4. However, ihis was a fandification. Wfhi^ was known to the Churchs or elfe how could Ireiitem fpeak of it ? and if it were knoyvaihai; foms weu fandified, the very Age of infancy bc»n§ fandified, then there
are
Infantis Church- meml^erjhip and Baptifm.
are certainly fomc Individuals whcm the Church is bound to judge to be probably fuch, and to receive as fuch : For to fay that Chrift by being an Infant hath fanftifi ed Infancy and Infants, and yet there are-no Infants in the world whom wc are bound to judoe probably fana'ified,and to rcceive-as fuch, is a contradidion. Nor will it follow that'' then all Infants are fanaiiied ; No more then that all the Parvuti & Juvcvcsp though Chrift became Parvidui & Juvcnii to fan^ifie them. And for Mr. T. his fayino that A judgment, of Charity U nogc9U7idt9 iv^illi by in this j I have fully anfwered ic
before. i r r
z. And further , as it is hence evident , that Infants were then taken for fanfiihed, and fo for Church members ( as Infants among the Jews were, ) fo alfo expnfly th:t they were baptiied : Soritx ^iffim Mmyr^ TcrtuUinn, and all the firlt Writers then, Rcnafci is an ordinary term to fignifie B.iptir^wi : Nor do cither the words or fcope of JfrcSfewi here ihew his meaning to be otherwifc , for all that /W/-. 1. faith. For as his fcope is to (hew that Chrift went through all Ages to fandifie fomc of all, and Infaiits among the reftj fo here he puts this in to Chew who thofc fome were, that we might noc think he means all of every Age •. And baptifm is the Cognizance by which he would have us difcern them. And Iper cum,'] may be meant [by his command J or [by him, asthe way to the Father,] feeinp they were baptised into the name of the Fa- ther, Son, and holy Ghoft. i he truth is, Rcnafctntid is nor ulcd by the Fathers ordi- narily fo far as I remember, for cither meer baptifm, or meer regeneration j but for baptifm as fignifying Regeneration ('oras many thought, effefting it ) or Regenera- tion as fignified ( given ) by baptifm. For thole that they judged probabily Regene- rate ( or to be fitted tor i:, ) 'hey baptised ; and thofc that were baptizcd,they called Regenerate. So that calling Infants Regenerate , was a certain fign , according to the language of 'he Ancients, that they were baptized. For Afr. T. can never llicw ( I think ) where they called any Regenerate, tha: were not baptized, or fit to be bap« tiled. The reft of Mr. 7*s. etctptions againft Ircnxiu^ Mr- MarfljfiU hath an- fvvcred.
The next Teftimony„ which I will produce, is from f ii (I'm Martyr , who lived in all likelihood in S.John's days, ( *nd therefore could not be ignorant of the Apoftles pradice inthis ; ) For he was aPhilofopher , and converted toChriftianity in the year of our Lord 1 18, And wrote his firft Apology i jo.as Hclvkui from his own Te- ftjmony gathereth.And therefore if he wcrea converted Fhilofcpher before thirty years of age, or thereabout, itisftrange; (hnA'% Juhn6yt6^anno 98.) 5"c«//c;k5 faith, he flourilhed I40. Pavxuiy that he was beheaded 168. You cannot expcft that he fliould fpcak exprcfly to the point, both bccaufe he is brief, and treateth on another Theam,to which this did not belong , and becaufe the Church then living among Heathens had fo much to do in converting and baptizing the aged, that they had little occafionto treat about childreajCfpecially it being a point not controverted, but taken for granted by the V hriflians, who knew Gods dealings with the Jews Church , that children were Members with the converted Parents j efpccially when the very Gentiles children were Meinbers before Chrilt j and it was the Jews that were in part broken off, but ao talk in Scripture of Breaking cfF the Gentiles or their children- ( If there be, Mr. T. would do well to flicw it better then yet he hath done , if he mean to fatiifie men with Sctipture, and not with his own naked affirmations. ) Yet doth Juflm give us fach hints , by which his judgement and the praftice of the Church in thofe days may be difcerncd. The commonly alledged place in Refponf. ^lefi, $6. ad Orthodox. I will not infifton, becaufe though the place be moft cxprefs for Infant baptifm, and the Book jjiclent , yet it Is dihev fpurious or interpolate, I have no: the Greek
X » , Copy
15^ Plain Scripture freof of
Copy n»)vf at hand^ an J therefore muft afe TranfUtlonj. In his Dialogue with Tiy phon, pa- 1. I. Propoj- 1, htfikh (according to GclcniM Tranflicion^ A'oj arte ojii bujui ope adD:um acajfinui noncundcm iflam Ciicumcifioncm aj}'umpfimus,f(d fpirilua. Urn lU.im quam Enoch & fimtUs obfcrvj'jcruni : Hancnos per bjptifma, uipote pcccatotes ' n tl, a Dtomifijnte acitpitnta\ e:m liatemmbm fmillUr acupcyc. Or as Scu/tctus tianfl ues it, Poftcatfuam vco per Chrtfinm aduum ad Dcitm na£li fumus , non camdem ftifccpimus chcHmcifiunefn,fcdfpuuualcm, qitam Enoch & fimlcs cufiodiCYunt. Ewi vcio tiot per BjptifmumiquAndotjuuicm peccatorcs fuci mus,p)Optcr mifeiicoidiam ipltus Dei ac- ccp'imus : Omnibuffjue adco ilUm ex ttcjito accipere integrum cfi. Now if i.this be the way by which the heart circumcifion is received, thit Is by baptifm, thenfure they did bap- tize Infants, For they knew thu Infarcts had the Promifc of that heart circumcifion Deut.io.'i^6y7 &c. 1. And if All might receive lt,cvcn fo as tficy, (which was by bap- tifnj!,) then fure the fort of Infants mul be part of that All^ and not wholly excluded. Again in the fame Dialogue J/iflix faith, Sic & prxccptum Clrcumc'ifumu qute ab om. n'lbusnuper n.ttis exiQltiiY o^uvo diCy fi-^ura erat ver a Ciicumcifionh, 8cc. This is but a leaf before the other j and fo he makes it plain , that the heart circumcifion which he before faid they lecelved by baptifm , and All might even fo receive as well as they^ is it >T»hich{ucceeds this Circumcifion of children the eighth day, and fo children are part of the All thatmiy receive it. And therefore a tew lines after he going on witb this, in expounding a faying of Ij aijh,iiiih,^;iod auicm diCitur pluraliier Arnfunciamuiy in confpedu ejus^ac niKx f.ngulaf'iUr^Vt pucri fiiniftcat t/iultos convcrfos a malitia per obc- dientiiVf} fecijje impcr.'ua lUtus^aiqjieita univafosfiiCius tati(juam tinutn pucriwi\ ficut vi- dec licet: in corporc cum mutta membra numerentHr^Scc And if the whole Church be tsadc of God as one child,and fo'callcd,then fu:e they did think that chtldrei^weie not them'* (elves excluded from being Members of that Church,
A^ain, Juilin makes baptifm to be the only way to Rcmifllon of fin , and fal- vation^ and he judgeth that Infants arc forgiven and fayed j therefore he judgeth that they muft be baptized. The foriner he lays dowr^ a little after the forecited place; Studendum eft ut cngnQfcatis viam remijjlonk peccato/um^ &fpem httreditatis promifforum bono/um^y ii nulla eft. em^alta prater hanc, (iagnito hoc chriflo^ abluti i?i remtfficncmpcc- tacorum lavacrq ab Efaia pradicato^fine pcccatis vivaiis in pojlerum. Its true, as fpeaking to the adult he ;oynetli afnition of C hrift , whtch all are not capable qf , but addcth baptifm w:hicn Infants arc capable of.. So in Apolog- x.Kenafcuutur modqrciiafcendi (fuo f!r nos yenati fftmus : nam in :w»nne Patris omnium dominique Deiy. (& Scrvatoris noflri Jefu chiifti,& fpintusfan£li in aqua tunc lavantur'idixitc7iim Cf^iiflus ipfcy Nifinnni fueritis , non intrabtiit in rcgnum cxlerum. So that he thought baptifm .neccfljjy to fal- vation ; And a littJe after : Adquod (aimcntum Euehariftite) vift qui crcd't veram ejje tio[l'amd<j£lnnam^ablutus.ifgencrationis livjcro, in Rcmi0aem peccitorum, & fie viver,s itt Chriftus docuit. And a little before he giveth it as one reafon w hy they muft be bap- tized for the obtaining of RenaiflTion of fins i ^uoni'tm prima naiivitas nee fcieniibus nee volentibus nobu obvcnit ex c»mp!exu parentum_ &c. Arid that he^adg^d Infants to be pardoned and faved. is undoubted, from what is alledged before. And Epijl. adZtnaw, Ojjortet autem pueros attendere; talium enim efl rce^num celoi nm. And if bethought that they belonged to Heaven, fure he thought they belonged to the vifible Church, For I hope Aif.T will not fay that fujlm by [fuch] did mean only humble perfons of Age, as excluding children, (as Chrifts words are uCually abufed.) For this would have been a i^cange reafon for Juflia to urge Mothers to look to their childjexij bccaule of hufpble pejfons at age is the Kingdom of Heaven. ' $oinPialv^oti4f;iTryph9nCf-h^Ciikhj lfAnineoiictnci[etilQn(\ lUas mtilis qu^in
pifcinis
Infants Church- mernherfhip and Baptifm. 1 5 7 ^^^ y
tifc'inu & aquii puteal'ibu* fii/nt.rccipiunt : Nihil funt cnim coUatu ad hot vita lavacrufo^ Sccl^os in came circumcifi opui habctis noflraciYcumciJiOfiC: Sec. Whence 1 gatherji.Thac he took baptifm to fucceed Circumcifion (is the Ancients generally did : ) 2. That he took baptifm to be the ordinary cmerance or way to Life and Salvation, in that he calls it The laxer nf Life ; and therefore doubtlefs took it to belong to Infants, whom he )udged before to belong to the Kingdom of Heaven. 3. And he thinks thofe that were circumcifed in the flelh Ihould ufe our Circumcifion, that is, the Laver of Life before mentioned : But Infants were Circumcifed in the flcflij and therefore ic is Infants aifo that he would hivc to be baptized'
I or the later Fathers ^ I need not to produce their judgements In this Caufe ; It will be ealily conftffed furcthat all after Tcrtuttian and Cj^n^w were for Infant-baptifm. yo[]tni in Thcf.ind Pamdiui in his Annotations on Cypnarit^nA onTcrtiiUixn de Bafif* and many more will direft you toproof enough of this.
a, TN the Next place therefore I (h:^! defire from Mr.T. againft the next, fome proof lout of the Antients, againft the baptizing of Infants, as good as we have brought for it : And when it firft begun ? Or, wlio did oppofe it for many hundred years ? He thinks it crept in ampng other corruptions.! think contrarilyjthat the delay of baptifm, which Conflantm and fome others were guilty of, did creep in among other corruptions, and wasgrotindedon thefalfe Dodrlne of thofe Herctlcks that deny^dforgivenefs of fin to thofe that fell after Baptifm, which sfF.ighted poor people fiom that fpeedy ufe of it which the Scripture prefcribeth. He thinkcth the worfe of it, bccaufe it is pleaded by O/Vgrw as a Tradition from the Apoftlcs J I think very much the better of it, both be- cauie it the more fully refolveth the Queftion concerning the matter of Fad, and Apf- • ftolical Cu!lom,and ihcws that it was no late Inventionor Innovationjand the Fathers then took not the word Tradition in the Popilh fenfe^ for that which hath been delivered in dodrinefrom Age te Age above what is delivered in Scripture, as to fupply the.fup- pofcd defed of the word ; But for the very written word it felf, by which the Apoftlcs delivered the Truth, ar.d for their Examples, and the report of it, and of fome paifages, cfpecially in matter of Fad, tending only to the explication of their DQdrincs,and not to theadding of new Dodrines, as if the former were defedive.
For my part, in my fmall reading, I cnnnotiindthat any one Divine or-party of me« , certainly oppofed or denyed Infant-biptifm for many hundred years after Chrift. The '^cUgiJtis in Attfiins days were accufed. of it^ but how UMjuftiy,though Hcretick ,Au(lin doth tell us. Anabaprifai I find condemned, but not the denyal of Infant-baptifm, In Eufcbitis: c\ea C/fria?i zhM Mr. T. thinks was the fpring of Irvfant-baptifm. ( k: the Councellhe mentiontth ) is called an Anabaptift for delning and urging the Re" bjptizingof thole that were Baptixed by Hercticks ; The. like kind of Anabap ifm . Nicephorus lib. 17. cap 9 faith^thc iynod of Confl.mtiuople condemned one Scvcfu-i Pe- ft- ^4, and 2 w>M for, but no other that I findc. b\ii Mr. T. will prove that there were fomethat.dtnycdinfant br-ptifna 500. years ago) and that our of Scy^jWi 66. Scrm. in Cant, a faying which he Ihnds much on, and putteth it in the .Frontifpeice of his Ex» • crcitation thitall Learned men may fee ho* little verity is in his Caufe, that rauft.bc upheld by fucb dealing j the faying is ih'is^lnidcyitnjs quiA bnpti-^amm I?ifantcs, quod 0- r.:tr,Ki p' 0 mortais, ^i^cd fancier am fujf'-^g'^ pOiUlamM. So the like out oiBirnaydi 1 4Q* tpili. And from F,Ltrui Clumacenfis.
Audhcre , ihosghl would fain believe th 3 1 M/, T. his Confcicncc is not {b
X 3 depraved (
1 5 8 Plain Scripture pr&of of
depraved IS his judgcmcnrj yet I cannot tell how to defend cither the tcnderncfs of his confcJcnce, or common ingenuity againft the force of this pbin lertimony againll him j ifany man hence gather, that hcisamantkit will Itrike in with any party, or take up any the faileil ftjuucr, to defend hijciufc with, 1 linow not bow to confute him. Fot I dire not think bu: M,-. T. his reading is fir more tken mine j and confequently, that he is not igno. ant, thatthcfc fuppofcd Hcreticks that Bcnurd and cluniaca.fis did thus accufe. where Hcncicm and Pcccr Bruu the fiifl great Preachers oi the Albigcn/es 2nd ff'ald(nf(Sj and that their acciifcrs were Papifts, and Cluniaccr.fis a railing lying Abbot, laying many othc: fallc charges againft them, and ccnfcffing he took ;hcm upon report } and though Rcurdwtte devout^ yet apopiih Abbot^ and took up this with other falfc accufarions againft them (as tl»K ihcy were Manicbccs) up. on lying fame: And that (as Mr.MdfPy.iU hath tru'y toid himj the /■lUrgcnfts and wVj/- rfw/« own writings and confcflions mentioned by vfijer, Hovcdcn, the MJfdcbur" gr/ifeSj B.Uta-^r Lydim, Si.:, do acquit tbcm from rhh falfeaccufation. And if Aff.Thnd been glad to take up fiich lying accufa ion againtt the Saints cf God, for the furthering of his Caufe, and to ftrike in withihc Accufercfthe Brethren, he migh: have found more of the like flanders and lyes, ii he hid rad A'bcrtiCicic Capii'^ncls o( the Orlgi- nallofthe P^aldn/s-, RiimeaiudcfortnihxrtUc.rfidi hn/ctkos; &jum:ri.x Claud. Rubis H:flor. Lugdun. &c. Where he might have tcund thefe godly Reformers to beaccufed of many Herclics, and to be i<ibalds, Buggercrs^ Sorcerers (as i3m;.W alio too much doth) and all as truly as to be agalnft Infant- Bapcifm. Yet that it may appear that fome Z^apifts, yea, a Pope himfelf dealcth more confcionnbly ana honeftly, then Mr.T. with them, you may find that many of thole their bitter Adverfaries do free them from thofe fahe Accufations, K.i/«m«i himfelf mcncluneth them as reported to have continued from the Apoftles dayes, and fteeth them ot mmy falfe Accufations: And fo doth Bjion'iui, an. iiyi.vul. i "- art 17. 1 1. And J^cr.bus de Kibcria in CoUeCl. deurbc Tholof. giveth them high commendations, and doth not charge them with this; Yea, T^^isr/iAJi when he reporteth their Doftrine malicioufly, yet chj-geh them in point of liaptifm, but that they would not have ic adminiilred iJi an unknown tonguej becaul'c the God-fathers underftood not what they anfwcred, orpromifcd.- Isit not hence plain, that they were for Intanc-baptifm ? And <^ncas Sjlv.ns, Oifief ward Pope P/«i the Second, in Miliar. Bohew-cap.iS- reportethall their DjAilncs,and in particular about Baptifm, and never chargeth them with denying Infant, baptifm, but onelythac they would have Baptifm done with common water, without the mixture of Oyl j And would not he that fcarched them fo narrowly, have mentioned more, ifthey had held more? And F/f^ez-zc^ the Second, In his decrees againft them, did never charge them with any fuch thing, as appcares in the Eplftlcs of P.Ur de yineis his Chancellor, [ib.ucr.p^i'^ ^16,17. Many moie Authors, both Proteltants and Pa- pifts, thacvindicatethe Albcgcnfeand ifaldenfcs fxom the forcfaid flinders, you may UeinPaull^crriiis Hiftory of them, and in the Lord ^/< P/f^^J Myftery of Iniquity, and others. I willonely add what they fay thcmfelves of theh: own belief in the point of Infanr-bnptilm- In their Book called The [piritual A!manacl{, fol.^S- they fay agalnft this flinders The time and place of thofe that are to be baptiicd, Is not ordained; but the Charity and Edificaticn of the Church and Congiegationmuft fetve for a Rule herein, &c. And therefore ilieyto whom the children were nccreft allyed, brought their Infants to be baptized, as their Parents, or any other whom God had made cha; itable in that kinde. 1 rue it is, that being conllrained for fome certain hundred ytars to fufilr their children to be baptized by the PtieUs of the Church of Home^ ihey deferred the doing of ic as long as thty could poflibly, bccaufe they
had
JKfaists church' member fh if and Baptifm. 15^
had in dereft.ition thofc humane inventions which were added to that holy Stcramenr, which they held to be but pollutions therefore And fora(much as their Paftors were many times abroad imfloycd in the fervice of the Churches, they .could net have the Sacrament of Baptifm adrainiftred to their Infants by their own Minifters ; for this caufe they kept them long from baptifmj which the Pricfts perceiving, and taking notice ofjcharged them hereupon with this impofture j which not onely their Auverfarics have believed , but divers others who well approved of their life and faith in ail other things.
Thus you fee what occafioned the Papifts to flander the na'dtnfcs , as being againft Infant- baptifm _, and their own Vindication, i-o in a Confcflion of their Faith about the Sacraments in Pcr/7«i Hiftory, iib.i.ofpjyt.i cap.i. they have thcfe words ; And whereas Baptifm is adminiflrcd in a ftill Congicgation of the Falthfull, it is to the end that he that is received into the Church, fhouid be reputed and held of all for a Church- brother, and that all the Congregitlon might pray for him, that he may be a Chiiftian . In heart, as he is outwardly tfteemed to be a Chiiftian. And for this caufe it is, that we prefcni our children in Baptifm J which they ought to do, to whom the children arc necrcfljas their Parents, and they to whom God hath given this charity.
Now, after all theft cleer Vindications of thefe godly men from the malicious Ac- cufationsof the Monks and Fryers, who would have thought that lucha man as Mr.T. or any other Proteftant that hath any profeflion of confcicncloufnefs, fliould ever dare fo openly to make the world believe that the malicious Papifts fpcjk truth in accufing thefe men ; and that all our Divines vindication of them is falfe ? Yea, and their own Vindication of their own Faith is falfe j and all this to have fomewhat to fay for his own caufe ? Whar a caufe is it that muft be thus defended ? Why may not Mr. T. afwell ftrike in with Cope's and others Teftimony againft our Bofjk of Martyrs, or with the Papifts in their other foul lyes and flinders againft Luther iCii-viny B ':i;a,Zu'ingliui^ &c. as well as he doth here ? Nay^ would not this m'jke the world believe, that all other the Papifts flinders of the jfaldenCcs ( as to be Arians, Manichecs, Witches, Buggerers, &c. ) were true as well as this ? For if the Papifts teftimonies be better then ours^yca, o: the mens own , in one thing, why not in another ? But yet worft of all is this^in thas when A//. M<i<(}]aU in his Defence had faid enough, one would think, tohaveconvinced M'.T. of the horrible foulnef* of this dealing, yet ha goes on in it, and publickly in the Pulpit inhis Va'cdiClory Oration to th^-people oiBctvdky ( onely againft mej did with mighty confidence repeat the fame palfages out oi Bcynn,d ^nA'Clmlaccnfis. He that dare do thus, what dire he not do :- and what teftimony will he not think valid, that will lean on fuch as ihefc > and how fmall matter will fatisfiehim that will take up with thiv J and upon fuch like grounds dare venture his life yet upon the truth of his Caufe^ I p M) G >d convince him } foj: bare eviciencejind !eafon,and Scripture will never do itj wh^le fuch rcafoning as thi; feems fatisfadory or honcft. , , '
For the reft he faith about Antiquity, and the Teftimeny of miftaken Strah and
X 6o Plain Scripture proof of
tJ Aving'thus to the fatijfa^tcon of myownfoul^ difcovered the duty of admitting infants into the vifiblc Church by Paptifm , anJ chc fiafulnefs of denyiiiij them this admittance,! would here hive ondujcd wich a fcrious advice to all men thac h:vc any fear of God, and tcnderntfs of confcience left, to take hctd of running intofuch balnous and manifold guilt as the moft lie under, ihuare op^ofers in this peine i or if they arc already under it^ to bewail it, and feikto get out- And hcie I had prepared to (hew twenty particular hainous (ins which thty are guilcy of. But my time wid not permit me to befolarge, and men that fcera godly,lovc not to hear of their faults. Only, thus in brief.
Moft that turn Anabaptifts^prctend onely tendernefs of Confcience j which if it be true, methinks they 111. iild make Confcience of all thofe grievous evils that they lun into. Bcfides thofc which I mentioned in the beginning, mcthinks it (liould lie hcavie on a tender confcience to add to Gods Word, to affirm the repeal of his Ordiaances, which no Scripture affirmeth 3 To fay he hath revoked hit met cits , when they cannot prove it ; To put fuch a fcorn upon the moft hij,h G od , as to lay he ha:h revoked hit mercies in mercy , without giving any greater or other mercy inftead of it J and that it is in mercy to the Church and Parents to have tivcir children al out of ihc vifiblc Church, and to have this Ordinance and mercy revi-kcdi though it be no mercy to the children; as if Infants were fuch creatures, that It is a mercy to th< whole Church to have them all kept ©ut.^ Thus to deprave and pervert the facred Scriptures, againft t'.^e mind of the Holy Ghoft 3 1 0 teach ialfe Dodrine i To dehle the Church, and make work for more Reformation ; 1 o break the Second Commandment by taking down a part of the Ordinances of Chrift j i o corrupt their own and other mens un* dcrItanding$3To draw poor fouls into error, wiiom thty cannot recover again ; 1 o run ■upon a way that God witneffetb agairtft from heaven ; To be guilty ot the Churches dolefuU Divifions, and the great grief that hereby oppreffeth the hearts of the godly j and etf ecially the faithfull Miniftry j To hinder the falvatio/i of multitudes of fouls, by beingfucha fcandal tothem; and utuaily by vilifying a painfull Mmiflrythat Ihould do them good , and doing more to the dilgracc of them, and fo to the hindering of the Gofpel, then the profanelt fcoincrs ; To vilifie Gods Ordinances, and fcorn ihcmi as moft of them do by Infant -baptifm 3 To hinder the blelFed work of Refor. mation > andfo help to deftroy the hopes of fo many thoufand Chriftians 3 To open themouthes, and harden the hearts of the Enemies, and make them fay af the godly. You fee what they will come to at lait i To lift up thcmfelvcs in the prideof their beart*, andcenfure ( if not un- Church) all the Churches of Chrift, (ince thetimes ef the Apoftles, or almoft all ; To lifcoura^e godly Magiftratts, and bring them into fuchalnare, that they know not what u do ^ if they reitrain thcle men, thc7 are a« fraiddf perrec«iogorbeingirijyyjoM> yvi»eiWoi/'J*'» (l^fF.ienc^rt ^ thcv doaot, they are afraid of being guilty of all thi .viU • lo waftj lo much prlclotK time la thefe Difputes and vain Janglings, which il.'jti j be Cp-nt in helping <ine another to ,v Heaven; contrary to Rofn. i^. i.'^ffhii. i.^ 4><C6;.},4. r<;,^ ?. 9. vrihmany more the like fins. O vxhat i^<^ C&ftflglttcctjrr bear ihem ?_ much kis ralhly and violently I u(h into all this g^ut; and all ffl1>"|*i*n no ncccflity /• What is it that they fo earneftly ftrive for , but to prov« that ih^if ow'h children a e all cur of Ghrifts vifibie Church? And what excellency is in that condufion^iiit were nuc^thatfo fliould make men break the Churches peace 10 Yindicatc it ? Alf,l\ coiiftffcth, that if they
cughc
Infants Chttrch-memherjlnf and Baftifm, i6i
ought to be admitted Church- membcrSj they ought to be baptiied. So that all the Qucftion iSj Whether thcyought tobe admitted vifiblc Church members ? And is it notadolefull cafe that any Chriftiansfhould be fo zealous to difpute their own chil- dren out of Chrifts Church ; and to plead that they have no right to be admitted Mem- bers ? thatthcyaieno Difcipics of Chrift, and lo noChriftians? Can none be found In Earth or Hell to do fuch an office againft our children, but Chriftian parents them- felves ? Doth Mr,T. take it fo ill, tha: I call this the Divcls part ? I fliall Chew you now that it is far worfe then the Divels part : I fpcak foberly without paflion, I believe it is materially far worfe. I conclude in the words of holy, judiciouSjpeaceable Mclin6lhony (who, as Mr.T- would fain make the world bclieve,w3S inclined in this to the Anabap. tifts) as they are cited by Conr.idiu Bagius in his moft excellent I'aciHcatory ( though hitherto much unfucccfsfull) Treatife,called Pyaxn C-^ihgLDivmi Canonii DifJcrt.C.pag. St. It a nos pyo7Uinciamus d<. B.xptifmo infant'itim : H.^bcmustcfiimoma in Scr'ipturis tnant' fcfta quit affirt»a}U,cxtra ccckfum non c([e falutetn : Ergo infcrimus Ecclcftx infanies, DC' indc & fYimie Ecckfia teflimon'usjuvamur. Ita Judex cflverbum Dei, & accedit purte antiquitatii confcjfiO' MelA'i£i.in Co, p.doClr true edit. Argi'titor. 1580. p 479. it. So we pronounce of the baptlfm of Infants: We have in the Scriptures manifcft teftimonies which affirm, That out of the Church there is no Salvation j Therefore we Ingraff In', fants into the Church 5 And then we are helped by the teftimonies of the firft Church: So the Word of God is the Judge^i and thcconfeflionofpure Antiquity is alfo added. The Lord jefus,who being yet an InfantjWas Head of the Church,forgive mens con- teftlnga^ainft their Infants mcmberlliip, and himfelf vindicate their privilcdges, that they may be fuftl-red to come to him, and not forbiddcni hccaufe of fuch u the K'«gdom of Heave?!. And the Lord recover all his own that are fallen into this deceitful! error, and deliver his poor Church from the mifchiefs that it hath already brought, and is yet bringing on it. Amen.
Camero in Difputatione cum Couroellio, refeicnte P. Teftardo.
iiDdiditca>nero Infantes fc/viii tit appendices parcntunii ad feedus pertme»tcs,
^lod HtilLti^raret^ Ariftolclem adduxit in Elhicis difpulantem. An Infantes Civium cjufdcm Civitatis Cives diet & cenfcri debeant ? ac Civium privikgiis fruitCitm Civesvul- go ccnfeantur a tantimqui Prmcipifidetitatu Jusiurandum prkftitcrunty aut cenhoffi" eiis erg.i dvitatem vel Prineipem defuKguntur,qu<e nondum vakntper tetatcm praflare In- fames? ^(ddifficultatc ficfe expedit, ut dicat, civium Infantes effe 'orfiii^'ivjofpoc t(l^ veluti appendices quafdam Parent um & reputari Cives ^quia cum ex Civibus nati ftnt^tatrm diu cives in bcncficio cerifentur^quamd/u opere&fa£iisco(e nonprodiderunt indignos.Ex- emplum ad rem (ic accomn.odavit Camero, ut diceritylnfantes pa, iter fidelium parentum effe 'o-etfiiyivliti^ac in fcedcc cenfcri J quia nafcantur inter fxderatos ex fcedcatis ; ac pro. indc tamdiu haberi pro fadcratis, quamdiu ipfimet fundus non dcferunt, & gratiam Chrifti qua efl fxdcris fundamentum per incrcdulitatem non refuiunt, quod nifi adulti facere non pojfunt. Itaque ft morianl ur antequ am ad tttatem pervcaerifit in qua poffunt bonum a a W4- ln d'fcernere, codemloco a. Deo haberi acfi credidijfcnt ^proindcquc falvari.
If you would fee more of the probability of the petifliing of all Infants wirh^ut the vifiblc Churchj and of ihe true Expoddon of i Coy>7. 14. and the d.ffc.
1 ^2 PUifj Scripture prdof of
rencc between Holinefs Typicall nnd Real, and rhat Relative or by Renova- tion, and the t;ue meaning of the Promife in the Sec nd"comTnan<irficm,wi:h more of this fubjcft, Read out the reft of that Difputiiion.
I
know by what M>-.T. hath borrowed concerning l^lvcst Sti-abo, &c. thatheijnoc unacquainted wi."fc the Tcftimonles which Vojsius bringeth for Infantbaptifm, not only out of fiierotn, Auflinj:' aulinus ,Thcodorct,ConcU McUvk^GounJ nl.& B-.'caunf. &c. And what Gz-of/whath In his Annotations,with which I fcealfj Mr.T. is acquain- ted. To which it were eafie to add many Tcftimonies gathered by others, as Fr.melius in Cyprian, Joan. Aiborcus in Thcofoph.lib.i.cap.i^^.BuUifi^cr in Vialog.VigUir. liftitut. cap t6. fol. I j6. Calvin^ZanchiuSj with many more. And the Fathers' A-gumcnts from the Remiffion of fin, and falvation of Infants ( ufed alfo by toUd modern Divines, as Chemmt.Examcn.ConcU.Tiidcnt.part.i.pag. (mibi) ^'6. 87. and others ) are not fo light as fome judge them. And Bafils many Arguments {in condone cxhortator. id Biftlfm.) againft delaying baptifm, are ofconfiderablc weight to Infants as well as the agedj it being once proved that they are DifdpleSjChurch-members, or Chriftians.
Though I know many of the Fathers placed too great a necefTity in baptifm ( as ap- pears by Greg Nyjfens Arguments in Oratienc Catcchet.cap. 3 j , 34, 3 j. TcrtuUianJtb. dt Baptifmo.) ('yet that it was not generally taken for abfolutcly necelfary j fee Arboreus proving out of Audin^AmbrofejCyprianf&cJYtt h was warrantable whichthey generally heldjthat where it might be had, it was Uods ordinary way of Re miffion andSalvatlon^ and fo fai neceffary } $0 that according to the general Dodrine of the Fathers, he that will fay they were againft Infants baptifm, muft needs fay alfo they were againft theic hUmon. y'id.yofsiumde Bapt.dii p. i rk/".i./)d^.342. 343.344. Thence the Fathers called {iBapt'ifmuifliifn,miiJ,nvc(l'nuracbri(llamfmijSiicr amentum novx vita ^^0'f^ijvt\triei, dva.'j^>ji<rta. J Sic Aiigufl. (de peccat.mer. & remifcontra Pelag.cap. 24.) Optime Punici Chrlfiiani Biptlfmiim nihil aliud tjnam Salatem vacant. Zfnde ? nlfi ex antiqua. ut ex- a^'imo,& Apofiolica Iradltione. Aad D.Cafaubon Exerc 16 ad A/it/al.Baromi,p-tg. 4 17. inveniiu & Baptlfmum in fcr'tpth antlquorum appeHari \\i?im& page 364: ^cov7/Miillu. minatiomm. And Luther aWs xi^rrfcrente L.Crocio^ Vutrperam rcgni ccclornm. A.nd many Scriptures hint the like, Eph.^^6. Tu i $. M:ir.i6.i6.A^s^ 8,eJ^ zz.i6j&c.Thc:s. fore Parfier de DefceHfu Chnfii, iib-^. page 18. dews that Credo unum Baptlfma^habeba- tur oUm inquibiifdam Symboln : & Baptiftnus Cbrifli oiim erat inter articulos Fldei, page t7,&c. So that dottbtlefs this being the Fathers judgement in general, he that can prove out of them fas I have done out of Juftine,3i\d TcrtitUian) that they judged Infants were ordinarily faved, doth thereby prove(if there were no more)that in their time, they were baptized. Of the ordinary falvation of Infants by vcrtuc of the Covenant, fee the fen- tcnce of Junius ("too large to tranfcribc,i» iib.de Nat. & Grat.ad rat.iZ . refercntc e(iam Do^if.Corad.Bergio.in Prm Cathol.Ccnon. D'jfcrt.6. Scd.\7^' page 847.848.
AN
A N S^W ER
T O
M^. Tombes
HIS
Valedidlory Oration to the People oi 'BEWDELEY:
In Vindication of the fifth Direclion;,which I give
my Hearers of Kc(\errninltery in the Preface
of my Book, Entituled
The Saints E\ferlajling ^Jl .
WITH
A brief Confutation of fix more of Mz-.T's Errors.
AND
A Corre<5live for his Antidote, and Confutation-
SERMON.
Being the third Part of this Treatife.
Extorted unavoidably, from one that abhorrethDivifion
and Contencion^and bendech his prayers and Qudies
for the Peace of the Church.
Rom> 16. 17,18. Ihefccth you Brcthrcnym-irk^hctn which caufe dlvifions and offences contrary 1 0 the doCli uic which ye ha ve learned ^and avoyd them. For they that arcfuch, fcrve not our Lo;d ^cfus Cbrijl , but their oivn belly , and by good words and fait jpccches deceiv: the hearts of tbejimple.
Rom. 14.1. Him 1b.1t is weati in the faith receive you^ hut not to doubifuU difputatiom
London^ Vunicdy Anno Horn. 16^2,
Infants church- memberjhip and Bapifm,
i6j
Mr. T.
should have f aid little tf!orc, had not an unexpcrtcd occafiiM enforced me to add fowethtvg further j the lafi Lords d'ty handling the pom of Here fie j becaufe I l^ticw there were not a fivp intemperate SpiritSy that rvere ready to ccnfuie tbe hold'* ivg of that Do£trine that I have taught j {^of denying infant' Baptiftn to be lawfully'] to be Here fie; 1 did therefutc thela^ Lords day abundantly (^aslfuppofc) clear my ftlf, and thofe that ho'd that which I conceive truths and do yet ajfurc tnyfdf it is truth y far from holding any Here fie. But it feemt others they [licl^ ?iot to veclfon them that deny Bapti-s^ng of In- fants mofl Hereticall : and the next dijy after uncxpeUcdly I lighted upon u. Bool; of my Neighlwur Mr. Richard Baxters mailing, to xvhich he hath pre- fixed a Preface^ or an Epifile Dedicatory to his Neighbours c/Kederminfter, imvhichhe commends to them ten Dire6lionSf in tbe fifth of which, after a veryffjort touch upon Anti- rtomianifm, Socinianifm, Arminianifm, Separation^ Independency, he then flies out upon the Anabaptifis whom he calls Hcreticl^s, and meddles withfomewhat mere fully, and parti- cularly nAmes me, andrecl^ons tne among them whom he calls Hereticl^s^as any man may eafily perceive i that if he did not lay at me only, yet mainly , andfoitfeims it istaljen ; and ac- cordingly that paffazehatb been had up in public^ by the Par/on of your Panfh the lafi Lo-rds day : and^erfons aye grown infolent in their Speeches upon it. And I can- not but ohferve it to be only ufed , partly t» ma\e me odiom i or contemptible to you » and partly to divide your affcdions from me > and it is n»t unlil(ely to be the beginning of a Schifmey or rent among you 5 and it is tilicly to be injurious to m throughout tbe whole Kingdom.
R, B.
I R, I am forry that your fplrit (hould be fo mored at thofe few lines In my Preface, as I underftand it was .- 1 folemnlv profefs, that I neither then was ^ nor to this day am confcious to my felf of any paffion towards you , but onely ©f comp.iflTion for you-- exceeding high and paflionate dirpofition,and that you (hould be an tnftrumenc of fo much hurt In the Church of God, who otherwife might have done much good. MethinkSj that ordinary ingenuity mlghi have reftralncd your paffion ; You know it was not In any ciufe of my own that I fpake $ It Is the caufe of God and his Church : In which, as no man iliould dare to mifcarry by Intemperance, fo no man ought to freez or be rcmifs. I hati both i^,r'.orant violence, andlukewarmncfs. Sir, I can fay ( whatever you accufe me of) btfore himthac knoweth ray heart, that If I know my own heart, I bear you no more ill will thtn I do the neerefl friend I havt ; but heartily long that God would recover you from the
1 66 TUin Scripture poof of
tnare, though I confcfs my topes do now much languifb ;) and that it was the meer enforcements of Confciencc that cau!ed me to write thefc words. Sir I am asadyingman (being almoft confumed) my people of J(.r^.>w/;j/?CT- arc very dear to me; My afT.ftions to them, and theirs to me arc very ftrong : I have laboured much among their, and God hath given me that fuccefs which binds me to be everlaftingly thankfull to God, and to be very tender of ihcm. And fliould I betray their fouls after nil this by my lilence, for fear of difpleafing ycu ? You know i take your Opi- nion to be an error •, and its confequence to be dangerous; Are you angry at this 5 will you b: angry with al 1 that are not of ycur Opinion f And I wrote thofc DircftJ- ons to them as my dying counfell , that they ml^ht have fomewhat to prcfcrve them and ml^h: be minded of the fnare when I am gone ; Had I not fpokc now, for ought I know, I migh: have never fpokefo more. And do you take your felf to be fo bound in confclence to Preach To many Sermons together agiinft Infant-Baptifra ? and may not I write a few lines to defend ;hcm againft the Infedion of your Doftrine ? If the plague were a: B^Wfly, had not }\fdci minficr nctA to watch ? when our Parifli joyneth to your town, and our converfe is fo frequent .' You know, or might do that I meddle not with you in the Pulpit (nor ever did in my life, though you wtote to me that you were informed that I had often girds at you j which is a notorious fallliood ; So well have you taught your few Dilciples to fpeak truth j) And may I nei. iher in Pu'.pitnor Fr^fs fpeak anything againft ycurmind? All that I was wont to difpute with nbout Liberty of Confcltncej v^ould gi-ant a Liberty to fpeak againft error, though not to ufe force againft ir. And by how many Letters, and Mcffen- gers, and Sermons have ycu urged me, and called upon me to write? and are you now fo angry at a few lines? If 1 haveoffcndei^, it Is agiinft my will , for it is with- out my knowledge J and no one hath fo much caufctobe troubled at it as my ftlf ; for if it be evill, it is uuconceivably more injurious to my own foul then to yau. I am drawing apace to the time of my account. Truly Sir, wiihout vanity I may al- moft challenge you to name me a man that hath proceeded Icfs ralhly and more caute- Ioi;fly in thispoint of Infant-baptifm then my felf 3 I neveryet baptized but two in my life J and thofe were children of godly Parents, which is ncer eleven or twelve years ago. 1 had prefcntly after fome doubts about it, and I endeavoured to get them refolved as impartiallyas I could ; while I have been fearching, I have foiborn the Dx.afticc till this day i I have heard all that I cculd hear againft it , in Army and Countrey j have read all that I cculd get againft it ; And rhcugh I have been long fatif- fied, yet becaufc I was to be your Neighbou-j and you were judged the moft able that way, I was willing to hear the utmoft that rould be faid before I praSiced. And though I flujnncd Difputesof thisnatureasmuchas I could, yet v\ hen you had forced me to it, I entertained it with much difadvantage j for a man of my extream weakncfs of bo' dy, and weaknefs in Learning, and unreadinefs of Speech oft times to Difpure before thoufands of people, and fome thirty Minifters and Scholars, with a B. of Divinity of(o long ftanding, and fo perfedly verfd in this Controverfic, having written a- gainft, and flighted far abler men then my felfj nothing bxt nccefTity and love of 1 ruth, could have forced me to it. In the mean time, I daily prayed unto the Lord as heartily as I cculd, that if you were in the right, he would notfuffermcto cppofe ycu^ but convince me, and bring me over to yru. And when the time came, though I was eTtream ill the day before, God enabled mc to fpeak from betwixt nine and rcaadcck. till after fou', when at no other time lam able to fpeak well above an hour i yea^ and I was better a fortnight after then of long time j This providence i know W3S in anfyier to my prayers; And foihc fuccefs of thatd3y« Difpute j
which
JftfafJts Chttrch-memherfliip and Baptifm. 167
which I have in writing by rae,3s It was taken in lliort hand^batam unfeignedlyaHiam- ed for your lal<e, that the world Ihould Tee it. I mention not my fufpcnfion of baptiz. ing, nor my doubts fo long by way of excufe, much lefs of boafling j for God knows, I lament It as my weaknefs and errcuf. But to ihc w you how cautcloufly I have proceed- ed In this cafe, and therefore how little caufe you have to be fo angry with me herein, (befiiics many a hundred pround means that 1 might tiavc had more if I would have baptized and adminiftred theLoids Fupncr. ) Do you think I did not know when I wrote thofe lines that I fhould offend ycu? Yesj And did I dcGre to provoke you? No, the Lord knows it. But I fiill bcgg'd dircdion of God, and then ftudied my duty, and then confultcd my confcience, and it charged me to fpeak faithfully and plainly for God,and notlhunmy duty for far of difplea(ing men. And your own judgement Is, that Truth muft not be filenccd,ro as to be loft for Peacc.Though it be not Canonical, he was a wife man that faid in Ecdef. 4.11,15. Accept nopc-fon aga'mft thy foul, mdlct mtjbe reverence of any man c-mfc thecto fall i and refrain not to fpcalf when there is a time of fa-L'ing. I tack this coufel to be divincj and therefore obeyed It, though againft your pleafurc. Yet I looked fuaher to vcrfei^. and rcfolved in no wife to fpeak againft the truth (if I could know it) and where 1 knew It not, to bcabafliedof the crrour of my Ignorance, when difcovered. But yet 1 looked further to vcyfe iS.wlrh which I took up -J Strive for the Truth imto Dcaib^ and the Lord [hjU fight for thee. And 1 found thu he did.
R. B.
I Am In little hope that you (hould be an Inftiument of difcovering any extraordi- nary truth to the Church of God , till you have fo far recovered the tendernefs of your confcience , as to fear fpeaking falfly. Perhaps you will take Itforhar/h language of me, to tell you that the laft Letters 1 had from you, and this your Oration, have very many palpable grofs untruths, which you either knew to be fo, or might have done 5 but if 1 could bethink my felf of milder language which might ac- quaint you with your fin, and vindicate the truth, I would ufe it : ( Though it's pity that men are grown fo tender of their names , that they muit he flattered in evil. ) I That I ufed thofe fpeeches only ( or at all ) to make you odious and contemptible, is very falfe. Ic was to preferve my friends from the danger of your error , and make It odious, and not you. 1. That I did it to divide the affcdions of your people from you, is untrue j Why (hould you pretend to know my heart and ends better then my felf ? Is not this to m\ke your felf a God, who only fearchcth the heart ? And is this no fin with yout Confcience ? j. That my lines th^rcK^ likely to be the beginning of a Schifm among them. Is a jeft indeed ; Rtfim teneatiS umia ? Mr. T. hath been long preaching for to have his people renounce thetr Infant- Baptlfm , and be baptized again, and he hath profecuted it fo hotly , that ho hath cha ged their own blood up- on them if they did not receive his Dodrinc ; but Bcrvdely huh divers foUd fetlcd Chriftiins j his Doftrine perverted very few ( when lie fent them to me for Refoluti- on, theie came but five or (ix,) whereupon Ai^. T, tells thcni; that it was their hypo- crilie that made them not liibmit to the truth, (as he calls it ) After all ihisj he knows what foccefs the Difpute had againft himj And now he.tellstherain his Farewcl- fpeech , thai a few lines ia my book co my own people is like to niak€' a Schiftn ^, among
( ■
i6S Phin Scripture fro&f ef
among them, becaufc I hinder that fearful! Schifm which by preaching and private dea- ling he hi;h been long a working. It is a fine world when fuch men as 5^^ . T. (hall ay out againft making a Schifm among them, becaufc I warn my own people to take heed of his trror. As if he had been fetting Bewdcly on fire, and I bid Kedermmjlcr take heed of it, and therefore he would pcrfw3dcthem,that by fofaying, I were llkcto fet Hiivdcly on fire It is pill thereachof my underftanding how thofe lines can caufc a Schifm: Will it fct them againft his Opinion? "^o they were all before he came thither, for oughi I can learn ; and almoiiall yet. Will it fet them agunft his pcrfon ? i. I fpeak of him as the moft learned and moderate of them in the Land j and he taketh the Anabaprifts for the li^hteft people in the Land ; and is not that as honourable a ti.lc then he candefire? I hare heard him oft accufcd to be very proud: And if this title be too low for him, 1 doubt he will ftiU more verifie it z. He is going from them, and this is his Farewell-Speechj and what danger then, that dif- nffe^ion to hin» Ihould make 3 Schifm in Bcvpddvy } ?. If he bc-fo innngled in an ill caufe, that his credit muft ftand or fall with his caufe, I cannot help that : I muft fpeak againft his ili caufc, thou£hhet3keit a difparagement tohimfclf. 4. If thetruc Relation of the Di- fputebc a disgrace to him, I think it is no fault of mine therefore to relate the tru.h. 4. 1 hat I call the Anabaptifts Hereticks^ is another uncruth ; Though moft ofour moft learned godly Divines beyond-Sea do frequently fo call them, wlto write againft thera. 5 . And that I reckon Mr. T, among thofe whom 1 call Hercticks, is another untruth. I Ihould know my own meaning better then M-'T. and therefore am fitteft to be my own Expofiror. If he had I faid that I feem to mean fo, it had had fomc fliew of truth, and not much. The Analylis of my own words therefore is this- Having named the particular ?c6ts as erroneous, 1 then fpeak of them in gencrall. I. As teftified againft by God i more particularly the //,7/i«oWj;« In Nav England by theMonfters 2. By bclnggiven up to evil lives j Where mentioning that Mat.j.by their fruits ye Ihall know them, I proceeded to vindicate it from a ufual mif-interpre- tation in thofe words [Hereticks may for a while feem holyj&c] which I added i. Left any lliould think that I applyed that of Chrift to every Sect o|: erroneous perfon, but only Hercticks. z .And of thofe named, I intented in that Speech only thofe Antino' »:ifls of ;V^R»-£H^/jwrf with their like, whom 1 had pointed at in the fort -going lines, and againft whom only I brought the Lxample ofthemonfters (for whom elfc can it belong too>) Hence I dcfcend to n?ew,thatas this Text is tiue of Hereticks Jo the judg- ment of a wicked life hath light fo vlliblyalfo upon the Anabaptifts, that may deterre ■ us from joyning with them ; which I exprefs,no: of every particular Anabaptifljbut of Societies of them only j and that not of a Society begun, or yet in progrcfs , who may pofTtbly repent and recover j but I fpeak only of the former Societies^ whofe end hath been known. From hence I proceed to fortifie men againft their Opinion^ from the experience of the weaknefs of their Arguments, which particular, and no other ^In exprcffion or Intention) lapplyed to M^ T. with the two adjoyning, vi\ ab- furdities which they are driven to, and little tender confciencious fearof erring j my
I thoughts never were to charge him here publikely with any more ; (and whether this chargebe Juft, youfluUfee anon j) And withall, Iftilchim the ablcft of them, and one of the moft moderate} And this is the true meaning of my words. If I did feem to call you Heretick when 1 never intended it, I hope I have now made you amends by difclaiming thatfenfe of my words, as publicklyas I mentioned you. And yet you might have been better able to have underlWd my words, in that you heard mc more then once profefs that I took not the denyall of Infant-baptifm for Herefie j SOjMir Rc»bapii£ing neither 3 apdthat Xwag none of thofe chat would call a meec
Anabaptift
Infants Chtirch-memberjhif and Baptifnt,
not miftakcn in that point ; and whether an error not againft the foundation, main- tained with feparation and faaion, miynotmske a Hereiick ; and whether the diffe. rence between Hcrefie and Schifm be lb wide as 1 have thought.)
6. But I pray Sir confider , whether you aboue many others (hould not have been filent here, as being an unfit man to take exceptions at this j which upon thefe two grounds I rtiall convince you of.
I. Are not you the man that Preached publickly that [It is Hercfic to maintain In. fanr-Baptifmjon the grounds from Ciicumcifion.as Mi . M.h(hj!I doth.^] And not only Mr.Mmfh.iU, huiCalvbi^Zuwglim^E.iUiPgcr, and moft of the glorious Lights of the Reformed Churches arc malntajners of Herefie, as ycu proclaim them ? And then the Papifts calling us all Hereticks, it fcems by you Ao us no great wrong. Ohfora humble fpirit ! how much is i: worth! I profefs Sitj when fober men told mc of this pafiage In your Sermon , I believed that you had not near fomuch pride in your brcaft, and therefore told them alljthat I would not believe but they miftook you; till having asked ycu concerning it) you acknowkdged it your felf in the terms 1 have fxprcfled it in; And yet do you fmart fo when you did but dream that you were called Heretick i
z. And arc not you the man who did twice in conference whh me aver, That whoeverholdtthany error in Religion, and labouieth to make a party for it, is a Heretick ? And when I diffented, and told you, I thought that error muft be againft the Foundation, either diredly or by immediate or undeniable confequence '■> you de- nycd it ; and all to (hew that you had juftly charged Mr. AIay(J}..li and all of his mind with Herefie. And when I told you, that if that were true, then you muft affirm thac ;he Independents are Hereticks ; you anfwered mc^ that [if they make a party^ or feek to make a party, fo they are.] And this you ftood in again, when I qutftioned you next J I told you, that it was undeniable, that they fought to make a patty j and you did not deny it : I further urged you (^ being amazed much at this your hard conclu- fion ) that we are charged to avoid a man that is a Heretick after the fitft and fecond admonition ^ as one that is felf-condemned ; and can you think that yoH and all the godly in the Land are bound to avoid an Independent as a lelf- condemned man ? To this you anfwered nothing. I confefs, if your charge be true, it is time for them to look to it. But for my part , I dare not call an Independent a Heretick. (Though! confefs, the Fathers feem to call thofe Hereticks that feparated or made Divifions in the Church, though the error which they maintained were very fmall. ) But as for you I. Can you call fo many godly men through the Land Hereticks, as are Independents, befides Mr- Mmfhall and thofe of his mind ? and yet arc you angry when you hat! thought you had been called Heretick your fclf .=■ i. Do you not judge us allHcre« ticks according to your definition, who difixr from yoa ? feeing we profefs that we take our felves bound to make all men that we can to be againft yi u- Opinion ? * J. Doth your pradice agree with your judgement .? do yoa avoid all ihofc In- dependents whom you pronounce Hereticks? or do you not f.ivour them more then others, if they more favour your Opinion ? 4 What a Diviiion w.-uld this make in England , If all men were of your judgement, in taking Independents, and all others that make a party for error, to be Hereticks ? Do you not hereby judge the wife of your bofom a Heretick? and yet are you fo tender of your felf before y^uhai need ? .$. If your own definition of a Heretick be ttue , I dare boldly call you a Heretick;
Z ' Vot
I7» Plain Scripture proof of
For I dare fay that you crrc ; and I dare fiy, that you labour very painfully and paf- fiona:cly to make a party j though I hope God will ftill blaft your endeavours and prc- fcrvc this poor Countrey in unity and truth. And yet for my pirt,I never did'nor dare call you a Hcrctick for all this . And if you thought I hadji tell you i: is your miftake ; And if you think thcdatkneff of my words were a wrong to you, I hcrepublikdy ri^ht you, by difclaiming any fuch fanfc.
Mr. T.
Vea, and it haih been vented when I little expelled any fuch muter , while j have been •■■ earncfi with him to give me his Arguments in writing^ thatfo I might examine them j and to hold friendly conefpondencc with him, at his dcfire to have privuc conference with himy I went over and [pent a whale afternoon, Little im:igimng any. fuch thing as this ; and loy in this time when I iittk dreamed of any fuch thing, this paffage hath been vented againfl me i andjudgey by reading of it, what l{inde of fpiru Mr.Baxter is of, and what thoughts he hath had of me. I fee I am necefsitated to vindicate my fclf in this place by an Anfwcr to the while paQ'jge^and therefore J befeechyou have patience with me this once^ and it is vciy. lively ifhallncvcr difquictyou any txoie in this place.
R. B.
BUt is it not lawful! or convenient. Sir, to fortifie my friends againft your error, bc-- caufe I privately debited the cafe with you indelire of your recovery ? what a fti ange inference is that ? What if I had fcnt to a Separatift, or PapJrt, or a drunkard, cr a fwcarcr to debate the cafe with them, in hope of their recovery ? Is It therefore my fiu to diffwade others from their fin the mean while i Neither was it at my choyce when to write it J for the Book was then coming forth, and the Epiftle muft then be written, and could not be delayed, in which I Judged my felf bound, as their Friend, and as tkcir Teacher, to give my people that warning.
And for mens judging,by this, what kind of fpirlt I im of i i.You woald make men believe that I am far better then I am, when you can find no worfe matters to charge upon my fpirit. i. It is a fmall matter to mc to be judged by you, or by mans Judge- ment J How little do I care what you or others judge of mc, furthar then the honour of God and his truth is concerned In it ? I confefs, Sir, the days have been, that when I heard that men yillfied mc, it was a trouble to me j but fince I have lived (o long on %he borders of death, and feen the dolcfull etfeds of pride through the Land, and difco- vered It, and watched over it in my ewn heart, I can truly fay, without vanity or hypo- crite, that it breaks not the peace of my minde, when I am defpifed or ccnfured, nor did I ever feel any paffion againft Mr. T. working In my breft upon any or all the pafiages which In I ulpit or Difcourle he hath vented againft mc. And if his paflions be kindled, I am fure h will be more to his own hurt then mine.
Mr.T.
Infants Church-memberjhif and Baptifm, 1 75
Mr. T. J
THcpnf^age U in the fc words [Anabaptifts play the 'Oivels part in aecufing their ovm children J nnddi fputing them out of the Church and Covenant of Chrijl , and af- firming them t« be no Vifdpks^ nofcrvants ofGod^ nor holy, as feparated to him. Tca^ God jaith the contrary, Lcvit-ij, 41^41. Deuc.i9.io,ii,iz, gjT-c. Ad.iJ.io. Col 7.14- I cannot digerfs to fortifie you againfi thcfe Sc£ls. You have feen God fpcal( againft them by judgements from heaven? whit rverc the two Monfiers in New-England ^wt miracles > Cbrifl hath tolAyou, by their fuits^&c.} Mr. V,^x:cr faith Anabaptifts phy the Divcls part in, &c. 1. Anabaptiji is a namethit Mr. Baxter miqht have linownis unjuftiy afcribcdtt thofe perfons that are baptised at the confeffton of their faith, when they come to fuU years ; and they arc not bapti':^d again, (heir infant Baptifm being no Baptifm, jf he would give m a title meet for m{but that he is willing to give us a title that might tnal^e ut mo(i odiout) he might have called ui AntiptedobaptiflsiOs being again[l lnfant-Baptifm,as indeed we are. z. He faith [we play the Divels part in accufmg our 6tvn children'] Aecufing is cither before Cod^or before men, or cl/e in their own cenfciencei. I am fare I am one of thofe he means, being named. And I challenge Mr. Baxter to mention wherein I ever plaid the Divels part. He faith [we accuje our own children'] what u that ? to accufe, n to lay fame crime or chargt- to them. 1 linow no faults, or crimes I ever charged upon my children, but that which Mr. Baxter doth himfclf (/ believe) that is, with ortgmall corruption. It is language that I un- derflandnot, t$ call the dcfiyingofSaptifmto Infants, accufmgof them. j. He faith £play the Divcls part in difputing them out of the Church and Covenant of Chrift] The Church of chri(i is either yifiblejor lavifiblci no difputation of mine didever difputc them out of the Invifibic church of Chri(l, any more then I thitil{ he doth. I am fure Mr. Marlhall faith as much concerning them as I do{^that none can certainly conclude if they be ele6led,or repro-. bated.'] Concerning the yifible Church t to difpute them out of that by my difputationftt mufi. be either to keep them out, or to caft them out ; no dilatation of mine did ever l^cep them out of the Church,or tended to anyfuch purp9fe,that by my difputation theyjhould beliept out. But only this I fay, they are no Vifible Members till they pyofefs their faith in Chrifi j no dif" putation oft/line tended ever to l(eep them from learning the wiU of God, or from knowing of thofe things that might bring them into the Church. By my difputation and pains, I blefs Cod, as 1 have endeavoured, fo have I brought many, though not Infants, into the vifible church. And I [li II hold that an in/ant it not a member of the yifible Church : neither is any per fan a member of the ytfible Church,tiU he profcfs the faith of Cbrifl J Nor is it the Divels fart to affirm this, but the contrary is more lil^ely (being an error) the Divcls part to affirm it, and efpecially con[idering the pernicious events that follow Inftnt. Bapti/m 5 whereby it comes to pafs , that many thoufands do thm\ them/elves made Chridians by their infant' fprinkJing, and do red in it as the ground of their hopes for cverla(i:ng falvation ; and thii thing holding thoufands in carnal prcfumption, we ought rather te thin^ tbofethat mamtam infant- Baptifm play the Divcls part.
Z 1 R.S.
1-74 P^^^^ Scripure freof of
R. 'B.
MT.T. Is offended thati give them the title of Anabaptifts J and tie thinks it un- fit for them. But I. Fit or unfit, cuftomc commandeth the ufc of words and names ; many know what the word means, that cannot tell what an Antipjcdobaptift is J that is a hard word for feme of his own followers to pronnunce, much more ro un. derftandjWere it none of the chief that they are taught, a. What unfi:nefsis there In the fignification of th€ word ? Doth he think chat I underftand not that [Anabaptift] fia- nifieth one that is baptized again ? And Jhall we believe him becaufe he barely affirms that they are not baptized again? and that Infant-baptifm is no Baptifm ? This Is poorly to beg the queftion. If he could prove that this is no duty to baptize Infants, yet I little doubt to prove that it were a Baptifm, though not regular. But he is earneft with his people to be now baptizcdjand we know they have been baptized once already, though he fay they have not 5 if wafliing into the Name of the Father, ?on^ and Holy Ghoft, as an engaging, dedicating, initiating fign^be baptizing
But fee what a courtefie Mr.T. will do all the finners of theChrilllan world ! when we tell him what an hainous aggravation of their fin it is, that they commit it after bap- tifm. and after their folemnYow,Covenant and Engagement there made to God • Mr, T.. ftcps in, and eafeth them of all the burden of this aggravation without a Siviour j and lelleth ihem that it is no fuch matter, they were never baptized, and therefore they never finned againfl their baptifm i and they never fo engaged to God, and therefore never finned againft that engagement.
But Sir, dare you undertake to bid all thefefinners never repent for their finning againft their Baptifm and covenant then made,and you will warrant them, and bear the blame ?
As fbr giving you a Title to make you odious, it is another of your untruths • it is none of my purpofe i but to call you by that name by which onely you are commonly icaown. 1 am fain to ufe the name of LucheranjCalvinift, A rminian^c^-c. though I could wilh :he Church had never known thofc names ; but when they are commonly ufcd, we muft ufe them, if we will fpeak to common people. 1 will call myfelfa Proteftant,be. caufeit is the common Title ; bat I like not the name Proteftant, as being too private 2nd occafional to affix to the Church • I like the anfwer thit the Kmg niade,when they enquired of his Religion and he told them he was a Chriilian .- or if you will have any more of me, I am a Catholick Chriftian, or an Orthodox Chriftian, or a Chriftian of that Religion as was held in the Apoftolical and Primitive times. And yet I muft ufe other names, though I utterly difltke themjas being the fomcnters of faftion.
But now wecome to the mainbufinefs ; Mr.'T. thinks I fpeak hainoufly, to fay, They play the Divcls part. But let me tell him, that truly I fpeak not thofe words in- confiderately , but upon moli fetious confideratlon ; nor in that bicternefsof pallion, but in judgement and companion; and in the fame fort (hall now fay this much more j that I do verily believe that the matter or fubflance of yourfaft ( feparated fcom the malicious intention ) is not onely a playing of the Divels part, but worfe •, yea, yery far worfe In fcverall rcfpeds, then-if it were the Divel that did it. I pray,ex- a?jiine firft deliberately whether this be wiiC or no j and if it be not, then blame me ..
but
Ifjfafits church' member fhip and B aptifm . 1 7 5
but if it be true, ic's time for you to repent, and not to be angry with chofe that tell you of it. And now I fliall manifeft it to ycu. in anfwer to your Challenge, that you are the man that play this hainous part. And i. Is it not pity that fo able and learned a man doth not underftand, that accufiitg contains more then laying any crime to ones charge? As the law hath two parts, the mandate and the fandion j and as the true nature of a Law is to be lAn Auihcritativc Determination dc dcbito, of Due] fo each part of the Law determlnethof afeverall debit urn: The precept (of doing or forbear- ing) determinethof, and producech the ducnefs of obedience The promife dctermi- neth of the duenefs of reward. The threacning decermineth of the duencfs of the Pe- nalty, Now Sir, as there is a various </f/'i;«Wj fo there is a divers accufac ion. As there is a twofold Rcati44y Guilt; Rc.UHsfafii vcl omffionii ut eulp.iy f^'Ccitia feBn<ei guile offaulc, and griilt of punifhment; fo is there a twofold work for the accufer : And as the Rtitm poen^ vet ad p csiiam, is the chief thing which is commonly called guile (and therefore the common definition of guilt isj thzt k is obi gaiio ad p/eftam, an ob- ligation to punilhmentj fo the Chief part of the accufcrs wotk is to charge that guile, rather then that meer guilt of faQ ; For this is his end in charging the former j What <-ares he for mentioning our faults, but that he might prove us by them to be obligati ad pecnam^ that we have forfeited our reward, and incurred the mifery ? And this is moft evident bythe contrary work of julUfication, wherein Chrft doth acquit from the guilt of penalty, when yet he muft acknowledge us guilty of the faft. And juftificatU on is oppofite both to accufation and condemnation. Now you know that either all pe- nalty (z%Barhrv\n Exercitat. and many Schoolmen fay) licth in privation of fomc good J or at leaft agrcatpart cfit. Now Sir, by this time me thinks you might fee plaincly, that the woik of an accufer is i. and ptincipally to plead the ^ft'/V/<w fo,'??*^ and fo the von di biium bom co/iditiotiaiitcr promiffi ^giinik the defendant , to plead that he ought to fuffcr, and fo to be deprived of fome good, and that he hath not right to thegood that is pleaded for him: And then i. As a means to this, he pleads his gurit of fad or fin. Now Sir,! Ihallfirft Ihew you that you play the accufer of your owii children, i. And that your fin is aggravated morehainonfly in feverall refpefis then the Divels. i. One ofthc mercies that God beftoweth in this life to his people, is to be members of his Vifible Church, and fo to be in all probability members of the invi- fible, to be iubjcAs of the vifible fpeciall Kingdom of Chrift,to be Dilcipled of Chrift, to be folemny engaged by the Parents into Covenant with Chtili, taking him for their Lord and Saviour, and binding thcmfelves to obedience if they live j to have the be*- Defies of theconditionall Covenant of grace fcalcdup to them j to be baptized for the remifllonoffins, as the Scripture- phrafe is, and to be baptized intthe Name of the Fa- ther, Son and Holy Ghoft, to be dedicated to God, or holy as fepatated to him. Now Sir, did you not zealoufly difpute a^ainft all thefe above fix hours togciher with me before thoufands of witnefles ? and plead that fnfants were no Difciples, no vifi* ble Church- members, nor fo holy ? furcly ycu did. And is net he an accufer of you tbtt would plead that you are no fubjeft of King or State •, no Citizen of a City where you are enfranchized ; no member of the Chuch Vifible, no Difciple of Chrift, &c > If you fVill fay that thcfc arc no Privlledges to Infants, and therefore it is no accufati- on, 1 come to that in my next.
i. And herein you hainoufly erceed the Divell. i. It is mote naturall tothe Divel then to men, and godly men j therefore you fin againft nature more. 2. You are nterly rehtcd to yout own children, they are yours, whom you are bound to love dear, lyj but they are not ib related to the Divell, th;y arengt hisj Ic is more hainous for
Z 5 a fa-
1 76 PUin Scripture fro§f of
a father to plead hisownchildc ouc of his inheritance, then for an enemy to do Ic. 3. The Divell u moved by his own defpcrate condition to be malicious j but you cannot fay fo. 4. And which is yet far more ; the DJvel, for oui^ht we ever find, dotb never accufe any as dcferving the penalty and forfeiting the mctcy , but for fomc fault J heproveth the guilt of lin, and lo the guilt of punilhmcnt for that. But yeu ac- cufe your dhiidrcni as having no right to the laid hclinefs, Church-membcnhip, Dif- ciplelhip, &c. without alledging any (in as the caufe,which is a fouler injuftlcc then the Divtll is found guilty of. Indeed you fay here they have orginall fin, but do not fay that for that they are bereaved ofthefc privilcdges. Nav, as the complement of your error, youdoplcad that it is no privilcdgeto bcof the Vifiblc Church for them, and that God Icavcth them all out In mercy ; though it was a mercy that once Infant* were in the Church, yet now it isagJeater mercy that they are out j and to whom is this a mercy ? why to Infants , to all Infants, thofe that are faved , and thofe that arc condemned, and to their parents, and to the whole Church j thefcarc you- own words i And isnot this to acidefcorn toaccufation ? as J«//a« did by the ChnftJans when he buffeted them, and took all from them , and thentjld them it was Chrifts will 3 and it fliould turn to their gooJ. Finde whereever the Divcl Is guilty of this.
And yet you fay, it is language that you underftand not, to call the dcnyall of In- fants Baptifm [Accufing them]. Anfw. i. It is pitty you Ihould trouble the Church fo much with your dodrlne, and vaunt fo againft all the Divines that aieagainft you, and yet cannot underhand fuch a thing as this. a. Do you underftand that denyallof their right to Baptifm, and to Difciplefhip, and Church-membcrlhip, and Chriftianl- ty, is an accufing them > Thcfe are the things that we are upon. Doch not he accufe a Prince chat dcnycth faim his Coronation, and all right thereto ?
3. You fay, you difpute them not out of the invilible Church. Anfwer i.But will you yield that they are fo much as feeming probable members of the invifible Church? if you do, then they are members of the vifiblc ; which you deny: For to be a vifiblc member cf the Church, or amerober of the vifible Church, as fuch is no- more then to be a feeming member of the invifible Church, or one that we ought to take in probabl* lity to be ot the invifible Church. Now if you deny this, then fure you deny more then I. A poflibility is not fo much as a ftrong grounded probability. And whether I fay no more for Infants falvation then you, 1 ieaveyou to)ud§ebymy foimer Art^u* ments. Bur you fay, that no difputationof yours tended ever to keep them out of the vifible Church. To which I Anfwer, It is not In your power to keep them outdircft.' ly , therefore it is no thanks to you if you keep them not out. The Divels falfe accu- facions of the Saints, as having no right to heaven, doth not keep them out of heaven j for which they may thank God, but no thanks to him. but you plead that they are no vifiblc Church members, norought to be ndmittcdor initiated fuch, nor have any prtftnc right to it. And what can Satan do more in way of accofation in this cafe, then plead that they have no right to thcfe privilcdges ? Indeed you arc more favouiH- blejiihen to plead diredly that they ought to be all damned, or certainly (hall be j but you plead withall againft the chief grounds of the probability of their falvation, Ycu deny them to be in Covenant with the Lord as their God, and the engaging of them to be his. Youdenyihat title to falvation which upon promifethey have in point ef Law ('as I have fhewed before^ and you might know that clcAion giveth no Ic^al title, and withall that all (lull be judged by the word, and according to the Laws of God i even Infants as well as others 3 and To thdi tide to mercy muli be pleaded from fome promife of Cod in his word*
3. And
JnJAnts Church' wemberjhif and Baptifm, 1 77
J And fure fo far as it is in your power, in my judgement you do as much as anymanin fAland, that Iknow, tokecpthem ourofthe viGble Church: For you arevTrvxealoutandinduftriousln preaching, difpuc.ng, private folHcinng men nee to enoa-e their children in covenant with God; not to bring them as Members mto the viable Church ; not to initiate them by Chrifts Initiating fign ; yea. "ot^o believe th cthcy arc, or that Chrift would have them to be Members o/the vifible Ckurch il thev come to age • yea, to believe that it is better to be out of the Church then in I: Andfme ifthe'parcntsrefufall can do any thing to disfranchifethe childe, and keep him out of the Church, you hare done your part to keep them cut ; for which I think Chrift will give you as much thanks as hcd id the Difciples for keeping luch tiom him But what a ridiculous paffage is this, to profcfs your judgment, that they are no Members, nor ought to be admitted, and yet to lay, 1 hat you do nothing to keep them
""buc you refolve you wlH yet go a higher ftcp ; and what Is it that you will not fay to maintain your caufe ? when you dare tell your people in the Pulpit, That it is the Di- vels part to affirm Infants are Church mcmbcis vifible, and to maintain their Bap- tifm I blame my hard heart, that doth no more tremble and lament fo horrid ex- preffions and to fee how far godly men may be given up. Mr. BUckrvood ^ou\d have made the world believe, that Infant -baptifm and Reftraint in matters of Religion were Antichriftj two laft Garifons : And the Socim^ns fay, That ic is Antichrift that firft taught that Chrift is God ; and the Dodrlne of the Trinity is of Antichrift .-And o. thersfay That the Dodrine of the fouls Immortality is Antichriftian (as Mr. B/^^ inhis Pfefacc to his confutation of Mr. Biichveodi which I would have fome others to think on too, that dcterr thoufands of ignorant Profetfors from liuths with the name of Antichrift.) But fee how far A/r. T. goes beyond them all ! he faith, Ihat his the Divelsparttofay, that the Infants of believers are members of the vihbic Church and ought to be initiated by Baptifm. How long haththe Divel been fo cha- ritable to believers Infants, as toceafe being their Accufer, and become a pleader for their Privilcdaes f And how long hath he been fuch a propagator of Chrifts Kingdom, as to be forward to bring him In Subjedsand Difciples ? If the Divel would bring them into the vifible Church, I am fure he would bring them the next door to the In- vlfible, and into a ftrong probability of falvatlon. I wi(h they do not next fay, that it is the Divel that brings people to Chrift, and makes Chriftians, and that brings them
to heaven, , . . -r i «
Eut let us hear 5W^. 7 'j proof for this j for he proves it too j but with a pitiful Ar- gument almoft as bad as the caufe for which he brings it. It is this j Becaufe many thoufands think themfelvcs Chriftians for their Infant-fprinkling, and reft in it as the ground of their hopes for falvatlon. I have anfwered this before ; but this much now. 1 If they think themfelves Chriftians, as all Difciples are called Chrlftiam, v^«5 II. z6. they think truly ; For they are Chriftians vifible that arebaptifed into the name of Chrift, if they have not fince by word or works renounced him. i. I doubc whether Mr. T fpeaks cf thefc many thoufands by experience, or at random. I have not met with many perfons fuch. j. If they do make this the ground of their hope foe falvatlon, (that is, the very baptizing, and not Chrift into whom they are baptized,) noqueftion that error, and to reft in it, is from the Divell: but doth it follow, that therefore their baptifm is from him.? 4. What horrid confequencc would follow up- - on this arguing ? Multitudes make their belief of Scripture, and believe that Chiilt dyed and rofe again, and is the Saviour of the world, and the profeffion of his name to ' be the ground of ihcii hopes of falvatlon ; [and I chink thoufands mote then cruft to
1 7 8 Plain Scripture proof of
their mcer baptifm.; And will !Mr.r. fay^That the belief of Serif cure, an J of Chrlft and the profefllon of his name are from the Divel ? Multi:iides uuil to thJr Hcaiini^ and Praying, and Alms-dLeds J Arc thefc thertfo;c the wo.ks of the Dcvi! ? What If I know many that think to be fivcd bccaufc they arc bjpriZ.d again? Will ,W/. T, confcfs that it is therefore from the Divel ? Alas, what poo: L.uls ate they thai will be led about by fuch filly,nay fearfull Arguments as chcfel But when tlie pocr filh is Iltuck, and the hook fallncd in his jaws, a fmali line will draw him any whither.
Mr. T.
fii^d for the Covenant of Cbrifi^ it may be under ftoodj either that Chrift made to them, •'-^ or that they have made rvith Chrift. 1 nevc-r by 'a>iy Pifputation did difpute them out of the Covenant of Chrift, at if he might notmal^e a Covenant to then/ of Rghteoufnefsj and falvation : Be fides rrhich, I l^no^v no Covenant of chrift that doth nffureforgiverufs "/ f^'^it fanSiifcation, adoption, and eternal life. And I fay as much as Mr. Baxter «» or dare fay , That Infants may have an iniereft in the Covenant »f chrifl^ being ekClei, by God i but whether they have or noti neither J nor Mr. Baxter can certainly a^rm, ix. being unt^Koyvn 10 us, or any body clfe^ feeing it Is hidden in thepurpofe of God j andl^nown only to God.
And for their covenanting with Chrift ^ for my part, I l;noiv not hoto a)jy perfon ftjohld Covenant rvith Chrift^ till he promife to Chrift that he will be his child^ and t.il^c him for bit Lord : And I thinli Mr. Baxter can nowhere pr eve thai Infants de Covenant with Chrift fo.
R. B.
NExt,you fay that you keep them not from theCovcnant of Chrift which he makes, for they may be Eled, and fo in Covenant j but you deny they can Cove, nant with Chrift. Anfwer i. That is no thanks to you, it being not in your power to make the promife of Chrift of none effect. Satan may fay the like, that he keeps not God from making promifes to his people, a. Eledion is not a Covenant, nor are they in Covenant, bccaufe Eleded. 5 . Y ou deny that God covcnanteth with them to be their God in Chrift, and to take them to be his peculiar Ptop'e, which is the C ovenant that he formerly made with Inf3nts,and which we affirm. 4. How much wc have proved to belong to them by Promife, more then you acknowledge, I have Ihewed befoie.
And then their Covenanting with God you flatly dcnyed, and you dilTwadc the Pa- rents from fo engaging their children in Covenant , and piomifing in their names, whichyettheyever did in the Church before Chrift , and it was their duty to do, as T>eut. ^9. and other places flicw. And yet you know not how any perfon ihould Co- venant with Chrilt, you fay, till he promife, ^c. It fctms then you know not how a ■pather (hould engage his child in Covenant, by covenanting In his name. Nor you know not how to diftinguifti betwixt the Phyfical and Morall nature of the Adion i €r ^fe >ou would know that ic may be the childs A^ion morally , and in Law-
fcnfc
Infants Chttrch'memberjhif and Baptifm. 1 79
fcnfe, when it is only the Fathers Adion Phyfically. I marvel! whether you know how anianfhouldput hischilds name inaLeafe. and bind himfclf and hisHeirt, and how his child is thus cntrcd into Covenant and Bond, and the Law takes it as his > Ifyou had rather fay, that the Parent cngageth the child, then that the child engageth himfclf by the Parent,! will not ftick with you for the phrafe of Speech , when the thing is the fame. But you would have no Parents to engage their children folemnly to God in Chrift, by covenanting In their names. And 1 pray you how well then do you free your felf from his charge ?
Mr. T.
tfd be faith, I affirm them to be no Difciples, nor Servants to Cody nor holy asfeparated 10 him.'] This p^Jf^c hath reference to the Difpute ; and then / affirmed thiSy that they Tvcre not Difciples in that fenfe that Chr'ifi appointed Dtfiples to be bapti^dj Mat.zS.i^ and thu ifayfiiUj u no fl<iying the Devils patt , bttt according to the rvords of the Lor A Chrift.
A
R. B.
NExtyoufay, you deny them to be Difciples in that fenfc as Jf d/fe. 28. 19, 20; Anfw. I. But did you then diltinguilh of Difciples ? or yeild them to be Difci- ples in any fenfe ? No; You denyed them abfo'.utely robe Difciples without diftin^ dion. And if you do not fo yet, why do you not fpeak out, and fay fo ? and tell u$ plainly in what fenfe you acknowledge them Difciples ? This is therefore but a confef; lion of your faft, and not any cover to it.
Mr. T.
ANditt that fenfe they are no Servants of Gody as Mr. Baxter produced to prove they are to be Difciples. For afervant to God in that fenfe is one that voluntarily and freely yields obedience to Gods commandsj and I thinly he cannot prove any Infant u fuch a fervatit of God.
R,B,
T^cxt you confefs you denyed them to be fervams of God 'In that fcnfe as T prc^ -*> ^duced to prove they are to be Difciples ; But you fay , a fervant in that fenfe is one that voluntarily obeyeth. But this is another of your miftakes; I took fetvanc
Aa and
l9o FUin Scripture froef of
and Difclplcs according to their Relative Formall niture,and notclthcr with the AccU denuU confideration of ASivc or Paflivc. And I have boforc confuted your vain con- ceit in this.
Mr. T.
^^ciall office heretofore the High-l'ricfl among lb: Jews, and others then Tvrre/cpara- ted to God > but as the cafe (lands now, I l(nO)v no vpay a perfon h bdy byfep,7ratir,;^but by £. ic^ion, or by Call ng: Now, I never dcriyed that Infants ntay be c'e^cd, and fepara>edt» Cod by vertuc thereof : in thatfenfe he falfly accufcth me there forcy as jaylng and d:/iyinr infants are holy or feparated to God, if he under (iindit in tb.it fenfe.
And for Infants fepa-rated to God by catling i if he under [land it by an extras -dinorf, immediate ciUirgy as John //;: B.iptifl was fanclificd from the womb^ I can neither affi-m nor deny ', nor I thinly h: neither, if he undafland it by ordinary callingy fothcy are not fepa^ rated to Go.-'i for they arc not capable t.f hearing the rvoi d of Cod. nor of receiving it by fajtb which arc the ways offcpoi-aiion to God.
R, B,
\|^0u come next to their holinefs : And indeed can a man of your parts know of no -*■ reparation to God, but by eleftion or by calling ? Methinks Gods G.ant or Deed of gih in his Covenant is the moft immediate uluall caufe of fuch holin.fs of repara- tion. Indeed you miy ftretch the terms Elcdianand Calling fo far^as to comprehend this : but that you feem not to cio. I qHcftiTn whether Eledion be a proper fepara - ting or fanSifyiiig , or to be called rather a Purpofeof farKftifying in time, if you fpeakof Adusll faniaifying, and take not fanflifying as Tcr/nimn d.minucns : For elfe that which is not , cannot be fanftified ; and the confcqu^nce would be valid, ^i e/2 tcrtnadjeGi, adcfifccundi: {a'lCl'ficatut efl, ergo cfl. lia: thij I regard nor, as little to our purpofc. But what do you think of Godsfcparatiiigperfons to himfclf by his own Law and Covenant ? The Law detcrmincth of all Ducnefs ; Now if God fay of thefirft born among the Jews, Thcfe fhall be mine : is not this a fepaiation of them c<vhirflfelf? and if he layof all the Infants of the Jews , they (ball be to me a people, ov a peculiar people : is not this lepirating ? I know no more proper and- dircdway of feparation , then when God fliall lay claim to a perfon or thing by his Law ani affix on it in Scripture the note of his iatcreft and propriety , o by Covenant or Scripture Gift make I'uch a perfon or fort of perfons his own. He therefore that hath faid that our children are Holy, and that they are bl- fled, and that he will be to them aGod, &c. hathfepiratedthemby his Law or Covenant , and fanftifieJ ihem by this word of tru:h. i^nd yet Mr. T. can underfland no feparation bu: by r.IeAijn or Calling! How can you teach the world to Hnierfland more then other Divines , as 3f they were all nobody to you , v/h:n yet you cannot undeiftand fuch eafie things^ which a very weak Chriftian may und'erftand ? If that a Landlord mike It a Con- dition with his Tenant in his Leafe that his firft born Son (hall be his Servant : Ded^Xic: this Covenant or Lea(e here feparate that Son tabe a Servant ? I thini< all
Infants church- merr.herjhip and Saptifm, 1 8l
our Fore- fathers, that did make over their Lands, or devote any thing elfe to tlie main- tenance of Gods wor(hip,did by that gift or dedication feparate them to God. Therefore for the fenfc of reparation by Eleftion, or extraordinary call, or ordinary perfcnall cal- ling as to the ear, (which are all the wayes of fcparating that you could or would undcr- fland or find outj they are all your own fancies3l mean none of them:and fo I gave you to underftand frequently and fully in the Difpurc: but what you would not know^you cannot underftanrt or remember: Nay, in private I ftill told you, tl-iat I afcribed this fanftihcation to the Law or Covenant of God onely. Therefore the falls accufation which you lay to mc, returns into your bofom.
Mr. T.
BVt hi fatth\_God faith the Contya)yJ] Lctui fee thefcTextf in jvhkhhe faith God faith the ccnlriiry } for they arc oil the Texts h: conclmlcth any thing out of, faving Rom. 1 1* 19 Thcfirft Text to prove Infants are Sewants of God, he bmgs out o/"Levit.if.4i,42. tvhcre he faith God faith the contrary to what I f^y : I fay they arena Servants, and (jod faith they are (fiith Mr. Baxter J Ma' l( th.it i theTcxt faith , And then fljall hedcpmt from thee, both he ^ and hfs children veith him, and (hdi return imtohU own Family^ ajid unto the Foffifjlms ofhi> Fathers /& ill he return ; for they are myfcwmts, which I brought forth out of the Land of E^ypt, they {h.iU not be fo<d /zs bondmen. They are m favantSf that if ii be tvou'd h iv\ A'C theic our ch Idrcn ? The Text fheivs plainly they are the chil- di en he brought out of the L ind of Egypt j and brings this as a rcafon why the Hebrew chil- dren Jljould hive more privikdge then any o.'hcr chil-iren ; Therefore this U fpol^en pccuUv ly of the Jews child, en : {_:hry are n.y f(rv.wtsf\ that is, thofc that I brought out of the Land cf Egypt. Tea^and 55 th vcrfe if more plain : For unto me the children oflfrae'are fervants^ they are my fervants whom I brought forth out of the Lrnd of Eqypt : lam the Lordwur Cod. Now I befccchyo.'f , nh it n this to prove that God faith contrary to me, that what Ifay my Infant ii not afc, vant of God, ifi his fenfc., fo as to be a Difcipk, when that a fer'^ vant m this fenfc hene that freely and •voluntarily gives fervicc to God ? Butbefdcs, when the Ifraeiites children are called fcrvants of God 3 tojjjen that can underfland any thing, the meaning is not, that Infants are aCiually fervints, but in right to me ', and thcrt* fore they (hall not bcfervcd m Bond-fervmts j he doth notfpea{ what they did, but of Gods right and iatcre[l he had in them. So th.tt the term iServants'] cannot be underflood any Olherwifc jhen pafjtvcly ^ they arc n.yfervantSy that is , bccaufe oftr.y right to thcmj and be* cancel do my win upon them, andnot bcenufc they do my mil actually i andiftha bcei nougb to pr(tve Infants Gods fcrvants, thenV^iX. 119. 9^.Thcy continue thUdjy according to thine ordinanccs/or all are thy (ervants : That is, the Heavens mentioned ver. 8p.and the the Earth, mentioned in ver. 90, ifthisbeagoodAgument, infants are called the fey. vants of God, therefore ihcy are Difciplcs, and mud be Baptised; by the fame reafonic tvntild follow, the Heavens and the Earth arc called the fcrvants of God) Pl'al.iipj)!. Therefore the Heavens^ and the Earth are Difciples, and are to be BaptiT^d. Judge I pray : Nebuchadnezzar Jer. 4J. lo. » called Gods fervant ; what then? is he there, fore a Difciple ? irhit a Heath :n, an idolatrous K'ng ? and tbae fore to be bapti^^d i Be- levedi J am loth to fpeal^. 1 might moire freely give my cenfure^ but If pare.
Aa X
K. B.
1 82 TU'm Scripture frotf of
R. B*
WHen you fay thcfe are all the Texts thit I conclude any thing from, except Row. 11.19 it is anoiherof your palpable untruths, as they know that werehca' rcrs, and is tobc fcen bef re. To that in LfwM5.4Jj4i jj. you fay, i. Itwas on- ly a priviledg to the Jews childrcn^and not ours ; To wkich and all the refl, I have fully anfwcrcd bcforCj and dcfKC the Reader to turnback to it. But thus much now briefly. i.Tfae Jews Infants were [nfints,3nd our Difpute you know was of the fpecies: 2 I have proved that our priviledges are greater then theirs (and you deny it not,) and that this was not peculiar to them. 3. It proves that there is nothing In the Age to make them unc3p3ble,or clfe the Jews Infants would have becrt uncapablc. z. Where you ftill urge that a Difciple and fervant muft be meant of one that voluntarily ferveth God, you do but go on to beg the Qucftion, which you never yet did any thing that I know of to prove, of any moment. ^, When you fay the fenfe ofLcwr. aj.is^thatlnfants were fervants fin Ri?ht toGodjJif you mean,[Relitedto him as a peculiar people feparated tohim- fclf from the world,] I grant it j and fay that is the meaning of Infants b:ing ferrantf andHoiy.and Difciples ftill. But your ridiculous additions of being Dilciples Paflively and as the Heaven and Earth^and Ncbucb-idnc^^Tf- ^Scc.l have confuted before in vindi- cating this Text.
I concluded not, that whafoever is called Gods fervant may be baptised, much lefs that lyfetf/'/ofX'O' is fo called may be baptized, Where did I argue In either of thofe ways^ But you are fo accuftomed to raiftakes, that you feem to underftand little that Is faid to you } nowonder if you lead others into miftakes. My conclulion was this, that if notwithftanding their Infancy they are capable of being Gods fervants, as relatively fc- piratcd to himfelf from the worlJ, then they are capable of being Difciples in Infancy too. Whereupon you denyedthat they were called Gods fervants ; and I brought that Text to convince you. But can you think indeed that thofc Infants were called Gods fervants but as the creatures, or as Ncbucbidnc^ar ? why then God fhould have com- manded the fetting free of their bond fl ivc$, and of .ill their Cattell, for they were his . icmnts paflively too ; yet its ftrangeto fee, when you have plaid your fclf with your own abfurd fidions, how triumphingly you conclude how you could cenfurcme, but yoH fpare me, and you are loth. It is, I am confident, tor your fake, and not for mine, that you are loth, as I (liall prove anon. But were it not for your finning by falfliood or reviling, I fiiould not wiih you to fpare me a jot .* So little do I regard to be cenfured by youjBut I fee here upon what filly grounds you can pafs a confident judgement, and freely cenfure the generality of Divines that are far more learned and godly then me or your felf. And when judicious people wonder at you, and think you have half rtnoun* ced your Rcafonjand talk as if you were between flcep^and waking, yet do you roufeup your felf. and glory that the day is your own, and boaft what you can do, but that you fpare and are loth ! A compaffionate Conqueror you arc indeed ', you hurt not,becaufc ycvjf fight but with a bulrufh.
Mr.T.
Infants Church- wemberjhif and B aftifm, i g >
Mr. T.
His fecond text if out of Dent. 19'. 10, ii,ii; &c. That u inother pUee wherein Mr. Baxter failh that God affirms contrary to that which If^ty } the words are thcCcy Ye ftand this day all of you before the Lord your God, your Capralns of your 1 ribes, your Elders, and your Officers, with allthemcn of Ifrael , your little ones, your wlres,and thy ftranger that is in thyCamp.from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer ofthy waterjthat thou (houldeft enter into covenant wi htheLordihy God,and Into his Oath whichthcLord thy God maketh with thee this day e>f.ji there atiy word here of our children? here is no mention rnadeofany but of the children of Ifrael. Atid that which I faid In the Difputaiiony though Mr- Baxtct fcemcd fo confident that it Is fo deer In that C^ venavty that every one of the little ones did enter into thu Covenant^ and f aid, If the Papifis bid but oi good plain text of Scripture to prove their Religion^ as this Is to f/ove that every fine of the litilc ones of th: Children of Ifracl did enter Into Covenant with God, he would be a Papi^ : yet It moves me not; but JliU I fay it cannot be cleerly proved, th.it every Infant did then enter into Covenant ; and there are two reafons flill in the text. i.From the phrafe cfenterinf^intoCovcniat. Entering into Covenant, fay fomefWoj by pajfing (for fo the He- brew word Is) by pafjiag between the parts of the be afl that was l^iUed j now this was fare done by fome in the name of the refl, and not by the little ones thcmfclves. And --It is faidj Yc ftand this diy all of you before the Lord your God, that thou fhouldcft enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, ver. 14. 1 y . Neither witB^ou only do 1 make this Covenantj and this Oath, but with him that ftandeth here with us this day before the Lord our God , and alfo with him that is not here with us this day . M.j>/^, he that is not here with Ui this day is not mU one with vcrf, i ^. That [thou] fhouldeft enter into Covenant.f tf / conclHde \_thou1 In the i i verf. is diflln^from the refl that flood there^ amongwhlch the little ones were comprehended- Tct I deny not but God did ma^c a Cove. Tiant with the children ofthclCaeVues j but then they were a peculiar people^ diflin^l fyotn thewhole world, to whovt God did engage hlmfelf ln'fn.my efpcclairefpehs j as to bring them mo the land of Canaan, and do other things for them. And for our ChMren,if any Magi' (irate did enter fo into Covenant, I l^now not but be may do It. But according to the Conjii- tutien of the Church ofcbrifilansjjcnce to Infer, bccaufe the little ones did there fo enter ints Covenant with God, therefore our Children do enter Into Covenant with God, and are to be Accounted vlfible members of the Church, and confequently to be Baptl-^dt I conffs, far try fart,itisafarfetihtyeafoni and indeed bath nor eafon , but it a g>e.it miflal(e which Mr. Baxter holds, as if the fame Conflitutlon of that church which was then is now ; when that God never fent his preachers fo to teach people and gather the Church of the Jews^as he did when thit he fent the Ap$(iles to gather the church ofChrifiians j this different way of gathering themjoth (hew plainly the different conflltution of the Jewifh and ChrlfllanChurchi and therefore Mr. Baxter doth moft impertinently alledgc this text for that buftnefs for ivhich the Dlfputewoj, to prove Infants to be Bapti\cd,kt him alledgeit as oft at hepleafe.
Aa 3 KB,
184 PUift Scripture proof cf
1
R. B.
Concerning that In Dcut.i^. I have anfwcrcd your yaln fcnfelefs avils before, and Ihalldothc reft in your confutation. Sermon aftervraids, and thither refer the Reader. Only 1 fee, and fay, the people arc in a poor cafe rhat ttuft their judgements Implicitc'y on your guidance , and take their opinions on your word ; for I fee the ex. prcfs words of Scripture arc nothing CO you, when it is againft your fancy. And thofe that will take fuch an anfwer as yoii here give for fatisfaftory 01 ration il, I think them uncapablc of prefent undcrftanding the truth, till they have got their Kcafon more ftrcngthcnedjor their prejudice and wilfulnefs more wcskned.
Mr. T.
^y| ,3iiXttrithireiTextyrphere'in he faith God J aith contrary to wr, « A A. rj.io, tvhne iV J. Peter ifi hiifpecchjaith thus. Now therefore vohy tempt yc God,t« put ayoal^^ upon the itecliof thcDi/ciples, "which neither our F^thcn nor tve are ab'c to bca-- ? Thcyon^y fairfj 3f>-.Baxter, wascircumcifton, oi binding to the ccrcmoniali I.irv of M>{es : th(ya,ecal- led Difciples uponrvhom this ytuti vras put; (ome of thofe were Infants i therejovc they are Oifciples. ifhatflrangeaxBuingisthis? The yojl^u but a \fetjphor, and it u uncertain whether it be Doflrinc, orthe afl ofcircumn{iun. It is true, by confcquence^ the Dodnne of thefalfe Prophets and Circumcifionwhich ih:y wou'd have put uponthc difciples,they would have put upon the Infants : but they did net, nor tveuld they immediately tal^e aw.iy the f me- , sl(in of their fit fh. But the putting on the yoal^ is plain'y manifcfled to be the teaching tf the falfe Prophets ; and the Difcipks rvere called Brethren in verfe. i, ardin verfe, 9. of the former chapter^ they are [aid to be ihofc xvhofe hearts were Phnfiid by Faith} and cr.n this be f aid of Infants } Shallwe from fuch an obfcurc infcrerice as ths u, contrary ta the ufe of the word throughout the rfhole New Teftamnt^ilh-'r thnt Inf.tats are Dfciples •? when as all along the whole NewTejia'i:cnt ^thc word{pi]tip!e'] f'gnifics nothing elfe but ihofe that being taught^ prefefs the Gofpcl. I may well fay here as ^ir.b3xte^ in another cafe-Jhatl rve take a word that is ufed five hundred times in another fenfe^ and leave that interpreta' tiony and chufe an interpretation where the word u ufed nowhere ell e^ but here ? no nor can it be ufedfo here. The putting on theyoal^ ii by teaching : I would asl{ any man at common re-ifen^lf Infmtsweretaught to be circumcifed} or if ihole falfe Teachers did go about, either atluaUy to circumcife them or teach them i So thit the Difciples were the fubieCls of putting the yo.ilion their mcl{S. They were Dijcip'.es upon whom they would have put the yoali And what wxs thu yoal^ whith they would have put on them ? by teaching Mr Baxter confeffcd I thinl( in the difpute pnblicl{'}'i but however I am fure he did in private conference with ntc'i And if it wa^ put upon them by teaching^ it wts not then put upon Infant t, for they were not capib'e of teaching ; it was there fire fut only upon thofe th it were taught ^a^ri im on Infants. For n.y party though I confefs Mr. Maxter feems con^dtntly to retain this Text after our private conference^ 1 admire hn holdir?g a text biOught fo grt*(lj and imperii' rtentiy. 1 would appeal to any man toM hath common fenfe^ ifputtin? on theynal^ be by teach. ing,ifthefeDi(ciples can be any other bjit thofe that were taught thu DoSidnii
R.B.
infants church-memlferjhif and Baptifnt, 1 8^5
R, B.
FOr that A^. i J. lo.I have fully vindicated it before } and Hiall add this much now. I. You beforefjid you denyed Infants to be Difclples in fuch a fenfe } buc here you deny it abfolucciy, faying, the word fignifieth in all the new Teftamcnt onciy fuch as are taught and prefefs /'which is a begging of the queftion) fo that you plainly h:rc ac- cufe Infants to be no Difciples of Chrift And it no Difciples, then no Chriliians j for the word maketh Difciples and Chriftians all one ('The Difciples were called Chi I- flijns firft at Aatioch.) And if not Chriliians. then what ground to believe or hope that they are favcd ? For whatg/ound have we to hope for the falvation by Chrift of any thatareno Chriflians ? But >//-. T. will fay. 1 believe that it is better that Infants arc no Chriftians then that they were. But believe him that lil}. for me,
z. Your main vain argu;nent againft this plain text is this. The putting on the yoak was by teaching, therefore it was put on none but thofe that arc taught j And here you talk of my grofs impertmcnt alledging this texr,and appeal i. To common Reafon;and then to common fenfe. To which 1 fay but this now , that if yoB can fpeak in your fleep , you may triumph as rationally as this in your dream. For to your Argument ; I" Teaching is that Ad by which the falfe ApolHes would have put on the yoak,and not thepuctingonaftuiUy. There was more to concur to produce the tCd. YouconfelTtd ( for you miift whether you will or no ) that Teaching was but their endeavouring to put on the yoak } And when this teaching prevailed not for the hearers aflent and con- tent, the yoak was not put on i And indeed, fo it was in the cafe in Aci. 1 5. the putting icon was prevented, z. Your confcqucnce is meerly groundlcfs/hough you think com- mon Reafon and fenfe may difcern it. If you fliould teach peoplcth.it 1 hey oudht to fubjed thcmfel ves and their children to the Turk or to fomc tyrant, or fome cruell Laws or cuftoms ; here the Ad whereby you would bring them into bondage,ls your Teach- ing j But doth it follow that therefore it will cnflivc only thofe that are taught? Sure if your Teaching prevail with the parents, it will lay the yoak on them and their chiU dren j if it do not, it will lay it on neither. You know the offence taken againft Pa/*f A^ II. was, that he taught That they ought not to circumcife their children. And If your arguing were good, it would prove that CMofes did never fubjed the Jews children to his Law, nor to circumcilion. For Mofcs'szd whereby he laid the yoak ofciicumci- fion,and the Law upon people, was bv teaching and commanding ; therefore according to your conUquencc, it lliould be only on thofe that are taught and commanded i bac that is not Infants. It was God that fcnt Chrift into £^^,''/ in his Infancy, and that called him out again ( du of Egyp: have 1 called my Son. ) But God did it by Teach, ing and commanding Jofepb to take the child and flye into E^yn^ &c. Now you will argue it feems, that GoJ fent not Chrifl by that woid, bccaufe It was not Chrift, but Jofcph and Maryi'kyi he taught and commindtd. I am forry that your common Reafon and common fenfe is no better, then to R^nt the Church of God, andabufe plain Scripture, and miflead poor peopIe,and dtfpifc the moft Divines, and moft learn- ed and godly that ever the Ciurch had fincc the Reformation, and all upon fuch filly grounds as thtfe, and, that you fliould lo ^lory in fuch inlipidc argujng.
Mr. T.
1-85 Plain Smptnre pro»f' of
Mr. T.
'T'H E hflTcxt hcb/ingsrvbaehefaitb, God fa'itb the contrary, is, iCor. 7. 14. The un'ocUtv'mg Husbifid is fanHificd Ify the wife, fo we read it •, ( but I would read it, in the w ifc ; for fo it is in the OyiginaU) and the unbelieving wife is fafifi/fied in the husband', c!fe n\ re pin children unclean Jiiit now they are holy. It is iruCy it is fitd children are bofyf but not that they are holy as in a flatc feparatcd to God : But^ faith Mi ."RjxtcTj that is the common acccftion i in fix hundred places it is fo t.it(en. n'eanfwer't Mr- bixtcx cannot, I thinl^^fhcw in any one place where the woyd\_Ho!yyis tal}cn in his fenfe,fo^ a (late or pcrfon Jcparatcd to God, in tbut way that be would have a perfonfeparatedto Godi neither by elc Hion, 7ior outward calling, nor any other way that 1 l^now of^ in which holi?iefs is ufedfor a (iaie feparatcd to God. If Mr. Baxter will teS fu htw children are feparattdto Godtwe (hall qu:cl;!y, I belecve Jhenit him that there is not a Text (hews that [Ho/y] is tal^en in hisfenfe* But beloved, he was then willing^ and (liU is^to carry things in the generalsjond not difim£lf tell m how Infants are faid tobc holy, andin a ^ate feparattdto ^od.
And for that jenfe he gave of the former part of the verfe,The unbeletvivg husband is fviClified in the wife > that is/an^ificd to the ufe of the wife, by vertue of the wiftj faith, <:5wTit. I. If. To the pure all things are pure : 1 ben this is onely true of thofe wives that have true faith before Gjtd j and thc^ »nely have their husbands fandified io them,wh9 by prayer and faith have a ho'y uje of their husbands, vfhat if it beg/anted ? then it follows that only the children of fuch parents are holy \ for clfcy that is, if the unbelieving husband •were not fmflijied in the wife, then your children wore uncleany but now they are holy, err clean : elfe were your children unclean i that is, if this were not fo.your children were itn^ clean j then it follows, that if there he any child whereof one parent is not a true beleeve-r be- fire God, that that child is unclean,that is, in a (late not fcparcted to God. And what will follow hence ? if this (late of fefarationgives them right to Godjhen it willfuUow, that no child ought to be bapti^edibut the child of one parent which is a true le'.iever beforeGodiand fo I would ask ^/-.BaxcerjOr anybody elfe, how they darebapt,":^ any Infan f He will fay,th(y ought charitably to judge ofthrm,But Ifay^a judgement of charity is >io rule in this cafe, nei. ther ought we to proceed without ground from Scripture. Neither he nor I do ^now that the parent of any child is a true believer before Gcdiandfo n.iiher he nor anyMini(ler upon earth may, according to this expofition, prefume to bapti-^eany Infant, until God vouchsafes by a peculiar revelation to tell them^ This is the child of one that is truly fanliificd. A judgement of charily hath no ground here ', neither can it be a judgement of charity, but when I conceive the bed of another sfa£ls or words. Nor is a goundfor'a judgement of charity a Rule for us, that mufl follow the rule of Chrt(ls infiitution. I l^now who are Difciples in Chriflsfenfe i thofe that pyofefs the faith of Chrifl; and accordivg'y we ouiht,iind I will proceed. And this text, in Mr. Baxters owu interpretation, will notfcrve the turn- tut concerning my inter- pretation, however Mr. Baxter conceives of it, I do not doubt, if he will let me fee his ttrgU' v,e:its forhisinterprciatidii, but when I h.ive weighed them, my interpretation may (land when hii will fall. And thus have I gone through the fourth Text that Mr. Baxter hath given out filth high words of, as if the denying of thefe Texts to prove that which Mr. Baxter brii^gs then for, were to fay contrary to God, I am loth to fpealf what 1 may j men at they . *re afeflcd they fpeal(, j perceive,
R.S,
Infants Church- rtfemhrjhip and Saptifm, 1 87
A
Bcuc I Cor. 7. 14. you have nothing that is not anfwercd before more fully then Ic ^Jefcrvcs j fave a ne»v crochet of the nature of the rell, wkere y-ou fay that I cjnnoe ftiew where the word Holy Is taken in my fence for a ftate or pc.fon feparated to God in that way. d^c Anfwer. 1. 1$ it not enough that I prove it is alwaiesta-ken for a feparatJ« on to God, but I muft Ihtw that the Word fignifies a fepeiation by ibis or that way or meanstffcftcd ? Muftevery denominationof an aft ora Relation, fignifie alfo ihe particular efficient caufe of it, of means , or Antetedcnts ? Here is arguing fit for yourcaufe. Shall I tell you of an Argument juft like your exception here? A man was out of love with his wife, and; refolved toputheraway^and to this cnd(beingonc of thofe that could believe almoft what his liftj^ he was refolved to_belieTe(or at lealt to maintain^ that it was lawfull to put her away. When the Scripture was produced that foibiddeth putting away a wife, he anfwered, thattheword [wife] in Scripture did fignifie another I hing, and not fuchashis wife; and challenged them tofljew where the word [wife] in Scripture is taken for one that was marryed with a Ring and a Common- prayer, book, as his wife was j and becaufe no fuch Scripture could be (hewn, he triumphech, and concludech, that Scripture foibiddeth not putting away fuch a wife as his ; And is not this the fame kind of Reafoning as yours > iio I prove that Holincfs Is alwaies taken fot a feparation to God j and you mult have it fignifie a feparation by this way or that way,
1, But yoH are fure that what you fpcak Is tiue j that no Scripture fpeakcth of HolL ncfs in this fenfe j you will confefs that the Jews Infants were feparated to God ', they are called the holy Seed i and was nor this diredly by the Law or Covenant of God, by which he legally ftated them in this Relation, and appropriated them to hlmlelfjand gave them a Legall right to the priviledge/ It was not by Eleftion in the ftrift fence only; forall men were not fo Elcded, but all were the Holy Sscd i It ij true they were elefted to this Relation from eternity j and fo are our Infants to the relation thac they ftand in , as Holy ; but the Law or Covenant did adually give them that Holi- nefs and relation to God, to which from eternity they were dcftinared. And by cal- ling they were not feparated; except yoa will undei ftand it, that the Infants are called la the call of their parents, and lo ours are called, as well as theirs , Yea, I'o far arc you befides the truth in this, that it is more doubtful 1 whether all feparation ro God orHolinefs be not by vertueof (bmc Law j or at lealt whether moftiy it be not fo, where God Isthe fanfiifier ; for Ekaion and calling txduje not this, but rather u- fually include it. God cals us to be foni ; and yet it is his Covenant that confers the the Relation and dignity of fonihip en the called; To as many as believe he giveth pow- er to become his ions ; fo that as calling goeth bcfoie Believing, fo helieving in order of nature goes btfo:e foniliip, as being the condition on which it is given; And where is this given on this condition, batinth: Covenantor Law of Grace ^? fo is ic in the prefcnt cafe j It is the Covenant that gives the title and Relation ofholyf or feparated to God, even to thofe thac are called ; and Co doth it Hill as It did former- ly to thefeed of the called.
And yet when i fo fully explained this to be my meaning to Mr. T. bothin pub- lick and private, he tds them here moft confidently, then I was then willing, and ftill
B b am
1 8 8 PUin Scripture proof of
amtocarry thing! In the ecnerall, and not diftinftly tell him how Infants arcfaidto be holy, and inaftatt upirated to God. To which what can I fay, but lament that Mr. 7". hath fo far laid by confclcnce andccmmon modcfiy. Fori, multitudes of wrncffes heard mc (Xfiainmy felfj and I did at large tohim rnconfeicncc alio, and never was unwilling to do it. z. He accufeih my will, boih as then it was, and as ilill it is J And doth he knew my heart ? will he ftill ufuip the prerogative of God '■f I folemnlyprofefs that ifMr. T. know not my will better then I do my own, that this cKarge is a moft grofs falrtiocd. i he nature of it will allow me no eafier la/iguige ; for ill (hculdfay ills tiue, IQiculd my fdf be untrue in fo faying ; And is this fit for a preacher of truth ? and that for the Tulpit ? and fo many of ihefe ? And will not thefc juftifie the charge of [having little tenderncfs of ccnfcicncc, tS'f. ] whichM.r« tcok as fpcke of himlelf '
And for his great exception about going upon a judgement of charity in baptizing, I have fully anl'wercd it in its place already. 1 have fecwed that we go upon a judge- ment of certainty as to our duty, though we have but a probability of the pcrfons fincc- rityj and that this fmires himfelf full as much as me j For he will take no profeHion buc what is a probable fign of fincerity.
And here he tclsihem again, that he will not fay what he may. If he mean [what lawfully he may] I give him no thanks. If he mean [what unjuttly and finfully he raay^ I thank him for not wronging Cod and himfelf) clpeclally if he bad been as confcio- uable ihrou^houtj as here.
Mr. r.
YGoBtt \l cannot digrefs to fort'i fie you againfl thefe feiis"] SeStarifis he chirgnh m we are. It is eafte far himiUnd My other i to write what they pleafe,jhey have the liberty. That 1 ama ScClary er do bold with any Se£li he cannot prove t
: — ' ■
\7'o« have little caufe to be angry if I had called you a Senary ; Vou know it is a ■'■ fin that the holy Ghoft condemns , and therefore no gcdly man fliould make lightofit. And may I notalmoft aseafily know youto bea Seft-mafter, as tobe a Chriftian? I would you would judge patiently and impartially your felf- Your In- fant. Baptifm you fay was no Baptifm j And though I hear you are fince baptized, it is more then I know^or ever met with any that did know. And you fay your felf that Bap* tifm is the regular way of admifllon into the vifiblc Church, fo that whether you be fo admitted or not into the Chriftian ftatc, 1 know not, yet I am confident thn you are of the Chriflian faich : But I know it but by your preaching and fpeech,and adion, and fo I do the other. Fordo you not preach, difpute, talk and endeavor as zcaloufly to promote your opinion, as you do for the Chriftian faith ? I will be judged by your hearers whether you ever laid ouc among them more zeal againft any Gn, or for the Chriftian faith, then you have done lately in this caufe of Anabaptil'm ? Have you not charged their blood on their own heads if they yield not ? And have you not written more for this caufe, then for the Chriftian faith ? fo that 1 have as good evidence (I ipeak It with grief) that you.are a Sed-mafter, as that you are a Chriftian,
Mr. r.
InfAnts Church -memherjljif and B^p/fm, 1 8p
Mr. T.
l\^Ou havafcen Godfpen\ aga'injl then by \udgcmms from Heaven j what were the two X monfiers in New England tut jniraclts ■ ] Tou havefecn '• rvho f he jpeal^s to the people o/Kcderminfter i what judgements fom heaven they bavefeen^ whereby Godffea^i ag.iinP ihefc ScBs^n loiifnown tome : I nv[l] they would tell mjtbat we may l^nsw alfo. For the Minifters in New England, th:rc it mention made in aflo>y of iJi. VVeldes, intituled the Rife and Fatty &c. and thcfe are the Monjlas be means j the one was a certain flrangc IfUtde of thingthat was bred in the womb of one MrsDyct j and the other, [omc ftrange things that came out of th: wo//;b of one Mrs. HaichiaCon. It is true, ^f. Weldes, and others la New England conclude^ tba: God did from heaien do it to fhew the errors thefe women held- But whjt is this to Anabjptifm ? I h.vc read over ihe eighty two errors that were condemned in an Jjfembly in the Church of bicw-Lnghnd at New Town jo. Auguft, i6l7 -and of thefe eighty two errors JihereU not one of them that doth in the le{i manner hint^ that th'feferfonsdidboldthcDoClnneofdcnyirglnfant'Baptifm) there are be fides feveral unfavoury fpeeches that fell from them, but not one of them againfl Infant' Baptifm. There are twenty nine Do£lrims of Af;-j.Hutchinfons,fc«f »««« of them againfl Baftifm of Infants,
R. S.
THc judgementJ that I Tiean they have fccn, are Rich as thl? Land Js full of, and now groans Hnder, giving up thefe Sefts to fuch vile opinions and praSJces as might be a terror to any confideratc man ihatfolloweththcoa, ualcfs he will go on as the Hgyptians into the Red Sea^
For thofe in Ncw-Erglmd, thcy are apparent and undeniable wonders wrought by the 6nger of God Almighty. Sir, God doth not ordinarily^ nor every day worlc'won- <Iers, and crofs the courfe of nature } and therefore his wonders are not to be flighted nor nverlooked. I wiih all Divines and Chriftians in EngUnd that are too favourable 10 the Antinomian principles, would a little more fadly and ferioufly confi<ftr oi thcfe wonders; and whether they fliould not above all errors decline thofe that God hath fo vilibly teftified his deteftation of. Certainly God would never have done it, if he illdnotexpedwertiouldobfervcit, and give him the glory. It is a defperare thin<' to be hardned againft wonders. "
But you lay, that this was not againft the denyers of Infant- Baptifm, &c Anf^v. i.I latendoJ only the Aminomifts In memioning that example, z. I have had acquain, lance with fome of them that left New-EngUnd wjjcn Mr. Wheeler and Mrs. Hutchmfon were difchargcd, and they were againft Baptifm . 3 . Your language about the abfolutc. ncU of the Covenant of Grace Is too like many of their Tenets
Bb I M^.y.
1 90 Plarjj ScrfptHre fr$of of
Mr. T.
AyJd'if Cod did dtduicrvhh jiidgcmtiits from Hcnvcn agaJnfl thefe crrrors i ont of ilnmii ihctwaUy one [Tobejufl.ficd by faith , is tobc juU/ficdby rvoilfS^ do but conftdcr haw ncer thUto I4r. Baxters orprf Dodrnjei in hn Ai.ho>i(ms of ^uflficaUgn^ •Jl-A-hoYiftfy and 01 he is'] from what hxthbecn fa'd, it cppearclh m what I enfe faith only jufiificth , And in rvhal fe»fe worlds alfo jufl.fic Faith only luft ficth as the great frimi'- fall Mafter duty ofth: GofpcU, or chief part if its ceniitwn, to which all the reft are fame wiy reducible, tt'ork^ dojuflifie as the fccondxiy, lefi principal parts of the condition of the Cov:»:V!t; and afteinvirds he cxprcfly maintains from the [ccend fl/"James (rvhtrh mu t not be underflood faith he by a Aletofjymy as Mr. I 'emble and others explain it ) and jffo, then M,\ Baxter boldi thit James teacheth that vne areju^ificd by rvorh^s of Qharity^ and giving to the poor I and if this bo not one of the errors that rvcrc condemned in Ncvr-tngland, yvhkb God from Heaven declared againfl, I leave it to be confidcrcd.
BUc thit w!iJch follows about my Dodrlne of juftification is the very height of all.I Know not what Is in your heart j but a hearer would think that it were the vile ebulli- tion of rancor and malice in a moft evident falfliood that hath left ne room for blufh- ing. I do not remcmbjr that ever 1 met with the like from any man in a black coat ; and I may we]l fay as you did to Mr. M.n(h.ili, I fliould foooer have txpedetl this from a /c/i/if then from you> and cfpecially in the Pulpltjand before a flood of teaiiS' The n. Article condemned in New- Englavd was this [to be juftified by Faith, is to be juftified by works.] This was one of the Antinomians arguments againfl juftification by Faith: For their opinion was, that the Covenant of Grace had no condition either of Faith or obedience, and fo thatno man was juftififed by Faith; but by Chrift gnly dwelling In them, even as our Antinomianiftsfay, that we are iuftiiied before Faith; either from e- tcrnity, q| clfe immediately on the death of Chrift. Now t® prove this they being this Reafon againft juftification by Faith^ becaufc [to be juftified by Faith is to be juftified by work$3 therefore they think none is juftified by l-aithor woiks. Now what doth Mr.T. but bring thi$-aj the fame tenent with mine > when It is even direftly contrary? That this was the meaning of the Antinomifts is evident. In the 17. error they fay. It is incompatible to the Covenant of Grace, to joyn faith thereto. And the thirty fcvemh error is, that wc are complcatly united ro Chrift before, &c. without any faith wrought in us by the Splrir. The 28, error Is, that to affirm there muft be faith on mans part to receive the Covenant, is to undermine Chrift- Errorthlrty eight if. There can be no true dofing with Chrift in a promife that harh a qualification or condition expref- fcd. Error fourty eight k. That conditional promifes are legal.- Se« error 4^,45,47,^0, 61,64,67,68,71.81. where the fame is evident- Now what is the Dodrine that I maintain ? why, it is in this plain terms j That Faith only juftifieth as the condition of our firft juftification 5 But fincere obedience to Chrift as a fecondary part of.t^e condition, of our. continued and cotw
fuumatc
Jfifants Church m^mherjhip af/d B aptifm . T p I
fummare juftificatJon ar juogcment ; yet that neither Faith nor obedience is any caufe of our jtiftification J ntr the leafl part of that Rightcoufnefs which the Law requires, and which we nni ft plead for cur juftificationj nothing but thefatisfaftion of Chrlft is that which Divines call the matter of oar juftification, or the Righteotifnsfs which we muft plead to acquit os in judgement. Thatwoiksin Vauh fenfe, that is, fuch adions as have relation to the reward, not as of grace but of debt, Kom. a ^• are no conditions of joftification at all j For fo works are put inoppofition to Chrift ; no nor if they be put in co-ordination} Butwoiksin J^Wfj his fenfe, as they are fubor- dinate to Ch ift, are conditions without whiih juftification fhall not be continued or confutnraate at judgement. And herein I ufc none but the phin Scr pture-txprefli- ons for proof, and fay no more then ^.imcs , and have cited the plain words of a mul- titude of Scripture, which I would Mr. T. would rationally anfwer. 1 fhould deal with him more cheerfully and gladly then in this loud quarrel of Infant-BaptJfm. And I undeitake to rnanifeft, that I afcribe no more to works then our Divines of grrateft note Hiually do> that is, to be fuch a bare condition of the Covenant asaforefaid j on- ly I give lefs then they to faiih, not thinking it meet to call it an Inftrumental caufe j and );,ct am rcfolved not to quarrel with any about that phrafe. And in this Mf. T, hath in my hearing cxprcffcd himfelf of my judgement. And yet he wculd have made his people believe, that this 1$ one of the dodrincs condemned in the Antinomifts in Hew Efi^land., when it is as diredly contrary to thciis as can be imagined. FrobpKdor^ hxc pictaf > YeJ, when I wrote that book tfpecially againlt the Antinomiansj And do here folemnly profcl's that I am confident no adverfary to the main dodrines of tbn book (for fin.iller collateral points I Uicknotat) is able to confute the Antinoml- an dotages j but he will build them up with one hand as he puis them down with the o- ther. And here let me take in what i'Vii'. T. brings in after on the fame lub](d- He faith, I. I hold that works juftifieas part of thecoadicion of the Covenant of Grace. Anfw* I. So doth J-^mei fpeak fullier, that a man is jullif^cd by works, and not by faith only. And is not Saint /ii//ifi Orthodox ? And Chi ilf faith, If y^ forgive mtn iheir trefpaffe$,your heavenly Father willforgivc you: but if ycu forgive not men^neither will your heavenly Father forgive you ; And is not Chiilt Orthodox ? aUo, Come to me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will eafe you. Take my yoke up- on you, for itiscafie^ and my biitden, for it is light j Learn of me to bi meek and lowly, and ye fliall finde reii to- your fouls. Reft, fom what? from that which they were weary and heavy laden under. What is that i^ One thing Aire is the guilt of fin, and accufation md condemnation of the Livr fihough I am told that i\// T. doth intetpret it of >he Pharifees dodrinc : but if he mean only that, it is a foul interpretati- on^ And to be eafed of the burden of guilt and condemnation is juftifyjng, I'hink : Andfoto come to Chrift in wearintfs , as to take his eafie yoke and light bardeii, and tolearnofhim tobe metk, d't. is the condition of this benefit. So Riv. u. 14. h'.c(fi:d are they th At da I'U iQ)nm.7nd'ncms , th:il they may have right to the tree of Life, and t»ify enter in l\i the gate into 1 ha City ^ And Mat.!"). n'cU dme fi^ood and faithfuU Ser- vant, 8i.:. Come ye b!cjfed , inbetit the I\j>fgdo>» i for Iwas bu/i^ry^ and ye &c. with > a hundifd more fuch plain Scriptures.
a,. But yet I fay only that thefe are conditions of Juftification at judgement , and the continuance of it here i but not of the firft Ad: which Mr. T. paffeth ever. And 1 ufe to txplain my felt by this comparifon. A Prince offers to marry a beggar j he rCQuireth no Dowry with her , not a penny j but only that fhe confent or accept him tor h r Husband ; yet it is implied that Ihe both continue that confenr, and goifonn the OlScesof a Wife to a Husband, and be feithfull tohiia : which if Ihe be
B b 3 ^ no; .
1 9 2 PUin Scripture frcof of
not but cleave to another, and prove a Whore, he will turn her off. Now this woman ispolfcffcd ofrhis Prince and aUthit he Hi h, up-in meerconfert or conrrad it firft, wfthoutany thing clfc •, bat yet (he (hiU not continue fo poff.ffcd, b»t on condition fheconriBue faithfull ^though for paiticulir hilings thst violate not the m:\rriage- Co- venant, (hj Mii!l not be caft off) So we are poffdr d cf Chrift with ail his benefits up- on condition of our Faih alone, or mecr liiliefand Confent i but welliill not contl. nueit, but on condition of fairhftill Love and 'ubjedicn to the dca.h. Yet this hath not the mtureofa dowry , as i: were, as if wc mull biingany thing In our hands to Chrift, either for firft participation of him. or continuance : tor faiihfulncfs is no me- riting work. It was included that we muft be fairhfull when we confcared and cove- nanted to be faithful! } and that to attain the ends of the Covv-nant. Oi thus, Asa man that freely Redeemech a condemned Traitor, on condition that hj take him thac Redeemed bim for his Lordj and acknowledge the benefit, snJ receive it j here the accepting the offer is the only condition of his prcfent deliverance ; but i{ he perform not the condition promifedj he forfciteth it again, So with ui in the prefent cafe. Or as Shimei that was freely pardoned, but his pardon was to continue in force only on condition he did not go beyond the prefcribed limits. ,
Mr. T. chargeih me that I hold, that jufti^ying Faith d Jth inclodc Acceptance, Anfwer, A hainous Errour indeed. Such as is delivered) Jjh. i. 1 1, i x. As many as received btm , to!h:m he^rf: porver to become the fons ofGody cvCn to them th.tt bclicv! iu hit Name, Doth he think that the rcJcftlng or refufall of Chrift is any part cf the fin of Infidelity? Doth he think that Faith is in the Will as wellasthe underftandingrlf he do nor, DJi'c;ztf77r in his Determinations, and Dr. Wj//, and Amcfiui^ and McUnclbor^ and moft of our Divines arcagainft him , and Johan. Croclits and many morcagainft BeUarminc do affirm it to be the common D'>drine of Protcftants / But if he do think that jaftifyingFaiih isalfoin the will (« doubtlefs it is ) then how can he exclude themcft immediate Elicite Afis, vihkhR(^e6liieornmq/i></antadfinetn, 3rc Eligere^ Confentire, uti, as Aquin. and others generally ? And I would fain know what is the dangerof either of thefe points ? Is it leafi hereby we rob Chrift of any of the honour of his office > O that any man would manifcit that in the left degree ! -Hath the Cove« nantof Grace which promifethand giveih Junjfication^ Adoption, and Salvation, any condition, or hath it none ? I know no man that is not of the Antinomlan Faith, will fay it hath none : And if it have any condition, is it any queftion whether Obedi- ence and pcrfcvcrance be a fecondary part of it? Is not Chrift the Author of eternal falvation to all them that obey him > Hcb p, 5. And I would know whether Chrift ilo perform this condition for us? or whether he require that all ofusfhould doit ouc lelves? and enable all his Eled to do it accordingly ? Doth Chrift Repent and Be- lieve inhimfelf, and obey himfelf in our ftcad? or will any fay fo fave a crazed brain ? why then if it were not ef Chvifts part to fulfill thefc conditions of the New Covenant for us, (but he requircth and enableth us to fulfill them,^ is It any wrong to Chrift that we fulfill them? or to know and fay that we fufi'ill them ? or to call them the conditions of his Covenant^ when he hach madeihcmfo ? What ? Isita wrong to Chrift to do as he bids us,? and as he reqnircth ws upon pain of damnation to do ? and will condemn all tbat do not ? When Chrift hath bought usj is It any wrong to him that we obey him ? and that to the ends he bath propoanded. t^i^, as the condition ofour participation of himfelf and hisbeneEts? If I give either to Faith or Obedience the leaftpirtoi that honour which Is due to Chrift, then blame me, and /hame me, and fpare me not. But Mr. 7. faich chat [he thinks I have not peirwaded any one Minifter In England to
be
InfAnts Church' memberjjjip and B apifm, j g.9
beofmy Opinioiij^ To which I give kirn this Anfwer : i. It isnoneof my en- deavours Co to do. When I had once put forth my Arguments in that Tradat€, though briefly, I was fatisficd : L«t any minifter ftep fonh and witnefs againft me that can, that I havefolcited or Importuned them to my Opinion ; Nay, let my own Hearers fpeak whether ever I folticited them or any one ot them, to the entertain- ing of my doArine, in thofe controverted points ! Much lefs did I ever preach and projed to promote it i and make a faftion for my Opinion fake. I leave that which I have written to God to fuccecd as he plcafe j for my part,[ look not after It. Nay as weighty as fome points in that book are, if I had thought that the publilhlng of them would break the peace of the Church, I would have kept them In : So far am I from your judgement about the not (ilencingof any truth for Peace. Truly, Sir, God hath given me fuch a deteftation of Schifmand Church difturbances ; that I keep a jealous eye upon mine own heart againfl it continually ; and you fhouldnot blame me for being iharp againft it In you j for Ithink Iftiould abhor my felf, if I found my felf guilty of it. When I firft fet forth that fmall booki as the truth was precious CO me, and I could not ea(ily fupprcfs It j So I reckoned what I might exped in Its entertainment In the World; and experience of the cafe of excellent Mr. u'otton Bradjhaiv , G Maimer ^ Amyraldui^ Com ad. BcrgiuSi Lud. Crocius , Junius, Mda^id- hon , and almoft all that have done anything confiderable for truth and peace, a» gainft the high extreams of the times, who were all ccnfured as decliners or erroneous ^with the Icalt of whom I confefs my felf unworthy to be named) I fay, their example bid me expcft the ccnfure of many hot-fpurrs } which I refolved upon : But withall I took my heart in hand, and fhewed it the temptation to Schifm and Fa^ion,and proud • contcndingsthat lay under thcfecxpcfled Cenfures, and charged it to take heed and avoid them as death $ and whatever provocations I nndergo, I refolve never to make aparty or rent In the Church ; I may errc,but I wilibc no Heretick. Though I have caufe enough to be diftruflfuU of my own heart, yet fo ftrong is my hatred of Church- divifions and making parties for Opinions, that I darepromlfeyouin the ftrengthof Chrift to avoid it. And if I be (harper then fome thinly meet againft ethers. It is only a-. gainft/«f/) chiirch-remcrs^ undgrofs errors, and not againft any peaceable man. I heartily love thofc that receive nor my dodrinc, but placidly diffcm, as well as thofe that do receive ir. And though by fome ftirrings I have felt that its very naturall to love thofe that are of out own (pinion, yet knowing fuch motions to come from pridcand felf Idolizing, I prayed to G.i to ciuili tbemand kill themln the bud. And the Example of Mr. JvhnGoodrvin Cwho 1 believe was tempted intoaway of Scbifm, by mens intemperate 2cal againft his elaborate Treatifeof Juftification) and others that have been undone by the fame temptation, were and are as pillars of fait in mine eyes. And Irefolvetodoas Leirned Gitilf.r, todiffer from my Brethren of the Miniftry In peace and love ; and whereto we have attained to walk by the fame rule and minde in. the lame things ; and then if in any thing any be oiherwifa minded, God will reveal e* ven this unto us
2. And where yon tTiInk I have not made one Minifter of my judgement,! know but one that you madeof yoirSj nor have heard bu: of one.
J. Perhaps they we: e of my judgement beforcjand then how could I make them fo ? But If that be the intent of ynur fptech, that there ii none in Eag'and of my judgement, I mutt tell you th't in every thing no two men in the world are of one judgement j but in the main of that book, I could name you diver* MinifterSi fome that now do liveamongus here inthefe parts, and fome that latelv have done, that approve it j yeadivfrsofgreateft note for Learning in Oxford^ iai' CmkicfgCj ^d La»do?r, thac
have-
I ^4 Plaifi Scripture prcof of
kaveteftificd their approbation, and indeed do overvalue irj yet others c#!»furc kl kflow 1 pfocaptulillans,Scc. Yea more, let me tell yea, that for ought I know, every Minifter in the Counrrcy mjy be of the fame judgement (though I con jedure other- wife, and am not felicitous to enquire :) for though I have had fpcech wiih many Mi- niftersofthis Countrcy (ince I wrote that book (1 think thirty or fourty) )c< to ray beft remembrance never a man of them did ciiher mention his diflike of it or, diffcnc £rorame-, Or ifanytavedifiured any point of it^ thc-y have quickly either been farij- fied, or by their fiknce Teemed fo. Ar.J how can M. /. have ground to think that no ininirter in Etiglandis of my ;udgeracnt ? £/7^/jwicoataineih more Minifters then tvet didmanifeftto M.T.their judgements.
4. Bu: I can tell Mr. T. of a great many Divines of grcarcft name and eftcem in the Chu.ch, chat arc of the fame judgement in thcfc points that heexccpteth againft, as 1 arr.. ("Though I conftlle I knew itnotwhen 1 wioteth:t beck.) For Jultific** tionby woiks, Co»^tf</. Be^giwin his excellent-book called Fraxu Caikol. C,;tiov, iSic. zadLitdovi. Croclwi m Syntagm. & Jobari' Crociiu de jfttfli^catione, ^ Johan. Bergiiii in Jc//?. 5.16. wiih divers others do afiirm, that fincere obedience is the condi- tionofnot looiing or keeping Juftification when wehaveit: And is not that all one as to fay, it is a condition of Jultification as continued, as I do ? Yet the fame Divines Tay, weareiuftified by Faith only nlthout works j but then ihcy fpeak of Juilihcation as in the fi: ft Ac^, andl'o I fay too. ('For it was not fo clearly difcerned by Divines till Dr. Downh-tm had evinced it, that ]uftification is a continued Aft, and no: any Inftantancousadi fo/w7«/d^/«:»«c/a$tobeceafed, as was before tau^hr^ ». And for my definition of Faiih^ not only ai i: takes in Acceptance of Chrilt, but even of Chrili as Lord, into the formall definition, Mr.' T. may fee that Dr P>e/?o« is pe- remptory for it and large upon it. And Mr.Nortonoi Hnv Engimdin his judicious grounds of Divinity gives the fame infenfcas I do [juflifylng Faith is a receiving Chriftasour Head and Saviour, according as he is revealed in the Gofpel] fo doth godly Mr. CulvenveU in his Treatife of Faith : and Mr. Tiogmorton in his Treatife of Faith Iix or ftven times over. Butwhyfhould I name more, when the Learned godly Divines in this Land in the AfTcmbly have agreed on the like definition in their Catechfns, to which I wholly and heartily fubfcribe [juflifying Faith is a faving grace, wrought in the heart of a finncr by the Spirit and Word of God, whcicby he be. ing convinced of his fia and mifery, and of the difability in hlmfelf and all other creatures to recover him out of his loft condition, not only alFcnteth to the truth of the promifc of the Gofpel, but receiveth and refteth upon Chrift and his ri'^hteoufnefs therein held forth for pardon, «>r.] And better in the fmall Catechifm, ihcy define Faith in Jefus Chrift to be [a faving grace, whereby we receive and reft upon him alone for falvation as he is offered to us in the Gofpel] This definition Is the fame in fenfe with mlnej and 1 heartily embrace itj for any man m*ay fee that by ^Receiving] (which is fomcwhat Metaphorical!) tbey mean [Accepting] for ic is related to the Offer of Ch 1ft in the Gofpel: And it is Ch ift himfclf that they fay muli be received : A:)d if [as he is C'fE:red in the Gofpe^,J then certainly^ as Ch:)ft the Anointed, or as our Lord Jcfus i or as King, Prieit, and Prophet, Head, Husband,
Yea. and in the very main point they are of the Dmc judgement as I am, that more then Faith is required to jultification : foi thiy lay in anfwcr, to this Queftion, whac doth God If quire of us that we may tfcape his wrath and Cuife due to us for fin ? 10 cicapt thewiaih and curfe of God due to us fi.r tin, God rcquireth of us Faith in Jcfus Chrift, Repentance un:o life, with the Diligent ufe of all the outward
means
In f Ants Church' memberjhip and B aptiffn, t^j
means whereby Chrift communicateth to us the Beoefits of Redemption. And the/ prove itfrom Afl, lo.ii. P/ov. i. i. to 6. and 8 jj. to the end. jft. 5jj. and in the great Catechifm they have the fame proved from JiUt.^ y ,^, Lul^. 13 5, f. Ail. 16 JO, 51. Joh.i- 16,18. Now though Mr. r. pethaps make no great reckoning of the judgement of the Aflembly .- yet thofe that doe, me thinks (hould not cenfure them in ccnfuring me. And for thofe that will not believe that Obedience Is any con- dition of our continued or confummate Juftification, I would knowofthtm, whe- thex they think that Go4 will juftific them in judgement, though they feed not, cloihe not, vifit rot, eb'f' and wi]l he continue their JulUfication here, though they take their brother by the throat, and fay, pay what thou owcft ? or though they live In whoredom, diunkcnnefs, murder? &c. If cheyfay No; then how can their obe- dience be denyed to be fuch a condition ? And I would know alfo. To what md they do abftain from thcfe fins, and obey God ? Will they fay, Only in thankfulncfs for forgivenefs and deliverance, as ihe Anthioffnans fay ? or alfo as a means or condition of their obtaining falvation , as all our Divines fay ? And how can it be a condition of our falvation, and yet nocondicion ofourfinall Juftification, or of the continuance ofithere? And is it not as great wrong to Chiilt, tofay that our Woiksor Gofpel- Obedience is a condition of our falvation, astofay, it is a condition of our finall juttification? fureitis Chrift Office to be our Saviour} and he that makes his own works to be his Saviour, doth wrong Chtift as much as he that makes them his iw^i' fiersj but he that maketh them but fuch conditions of both as aforcfaid , doth no whit derogate from any thing of Chrili j except it be an honour to Chrift to have his fetvants wicked and rebellious •• They that will fay that all their obedience hath no other tendency to their falvation and finall Abfolution, but asmeer figns, and ihac they Obey only that they may have a bare fign which is not fo much as a condition, of Life, I lliall expcft they fiijuld flag in their obedience ere long: I am fure the tndof P.i«/i bringing his body in fubjedion, was, leaft himfcif fliould be acafi-away; and he flrove for the high price of our calling; and he would have us tun to ob- tain the Crown : And Chriit will condemn men at laft co nomnc becaufe they would not that he fliould reign over them, and becaufe they did not Improve their Ta- lents 5 and they (hail be made Rulers of many Cities that have well improved many Talents. But i have brought proof enough of this in the Book ic felf that is accu* fed.
I will only adde this, Though if it be unmannerly to challenge my Senior, yet be- caufe I know no milde or modeft way will prevail, 1 do here challenge Mr. T. and by challenging provoke him to confute the Doftrineof that Book which he accufeth •, and I lliall think my fcif as able to defend it, as almoft any controverted point in Divinity ; & (hall think it a fubjed more worth my labour then this of Baptifm. And if Mr.T.will not anfwer this challenge, nor by all this be provoked to undertake it, let all men jud»e whether he be not a meet empty Calumniator, that will preach againft ihat in the Pul- pitjWhich he cannot confute.And let him not put it offbyfaying that others enough will do it, and therefore he need not: Fori. So others enough have written againft his Deftrine,andyetheftillurgethmeto it.z. I have importuned other Diflenteis to pro- duce their ArgumentSj and cannot prevail with any one (fave one friend that at lirft of himfelf did fomewhat, which is not unanfvvered ;) 5. Becaufe I am a confoming man, and like to die quickly, therefore fome will delay till I am dead, that they may hare the laft word, and feem to conquer when none (hall gain- fay themt Therefore I would fain provoke Mr. r. who Is at hand, to do it fpeedilyj andllhall th^nk him for it as a hi^h favour.
C c And
1^6 Plain Scripture preof of
And for that paflagcof Mr. T. [I am furc in his Letters to mc, he faith, he was hifl'.d at from all pares of the Kingdom.] I s-nfvycr i. Mr. T. having pubtilhcd in the Tulpit what paffcd privately in Letters between him and me, hath now fully fet mcfr e topublilluhe relt, and ncceflitated mcto lome So I leave It to the judge- ment of all whether I may notdo it vvifhout blame, i The rebtionof this is like the reft, as from .1 bitter root, fomoft falflv; when yet he had my Letters which might have dinded him to fpcak the Truth. The words [from ail parts of the Kingdom,] are his own falfc addition, which is become fo ordinary witlfchim that It were a won- der if h. /h uld be a rtvealer of extraordinary Tiuth. 5. The occallunof that paf. fagein my Letter to Mr. T. was this j I perceived, btcaufe I never medled fh the Pulpit a^ainll Anabaptifts, and becaufe I bad preached that fomc Truths mutt be fiif- pcnded tor peace, th tefore it begun to be taken for gi anted that I took Anabaptifliy ior ruthj but only becaufe it was a difgraced way I would not be for it. Therefore JO convince Mr 7\ that I did not go againft my confcience, but would entertain tl c moftdifgtaced Truth, lufedfeveral /\igtiments, whereof this was one, That I had voluntarily been more prodigall of my reputation in putting out that Pamphlet of J ufti- ficatlon, which 1 knew was like to blaft my reputation, &c, and that 1 was fo hiffed ac^ that I felt temptation enough to xhiim (and he need not adde more .-) If he urge fur- ther, I will publilh the Letters at they were written on both fides. This palfagc was true, as from many hot contentious fpirits who fpake againft what they could noc confute: And I fpoke it alfoto let Mr. T. know, that though my temptations to Schifm were greater, yetl was fortified in that point ; Yet what doth he, but thinking tc had meat fome advantaige, in his next Letter fals in with me, and oilers me his help for the defence of my Book, wherein we agreed, hertby to draw me to a combina- tion with, and engage me to him, for dividing ends? But I abhorred rhe temptation, and made him no aniwcr to that part of his Letter. For as I thought I had no need of his help, fo I was refolved not to engage with a renter of the Church. For as I will not meddle with Controveifies tilllam forced} fo when I do, it (liall be in unity and
leve.asfar as I can.
Andfomuch to M.V.his fhamelefs charge againft my Doftrinc of Juftffication, as if it were the fame with the .<4^/;«flW//Z5/« Neiv-EHglnfid, which it is dircdly contrary
to.
Mr. T.
YFJ ivp'tU adde thm much further , tkn it u very nnfafc for arty man to judge of De' eiw'.e by I tab accidattall ftrange ih'mgs. Many wfl.mccs could be given, whncm people k.ivc been led 10 Error, upon a fuppofalthat Godhaib dacmncd again (I any opinion by fme pangc accident. I will name but one. We read in the Story ofa^rcatco.ventim that there voni in England a little before the Conqnejl, whether marned Prtefts n/erc more acceptable to God , then Monk^ that vowed a fmle life > at lafi they pxt at Caw in Wilt- fnJre in a Synod, there to difpute the bufnefs j and that party that h^ldfor married Prieffs fate on one fide of the room where they met together, and that party that were for Mon^i fdtt -imthe other fide the room j ithapK'idiu the Difpute, that part of the hottfe, whsrc the party that were for married Pricfts fate, feUdorm, and many were hurt^ and many loft thtir lives \ upon thu they prelcrMj concluded that OodnfOi bcttc-/ pteafcd with iMonkh f then
Infants Church- memkrjhip and Saptifm. 1 91
hen married Triefls j and fo it was tal^en that Priefls vt>r,'c not to be married. N6W judge of the lU Confeqiiences that fell upon this 5 to conceive thai by Accidents people (hould determine of DoClfine. Nay. give me leave to tcU you^ rve nay rather lhinl( we ought to determine y that God may order accidents (0^ as to become (lumblmg blocl^s, that people fljould not receive the truth ; rather then by any Accidents to deter mine a truth to be an untruth, Tlh'refore I conceive there is no fafety of judging what Do£lrini is true, or fa! fc^ but by going to the Law , and to the Teftimony 1 and try thereby. And I would wip) Mr. Baxters Followers of Kcdcrminftcr to tal^e heed how they foHow him in this dire&isn , and learn what the Scripture (hews them, andtotal^e keed of fucb monfleri wrought from Heaven ^ as he tal^s of; but to cleave to the nord of God, a-/id mal^e th it their only Rule, feeing we have Scripture toguidfi utiMd no warrmt to judge of Accidents ^as Miracles from Heaven tofway m.
NExtNfr. T. gives his jaJgcment andadvJcethat we judge not of Dofirincsby fuch accidental llrange things , and tels a ftory of a houfe falling down ( I con- jedure he means the ftory of Dioifianc ) and concludes that it is rather to be thought that God may order Accidents fo as to be ftumbling- blocks, &c.] To which I anfwer ; I. Will not this man rather fight agiinft Heaven, and difpure againft Miracles, then he will let go his Error ? ( If the nature of the fin againlt the holy Ghoft be well ftudicd J it will appear to lie much in an 7>/jf(ytYi(y againft the convincing teftimony of Miracles) Mud God witnefsof Hercticks by wonders from Heaven , and fliall the fonsof menbe fo vile as not only to (hut their own eyes, but alfo to labour to weak- en the credit of the Tcftimony of God, and to bring his wondrous providences Incoa meanefteem, and to darken theli^ht that (hi nes from Heaven in their faces 1 Othac God would make you feci with true remorft'i how far you are fallen, when your Opi- nions and credit have Co much intereft in you, and God fo little, that you can fo freelj facrifice his Glory to your fancies 1 God worketh Miracles (o feldom, that when he doth it,menihould obferve,and admirejandUarn^and not eclipfehis Glory manifeftej by them-
I. He calls them only ftrange Accidents ; 1. He compares it to the falling of the houfe , which might cafily come from a natural caufe. 5. He diflwadcs from judging of Doftrine by fuch Accidents. 4. Yea, would rather have us judge that they arc ftumbling.blocks that people (hould not receive the truth. Anfw. i. All monftcrsare not Miraculous I know : Some come from a mccr defed In nature, and fome from er- ror = But thefe in queftionare fuch as muft have a fupernatural caufe ; When there (hall be the parts of birds, of fiihes, ofbcaft', (as hornsj of mm: I could willingly en- ter a Dilpute with Mr. T. how far nature may go in this, but for tedioufncfs. And then this to be on two fuch leading perfons. and at fuch a time, &c. I will appeal to the judgement of all the godly reverr n i Minifters and fobei Chiiftians InNew- England, whether this were not the excraordinary direfting finger of God. Yec who knows not that the Law and Teltimony muft be the Rule ? ( to the judgcmcnc of which V provoke Mr.r. ) but when blinded people do defperatcly pervert this Rule, and God from Heaven (hall juJgc them vilibly. and in controverted Cafes incerpofc his judgement, would Mr. T. have usfo careltfly legard it f Yea, and rather judge the
Cc » comrary?
>
ip8 Pldirt Scripture fro§f of
contra-yf Icfcems ifhc hid fcen the wonders of f^v;»^ he would not only have been hardened as ?hiriioh,\)MX. judged God laid them as Itumbling-blocks. Who would not tremble to hear the holy God to be thus accukd by man ? as if he led people into evil by his wonders ? I know wonders that are not Miracles, are not to be interpreted or truftcd to contrary to the word; for Sitan by Gods pe miftion miy perform them, and Antichrift may do lying wonders: But yet i. True Miracles are never to be diftiuftfd, but b;.lievcr'iwharfocver they teach i For they are only the 1 cltimony of God, and God cannot lye j nor will he ever give the Tiftimony of a N^ ir- le to any thing that is againft his Word.Otherwife how fliould Chrift himf.lf have been believed to be God * Doth he not fay himfclf, ifl hid not dene the r»o> l^s that no man eljc could do. you had not bad fin ; hut noivjojt hav: no do al^ for your fin f
z. And fome wonders thitarcnot proper miracles in their nature, may yet have a plain difcovery of a finger of God in the ordering of them , and fo when they are not againft Scripture, bn: according to iti fnould exceedingly confirm us. It was no miracle for a man to fall down fuddenly, nor fo*- two or three, or four to fall 3 Yet for fo many Jews th.c came to take Chriftj'-o fall at once, and fall juft at that time, vvasfure a con- vincing wonder of God. Would M T. ifhehad beenone of thefe Jews,have perfwaded them not to regard it, but rather to take it as ordered by God to be a Humbling- block ? So, If it were no Miracle for Miftris Py '> and Miflrifs Hatch'm''on to bring forth thefc Monfters, yet to fall out on the leading Sedaries, and not on one only, bu: both, and that in fuch a rime when the Church was in nerpltxity becaufe of thofe Controver- fies, and for one to have fuch variety of births, andtheotSera Monftcr, with fuch va- riety of parts (utable to their various monftrou5 opinions; thefe are fo evidently the band of God, that he that will not fee i: when it is lifted up, flialf fee and be all a ned, Hcwoft doth the Pfalmift call on the Saints to remember the wonders of God, and Wii to forget his works? And I hope Mr.T his tongue will fooner cleave to the roof of his mouthjthen thefe wonders of providence (lull be forgotten by Neiv-E.vgKr/id» And the f )rgetting them among us, is no fmall aggravation of our fin ; That ever old Eng-, Uyid\\\o\x\A become the dunghill to receive the cxcremenrs of all thofe abominations which were purged out of New L'lgland by wonders from God ! I give the people of ixf^cr/y/w/yf' therefore ft ill the fame advice, i c. thatthey t.ike Scripture for the only rule,but fleiihrnot the judgements of ^^'od on the corrupters of it,nor fliut their eyes a- gabft the Commentary of I'uch providences.
Mr. T.
GHrifi hath told yeu by their fruits yon (linUlfnoiv thcm-i ^'<^ mifinterpict tvhcn wt fayhemcam by their falfe doBrivc ; that tve-ic hut idem per idem. ] And Chrift hath /aid, Mat. 7. ij. Beware of falfe Piophts which come to youinfliecps clo- thing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves , ye ihall know them by their fruits; helauhj it is a mi fmteprctation to fay thefe fruits are falfe doSlrine'j coniray fo Parous Pifcator, Perkins, bis Sertmn on the OAount ■, aud Il^norv netwhy thefe mtds inte/pietO' lions (hauld n$t hold for the truth. Jffo be that ivo fnall l^norvfa/fc Prophets by their fruits then their fruits are notes, md notes do diftivgufh \ and Jo they mufl be then fuch 04 agree to aU of thitn, ornoneofibem'} but the vote of unholinefs doth not a/rree to all falfe Prophets, or io them onlyithercfore that cannot be that by xvhich they (fiouQbe Ifnoivn to be fkife Prophets. For there nerc many falfe Prophet Sj that not only feemed holy for a time
but
^v
Infants Church'memberjhip and Bap/fm, i pp
but if we believe ftoyicsy mdny of thufe that h.iv: bceft accounted. Hcrcticl^s, have lived, ani died holy lives. And therefore this is very unfafc to judge of men to befal/e Prophets by their nnhoimcfs of lives. Nay, and I thinly thtu.aU thofe cannot be acquitted that Baptic^e Infants, as if they rocrc all ho'y men \yca,nnd I thinly it may bcfa/cly faid^that there arc as many un. holy men for th:ir number^ ofih.it party, or fcH that he is of, if he be ofafc£l,or of that Opi. nion that he is of) eu there arc of the contrary Opinion.
R. B.
NExt Mr.T*. contradi^cth my Expofitionof Mit.7.1^. [By their fruits ye Pjalll^fjrw :he»>2 His reafons are thefe: i. It mult agree t:) ail or none i buc a vii-ious life doth noc agree to all . Anfwer, This I havj anlVvercJ before, and fliewed that It is fuf~ ficient that it be ordinaryior agree to moft. Chi lii tells them how to difcern the whole partiesof faUePiophcts, and not how to difcern every particul.ir man that is fuch •• Ic is fufficient that enough of the men may be difcovered to impeach the Dodrine. You may know fuch a mans F'lockot ^heep by the mark ; when yet perhaps fome may be unmarkr. You may know Spaniards frrm Englifh m:n by their colouv ; and yet fomc f:w Spaniards may look cleafjand fome Engli(J} more fwarthie. You may know a Crab- t.'cc by the four fruit j yet not every Crab- tree ; for fome may have no fiuitj and fome gro.v where you cannot know them. Is there no ufual charader of a faftion , but that which is a fii id property of each individual party ? Ic is enough that by the lives of the generality of them, Hereticks may be known, z. Many have lived godly that hive been called Hereticks by the angry Fathers, ( for the Church hath ftiU been too liberall ei this title even to thofe that difFired in nothlnj[ fundamental,^ But what real Hereticks can Mr.T. name that had holy lives ? The beft have made nothing to facrifice the unity and peace of the Charch to their fancies, and rent it in pieces to ftreng^hcn their party.
i. Mr. T. faith, that there arc proportionably as many unholy of that party that I am of J To which I anfwer : i- I never meant that meer Anabaptifts were Hereticks; therefore my fenfeof that Text were ncverthelefs good, though all the Anabaptifts had holy lives, ^, But for the comparifon Mr. T. makes, I have faid enough before. Liy by the common people who are confciemioufly of no lJde,but will be of that fide vvh'ch is in credit^and then compare thofe on each party that are carried to ic in judgement and con- fcicnce, and experience will quickly confute Mf. T. his reproach: And it is no fmall degree of evil that a man is fallen to, when he dare Hinder or make infamous the whole orgrcatcftpartof all the holy Churches on Earth,to maintain the repucation of his owre Opinion. I know we have fome Davids (in fin) and Meters, yea, and Judxs's too j but let him either (hew any that ever came to the height as Co/> and his FoUowerSj or any' number of zealous Profcffors that lived as the Anabaptifts mentioned by Bullingcr,CaU vin, 6i:c,or have been guilty of the fin that in this age hach accompanied the Anabaptifts*
Cc J Mr.r;
200 Plain Serif ture praof of
Mr. T.
ANdpJT thit he faith {that were but idem per idem] it is very ^rarie ; Fdlfe Profhets were the fubjchst andtbcir daClnne the fign^ and u this Idem per idem ? ihu ;j but a eonccit of Mr. BaxtcrSj and (Iconfefs t9 you) beyond r»y ilfillto conceive.
R. B.
IF your capacity cannot reach to conceive a thing fo eafic, I would advlfe you to think your fclf unfit to lead the world out of error, A rtian would think that your Logick (hould be better, though your Divinity be fo bad. Falfe Prophets you fay wc:e the fub- jcdSjand their doftrine the fign; But there arc three things in this fubjett confidtrable,' and the qucftion is, which ut thefe is ikc fiinatum,thc thing figtiiritd by this fign f i. As they were menj and fo Chrift never intended that we (hould know chem to b men by their fruit?, i A'- they were Prophets ; and fo Chrift intended it not neither, g- But as they were faU'e Prophets, and fo Chrift intended that by their fiults they Ihmid b« known. Now what is a falfe Prophet, but one that preacheth falle doftrine?are not thefc Synonima's > N .w Mr.T. faith their Doftiinc is the fign: Not their Doftrine as Dod- rine,but as falfe. St that this were plainly according to Mr T.Boware of thofethat preach falfe Dodrlne^you Qiall know them to be preachers of falfe DoCti ine,by their preaching falfe Doftrine j or you fhali know their Dodrine is falfe by the falihood And doth a Philofopher of Mr. T's itanding fay it is beyond his skill to conceive that this is idem per idem ? and call it one of my conceits .' Let better Scholars judge.
Yet I was not igaoranc tkat more then he names did fo interpret it ; But magti amicave-ritas.
Mr. T.
n
'Tlrpocritcs may fcem Holy for a little Tvhtkibut at lafi all fcdfe DB^rirus likely end in ^^wic^ed Kvcs."] See rohat a pretty oldmincing bufincfs u here ; he doth not fay they do alivaycs do Jo, lil^ely j finely , and probably, and pa chance are fine Rulei-for perftns to examine truth by. And what a good Rule is here for his people of Kcdcrminftct to fuUorv, tlxy mnj judge men to be falfe Prophets^ bccaufe they may judge them tilr>^'y to befo ?
R. B.
BEing not able to undcrftand an ufual phrafe, you fuppofc it to be ridiculous, and ^lay wich it j [probably and perchance] are terms of your own, and therefore the Hcter for you to jclt with. But by l^likcly] I mean [ordinarily or foe the moil part,or
ufually
I
Infants Church-memberjhif and Baptifm. 201
ufually] it being oar ordinary fcnfe of thacphrafe And this 4s nootherwife propounded as a Ru'ethen Clirift himfeif doth propound it j not to be inftcad ofScripture^ but as a confirmation and explication of it.
Mr. T,
l\J\7Hcre hstJj there been f(>tomi afockcy of Annbafit'ifls fincc the rforldfirfl Ijneiv themj V V that proved not tvxl^cd ? ] uby, I tell Mr. Baxter if he doth not i>fioiv i. Ift London there is l(»own at this day, and I doubt not but there arc in this congrrg/ttion that , cm tcflific it. 1. Tt'J, Slid I iMtl tell him this , five hundred years ago tbofc that he accounts A'l'ibaiHids^ivcre holy mcn^and are [o repntcd^and recl{omdamongtl}oje Saints that oppofcd the Papi(lsi and 1x^:11 prove it out of Parus Clunicenfis, out <?/ Bernards Epiflks, the . \o.Epi(lle. i.And abundance of others th':re were in Germany aad FrancejiW;o/a we h iVe rtdfon to thinlf that they w:re holy. Tea, at this d-iy in the Low Countries there are focicties of Godly men that deny Bapti'^irg of Infants j and when men have rat^-'d ►« much as they can agaiafl them, they be but mfleSfiacompanfonitbat they charge them mtb.
R. S.
nrHofc now In London are not yet come to the proof ; when they have reached to the end of what they are tending to, then It will be feen what they will prove, if they do not repent and return, z. It is hard with your caufe when you cannot name one fociety of thcra, that ever lived In the world, that proved not wickcdi except thofc now alive,whore ends we yet fee notj.lf I were never fo able to anfwer thisjet as the world goes, it Is not fafe to fpeak all orhalf that wickednefsofthc Anabaptith now living, which the Hiftory of this age will fpeak to pofterity.4.Yet if you had named that fociety, that are not guilty of Schifm, and demolilliins the Church by dirifion, and contempt, and reproach of the godly Miniftry, and difobediencc to th:)re in Government further then they pleafe them, and Covenant breaking, and negled of the Lords Day, &c. You would credit that particular fociety if you make it good. In the mean time I fee them rolling down the hill fo faft,that I think many have but one ftep lower to go, when they place their Religion in full-mou hed Oaths, and blafpheming the moll high God, and t-ut(ing, and Whoredome* j and when even the Army begin to bore them through the tongue for Blafphcmy.
z. And for your mftance five hundred years afgo, I have anfwcrcd it before, i. It bewrays your caufe to be new and naught when you can go no higher then five hun- dred years ago , and yet you except againft the witncfics that we produce necr fifteen hundred years ago, if not full out. z. 1 know men are fo tender of their own names, through pride, that they think him a railcr that doth but name their faults } and they look to be ftroaked, and fmoothcd, and reverenced while they fpeak molt wickedly j fo did the ^apifts Kifhops when they were condemning the Nlartyrs , and flandering the truth ; yet (though I abhor reviling) I take my felf bound to tell you of the quality of your offence, that it is in my Judgement a moftunconfcionablc Jcfuicicall trick to
fedvicc
302 Plain Scripture f roof of
fcdacc poor Igaorant fowU, for yoa to cite che lyes and flinders of Papifts againft the godly Reformery, and go abcu: to make your people and the world txllere that they are truths, and fo to fet in with thofe flindtrcrSj and fet up their credit | I have told you before how the VValdcnfes and Albigeiifes arc acquit from iheft flinders, both by their own writings and their very advcrfaries ; You may upon the fame ground make rhem witches and buggerers, and whatnot? for thtir adverfaries report that of them too. And yet you svUl take k ill to be called an Accufer of the brcihien j you know whofc pare that is.
5. And for thofe in Germany, &c. I have told you before what they were cut of more credible and knowing witnctfes then your ftlf, and as godly as the world hath had fince the Primitive dayes.
Mr. T.
TTOn> many ofthcfc Antinomijlsy&chave your l^novon rvho have not proved palpably guilty *-^o] lyhig^-perfidioufnefs, covetoufncfs, maUcc,contcmpt of their godly Brtih/en^ licentiouty feared c$nfcicnces i* ] ; linorv 7iot how many the men o/"Kedermlnlter l^norv ofthefe : ll(noyv Tiot if they l^aorv any that is palpably guilty of lying, per fidioiiffiefsy covetoufnefs, malice,con' tempt of their Godly Brethren , liccntioufncfs, or feared confciaiccs. I am the only man that is here named in this pajj'age. And if the men of Kedeminfter l^now anyfuch thing by mc tii lyingyperfidioiffne/syCoveto7{fKefs, malice, contemptofthc g"d<'y Brethren, l/centioufnefs, or a feared confcienceythey may do well to follow the Ride yV/^. Baxter hath given in his Ser- mons ; firft to tell me of it, between me and them ; and if they do not win me, to tal^e two more with themi and if I hearl^en 'not to them, to tell it to the chtirch.Biit Hove not to recri- minate Jor that were tofcoldil abhor fuch doing. My life is l^nown toyoii.ifl am guilty ofty-m ing,perfidioufnefs;,covetoiifnefsjmalice,contempt of the godly Bretlxren, licentio/t/nefs, or of a feared confcience ; whether I am guilty oftbefCf I appeal to yon that \now my converfation*
TrHey knowfo many, that makes them the more abhor the way that leads to it. And for your fclf , i. I never Intended the accufing of you In thcfc , but named you wi;h the honour of being the molt able and one of the moderated. If you will fuppofe your felt accufed when you are not, you may. 1. Yet becaufe you charge it asmy duty to tell it you, and that ^rft privately, 8cc. 1 Hull fay this much, i, I would thefc publike Orations did no: too frtcjucndy manifefl how eafily untruth will fall from your mouth i as 1 have fliewed in that which is faid already, and your letters and Confutation Sermon fay too much. z. Perfidloufnefs lies moft In breaking Co- venants and Oaths, and this 1 charge you not with : It is a great queftion in this age, whether it be a fin. 3, Covetoufnefs Is beft known by mens pradices • and I am fare it was wont by thehonelt old Divines to be accounted a fin, and a fign of Covetouf- nefs to have many Livings, or to be a Plaralift ; To be Parfon of Rufs, and Vicar of Lem^'tt and Preacher of Bewdly , and Maftcr of the Hofpicall at Ledbury ( which re- 'j ' quiretb
Infants Charch-memberjhi^ and Bapifm. 203
quirtth many monecfes yearly rcfidcnce) having means alfo of yonr own bcfides, and ycc to complain as you do in your Books , of the great want char you and ycur Family
may be put to j Si cf^o jic feaffem. 4 And for malice, I will not accufe you
of it, leaft I feem to plead my own cauCe. '1 hough many of yeur Hearers think that they have oft heard its voice in your Pulpit ; and in particular when you would hare made them believe, that my dodrinc was the fame with that condemned in Nctv- r.ngUnd'i which you have fecondcd in print. 5. And for the Iin of contemning your brethren (yea, th*^ molt of the learnedftand godlieft Divines in the world, mul- titudes of whom arc incomparably in all excellencies beyond your felf.) 1 ap- peal to all that cverdifputed with you, and to your own moft judicious Hearers.., whether they have ever known many more guihy then your fclf ( who pre- tended to be learned Divines themfclves :) and whether it be not ufuall witJj you to puc oft" the authority both of their Argumenrs and judgements with 3 contemptuous fmile, or a wcnJer at the filiinefs of them? And you told me your fclfj that it was wilfullncfs or negligence in all tKc Divines that were for Infantbaptifm. And who can exprels higher contempt, or more evi- dent untruth ? or a confcience Icfs tender in cenfuring others ? or more pride, in exalting Ins own judgement and fincerity ? But 1 undcrftood by this, that it was wilfulnefs or negligence that kept your ftlf from being an Aaabap- tift To long 'y and thcrctorc what wonder if he be one now , who had no better prefervatives ? 6. And for licentioufnefs, further then it is expreflcd by this liberty in finning , I hope yea are no: guilty. Though your not reproving the.proph.ining of the Lords day , and exculing your felf from rcfolving the qutftion concerning its morality , hath no good favour. 7. And in all tkef;: , the tendernefs of your conLciencc appears. If you think I wrong you in mentioning thcfe , I give you my true Anfwer. i. I never intended your accufation in the pilfages wherein you will needs take your felf accufed. But yoa will needs m.;ke your felf the accufed perfon. a. And fo publikeiy challenge me to make it good. 5. Efpecially bccaufe you wM needs hang the credit of your bad c.v/j'c on your own, as if you were refolvcd they fliould ftand or fall together : elfe ("hould [ never have medled with your faults. But that canfc hath this day troubled Enghnd, and 1 will trouble it by fpeaking the truth. 4. And if I filence your fin after fo publike an invitation to reprove you, it may lie on me. !f. I mention no faults, but what all the Coun- trey knows, or what you publilhcd your felf in Prefs or Pulpit; for the mat- ter. 6. I have privately adraonillied you of your un:ru:hs in Letters j and of your hatd cenfurcs, before two cr three; and of your plurality of places, and thcfcandall thereof j batall in vain. Yoa made fo light of having no lelj then four Market Towns to lie on your fnoalders, as if it were nothing; and thofe cvafions (from non-obligatiin In LawJ do fully fatisfie youj which feem frivo- lous to me, and to far wifer mm 3 fcEing where you receive wages, you owe duty, which confcience will require, though the Law of man (liould not. And were you abler then you are, and had many to help you, I 6L^-;t fay , you are little enough for the work of one place, 7. And for telling th; Church 3 ycu know you are not of the fame particular vllible Church v/ith me, where I may fo tell the Church of your cilVrces. S, And indeed in this I have the adviceof fdrae pious fober menthati have advifed with, who think it my duty to .fay what I do ; feeing the reputation of your fuppofed innoceney is the fnarc of many, who forget that there are thoufands more innocent that differ from you, and thou-
D d fands
2P4 ^^^^ Scripture proof of
fands leCs innocent that arc of your way, 9. Yet fhould not this have moved me, bat that I finde warrant from Scripture. I finde Chrift ipeaking farpiainlicr of the (edu- cing Phirifci, and the leaven of their falfe DoSrines and wickedlives, and that openly before the people : and Pauldnh far more of them that would have fcduccd the Coii/t- tbiansind G.iiJtiafis'Mt publilheth Dem/rs his forfaking him, and turning rochc world ; and AlexJfidcts ovpoCn\on^3nd Hymcmtui and rh/aui talff Doftilne.and punifhmcnt/ yea. he openly rc*provethi-'f;c/tohis face, and publiihe h both his diffimularion and Bxinj.b.u *s in an L piftle to others. Tho''c that fiiinc ( opcn'y ) mull be rcbul^: d btforc all, thatotbe-anaybcrvxic. i Tim J. 10. Yea, and that flurply, that they may be found in the faith. The credit of no man in the world, mult befo dt-ar .0 a Chriftian as the honour of Chrift, and welfare of fouls, and peace of the Church : if any would make their credit an Engine to draw men to Error and Divifi'im, and i-ncrcafe the Ciiurches calamities ( which is too palpably your cafe, ) all godly men are hound by true and lawfu'-l meanes to coniradift them , and not to ftrtngthen that Engine. lO. And yet I will not fay fo much as your felfj nor ever did. Treat of Sc.vjdits^ page 1^4. You fay, [^Andnobcttc-f (then the Jefiiiies ) arc the ends of mnny other Her c- tkl^s, as Soc-ni.tns, Anabaptifts, Familijis. SeparatiJIs a?id the rejl of the litter of zj'uvotu tf'olvrs^ M Paul caUi thenii Afts lO. 30. thit enter among Chriftnnsand [pare not the
M' 1
Mr. T.
[^ Hey have confident expre/fions to (halfC poor i^orantftah, vcham God will have d'lf-^ covered in the day of trink'] [conceive ftiU I am reckoned among thcfe • .W^-. Baxter (houldjhciv what confident expreffions they wc/f, and rvhen they were dciiveicd. True, I W'ti then confident^ and I amfiill confident , yea and fo far, that as far as I l^novf my oivn hearty ijhould lay down my I'fe upon it. that itUa truth of God^ that neither Jefm Chrifi^ 'tioY hit Apo(itcs did appoint Bapti-xini of L.fants, but that it is a meer conceii. Did I cvir go about to (h.l^e any of your fouls f it is true I have brought all the Texts of Scripture that Il^norv ofi which arc urged to prove infant-Baptifm, and have anfwered them ; Tfrf, (7-itd ihui mucb more, if 3/>-. Baxter will let me have Ip.s Argnn.cntSy or writer hefijaU have an anfwcr ( if God blefs and enable me ) jo full, that there Ih.ill be no \ufl reafonfor him to fay he huh not a f 11 U anfwcr. And I thaii\ Gid for that which haih paffedfrommei it hath been mihing but found arguments.
R. B.
W;
'As ever man in fuch a cafe mere confident ? When you tell your Hearers , Their blood be on their own heads if they yield not to you i as sf it would be their damnition , and lofethe blood of their fouls if they were not Baptised again ? And do you no: here confefs your felf fo coafidcnt that you fliould
^riifbitiM
Infants Church-memlferjhi^ And Bapi[m. 20 J
lay down your life on it, that you are in the truth ? TialySir, all the Minifters and Scholars that I can meet with, that heard your difputes, did think you had filly grounds to build fuch a confidence on. And for all you boaft fo much of your anfwers by wri- ting, I think your writings have little to be To boalted of. 1 Nvould God had pcrfwaded you to imploy your parts and pains a better way.
Mr. T.
BVt when they meet with any that csn fcmh out their Fallacies j how little have they to y<iy ? ] ^f'hat Fallacies have paf[ccl from me,that ^y.BiXKiJJjould thftt Wfitc^ why dotb he ml produce them ?
R. B,.
I Did produce them before wltncITcs enoughj and in particular, before mtny ofihem CO whom 1 wrote that Preface.
Mr. T.
You k'low I have had as wuch opportunity to try their JlreagthyOS mofl^oiid I never yet Met with any, in Garifon, or Artfiy that could Jay any thing which ntigbt ftagger a (olid tnan.l if ;>fr.Baxter never met with fuch ^ he hath met witbthofe that urgeffom Mat.zS. 19,18. That Cbrift bid go mal{C Difciples^ and bapti':^ Difciplesj and Mar. ij, i5. Go preach the Gojpd to every creature j and thaifiHl the Apoflleputs repenting before bapti-^n^ > and is not this able to (laggcr a folid man ? truly if fo be that men will not be (laggFred with thefe tbingSy that hold baptio^ng of Infants^ for my part I [fjall be fo far from thinlfing it it part of their foUdity^ that it k pan of their ivc^il('iefsi and chit their praHice u a corruption. And I will not now be afraid to fpeali itj that it is but flight, frivoloH* argning^and a man of reafon would think Mr.Baxter were rather injcfi, then m carneft.
R. B,
VA7Hen you will from your Arguments from thofe texts, then we dial! know their ▼ ^ ftrcngth : In the mean time, all your confident words (hew not me the leaft ground for your conclufion ; No more then thiSjScriprute rcquireth faith to juftificatl- on, therefore none but believers are juftifi.ed,which is falfc,and yet like yours, if I know what you would thence deduce.
Dd i Mr.Tj
ao6 Plain Scripture proof ef
Mr. T.
BVt bcfj'uh ofb'is D'ifpiitat'iofi[You hcnydin n,y late publicly D'lfputc at Bcwdleyjan. i. vc'ith M>: Tombs, rvho is tal^n to b: tbc able ft oftb:m in the Lind, and one of the meS ynodcratc, botv little they can lay even in the b3.ydc(l point (jfBaptifm, n^h.it g.ofs abfurditics they arc driven to, and bow Utile tender conieicntioui fear of crmig is hft among tbc befl,"! (i) He faith this j the people of Kcderminftcr bear borv little they cm fjy. From whom did thy h:ar it .' it may be from Af/.Bixtcr hii^fc/fin his otvn ciufe j a mam otva Tcflimony is fcarcc a competent mtnefs [_B:it borv little they can fay ] (i) why? i w.is not to ple.id by way of arguing thca^ifKfus my part only to Anfrvcr : A,id how could ihe men ofKedcrmin*' ftcr k'low by this what I could have [aid ? :b::y might ((How wha^t I did fay j but I thinly not rvhat I could fay ; for how the men of Kcdcrminikr (hoi(!dl(now tfhat I could have f aid, is (Iraigcto me (3 j ihcy might l^nc'v thu I preached fivcn or eight Sermons of that Text m Matthew, anifo much as neither Mr "Ryxttr^vor alt the Divines in England wiUbc able to anfwcr i yea, and more I will fay, tnd preach, and write, if the Lmdfh.iU fave mylife. (^) Seeing God hitb carried ih: bufi'iefs f«fay, I am fo engaged /» u,tbjt tj my lif be of feted in It} I conceive that I ofu it as afacrifce ti God.
R. B.
WHat 2 ftrangc feigning fancy have you , that would make men believe thn it ( I j was only from me that they heard it,iind not from your own mouth ? A nd this you would tell the men of Bnvdlcy in the Pulpit, who themfelves faw muhicudcs of the people of l^dcrmmfler prefent at your Difpute , being a confiderable parr of the- CongrcgationjWhich was judged to be many thoufands. (1^ And how few will bslieve yoUjthat you could have faid much more ro the points in han<i- who heard i. how long, we fhid at it j even above fix hours ; z. And that you, though Refpondcnt, took up far the gr<3C<;ft part of the time, and would oft-times fcarcc let me lpcakj3nd ufually inter, ruptedjand were very little interrupted your felf. j . And that \ gave you leave alfo to oppofe in proving the repeal of the (Ordinance for Infints Church.memberfliip. 4 An<J that you forced me to oppofe, and never will be brought to Difpute as Opponent your felf, but only to put us on the ptoof. And yet you would make men believe what you could fey more if you might. (5) For your eight Sermons, 1 heard them moft repeated, and unfeignedly judge them worthlefs for all your great boaft. You chofe out the weak- eft Arguments) and then triumphed over them ; and fome that wete flrong you urged hi a weak way ofyotir own, or elfe weakly anfwcred. It is cafic to conquer and triumph when you have no body to gain-fay you. ^4) For the facrificingofyour life, I wilhyou may doitjif ever jin a better caufe, left you lofeit. But if you had conceived your life in danger, you would not have threatncd tne with the danger I go in for oppofmg yea.
Mr.T.
Infants church' member Jlnp ajtd Baptifm, 2 07
Mr. T.
HE faith [wh.it g,ofi abfuydii'ics they arc d.wn to .' ] Had he named thm v?c then wight h.iv: judged of them ; the^fofjcfl abfttriiiics I conceive ^vere not fuch at he tdll^s of his A'guments brought me to \ the moft rverc about oiy Expofition of i Cor. 7. 14. and what if onelctpafsan aifurd'ty upon an Exfofttion urged /iiddenly ?
R. B.
HEre begins all that I charged you with , though you arc pleafcd to take the reft to yourfelf. And i. for Abfurdities , (i) where you would have had me name them , buc that was not fo fit a place } but to p'.eaiute you I will name fome of them here C though about 1 Cor. 7. ^4. you feem to confefs fome j and yet even now, you thanked God for that which paffcd from you. and fay, it was nothing buc found Arguments. ) i . You abfurdly affirmed , 1 hat Chrifts comming In the ti.(h is 2 mercy given to th: Cbiirch inftead of Infants vifible Memberlhip. 1. Thit it is to //a* ;«/itj;5 a mercy given them inftead of their vidble Memberlhip 3. Yoa affirmed that all the whole pcspic of the Jews wcie members of the Cong'egation of the Common- weahh /as you call it) buc not vifible Members. 4. Y'ou abfurdly affirm, cd, that the Infants in the Wildernefs were no Church members without Circumci- fion. 5. Yea, you affirmed this after you had granted that all the Infants of tho jews were vilible Members. 6. Y^ea, you affirmed that «o«e were vifibly Members without Circumcifionj and fo God hath either no vihble Church among thv' Jews, or but (^aleb and Jofluta^ or few, when ihey entered the Promifed Land. Thi> was not a flip from you, before you were aware, but you infiftcd on it ncer an hour to make it good- 7. This you did after our folemn engagement in the face of the Congrega- tion, that we would not fpeak any thing againft our judgcmems for the advantage of our Caufe againft the other. And you took it ill when I told you I believed you fpakeagainllyour Confcience f that neliher the Infants in the Wildernefs nor any without Circumcifion were vifible Members :j and yet when I told you that women were vifible Members without Ciccumcifion, you conftfTed it, and unfaid all again : And yet had not the ingenuity to confefs you had erred, though you yielded the point, 8. Y'ou moft abfurdly affirmed, that no Infant can be faid to be a vifible Churchmem- bcr without fome Aft of his own (though his Parents enter him into the Covenant with God- j And doth not this overthrow all thu you faid before, that the Circum" clfed Infants were vilible Church-members^ For it is by no Ad of their osvn that they arc Members any more then the uncircumcifedi Yet did you appeal to the Con- gregation for the truth of this, 9. You acknowledged that the Infants of the Jews in the Wildtrnefs were Members of the Church, and yet not vilible Members ; And when I asked you , ttow you knovY them to be Members , if they were not vifible or difcernably fuch ? You anfwered , Bccauic the whole Congregation of the Jews in a lump was taken to be the Church of God ; So that you knew the whole were the Church, and that the Infants were of the Church, and yet they were not vifible Mem-
Dd J bers.
2o8 PUni Scripture freof ef
bers. lo. You faid [vifibility] was ihefubjeft, and the perfonsvifiblc were the Ad- junft J which as delivered is abfurd. ii. You faid that the metcifuil gih and Ordi- nance for Infants ChurcK-mcmberll\ip was Repealed in Mercy. Yea, that i: waia Mercy to All and Some j to the favcd and to the damned, ii: Yea, thit it is a greater M;rcy to us Chriftians, that our Infants arc not taken to be Cfaurch»members. 13. You abl'urdlyalflrmcd , that the Infants that now are not vifible Men. bers have as much mercy as thofc that then were vifible Members- yea and more mercy, and that bccaiife they are not vifible Church- members, 14. You laid the Jews were na. rurally b anches , but not by nature : When the Text faith b.nh, /fow. 11.24, ij; You affirmed abfurdly, that they were called N'aturall only in their being Men^ and not Branches. 16. After all this, you come again to tell me, ihit ihere was nofuch thing as a vifible Memberfliip without Cjrcumcifion, when yet upon the Inrtancc of women being uncircumcifed, you had granted it before , after a long deniall, Cwhich fee the people a laughing at you.) And was, this truihoc Confciencious ? 17. You tell me that I cannot finde any one Author that expoundeth iCor. 7. 14 of In- fants hoiinefs in my fenfe, before L«//?i?/- and Z«i;/^/i«j j Is this true? i8. You fay that the word e5«7j3t, is taken in Scripture many hundred times for Authority: I« that true? 19. You confidently infifted on It, That the Corinthians were certain that their children were no Baftardfi, and yet they doubted left their living together were fornic3tI:)n. ("And fo they were fure their children were lawfully begotten^ but yec doubted whether they lawfully begot them J lO. You yielded that the word fanfti- fie, and Holy, is taken in my fenfe ncer fix hundred times in Scripture , and no where elfe once in your fenfe j and yet pleaded that here it muft be taken in yours and notinmiric; without (hewing any ground for a neceflity of it. n. You arguad long (hm moft abfurdly, and as fikea right Anabaptift as ever I heard you) to prove, I hac all things are pure to the pure, andfanftified ro Believers only by the prefcnt ASt of Faith and the prefenc Ad of Prayer. ( And fo revive the old Hercfie of thole thac would alwaycs pray j as if all things became unfandified and impure to usasfoon as we give over praying and adnall believing,) and as if the fruit of thefe lafted no longer then the Ad.) ii. When I urged you that then {[tt^ could not be fandJ- fied to us, nor any thing while wefleep^ becaufe then we do not adually p;a/and be- lievej you flood in it,that fleep was not fandificd. a j. To prove thac ficep was I'andi- fied, 1 argued from the Apoftles words, Ail things are pure to the pure j therefore fleep is pure to them. And you denied the confeqtience , faying, that by All things was meant Some things. 14. Andtoiliew rhac thefe were not mecr flips, and that you had the Confcience to defend fuch horrid abfurditics, as the Tiuth of God, and had fo far loft your modefty at to plead thus before fo many Minifters and Scholars } you raott learnedly argued from the word, which the ApoHIe there ufeth to fignifie Pray- er, that hliu^ti fignificth only prefent Prayer j and therefore it rauft be only prefenc Prayer that fandifieth, ij. When I argued to prove Infants DifcipleSj thus: If they are not Difciples, then It Is either becaufe they are uncapable of it, or becaufe God will not Ihsw them fo mnch mercy j buc neither of thefe ; therefore &c. You broaghc a third; It was becaufe they have not learned, 2,6. When I further argued ; If they have notlearned, then it may be reduced ro one of the former } cither becaufe they are uncapable, or becaufe God will not Hjcw ihcm that mercy ; you give a third* becaufe they arc no: taught. 17. You abfurdly fay , It is not Circumcifion as ncccflary and engaging to u^tofcs Law, but it was the Dodrineofthe falfe Apoftles, which JPc.'e/- faid thac they and theic Fathers were unable to bear. It were tedious to number all. How lamentably did yQu argue to provQ the Repeal of Gods Ordinance
for
Infants Chtirch'memberflii^ and Baptifm. 2 op
for Infants Ghurch-memberfnip ? noticing but idem per idem over and over : Infomuch tkat frequently Mr. Good and the reft of the Minifiers that fate next me, urged me to give over, for you were utterly puzzled and mated, and knowing not what to fay, were refolvei^ to fay fomething,left if you were filent^the people Ihould think you were worft- ed. This was their judgement. And thus at your requeft, I hav? named fomeof your abfucdities.
Ktr. T.
*jpVt is thiifo much? (\)n-henaman rvasjct upon at afudden. (i) And the budncfs was ' ^fo carried on, that I mull fear cc l^nn'iv of it. ( j j And h.7vc concealed from me the A, gu- ments beforchmd j and('\)vphen I had fear cc time njf'nydcd me to repeat them. (^) when the Opponent ivdi; 'd not open his terms. (6) irhen a Rijpoirdcnt /&^ // be fo chccl^ed, as he did me then. I ihhi\ hemay be driven by an Opponent to asgrojsabftirditics^ as he can (h.w in any one of my Anfrvers,
R. B.
BUt I underftood ( as from others by your private confeffions, ) (o here by your ownconccfiion J that you are confclous of fome abfurdities that you were driven to; yetyouexcufe what you will not confefs : and what needs there any excufe, had there been no fuch matter ? but fin is an entangling engaging thing. One draws on another by 3 feeming neccfliry. Your excufe much aggravateth your fault. For while you pretend to fee more truth then moftof the Chriftian worldi even the moft godly, and here to plead for this truth , as if Gods Glory needed mans fallhood to maintain it, and as if the heap were not great enough already) you here add in four lines fix grofs untruths more. lamforry that lam neceffitated to tell you fo. But hethat will fin openly, muft ht rebuked before all (i) i. Who cnn believe you were fct upon at afudden, that knoweth how many weeks, yea, moneths thebu- finefs was in motion, and how many Mtflages and Letetspaft between us ? and that It was not in my power to force you to Difpute' (2) z. And who then can believe that that bufinefs was carried on foasyou fcarce knew of it > Who carried it onbutycuand I ? D/d you not know of your own Letters and mine ? Did not yon forceme to that Idid, as I (hall fliew ? Did not you proraife your people In the Pulpit to Difpute with me , when fome of them urged you to it? and preach eight or ten Sermons to prcpoffefs -them with ynur notions ? and told them when you promifed the Difpute, that you thought good firft by thofe Sermons to acquaint them with the ftate of the Controverfie ? and therein anfwcred , as youthought, all of moment that could be faid for Infant baptJfm ? When T never preached one fentence before hand, nor fince to your Hearers or mine own, thit I can remember, on the Qucftion j and when you would not at the defi; e of your people, give me leave to preach one Ser- mon on it aftirwa-rds ? And yet can you fay, the bufinefs was carried on that you fcarce knew of it ? Why Sir, lam forced to tell you, that it were a wonder if you fliould have found the truth of God which others have loftjwhen you have fo loft common modefty
and
Z I o Plain Scripture proof of
and truth in your PulpU fpccches.i j) j.And is it trae,thit I concealed my Arguments/ Did yoa eve: dclire me to let you know in reference to the Diipute what Arguments I would indli on ' Yea, or did ycu ever dcfire mc to give you any thing as to your own fatisfaSion or information ? And ccu'.d any Arguments of weight be new and ftrange to you, that had ftudicd the point Ic long ? and wrote on i: fo mu-h ;• and conaadiQed fo many^and laboured to make a I'arty and Schiim for ycur Opinion? who would think that a man that had any fear of God, lliould do this much,before he hid fcarcht out aU of moment that could be faid agalnll him ? Yea, did not you tell me thit Divinesdid all differ f:om you, and were ignorant in this, only through wilfulinefsor negligence ? And did you not ftiU plead with me. that the Controveriic /j not diffJcull ' And yet do you lay the blame on me for nor giving you bcfosc-hanJ my Arguments ' Luc what if I had denied you it ? had it been unfcemly ana unufual ? But bccaufe ycu iiy the like in your Letter to me, and make this your common txcule, let mc tell the wotld how falfe it is. 1 he firll time that ever / had a word with Mr.T^.about infant. Baptifm, was about five or fix year ago, when he accidentally came into my quarters at the Houfcof my moftintire and dear friend Colonell Sylvxnu^ T-n/f/' In Lofidfm, and there did I urge Mr, T. with this one Argument, and none but this^ which 1 ftoud on in thatdifputc, drawn from Infants Church. mcmbeilliip. After this I was forced to prc«ch on the fub- jed at Coventry, and I am informed by thole that had rcafon to know, that Mr. T. had the Notes delivered him, where this Argument was in th; front. And yet did he not hear my Arguments bcforti*(4)^.That you had fcarcc time afforded you to repeat thdm, is an untruth that hath a hard fore-head : or elfc it durft not have ap,cared to the world againftthoufands of Witntfllsthat arercady toconvift it ; and in the Pulpit before that very Congregation that knew it to be falfc j aad knew that though you were Re- fpondent,yet you ipoke much more then I ^ and that I was fain to beg of you not to in-, terrupt me,but could not prevail j and that you repeated Arguments over,3nd ovcr,ind. over, before you would take them right j which overtedious and frequent repeatings In- deed I told you would Icfe us time (j) j.Nor is itany more true that 1 refufed to open my terms fo far as was the duty of an Opponent ; Indeed I was loith to turn a Difputc into a meer Catechizingi to follow you in anfwering Queftion after Qii.:ftion.If I hajf fpoke ambigHOufly, you Ihould have (liewcd the ambiguity, and have diftin^uilhed ac- cordingly, which I intreated you to do (6) 6. Nor is it any truer rhat 1 checked you, if thereby ycu me.in any paflionatc uncivill terms ; except yuu mean the checking your Opinion by Argument, which mated you, or the bare naming and difcovery of your miftakesand mifcirriages. However I hope you arc not t'^j baHifuU after aJlyoor,de- fying the Armies of fVac/jand calllng,Give me a man that we may Dirpute,&c.for your uicircumcifed Cpinion,as now to be driven to abfurditicsjmeerly by a check from fuch a one as I !
Mr. T.
T Et Mi.Bixtev bring bu ^'guments in writing^ that j may examine them^ and then fee ^-^tvhit abfurdities be cm brifg rue to. For I told bim before the Difpute, cbat a fiiddcn /Itijivc/ rvould not fads fie any learned man in tbe ivorld.I coufd tcl/ M, .]i:ix:cv that^i learrt' ed men a$ ar,y rvere in tbc Landy tverc not vc- y able te An fiver at a fiidden,thfiUih tbcy rverf excellent in writing. A nimble wit/ind a voluble to/igii^thongb fhallutv m judgement /nay do miuh before fi Uy people.
R- B.
Infants Church'membirjhif and Sajitifm, Jtl I
R. !3.
HOw many Rcafons did I give you againft \»rfting,and you denied not the validity of any one of them ? And yet do you call for writing ' why have you not anfwcrcd Mr.Cobbetj Mr.Churchi Mr.Bayly^ Rutherford^ Drnv^ v»ith many more ? And did I not fee the weaknefs of your anfwcr to Mr.MarPj.ils Defence,which you have now in or ncer the Prcfs ? But yet feeing nothing but wrKing will fatlifie you, writing you fhall have, E^ut let me tell you j 1 take It for the grearcft injury that ever I received from man, that you have thus forced me unavoidably tn fteep my thoughts in (o bitter a fubjed^ and take me off my fweeter ftudies, and wsftc fo much of my precious time in fo low a matter, when I am parting into another worlds which I refolved Ihould hive had thcfc thoughts and hours;and that you have deprived the Ckurch of more ufefuU labours which I had in hand on the moft weighty fubjefts. 1 pray God lay not this fin to your charge. For my own pnrr,Iatn fo far from being delighted in it, that I profefs I take it for one of the greatcft afflidi?n» that ever befell mc.
X. What you talk of not farisfying learned men, is vain j I was never dciTred to fa- tisfic learned men , but only to fatlsfic your hearers of B^wdnley , who are unLarned. 3 . You fcem to compare your felf with thofc that being as learned as any in the Land, were not very able to anfwer on a fudden,but were excellent ar writing- And indeed this conceit of yours Is it that keeps your Followers implicitely of your Faithj Whereas I af« firm from my very heart, thathad ltlmeandft>cngth, I had far rather deal with you by writing then by words jand think m) felf far abler for Ir.Only your people be not able to examine writing$,3S they confefled to me-,and therefore this is a pretty device to de- ceive them, to make them believe that all your writings are that which they are not* 4. What'you Intimate of the ihallownefi of my judgement, I deny not to be trucjbut for a nimble wit, a voluble tongue, I am far to feck j and pr^ fefs that I came not thl her in confidence of the adrantage of my wic and tongue (as the world Is made b.licve^/) but of my caufe. And if your people be fo filly as you intimate, that thi.y will be fo taken with one difpute from me, what an advantage have you to ca;ch thefc filly people by all your partionate Sermons for Anabiptiftry, and all your privite infinuaring endeavours? But I hope God will watch over them,and not fuff.r them to prove fo filly. But corcern- Ing the truth of all this, I wholly refer it to thv. judgement (not of the filly people,) but ^f all the Minifters and Schollars that were prcfent.
Mr. T.
AfJi I conftfs tnyo/tj the thing that moved me to the Difpitte^ vf.rs ihegcod Cp'in'inn that I bad of iSW/'.Bax:cr,r/7.7r he would have fought fo/- truth candidly, a?id n»t t.lfC adv.'^n. tagc to trample men under foot, and tofhcrv binifclfto crow over hu broihcr. I thought tbcrf bad been »o{uchfpirit in Mr.^ixicvjbut I was rm[lal::n i pardon mcibis fault.
Ec R. S.
•ill Plain Scripture preof ef
R. B.
ON what Ground* your good Opinion was taken up T know not j but I perceive k ii an eafie matter to take it down. You crave pardon for your good opinion, but ir will never be well with you till you crave pardon for your i4I t)p:nions. But bow did I trample yonundcr foot? wa« my language unieemly or d il . tfpcdivc ? You fhould have named the ill words I gave youjwhich I provoke you to d ^ And how did 1 Crow over youryouknewl beg'd>andbcg'd,andbcg'dagain,that w- m'ghck.epclofc to the ttridt- eft Logical Difputing, without any vagaries or difcouru ^ : And what room was there then for me to trample you underfoot, and Crow over you? And when I would have drawn you to ftrid Dilputingj you had nothing to fay , buc [The people muft be made tounderftand.] If you account the bare difcovcry of the uakedncfs and evil of your caufe by ftrcngth of Argument to be a Crowing over y u ; and trampling you undcf foot, I am forry thJt you fo make the difcredit of an ill caufe to 6c your own : Yet you would do well to confefs , and forfake that caufe that canno-^ defend it felf any better. Would a man ever have thought, that had heard how light Mr, T. ra.ikes of moil Di- vines in the world in this point, that he would have complained in the Pulpit of being trampled on, and Crowed over by To low and w<sak a pcrfon as my ftlf by mcer Argu- ment ?
[ A Ndboxv little lender confckntioiu fe.ir h.kfL among thebefl.'] i-rb.tt afalfe chirge is *-^kert ? U appears th.n In the Difpute I had acsniciemioMfear ; Hae u a deep charge.' ardgathereA as 1 conceive, upon a (I ght proof I ha-je little conjcientleui fear ef erring lift, and this k l^fiorvn by the Difpute at hewdley j -M'hat was the Dijputc that maizes me thus ? irhy,bccai(fe 1 did not yidd to MryBzxiets Arguments- Ididnoiyuldtothcm, nor d» Ifce any Reafon rvhy I [JjOit/dyield to them then. Huh a man no confcicntiouifear of erringj uti- le fs be bold the fame rvitb /i/r, Baxter ? A//-.Baxter holds thSl uo/^s j up fie as part oftlx condition of the Covenant of Grace, and that juflifying Fanb doth include Acceptance, and fundry other things hepreacheth as confidently as I do thii. And^all I fay he bath no con. fcientioui fear ! I thinli ^^' ^^^^^ tiOt pcrftvaded any one Minifter in England to be of ha 0» pinion, I am fure in hit Letter to me, he faith he rvat hi(fcd at from all parts of the Kjngdom ; and {hill Ifay he hath no fear of erring ?
R. B,
WHether this deep charge be falfe or true , and on ftrong proof or on weak, I willbe Judged by the moft judicious hearers. Yea, and leave any Reader to judge, whether he that will maintain all the aforcfaid Absurdities, rather then forfake fuch a caufe , have any great confcicntious fear of erring ; For what you fay about holding the fame with mc ) its one of your vain intimations: icis for no fuch thing
that
Infants Church-memberjhif and Baptsfm, 2 1 j
that I charge youjbut for i. Returning fuch feeble Anfvirers : z. Building your caufe on fuch grofs abfurditics. 3. For flanding In them, and faying and unfaying againft your own confcience, and knowledge, and engagement j and yet will not confefs Jr. 4 Foe your lamentable Arguments when you were opponent, to prove the Repeal of Gods Ordinance for Infants Church- memberfhip. To what you fay about my DoftrlBs of Juftification, I have anfwered before. Only this much more j If I have made no one Divine of my mindejbut am hifled at from all pafts^then you may fee I am not of your judgement and fplrit j For I do not f;parate or make a party to follow me, nor dif- e. fpeft nor alienate my fclf from thofe men that are not of my judgement, but reverence and love them with all my heart. Should I be angry whh every man that is ignorant of any thing that God hath taught me ? or that in their well-meaning fpeak what they un- derfland not ? Many Manufcripts that arc abroad betwixc me and others, (hew that I have done the like my Iclflnmy ignorance.
Mr. T.
HE littnv well I laboured with h'm,flr(i by niyfelfy and aftrnva-rds by others to get bis At', gimcms in rvtitivg^befgye I entrci upon the Freaching eftbU point infublilic j and thU "was the gicat thing I aymcdat^and laboured (0 imch after, that fo I might not lead people inr- to error j thU very thing dtdpjcrv a tender fear of err or ; and truly if I had not been yvilli?f^ to l(now ha A'gumeats to l^ecp me from error, I had notycildcdto the Difpute.
R. B.
yOu muft not blame me if I believe not all you fay here neither , bccaufe I cannoi believe what my Uft.bot what feemeth ttuc. I kaow you fent me two Hicets or three of an Anfwcr to Mr M^rP^alls Defence, only on x Cor.7.14. without the beginning or end of the debate on that very Text- Ic fcems you cxpefted that I (hould have confuted your anfwer to Mr. MarffjdU ; yea.and took it ill that 1 did nor, and exclaimed lince a- galnft me in your Pulpit for it. Now 1 leave it to any man of common reafon to judge, whether j^if I had intended by writing to deal with you) that 1 was bound to confute your Reply to anoihcr. Nay, whether ( if 1 intended a profitable handling of the que- ftlon ) it had not been a meer dotage in me to fall in upon you- quarrel with another, and that in the middle,on a loofe (liect or two that had neither head nor tail ? and what Is It in you to be angry at me, that I plaid not the dotard/* was it no: much fitter to fetch it from the beginning ,and to argue upon my own principles ?
But you fay you laboured to get my Argumtnti] Anfw. 1. 1 was oft in company with you, and you never defired them that I kaow of, 2. You never that I know of fent tome for one Argument for your own ufe till after our Difputej but only for the information of your people j nor did your people that cam*: to me, de(ire any thing for you , but for themfelvcs j and cold mc that if I fatiified them not, they rauft yield to you : And did it not then coiKCrn me to take rather the courfe that was fiiteft for their information then yours ? And iherefore whac ctuth is there In youc
E e 2 , _ fpeecb,
274 fldift Scripture proof ef
ffcech, tKat you fern for my Arguments to keep you from eiringj and ihcrtby mani- fefted your confcicnclcus fear ? j. Nay, you exprtfiid fo grea^ccI)fidence for your O^ pinion, that in all my conference with you, I could never pcrfwadc you that the point was difficult, but cafic; and faid (as before) that it was wilfulnefs or negligence that was th cju'e that learned and godly Divines were againft your judgement. And could Ipofliby -hink then that you dvfired any Argumtnts of mine for your information, when ycu never demanded any fuch thing? 4. I thought it would fcem meer pride andimmodcfty in me to fend Arguments to you to inform you, as if T could teich you, or fjy more then you had heard ; having no Call iherctc, 5. I gave yovj.twelvc Reafonswhy 1 might not enter the Difpute by writing , and you could not gain«fay one of them > and yet arc not you aihamed to blame me in the Pulpit fo oft for not doing it ? Have you yet ended with Mr. Mf^z/^.i// and Mr. B|j;{t^&c. after fix or fevea jcats ? yrur people defired prefcnt fatisfadion j Gould they ftay then while you and I wrote one againft another, ai you and others have done ? They confeft they cowld not examine Volumns -, Why then (hould we write them ? It is well known that I hare nci her time or ftrtngth for long works. Let the world judge whether that brow be not. hard that blames me in the Pulpit for not writing ? When you followed me imponu- narcly to writemy Arguments, I cfF^red you, i. To Difpute publikely, onlyfor ijuick difpatch, which 1 profefs was my end : x. Or to Difpute before a few ; 3. Or to preach each of us two Strmons, and fo leave it: 4. Or to writeear ffw/'orc inpre- fence one of the other. 5. Or to write asyou defired at diftance, fo you would but fliew and give mc any affuranceof making a quick difpatch. For none of all thefc could I prevail. nor yet be fuffered to be quietjtill at laft while yon preached only for your O- pinion/ome of your hearers urged you publikely to Difpute with mc,and fo Ihamcforf ced you to promife It tkem in the Pulpit*
1
Mr. T.
ANdfurefy if Mr. Baxter had but had fuch a tender confckntioKS fsar of^eefmi his' Brother from error ^ ashejijould have had, be would not have permitted Ae to go on from day to day ^ to hold thatt^huh wai an Error, and never let me have an Argument^ thougbhetVM fern io five timesy but conceal tlKm^till he could have an opportunity , thathe- might (ti it rvere upon a Code pit [hew hit slitUf and get a repute, ai if he had confuted me, end thereby put the people of 4bU Town, andr^UtheCountreya laughing at me.
R. B. 'TRulySir, I had no hope of convincing you, nor any call to attempt It from you. or any other. Wouid you have let your Opinion alone, or touched on it modtftly aod tenderly, I ftiould ha,vc lived as friendly with you as I did : Yea, would yoa have given me leave to look on ia quietnefs, though you had rent the Church, and ga- dkcred a party it Btwdley, Ithould perhaps have done little againft you. I never yet., preached againft your feif or Caofe that I know of , here. And would you give me no ^ft,-«i« fufler mew be quiet, and yet fay, I did it to (hew my skil upon a Cock* "■ I'v -; . •.;• .'•. rl.Ki; ■ "■ pit*.
Infants Church- mef?iberjhip and Bapifm, iif
pk, and get re pate ? And if the people of this Town, and all the Country laughed at you, let any judge whether it were long of me or you. Did 1 provoke them «o it i Did I not reftrainthem ? 1 remembfr indeed when you had long difputed that none but the CIrcumcifcd were vifiblc Church-mimbers ; and then confcffcd the contrary when I Infianccd in women., the people did laugh, but were at a word reftrained ; And was iliat long of any body but yonrfclf? You took another courfe to vilifie mc, telling themhow Iwas unacguaitited withtheSchooUdifputing, and that I would behifled out of the Schools ; I told you then I was refolved,! would not fpeak a word in defence of my own reputation j I came not thither on fo low an err3nd,nor had any time for it. Indeed theMinifters rrplied,that it was your felf that would behiffed out of theScbools. and Mr. Goodonct would fain for expedition have taught you the SchooU way, but that be was Iilenced. But what's this to me ?
Mr. T.
Mr. Baxter huh In hh next DheSlioH only two pajfages tvkich 1 thinli 1 am bound tt tat^e notice of, {I'bofe that fay no truth is to be concealed for pcace^ have as little of the one ^M of the other. "] Thuli(norvbyhU Lttter itmcantofmc. It is true ^ in a (hop of (ba Town, hearing Mr. Baxter preaehcd.that for peace fiil(e Truth [hould be conccaledj If aid, no truth was tO'beeoncealcdtfoaj to belofifor peace i and that thit woi tny meaning^ certified him in my Letter : and if he had dealt candidly with me, he might have put tbit in his medi- tations, and perceived that was tny meaning : And in tbisfcnje the Proportion u UruCiOnd no more thenwhat Auftin hathfaid, fi'emujt notlofe truth for fear of fcandaU
r: b.
I Meant not you only, nor more then others of the fame Opinion In this paffagc j for I have met with many fuch before 1 knew you.That which I dclivcred,was,that fome Truths are to be fufpended for peace j and not that Truth (xn the gcnerall) as you tx-^ prefs it, after your ill cuftom that youliave got. And that you affirmed [that no Trutfr was to be fufpended fat Peace,] and bid Mr. D. tell me, that [if 1 preached as before, fald, I preached a falihood or untruthj of this I have full and credible witnefs. And yet ( according to your ill cuftome ) you deny thls,and fayjou added, That truth may' not Iic fo concealed [as to be loli] which words come in fincc. And fo much you fecm to be confcious of, in faying, It was your meaning. And for me ', how could I know- yoar meaning J but by your words ? But I will take it as you ftand to it, and confute ic anon among fome more of your Errors. In the mean time, you might fee how you abufe- Auliin (if he have the words you alledge \ ) For to fay [Truth muft not be loft for fear ' of fcandall] doth as much differ from yoars, that [No truth is to be concealed, fo a« w ' be loftjor peacejas Tiuih from a mofl deftiudive faiihood.
Ee^J, MiJ.T;
2i6 FUin Scripture proof of
Mr. T.
THe oihtf pa ([age is [Temptations are 'now come uearyour doors ^'] Thit I doubt not but he means of my being here. Iihanli Godlhave^at oc(4,[ionhath h.ipned^p.eacbcd to them at Kederininfteri<i«</ l\noivnot that by me thty ivcre tcmjded to evilMcrc I have prea:hedt And many of them have come to bear ne, and I l{aurv not that I haw fcduccd them, ttiyy my hcinghcre(hoidd be dangerOHi to them at K.ederminl\er, i l^nnw not. jl/.tt as Mr. b:ixm fccms to matie me play the Devils part : So ijhatt pray for himj thai God "wouta give him a confide/-ate, andacalmfpiritjtorevicrvthefepajfages of hit, and /.iy a[ide all thr/e t^mi of bitter cxprcffions, and debate rvlth me wherein rve d-ffcr., fairly ^ and as a bccohtes chri- (lian Brethren, and not in this manner go abmt as it were to paraJi^matiT^c^ undftigmati^ me throughout the whole l^mgdom.
R. 15.
nr Hat I meant you, and your Dodrine, and party here, is very true, and judge that I was bound to warn them of jhe temptation. For your preaching at I^cdermtnfter I give you unfeigned thanks, and was more glad of your Labours then other mens,and had you preached no otherwife at BcvcdUy fmce then you did nl{ederr/iin(ier , than they Ihould have had caufe to thank you, as well as I. And as 1 wrote not in paflion, but In confideration and calmnefs of fpirit, fo upon the review of it, I finde thatit is a moft evident truth, That Aoabaptilh in pleading againft their own Childrens Prlvi- ledges, as that they are not Chrifts Difciples, nor Chriftians, not Members of thcvifi. ble Church, not holy by feparatlon and dedication to God, not to be entred Into Co- venant to take the Lord for thelt God j and to be his peculiar people, &c. doplaythe Devils part, who k the Accufer of mankindej and inltV;ral refped^ before expreffed* far worfe. And this , with the Schifm you have made in the Church , ( and ftill with iDij^ht and main endeavour to makejand all thegrofs untruths and mifcarriages in the managing It^ being your great and very hainous fin, I had not only warrant but necef-* fity and duty on me, to warn my people of the danger, and pubiikely reprehend you, though I know both you and your party take it ill; and think me too bitter. A man may no: fuffer another to fet the Town on fire, and not meddle with him for fear of being accounted unpeaceablc^ccnforioM and bitte-r.Mcn are colder inGodsCaufc then their own. You have endeavoured by your writings to make your (elt famous for refifting truth, and kindling a fire and fadion through the whole l<.ingdom,and further j and therefore 1 do bur my duty, in (hewing the whole Kingdom your error. I am commanded, T/?e«» that fin rebuke before AUy i Tim. J.io. and your fin is fuch as is moft pubiikely com;- mv.xtd.ii'e arc befeeched to marl( thofe that caufe divifiois and offences, contrary to the dO' Clfinc which we have learned,and avoid them^Kom 16.17,18. For they that are fuch./crve not our Lord Jcfus Chrifl^ but their own beliiesjaud by good words and fair fpcechestdeieivc the hearts of the jmple,
H any yet think me harfh , I refer them to Be-^^as Epiillc before Calvins TrallatM The»leg* which contains my defence, if they will read it,
Mr.T.
Infants Church- memhrjhip and Baptifm, 217
Mr. T.
I Say no more. I have wiped (fwaythe dirt that Mr. Baxter would hnvc ea(l hito tny facet atidfor bim, I pray God forgive him the nfrong he hath done mc, who am confcious of no other then brotherly deportment torvoidi him-, and the Lord five him memem fanam in cor . pore fano.
R. 3.
THc dirt I caft at the face of your Error and zealous Schifm s and you were pleafed to ftep berwccHi and take ic into your own. You arc fo in diflikc wirh wafhing the fece, that you have but wiped it, which is lutiim Into lavarc^ and fo have made it far worfe J and yet being In your face, it is fo necr your eyes that you cannot fee it, and fo neer your fclf, that you have not patience to endure to be told of it. Andfor me, if I haye done you wrong , Ic Is againii my will > becaufe without my knowledge *, yetl' know we arc all fo partiall in our own Caufc , that I muft daily beg of God, as to dif- covcr my fin , fo to forgive me that which I do not difcern j and particularly in th^U my writing. And for your unbcotherly deportment to me^ the moft hath been your (refluent traducingme in your Pulpit j which yet as I know not that lever heard of with pafiion j fo if it had been all^ it fhould never have coft me the writing of a line* But of your fin againftttod and his Church, I defire the Lord to make you fenfible, and give you repentance unto life ; and that you may live to right the Church, as you hare wronged ic, and to make fome part of amends to deluded Touls^by your as publike re- cantation. And in return for your prayer^ becaufc I cannot put up St, Johns requeft for you, that you may profper as your foul profpereth, I defire you a miodc as found as your'bo(^v j and that the Inflation, Mole and falfe Conception of your Intelleft may be fafcly'^iurcd , and the Mbnfters there begotten by the pretended Angel of Light, may diflblve in the womb where they were conceived, or If they muft needs be brouijhc forth, that they may be ftill.born, and haveno other entertainment in the world^ then CO be Beheld, Abhor' d, and Buried,
A brief
a 1 8 Pi din Scripture fro»f «/
A brief Confutation of divers other of Mr.T. his miftakes.
M
Error I.
r.T, hoUeth, That noTruthisto hr fufpettded ^fo m to ht lofi'^ for Teuce,
^offfntation.
'P'Hcfc words [foastoVloft] nkicli yoa add fi ace, do(ignl(ie an Event) wMch IS ('asfuch) no Objcftof Law. God commandeth not Events dircdly, nor for- biddeth them. Duty only is the Ob)ed (or raiher immediate refult or produS) of Precept 3 and duenefs of Reward or Punilhment, is the immediate Produft of Promife or Threatning. The Law commandeth us to do oar Duty to prefervc Truth from being loft ; bat it commandeth not the Event [that it be noj loft] If Truth be loft while I do my Daty,it is no fin ofmine.-If it be act loft while I neglcft my Duty, it is yet myelin. God difpofctli of Events, and not we. Now oar queftion is, How far a man is bound to reveal or inculcate Truth for the preferving of it ? I delivered this : [ That Fundamentals and points of necelfi^ next the Foundation in matters of Faith , and alfo matters of abfolotely neccfljry praftlce , muft be midf kjpkjwn : ] But among other caufes of our want of Peace in the Church, I laid dowrt^is Tenet for one, [That no Truth miy be fufpended for Peace : 3 and I proved the contrary. That feme Truths arc fofmall that they may be fofpendcd for Peace. Mr.T. fcnt me word, that this was an untruth. Nawhislaft qaalificadon can reach nofurth:r then this : That a man for Peace may no: fafpend any Truth all his life time. And I prove he may : Xhus, i. That which 'oj never commanded me to tcvcali it is no fin to conceal- 1. But God never commanded me to reveal every Truth » Therefore it Is nofin to oncea'.fomeTruch. I inftancc ir» two fort of Truths, i. Truths un- known, which God never revealed to me } as thoufands about Angels , * pirit j , and the things of anoth:' world, i. Common Truths about naturall things; as that this Inke is made of Gum, Vitriol, eb-c. and this Paper of Rags, ^c. Where am I cctiTi^nded to r'veal thcfe ? and that to the iofs of Peace ? But Mr.T. will fure fay, tha: h» meant only i^cripcure-Tru'h. Anptv. i. His aflertion to me in writing is [No Tsurh muft bs fu'pendcdf ^^f ] without exception, i. I will prove it of Scripturc- Tru;ht. Ic iia Scripcure-Truth ihac y4/.ri/«wasthc Son oi Sacar , and E/iphithkc Son of V/-, and i,a the Son oil}{}{c(h^ with huadrcds the like : that oiJe{hiti came the
Family
Infants Church-pjemberjlnf and Baj>tifm, 219
Family of the /c//W^a; oi MaUhicl the 'Pim'ily of tht Malchielhcs. Sec. And is h better never fee Peace in the Church, then filence one ofthefc Truths ? But perhaps Mt.T. will fay he meant only Dodrinals^ or Prafticals.
1. But his words are clean ctherwiiV.
2. That they lliould (alute cnc- another with anholyklfs, was a Praftical truth; theContcndings, Queftions,ani! Difirutlngs about the Law, &c. which P^«/forbJdtj tccrc Doftrinal at lead, with mul;i:udts of the like. And naay not one of thefe tc filenced for peace, even as long as one livcth ? I prove it further ; a. If a man can- not poflibly have time to revcnl all I ruths while he liveth, then he may and muft leave fcmeunrevealed : But no man can pofTibly have time to reveal all Truths while he livcth, (orat Icart fome men cannot) therefore we may and muft leave fome unre- vcalcd. But perhaos Mr.T. will iay , he meant only of a purpofcd, willing con- cealing,
^Kf-^. I argue to that alfo ; If a man have a multitude of Truths to reveal, and can poffibly reveal but fome, then it is his duty purpofely to icvcal thechitftft, and conceal the reft ; But this is the cafe of all Minifters, or at leaftoffomc } thercforCj^c.
4. That which a man may, and muft do without reference to the Churches peace ; that he may, and muft do much more for it : But a man may, and muft conceal fome Truths whether he wJU or no, without reference to the Churches peace^ Cas the aforefaid arguments (hew ; ) therefore much more for it.
5. When two du:ies come together,and cannot both be performed, there the greater muft be chofen , and the Icfs let alone ; But the duty of fcekiug the Chuiches peaoc is greater then the duty of rerealing fome Truths j therefore when both cannot be per. formed, we muft chufc the former. I he Minor is evident 3 Jn that the charge is fo ear- n-ftly and frequently laid on us in Scripiure.to feek peace ; but not fo to reveal every fmall Truth.
6. When two mercies are before us, and we cannot have bdth, we muftchoofe the greater only j But the Churches peace is a greater mercy then fome Ti uths j therefore, when we cannot have both, Peace muft be chofen. To prove the Minor, I argue thus .* That which is the lofs cf all outward Mercies, and Truths for moft, is not fo great a mercy as that which prefervcth them,and givetli us the comfort and profit of them ; Buc want of Peace (cfpecially if the privation be totaU i^ the lofs of molt other Mercies and Tiuths fto moft mcnj therefore, &c. Who can reveal Truths or enjoy Mercies, where there is nothing but enmky, bloud, cutting of throats?d^f. When every man is an ene- my to other, who will receive any truth you reveal ? Is not that man far gone that doth not know, that it were better for the i. hurch that the Truths about Pauls Cloak and ParchmentSjWith the like before mcntioncd,werc wholly buried,then the Church (hould live in everlafting enmity and bloodlhcd ?
7. Ifaman mayfufpendaXruth foi a time, then in fome cafes he may fufpend it for all his life-time. But the Antecedent is proved thus. i.Becaufehls life is ua- certain • and if he lilencc it in one Sermon , he knows not whether be fliall preach another. 2. And the caufe of his then fufpcndlng it , may continue while he livcth.
8. The greateft fins are not to be committed or occafioned ; nor the greatcft dif- honour done to God,rather then the Imalleft truth be concealed. But the total breach of Peace containeth the greateft (or exceeding gveat^ fins , and bringeth the greateil diihonour to God j thereforCje^c. The contrary to peace is this , For every man to hate his brother as an enemy, and /hed his blood as Cain did Abels, &c. And had Mr. T. rather fee the Church in this cafe , then ihey (hould hear his fuppcfed
F f Truths ?
220 Plain Scripture froof of
Truths? \V(uld not this ovcrttirn all Religion, Wo;nTp of God, and Humanity^whtn every man were like a Devil to his lirothcr,or Child, or Father, or Mother, going about nightand day fcekinghow to devourc them ? He that had rather {ec the Charch in this cafe, ;hen his Dodrinc of Anibaptiftry Hiould be concealed, is good for nothing but to make an Anabppiift of,that I know ; When Chrift hath faid, By this (lull all ma: hnoiv tbi! y^: arc m Difc'P'es ifye love one anoO cr. Afypc/uc 1 leave wilhyoii^Scc.
9 The vfiy rcafon why P/iu! forbids queflions about the Law and Genealogies' &c (which on one Cu'i' were TutV.s) was Kecaufc thcv rneendcr ftrife, that isy breach • of Peace; tterefore he thought Tome Tiuths were to be filenced for Peace,
10. Hell is not t n be chofcn rather then the Icift Truth filenced j But the total pri- vation of Peace is HJ'i thereforcdFC. We are little beholding to thofe that would have the Church tu ned into Hell, rather then filcnce their fuppofed Truth.
11. If a man miy fiUnct fome Truths for hir own Peace, then much morc-fcr the Chuiches } But a man may filence fome Truths for his own Pcace,thercfore much more for the Churches The Minor is evident from ChriQs own pradicc, that would not anfwer his Enemies when they enquired whn might cnfoare him fcveral times ; and Co :he ApoftltS : and no man is b'-und to accufe hin^'fclf, though it be Truth. And I con- jcdhirc that the rcafon why Mr T. mcdicd not with thefe things in the Pulpit, while the Ordinance againft Hereficsand Errors was in force, was his own Peace j but when the Authors were pulled down, he quickly fp ikc out. And is the Churches peace of fo little worth to him in comparifon of his own ?
f 1 1 Laftly, That Tenet is not to be fuffered in the Church, which evidently tendeth EO Its deftrufiion : But this Opinion, [ that no Truth is to be filenced for Peace] is fuchjtherefore &c. For if this takc,then every one that dotli but think it i« a Truth, that Chrift is not God, that there is no God, nor Heaven, nor Hell ■, that it is the height of Religion to Blafphcme God, and Swear, and Curfe, and Whore (js Cop and the reft of the Anabaptifts that follow him ) or that it is a duty to kill Kings, to blow up Parli- aments, or the like, will prefently think himfelf bound to reveal it to the world, though it turn all into confufion. And will there not be enough that will think it their duty to pradlfe it ? And fo you fliall never want for a clemeni, a KavlUiacli^ a Faux, &c. And every Congregation and ".'arket-place will have heaps of Pi cachets, while every man hath his truth to reveal, though it turn all into alhes. And fo I leave this Opinion 60 Mi;T. and his party i and again dcfirc my friends to abhor it.
Error II.
"fujr. T. holdethy that Bapti':(ing is not fo tycd to any pti-fon, but that perfo?! that is the in-
(irumnt of converting others, may be the hrflmmoit of baptii^ng. ( ret he fccmih W
eonjent to our excepting of women') , ^
Cenfutaiii3K.
[^ueftion ', which he handled i
I. If
•TMis he layeth down In his Anfwer to the fixth Qucftion j which he handled in hit Sermons. I prove the contrary thus :
Infants Church -mtmbcrjhif andBapti[m,
111
I. If Chiift never fenc any ba: Minillcrs to Baptize, then no others may uo it j But Chrift fent none but Miniftersto Bnptizc, ihcrtfuieno ohcis may do iV The Antecedent is evident in the Hiflory of the Golpcl ; Lee thcni iliew where Chrirt fenc any other, and I will yield. The confcquence is plain hence ; i. Jnchat none may ^a any work withcuc Authority ; but they that are not fent have no Authority j therefore &c. z The Apoftles received commiflion for Preaching and Baptizing togcthi^r ; therefore one may no niore be done without commiflion then the other, according to Chriftsway. Thi AipoRkhith^ Hi*tv pjil! th(y preach except ibcy be Cent ? and Ch:ift hath joyncd Baptizing in the fame Commiflion. 3. That which Chrift hath made part of the Minifterial work, by putting It in their Commif';ion,that may not be ufuipcd by others .- but Chrift hath made Baptizing part of the Miuiftcriji work, by putting 1: in thcit Commiflion j therefore, &r. Ihe Apoftles received this Commiflion as Mi- nifters^and not as Apoftles only, 4. If there be no Example in Scripture of any but Ivli- nifters that have Baptized, then no others may j ( for the Apoftles cftablilhed the Church according to Gods mind, and the Scripture is a fuificienc Rule) But there is no fuch example, (They that affirm there is, let them prove it) Therefore^ e>c. j. If any that convert may baptize, then women may : Bu: that were abfurd j Therefore, e&'f, 6. If all things muft be done in order, then every man may not baptize, but thoie to whom Chrift hath committed it as their Office; But all things nnift be done in Order* Therefore ,c5^:. The confequence is evident, in that Order requires that every Member ofthe body have his own Office J And if every man (liould be judged to have Autho- rity to baptize, what horrible confufion would it make in thofe Churches that border upon Tutks or Pagans, or live among them ? Every one that had a conceit he hid converted them, might baptize even the deridcrs of Chriftian Religion, and make mingle mangle in the Church.
Error III.
\A r. T. h6!deth, that not Mmflen only^ but othm that are no M'mWers,f»ay adm'mflef ■^^■*'thc Sacrament of the Lo-i-ds Supper.
Co>^ff*tation.
'J'His r am informed he preached ; but I am certain he affirmed to me Jn'Bircou'-fc
Vf if h confidence. In acafeofneceflity ( as if people were In the /«rfi« ) where no
Aiinlfters can be had j if any fay that it is better a private man Baptize and Ad-
^frtHifter the Lords Supper, then wholly omit them, I will not deny it. For the re- verence of Antiquity prevaileth much with me ; And / know God hath alway difpen- fed with Circumftantials , when they come in competition with the fubftmce But
y Mr. T fpeaks it in reference to our ordinary cafe in Et gland. Now againft him I ihaU now fay thus much. i. He that adminiftreth the Lords Supper (in breakme the bread,i,clivcringlttoaii, bidding them, 7:;(r, f^/,&c.) muft reprefent the Lotd Jefus, who himfelf didthisatthelnftltution: Bur only Minifters, and no private men, are perfons who fhould repvcfent the Lord Jelus in Church Adminlfl rat ions ;
f f * Theufore
22 J Plain Scripture f roof ef
Therefore only Minifters and no private men may adminifter the Lords > upper. Mi. nlfters only arc called his Ambafl'iJors, Stewards of his Myfteries, and bcfccch In his' fteadjebr. It is a filly anfv/cr of A/.T-that Sacraments are not called Myftcries of God. For the Word preached neither is not the Mjftaic itfclf,but a rcYcaling and (xbibiring of that Myftcrie ; and To arc the Sacraments : The one revealcth ihem to the car and the other to the eye. z. If there be no command or example in Scripture of any buc Minifters acminiftring the Lords Supper , then no other may do It j But there is no command or example in Scripture of any other doinj it j They that Tay there is. Ice rhem fliew it.
But by this time you may fee whi.her Af/. T. would reduce the Mfnifterial office^ I . Others may baptize, a. And adminifler the Lords Supper. 3 . And then^Preaching is all or almoft all thar is left, ( fur he gives them lefs far in Government then 1 do j ^ And how wci! he defended the Minifterial priviledgc of publikc preaching , in his Di- fputcs with Captain B'ay, is too well known. And what need the people allow fo much of thtir means then to maintain Minifteis* Is not this next to the urtcr extirpation of ihem, according to the codrine of their learned Mai tin Mar-Piicfl ?
Error IV.
\k r. T. a^mah ;n hii Analog, p 1 5 1, 1 5 3. That every nght admmflration of B.jp- '-^^tifm u -not Gods fcalmg : A^uaUy Godfcnlctb not bnt rebcn it is adminijhcdto a Be- liever. li may be called a Kigbt .iCc of the AdminiJIi-alor according to Gods appointment, bul not Gods /ialir:g^ Sec.
i;
C<'»fiitatioH.
'Conceive thefe dangerous Errors of M'.T. about the nature of the Covenant and '-Seals in generally which I Oiall touch in this and the mxr, arc the root of his eiror a- bout Baptifnij or at Icaft much ftrengthcn It.
Ic muft hcrcbeunderUood, that our qucftion is not about the internal feal of the Spirit, but only the external feal of the Sacrament, which are two diflinft things. 1 he nature of this. 'ieal, and whether it feal conditionally or abfolutcly, I have fully opened Inthe Appc'adi.x of my Apbcyi/r/is of J/tltificatief!^ whither I muft defire the Reader to turn and read Ir, to favc me the labour of doing it here. His opinion I prove unfound, thus. 1, If the Sacrament rightly adminifired to an hypocrite, have all in it that is ef- fential to Godsadual ftaling, then it is an adual fealing j But the Sacrament rightly adminiRred to an hypocrite hath ail things in it effcntial to Gods aftual fealing j there* fore it is his adual fealing. A feal is an engaging or obliging fign, or at leaft a teftify- ' ing .- He that adually ufcth a fign to fuch an end, doth actually ftal. Now i. Ood u- feth this fign. i. And to this end. i. He ufcth tlie fign, while his Minifters ufe it in his name at his command ; for immediately he never ufeth it or applieth i: to any. 2, He commandcth ir to be ufed to this end, to engage himfelf to make good his promifes. Far 1. To what other end fhould God command them ? a. Elfe he fliould command them io jbe ufcd to one end to one, and to anothcc end to another, which it cannot be Ihewed
that
Infants Church- member Jhip and B aptifm, 225
that he hath done, ( I fpeak of the end of the Ordinance, not of the event which God hath decreed (liall follow ) 3. If the promife be to ethers befidcs Believers,then fo Is the feal,(for to whom God promiTethito them he engageth himfelf to perform) bur the pro- mife is to otherSjthcrcfore,^r. This will be evident, if it be once underftood that it is only the conditional piomife whichGod fealeth by the Sacraments [///fco// bcliiv: m the Loid jcfm^tbou (load be fnvcd.']'^ox this promife is made to unbelicve:s;thoii§h the good promifed is not to be enjoyed by any that perform not the condition. ThislhAve fully proved in the fcrefaid Appendix to my j4pborifms,:ind will fall under the next qucfticn. z. If God doth no more in his adual fealing to believers, then he doih when the iacra- rnent is rightly applied to Hypocrites, then he adually fealeth to Hypocrircs but God doch no more in his aftual fealing to Iklievers , then he dorh when the Sacrament is rightly adaiiniftrcd to Hypocrites i therefore he adually fealeth to Hypocrites. The Major is proved by the enuiieratlon of the feveral Ads. i. God makcth ;he promife ; 2. Hecoramandcth Miniftcrs to publilh it ; 3. He hath infiicuted the Sacraments as mutual engaging figns or fcaU; 4. He commandeth Minifters to dclivtr or apply ihem to thofe that profefs their confent and defire to enter or renew the Covenant ; (TF"!s I need not fland to prove, feeing Mi\ T. here yitldcih^ that the giving of the Sacrament Js a right 1^ of the adniiniftrator j which it could not be except it were commanded^ as ajfo the initiating Seal to the children of thofe believing parents that will enter them into the Covenant, as is proved before. Now v^hat afi more then thcfe doth God per- form to the Elcft or Believers * If itbefaid, that he addeth the fcal of his Spirit , that is nothing to the quefiion^ feeing wc are fpeaking only of the outward fcal. if itbefaid that he sllureth the confcicnce of the truth of the promife, and maketh the outward feal eftldual I anfwer, i. That is ft ill the inward feal, and fo nothing to this, z. That is the making of the feal fuccefsfull , which is nothing to th; ad of fealing. If you feal a Deed of gift to three men^nd one believcth it, and another doth not believe itjand an- other doth half believe ir, yet this doth not make it no fealing to him that belLcveth nor j you feal equally to them all. 3. And God deth not always thus afiurc the Eled or be- lievers, but that they eft conclude hardlier againft themfelves then others do that have no faith. So that I defire M,:T. to produce any one Ad which God performcth to Be- lievers, and not to others^ which may appropriate the name of fealing to them. But all this dependeth on the next quettion,whether it be the Abfolute er Conditional promife that God fealeth to ? which wc ate now to enquire into.
Error V.
^r. T. holdcthj Th-it the Covenant whereof Baptifm is the fcal^ktbe Jbfolute Covenant ofGrace^ made otily to the ElcH.
Confutation.
\A Anv more miftakes he utters in the way to this about the Covenant. This he ■^'^J^publikelypleadedfor in his difpute; and alleadged Doftor Tiv/j/i: as affirming the Covenant of Grace to be abfolute. To which I then anfwered, 1. I hat to thruft in mens names and words, wheq in difputation we were enquiring what the Scripture
F f j! faith,
224 rUift Scripture pro&f of
faith, was unfeafonable and (diverting, i. That Doftor Trvijjc doth conftanrly in all his Writings affirm, that the promifc of Remiflion of fin and fa'.vacion arc conditional; though the promifeoftke firft grac^*, I will take the hard hcaic out ofihdi bo.iieSje^f-] isablolutc. This I dare affirm, as haying read lixofDoftor Tivijfc hii Bicks agiln and again ( which I think are all) having been long ago fo great an Admirer of him, tha: I valued him above all others ; yet though I ftill much vilue him, I would give young StHdents this caution. That they take heed hon they read him in the do« drineof Juftificationj For he fpcaks of Juftification from eternity, and Remiffion of fin from eternity, and Faith procuring but the knowledge or Pj-don and Juftifying in fore Confcicnt'i^j&c, as the Antinomiins do, and fiihcs againit Arminians with Antinomian weapons, to the grtat endangering of young Studenti, who are i. Apt enough to lun from one extreme to another ; i. Efpccially to a worfe : 3. And will eafier fwalloir an error when it comes in way of oppoli:lon to an advcrfiiy, and as an argument againft another error. And I have been informed by a Godly, Learned, Jadicious Divine of the AfTembly, that the Antinomians bemg queftioned , did plead Dodor Trviffes authority ; and the Affembly queftioning him for thofe paffagcs in his book (while he was Moderator) he was able to fay little in excufe of them. This on the by. But Mr. T.'s anfwer to me was, that the promife of faving grace is not con- ditional j and that though fome parts of the Covcnan: be conditional, yet it is all together that is called the Covenant ; and the leading promife being not conditional, therefore the Covenant is not conditional j and that I: was a grofs palpable error of me to fay, that the promife of faving benefits was maJe to Infants that were not eled.
And he filth In his Examcn ind Apology ^thitMr.M'tiJhal fpcaks like Ctirvrnut and the Arminians in his afTerting the conditional fealing j and when he talks of the Covenant, Chrifts furctilhipjci^f.
To all which I anfwer, i. A great many more Hot- fpurs ef this age do make any thing Arminianifm , which Is but contradiftory to Antinomianifm. 1 will not fay Mr. T. is ao Antinomian^ for I think he is not : But this opinion, that the Covenant of Grace, which Baptifm fealeth, is only to the Eled, and Is not conditional. Is one of the two mafter- pillars in the Antinomian fabrick. 2. But to thcfe Mr.Bla!{C hath fully aofwered Air. T. though in his ApoL he pideth over much, and is not able to dlfcern his meaning; but he hath the laft word, and that muft be taken for a fign of vidory. For my part, I fpeak impartially, according to my judgment^ I think there is more true worth in thofetwo or th c leaves oi Mr. Blaise s book, in opening the nature of the Covenant, then in all Mr. T.'s books that ever he wrote about baptifm. And Mr. Blaise hath fully cleared My.Ma-r(lhil and hirofelf from the charge of fymbolizing with the Arminians ; and hath fully proved, that the entrance into Covenant, and ac- ceptation of the terms of it (though not fincerely and unrefervediy) Is common to the Elcft and Reprobate 5 and that the Reprobate are within the verge of the Covenant, as tendered in the Gofpil, and accepted (m beforcfaid, with a half heart) And if any that are run into the other extream , Hiall think that this affirming that f Chrift hath brought the Reprobate alfo into the Covenant of Grace conditional] be any part of the Arn::inian Errors, as the whole fcppc of Scripture is againft them, fo Mr. Bltt\e hath faid enough to fatisfie.He that will deny Reprobates to be fo far wIthintheCoenant of Grace, muft not only deny Infant- baptifm, but all Sacraments ,till he be able infallibly to difcern a man to be Elefi. ( And doubilefs this intereft in the Covenant is a fruit of Chrifts death.)
Mr.T.
Infants Church- mtmbcrjlnp a?fd Baptifrf, 225
Air. T. one day in the Pulpit, in pleading that tKe Covenant belonged only to the LledjWas pleafed to bring me in as wirnefling thereto. in the Appcnd.oi my Aphoy.p,/^^. becau[e I there fiy, that the Abfolute promife or Tioj^hefie there mentioned is made only to the h\i&. When yet the very fcopc of the place n to prove that it is not the Ab- folu-e promife tha: is moft fi ly calkd the Covenant of Grace
But that this Abfolute Promife or Covenant (if you will call it fo) is not it that is fealcdin Baptifmand the Lords Supper, I prove againft Mr.T. thu.?, clearly.
I. That which is fcaled to by the Sacraments , is a prcper Crvtnant. having a Rc- ftipuLuion on our parts as well as a promife on Gods part ; But the Abfolurepiomife is not a proper Covenant , with fiich a mutual engagement , but properly a meer Promife or Piophcfie •, therefore it is not this Abfolute Promife which is fealcd by tfce Sacraments. The Major Mr.T. cannot deny ; for he pleaded it himlelf in the Pulpit as a reafon to prove that Infants might not be bapt zed, bccaufe they could not engage themfelves. And he brought that palTige in my forefaid v^/j/T^^iA-, p 68. as attelting it, where I fay that it is a mutu.il engaging fign or feal ; As it is given, it is Gods feal i as it is accepted, it is ours. And indeed the very definition of a prcper Covenant ( of which Gio'.ms dc ^urc bcUU and other Lawyers will inform you ") fliewcth as much that it mull be a mutual engagement. Now in that abfolute promife, [I will take the hard heart out of tkir bodies, c>£.] there is no fuch matter, but only God tcllcth what he will do.
2 If it were the Abfolute promife of the firft grace that is fealed by the Sacramer.tJ, then the Sacraments muft be given to No man, or to all men : But that is abfurd, there fore fo is the former. The confcquent is manifeft , becaule that Abfolute promife oc prophefic is only of the Elcd,and that before Regener-ition. Now no man hath any fign given him, fo much as probable, by which to judge of the unregcncrate Elcft. So that it muft either be given to A'l or none.
^. Or we may argue thui j It may be known to whom that Covenant bclongs,which Is fealed by the Sacraments : But it cannot be known ( before the fulfilling, no nor at al') to whom ("particularly^ that Abfo'ute promife doth bdong j therefore that Abfa* lute promife is not h which is fealed by theiSacraments.
4. If (according to A/r.T.'i judgment^ that abfolute promife muft be fulfilled to a man, before he be capable of receiving the Sacraments which are Seals of the Covenant of Grace, then it is not that abfolute promife which is the Covenant of Grace fealed to by the Sacraments .- But (according to Mi.T'\ judgment^ that abfolute promife mufl be fulfilled to a man before he be capable of (a right^ receiving the Sacraments, which are feals of the Covenant of Grace ; therefore 1c is not that abfolute promife which is the Covenant fo fealed to.
The Antecedent is evident, if you confider, i. That it is the Promife of the firft re- newing grace which we fpeak of ( for all after-grace is promifcd conditionally J
2. 1 hat A/r.T. pleadeth that Believers only are Dlfciples , and fuch Dlfcijhs only muft be baptized.
5. That Faith is apart of this firft Grace abfolutely promifed fas is commonly judged ) The giving of a New, foft heart, is the giving the feed of all Graces^and fo of Faith.
^ The confequence is as evident ; becaufe, the M^rcy promifed In the Covenant which is fealcd, is not given before the firft fealing j but the Mercy promifed in that abfolate pronaileis (according to Mr.T' and in part the truth ^ given before the fitft lealing the Covenant of grace ; therefore,«:^c. God doth not promife and feal to a man that hath a new heart, to give him a new heart ; or to a man that is a Believer,- that he will
give
2 26 PUin Script tire proof of
give him to be a believer *, except we fpcak cf the continuance,or increafe of faich and ncvvnefs, which is no: the thing in qucftion,
J. 1 he benefits of the Covenant of GracCj which is fealed by the '>acraments, are (by thole of A^e) to be received by Faith j Buc the b:ncfi:s of theabfolu'e iVomifcof the tirft Grace, are not to be received by Fiith j therefore this is not the Covenant of Grace fo fealed. 1 he Majo.- is evident ; M,\ T. fiith, onely Believers mutt be bap. tizcd as Difcipes. The Minor is proved before. Fiith is part of the thing
fromifcd : and we doe not by Faith receive our hi ft l-aich, or our power to be- ievc.
6. The Covenant fealed to by the Sacrament , is a plainly propounded unqucftion- able Covenant ; but this abfolure promlfe of thefi;il Grace is no: fuch, bu: very dark and doubtful, fand the moft learned cannot agree whether there b* any fuch thing ) therefore,c^c. I have fpokcnmy judgment of this in the Appendix of my A- phorifms. The places that arc alledged to prove an abfolute promife of the fi-.ft Grace,' fome learned Divines fay do not prove it j becaufe the New and fofc Heart thete mentioned^ may be a farther degree of Newnefs and Softnefs j or though there be no Condition there expreffed, yet it Is in other places, and therefore :o be fo underftood there J to which end they cite Deut.^o. where God promifeth the very fame blefliiig ('to Circumcife their hearts that they may love the Lordj^c.) on a condition which is here thought to bepromifed abfolutely. Mr, T. could not underftand AL\ Blaise a- bout this.
So that you fee what a ftrange wild Doftrinc h Is to teschj that it is this abfolure pro- mife or Covenant to the Eleft only, which is fealed by Baptifm. And whether A/,-, T. donot in this fpeak liker to Mr Sdonarfl} and the An- inomians, then Mf.M.tiJhjl doth to Cor-ziinus and the Arminians, let any that have read both judge-
And by this alfo the former Qucftion about Sealing Conditionally^may be decided; which Ajy.Tt darkneth with a M:ze of words 5 and addcth, [That God feals not Con- ditionally in this fenfe, as if he left it to a mans liberty to whom he had Sealed,to agnize or Recognize that Sealing, or to free themfdves if they pleafc, and fo nuUifie aH ; yec fo as to aff ird them a while the favour and priviledgc of being In Covenant with him j which Mr.M.ri[ha!,he conceireth, nieanr by his Conditional Sealing.]
Here is more things heapt up, then will be fatisficd in one anfwtr ; therefore I fay,
I It is improperly called Liberty of the will, which coiififts in an indiffcrencic to good or evilj (is Gibieuf. and Bradrvaydin^Scc. will fully teach you.)
2. More improperly is the nullifying of the Covenant called a freeing of rhemfelves, which is an endaving thcmfelves.
5. And the violating of the Covenant is not fitly called a nullifying of it.
4. Yet if you will needs ufe thofc terms ; I fay, that God fcaltrh the Conditional Promife tothcufands that fl^all periOi, and leaveth it to their own choice whether they will Recognize and continue, and be faithful to the Cove.nant, Cgiving them only his Common Grace-, ^ which men do prove unfaithful," and break the Covenant, and fo perifli for treading the bloud of the Covenant under foot. And doth Mr. T. thiuk, that no wicked men perilhas Covenant- breakers with Chrift ?
5. It is unworthily faid. That God afibrdtth thefc but a while the favour and privi- ledgc of being in Covenant with him^ feeing it is their own wilfuU aft to caft them- fdves out of thij Priviledgc ; they might have continued it, and proceeded further in l',if they would. I remember what SMrniitiiis Fcclix faith of the Jews in his O^avius (^m the cndoi ^ynob'ns mihi J pag. 55>4>) /^'^ prius cos dcferuifje comp- thcftdcs quam ejfcdefeicos'i m, lu impieloqiteri^i cum Pes /no ejje capiosj fed a. Den 3 lU difcipllrm
transfugaSf
Infants Church- member jl)ip andBaftifm, 227
tramfufM^ deditos. 6. Yet withall we affirm, That to his Elcd God freely glvcth as leave, foa will to enter fincerely into Covenant with him, and faithfully to keep Covc; naac, and fo the continuance of the Pr iviledges of the Covenant,
Error VI.
u4£Jiitt(f Ma^ijirates fuhordination to Chriji tht Mediator,
I.
CotifntatioH.
Shall not njentlonihisfo much to convince M.T*. as to vindicate the Truth, and Lmy felf ( but will be brlcf,becaufe it is not of kin to the reft of the matter here hand- led. ) And he hath not caufe to be offended at itjbecaufe it cendeth more to his reputatl> on then difgrace. i.In that it is an opinion that hath learned and godly abettors, i. And bccaufe he is generally taken for an frajZ^w, and this will fecmfarto vindicate him, feeing Mr.Gdafpic thinks. That the proving Magiftrates Subordination or receiving or holding their Authority under the Mediator ,will go very far to the making good Era(iia hit caufe. And bccaufc many fafped me to favour E/ajitu svny my felf before I come CO the point, I (hall fay this much to remove pre)udice,That I profefs my felf of no ic6t or party, nor to follow any Mafter in Chriftisnity, but Chrift. I have read Eraflns^ but the reading of him brought me no nearer his judgement then I was before ever I faw his book j or ever read or heard any thing that way. I know he was a very learned, judicious man in Divinity, Philofophy,and Phyfick. And whereas many blame him for medling out of his own Calling in the bufinefs of Divinity, I wifli the ordinary fort of oar D* vines were but near as able la Theologic as he.
Phyficians in thofc times did as much honour their profcffion by their great learn. !ng, and godlinefs, as in any age (ince the Creation, that is known of: And they were very g- eat means by their intereft in Emperors , and Princes , to further Reforma- tion, and procuie that liberty for Religion which was obtained in Germany. Witncfit, Crato, Jul. Alexandra. Monavm^ C^fP- ^"<1 Joan. Nteviiy Fcuceru-t, trcgtu^ Vbte. riUtCurteuAiVadiianiu-, Fuchfiu4, GefncruSiZ'iir.gcriui, CamerariuSf ValcrXordHiiScbcg- Ifius^ SchoU':^ui^ Po(lhius, Obfepaus, E/7/wi««j, with multitudes more, to whom the Church hath been much beholding j among whom Eiajm was in all refpefts one of the chief and moft honoured by the Divines, ns well as Phyficians of that age ; as is appa* rent by muUitudcs of Epiftles which Zanchiuii Bullinger^ Smler, and many other wiot« to him.
Arid for foch young Divines as the moil of us are, to blame men fo much more learned and judicious then our fclves for writing of Divinlty,'a$ if It were beyond their reach or calling, doth favour of that Arrogancy, which maketh ourfacred funftlon by many to be defpifed.
As for Ef alius his book , 1 conceive that fome of it Is good ^ andfome erroneous ; his arguments for miict coramunJon are very weak , and he feemeih oft to contradift what he there plcadech for. For my part ( were my judgement of any moment to o- thers) after my moft ferious fiudy In this point, bochin Scriptuieaod Amiqu'ty,
Gg (fpecialif
228 P^-^i^ Scripture freof ef
(fpccially the writers of the [hrcc firft Centuries) I am confiJently perfwadcd, That the true way of Chrifts Dirciplinc is parcelled out between the Epil'copalj Eraftian, Prcsbytcrianjini Independents} and that every party hath a piece of the 1 ruth in pecu- liar j andhad we fo mu^h humility, pcaccablcncrs, aid felt deniiU, as to meet and Ic- vingly debate the cafe, and lay all together, it would be happy for the Church ; AaJ I verily think, That ifcve:y oncofthcfour parties do entirely eftablilh their own V»ay, they will nor eftabli.lith: Scripture-way. For me to call in my Model, would bu'. be judged Arrogancy : but to bcfeech them to joyn all fpeedily in a pe^ce-making ConfuUation, me thinks (hould not dcfecve actnfurc. And yet let it betaken how it Willi I purpolc, if God will fo long draw out my life, to accquaint the world with my thoughts in this alfo. But to the point.
Mr. T. told them publikely in the Pulpir, that I had delivered in my Aphorifms a Doftrine of dangerous conftqucncej and lb read lo them thefe words, Vag. 17 j. [Some of his Government Chrifl: exercifethbyMiniftcrs, and feme by Magilhaces under him. For I cannot confcnt to them that fay, the Magiftrate is only the Officer of uodas Creatour, and not of Chrift the Mediator, e>c.] But what could be Mr. T's. end in telling his people of the dangerous confeque/.cc of my Do.^rine in the Pulpit (for that is his way of preaching, though 1 never mentioned him- dircdly nor Indiredly i no nor ever preached to my bc(l remembrance ngainli his cpinon of Anabaptifm to my own Hearers J when yet he never told them what; hat dangerous conftquence was. And can any man conceive what danger can be in faying, That the ^lagittrate is the Officer of Chrift the Alcdi .tor ? Where lies the danger > All that ever I heard is that from Mr. Cilajpic , left it bring in Church Government by Majiftrates , and fct upon £?j(2;/i his caufc j and Mr T. alledged not any Script turCj or Argument of hisown againlHt (yea, though I wrote to him to difputclt) buttoldthe people that Mr. Cilafinc had confuted it; efpccially that his 7. Argu- ment (which he named) was unanfwerable. And he told me. That he Ihouldtake my Dodtine fur Errour till I hjd anfwcred Mr. Gi'afpic : which is a ftrangereloluti' tion. bhuuld I deal with all Mi-. Gal.ifpie hath faidonthis point, 1 fliould till too mnch paper with this Heterogeneal Iiibjcd. Oncly this I fay, i. I undertake to prove eve- ry Argument of hii to this point to be rain and fallacious, to any man that will difpute it. a. Againfl Mi. Galafpics }ixd^cmenty I lay to Countcrball mcc it, the *udgen:icnt of Mr. Rutherford, hiscompanion, andaman acknowledged a more able difputanc ihcn Mr. Galdff)ie ('though both very txcellent men) And this I do with thefe advan- tages. 1. Mr. K«///f/-/o/'dj greater ability. 2, He was well acquainted with Mr.Ga. lajpics Arguments, and yet judged contrary ; why then may i not judge them weak ? J. it was Mr. RHthcrfoidi judgement upon fecond thoughts, which ulually are the wifcft. 4. He was far from being an Eraflian : therefore this opinion will not prove a man anEraftian. His words are thefe in his due right of Presbyteries, Pag. 405.' lObicfi. But they reafon, Afupernaturallgood, and life eternal!, arc cfFefts fl-)wing from the mediatory office of Chrilt, beftowcd on the Church .- but Kingly power floweth not from the Mediator Chrift, but from ^ jod as Creator, who bcfloweth law- full kings and Magiftrates upon many nation?, who know nothing of a Saviour. I anfwer J when I confidcr the point more cxaSly, 1 fee not how Kings, who reign by ihe wifedom of God, JclusChriii, Piov.iS .ij^. 15. havener their Kingly power from Chiift who hath all power given to him in Hcsven and in earth, ALit. i8.»8.For they arc Nurfjp- fathers of the Church as Kings, Ifa.'i^.i^. they are to kifs the Son, and exalt his Throne as Kings. T/^/. 2.11. they bring prcfcnts, and Kingly gifts to Chrift asKixi^Sj P/rt/.7».iOjU, and they (crvc Chrift, not ooely as men, biualfoas Kings,
as
Infants Church memberfhip andBaptifm.
229
3is A;igulTme Cihh,Ep}fl.ad Bomfac.Com.<)0. therefore are they ordained as means by Chriit the Mediator, to promote his Kingly i hrone.
Some of our Divin.s will have the Kingly power to come from God as Creator, in refpcft God giveth Kings, who are his Vicegerents, tothofewho are not redeemed, and to Nations who never hcaj'd of Chrift : And others hold that the Kingly power flowethfrom Chrirt-Mediator, in reipcCt he accompliiheth his purpofe of laving of his redeemed people by Kings Authority, and by the influence ot their Kingly Go- vernment procuretha feeding Miniftryj and by their Princely Tucory the Edifica- tion of his Body, the ^.hurchj which poillbly both aim at Truth. [Sofar Mr. Kit- thtiford 1
3. Mr. Ga/.ifpies unanfwerable Argument (isMr. i". called it) I fliall briefly repeat, and anfwer. It is this : 7. That Government and authority which hath a Foundarion in the Law of Nature and Nations, ('yet might , and fiiouid have had place, and been of life though man had not finned) cannot be held of^ and under, and managed for Chritt as Mediator; But Magilhacie, or Civil Government hath a toundatioiin^ eJ-c- Theicfore, &c. Anfweri the Minor can never be proved, and the Mijor is apparently falfe. 1. No Sciipture faich, there lliould hive been Magiflra- cie in innocencie. 2. Inferioiitieand fubjediontothe Creature is part of the Curfc. 5, Even theWomansfubjedion tohcr Huiband, is mentiond as pait of the punill;- ment for fin. 4. There would have b. en no evil works to refirain, nor any diforder, if there had been no fin; therefore there needed no Magiftratc. The Magiflrate is Gods Sword bearer, and there would have been do ufe for the fword in innocencie. J. And for Order, God would hive ruled all immediacelyj without the interpofition of our fcllow.fcrvants,
i. But if there lliould have been Magtfir.acie in innocencie, it follows not that it is not upon the tall delivered over into the hands of Chrift. I he whole Ci-eaturc is de- livered np to him upon his undertaking the work of Redemption, and lb Magiftracic, andeven the Law ofNature it I'elf. And the deniallof this is very injurious to the Dignity, Dominion, and Redemption of Ch.ifl. And yet fome are lb zealous againft Arminianil'ra, that ihcy lun intothe other ex ream, andeven deny that all things are delivered up to Chrift upon his Purchafe and Redemption , which yet the Scripture is moft exprels for •, I w ill name fome undeniable Arguments, 1 . Rom. 14,9. For this end Cbali both d.ed, rofc, oidrcvivcd, th.it be m-ght be Lord of the dead and living. He that expoundeth thisof ibmeonelyofthcdeadand living, dare pervert Scripture from its plain ftnfc. And I hope they will not fay , That this is fpoken of Chriit as the EternallGod,andnot as Mediator; For it was the end of his Dying, Rifingjand Revi- viiigjto procure this Dominion. ;• AlJt. 28. 18. All potvcr in Heaven andEanh U given to me ('therefore, fure the power of iMagiftrates,) Co leach all natio?is,&c. Two flrange Anfwers M/. Galafpie givts to this ; i. It may be meant of all power in the Church onely- Anfiveri He that dare fay That all power in Heaven and Earth, isonelyall pjwcr in the Church, and none elfewhere, fliail not be much difputcd with by me .• for it is in vain to prefs him with Scripture. And is it not fad, i hat the maintain- ing of our own opinions. Ill juld drive Godly men to maintain fuch a Malignant Te- . nent againft Chrifts Dommion, as to fay that all power out of the Church is not gi- ven to him? 2, Bat Mr. Ga/afpie iiiih, All power may be fad to be given to Chrift ai Gitdi X. In rcfptCt of EterncU Generation •■, 1. And of tempo/all declaration. Anfwer; 1 think no impartial man that doth but read th : Text, can believe either of thefe Ex- politions ; efpecially if he read thofe many other Texts that fpeakof the delivering up of all to Chrift in time jand that to this end he died;tbac be aiight be Lord, &c. And
Gg i for
2 50 Tlain Serif tnre preof of
for that of [Declaration] kc may as well fay, as many brely, That Chrift was man
from Eternity , and but Declared fo at his incarnation. 1 he Rule he brings out of
Auflin ( allqiiid dicitKi- fi:yi(]!tji! lo incipu putcfci) will fit \ht An:ino>m.:ns vtM^.
Mrho fay weare Jurtihcd fromcccrnity. But according to this liberty of txpounding
Scrlptu:e will be oili'.tle ufe , but muft mean whit plcafe the Reader. Many other
Scriptures fpeak moft plainly, and fully to this point. Mat.ii.rj. Liil{ lO. ii. /ill
things arc d.hvercd to mc of my Fat her ^ and tio man l^nowctb the Son but ^hc Father , and '
he to whom, &r. J ohn J . 3 J . The F.ithcr lovelh the Son , and bath given all things into
bii b.ind. ]oUa 13. 3, f:/u4 l-norving that the Father bad '^ivcn all .h ?Jgs intohu baadt
^c, John 17. 1. Thou bjil givcnbim power over all fi.fhy that be wght give eternal life
to ai many as then haft g,vcn him. Fphef 1. lo, ii. irhich hew. ou^^ht in C'ltnllivbcn he
raifcd him prom the de .d , and fet him at his own right hand in the h. a vcnly places^ far a-
bcve all p/if!ctpa!tt!CSy and powot and might, and dominion y&c. and hath put aU things
under his feet , and gave him to be the bead over all' things to the Church. So Rev. 1.5.
18. rfal.i. Phiii^-i.2.67.8,9,io,n. Mat.9.6. Joh.5. z6,i7j^-. Revel.i.ifi. Heb. i.
2, J, 4. ASs 10.35. I Co;. 8 6. 1 Pet. i. i,&c. M G^j/a/pic thinks ftrange that this
fliould be given to Chrift [as Mediator] any more then i: may be faid, That [as
Mediator] he fate in Simons houfe, or wept for L^^.i/tfi, 8cc, Anfwa: 1 he word [A> J
is ambiguous ; and either may denote the effential parts of the Mediators Olficc (and
fo thefe were not his A'^s as Mediator, for fo he onely Mediatethj or elfc the iubfervi-
ent , Accidental or Collateral ads ('and fo all thefe arc his Ads as Medbtor J When the
Qncftion Is whether Chrift fate in Simons houfe at meat) and wept for La-^^rm^ Sec. as
the aernal God, or as God. man, the Mediator,! do not doubt to fay fand properly) as
Mediator.
And for his firft great Argument (That this will prove Heathen Magiftrates un* lawfiill. ) Anfwer. I make not the leaft doubt but heathens have their Magiitracy, and all that Jsgood, from and under Chrift the Mediator. H. Ball faith truly of wic- ked men , That what bleflings they enjoy , they are given according to the Covenant of Gr3ce,andnotofWorks: Treat, of Covenants, page 91. And indeed there c^m be no bleflings from the Covenant of Works once violated : And God gives none in a- ny other way, then upon one of the Covenants: A. id if they are giv*;n according to the Covenant of Grace^ then fure from Chiift as Mediator of that Covenant. And it is nothing againft this, that the Heathen know not Chrift, nor the Covenant, no more then it will prove thofc Heathen Magiftrates or people to be from under God,, and the Law of works, who know not God, nor that Law. For as God, fo thcMt-; diator God-man doth cxercife part of h,s Anthority where he is not known, and ac- knowledged; yea even among brutesj and fcnfitives that cannot know him. M.Gt- lafpies fecond Argument is , That we muft prove the Magiftrates Commiflion to be from Chrift, orelfewcgive M.iglftracie a dangerous wound Anfwcr. 1. It being proved that all things are delivered into Chrifts hands, andall power given to him, and the Father judgeth no man,but hath given all judgement to the Son ; and that all mercy is now given by and from him, i: eafily followtth that the Magiftracie is from him. 1, Mr. Rutba ford his friend hath done it to his haad , out of many Texts qf Scripture in the words before cited. It is Chrift, the Wifdom of the Father that faithi M^ me Kjngs reigttj &c. Prov. 8(14,15.
Bat I intended not this much ; having fully explained, limited, and confirmed this pointinmy Ledures on Chrifts Dominion, which are in the tranfcribcrs hands, in. tended for publikc ufe. If they there mifcarry not. Onely I muft fay^ I judge it a very caCev.Work to anfwer fully all thcrslt of Mr. Galafpics Arguments on that Qjellion,
and .
Infants Church-memlferfbip and Baptifm, 23 1
and to vindicate the arguments for tbe affirmative from his exceptions, And ttat it ismensgTcatmiftake ot the very nature of Chrifls Redemption, and the Covenant of Grace which mikcs them thus deny his univerfal Dominion j which as it is baincufly derogatory to Chrift to deny it: fo if fome violent men had but fuch an occafiona- gainft others, they would with open mouth proclaim it Blafphemy. Oh that I could fee as plain Scripture warrant for meer ruling Elders (without power to teach) as for Migiftratcsl I doubt not but in ruling the very Church, there is fomewhat proper to the Magiftratc,and fomcwhat to the Miniflcr j and it is not difficult to manifeft to each his own work > if prejudice had not ftopt mens ears. And they that would not have the Magiftratc rule the Church as a Church, but onely as a part of the Common-wealth, may as well fay the Magiftrate fhould not defend, promote or be a Nurfing Father to the Church as a Chu;ch ; and at lafl they muft needs come to the Libertines, and Anabaptifts Dodrine, That the Magiftratemay not rule a Chriftianasa Chriflian, but onely as a man or member of the Common- wealth ; And then either the Church muft bear the fword again Cwhich Chrift hath forbidden^ or elfe goes up that liberty of falfe worlhip, which is commonly called Liberty of Confcience } which I fbould be forryany fobcr Divine fliould introduce, by denyingihenecclfary power of the Ma- giftrate in the Church, which I doubt not he derlveth from Chrift the Mediator, who is ever fince the entring upon his Office, the Conveyer and Origlnallof allttue pow- er, which ('chough I now wantume, and am loth to digrefsfofar in this point^ I think my felf fufficiently furnilhed to make good.
Onely that Mr. Riiihcrford may not want a fecond, I (hall add the judgement of one fit to be his fecond, who was notimcferver, Eraftiaa, Armlnian, nor a Dull Divine to be eafily mifled ; and that Is cvcellent Mr. BipU in his Treatife of Cove- nants P^i^.goj, 306, 507,515. It may bedefcribedthc higheft and fupream degree of Chrifts Exaltation, wherein he hath received of the Father excellent glery, digni- ty, power, and dominion, and is aSually made the head of his Church and Lsrd, and Ruler of all things both in heaven and earth j who is gone into Heaven, and is on the right hand of God ; Angels, and Authorities, and Powers being made Sub- jcduntohim. i Pf/.j ii.Hf^. 1. 7, 8,9. Hfi». li ij, i Cor 1$. ay. And Pd^ 50^. This glory and Dominion was given to Chrift, and fo was not that eternal 1 Glory, Natural and Efl'cntial which he had with his Father before the foundation of the world. So Pj^.307. It is not ihcn the might of Divine >over3ignty over the Crea- tures, which is given to htm; for this doth fo follow the Nature of God that it is ne- ctfl'ary with every perfon that hath this Natutc. This the Son could not relin^ulfli tire, What is it ihen ? A right of executing immcdiatelyj and in a manner appropriate to this fcrfon, the Sovcraign Dominion of God over every Creature. This So- vcraigntyis given to the perfon of the Son, both as God and Man now afcendcd, &c. Vide ultra*
So V*g. a I f . 4 Chrift not only as God, but as Man, hath power over every Crea- ture. As !Mid:ator he hath received a power imperial! over every Creature; which is ap- parent in this, that tlie Apoftle (aith. Chtift is fo placed above all, That nli are ^ubjell under bu feet, Epb. i.i i. To rr.c u zi-vcn all pirtvc,- in hcuvni iifid earthy CMjt. 18. i8-,that is, Powtt whereunto every creature isfubj. A. He fpeaketh ofi: as done, bccaufe it was imn-eJiatcly to be pL-rformtd, 7 his pei Ton ns God, receiving by voluntary difpen- fation this honor from the Father, that he Ihould in an immediate and appropriate man- ner, execute Government over all creatures in Heaven and Eacch ; the fame perfjin as man participating in this Kingly Divine Au.-hori y, fo far that hefliould loltriimen- laily concur in executing all that judgement which Chrift according to h«s Divine-
G g 3, nawirc.
232 Pldin Scripture proof of
nature Gi'd p. incipallyefFcd. Though the Father nnd the Spirit have a right and fo- ▼eraignty over the Creature, yet they do not Immediacy execute this In fuch a manner as the Son doth , who hath received a right of executing Imntcdlaitly and in a manner appropriate to his pcrfon, the fovtraign Dominion of God over every Creature. The Son by voluntarily difpcnfation lent by the Father, did empty himfelf of cxercifing and fiiewjng forth his ri^hr and Dominion over every Creature j and the Father by vo- luntary dilpcnlation doth relign to the Son the immediate execution of All power over every creature, till that time that all things be fubducd under him. This the Scripture doth lay down. As in regard of Earthly Power$,thcy are fubjeft : For he is Ruler of the Kings of the tarth, Rev. i. 5. He ha h this Royall Hate wtitten on his thigh,as it were, Kf!gofl{if!gSyJK'd Lord of Lords, Rev 19 16. That he hath power over the Angels, is plaln^bothbythcrevcrencethey do him,and their Obedience towards him i Lv yy l^nce bsivcihto hif/j 'y the evil Angels yield Cgns of lubjedion, either deceitlully to wrong ends, or by force compelled, &c. When the Saints-fhall judge the Angels, what power hath Ghrift himfelf that way? A/id as for the excellencies (W Earth, they do all receive their Torvcrfrom Chrift^ovd arc r,t his difpofc ; Yea,the A pcftle faithjHc is crowned rviih gloty and honour^ and all things arc put under his feet, Heb. 1,7,8. The Apoftle fpcaks of that Dominion which Chrift received over All the Creatures of God, none ex- cepted.
Thus far Judicious Mr.Ball.
To conclude this ; The Magiftratcsarc herein little beholding to Mr.Tombst or any others, whodeny them to hold their i-'ower under and from Chrift the Mediator, as hying the moft probableground for the utter extirpation of them- For there would be quickly enough to Dilpute and preach againft the lawfulnefi of any Chriitian Magiftrate, if it were once taken for granted that they receive no Authority from the Mediator, when the Scripture is fo full and plain in It^ That all Power is given to him, andjh 11 things are delivered into his handSj and that for that End he died^ that he might be Lord both of dead and living. I contefs I would wilUingly have no Power to bo over me, which is not derived from the blefled Mediator. As much as I am againft the Anti'/iomians^l believe they fay true in this, [That the Morall Law bindcth us, as it is the Law of Chrift the Mediator : ] And then fure the fifth Commindment muft be his Lawaswellasthe|}tbernine j.and it eftablithech Authority, and requirethobedi. ence to it.
O that Magiftrites would as heartily own Chrift for their Lord ( in their mea- fure ) as he will own them for his Servants j and that they would as readily vin. dicate his caufc and glory , as he will cci thinly vindicate their juft Authority : then would their own ftanding be the furer, andthe Chuichts Peace, and welfare greater. 1 am certain that if they mifcarry , it is the Mediator that will judge them : ( Tor the Fiuher jiulgcih 710 man, hut hath committed all ludgctnait tothe Son : Joh.^.i^. ) which is both a Itelficicnt wfr^///« to prove that their Authority \%Trorn Chrift, and niethinks lliould be a quickning motive to them to fee that they ufc it For Chrift j feeing then (as honcit Al.Vnbritnis faich in Dcflrulli)r4vitior.p.irt.6.a'p.^°.K) Sol Jujh~ lite qui quondam er at in figno Lconis,& nunccll in ftgno yirginis, tuncerit in figno L<brie, where the great muft be weighed as well as the fniall, and wo be to them that are found too Light.
Aid though I know they that differ from me in this point are many and Learned, yet I tnuft advife them to confiderj VVhether,as it is Treafon to deny a Princes Title to part of his Doiflinions, though the reft be acknowledged j So it be not high 1 reafon agaioft chcjyord JcTus todeny him fo great a part of his Dominion as this is, when
he
Infants Church- memkrjhif and Baptifm, 233
he hath purchafed it fo dearly {Ra>?}. 14-9.) and we have no reafon of moment that lliould move usco deny ichim. I conceive this to be more evidently derogatory to Ch'ift then my Dcdrine of Juftificacion, which M. r. here fpeaksagainft, inwhichi never yet could meet wcth the man that would once name to me the leaft particular wherein I afcribed any of that honsur to works , or to man , which is due to Chrift ; Wherein I conccive,the Dodrlne of Juftification by Faith as Pliylically and properly a paflivf Infti ument, to be moft hainoufly guilty.
I (hall add but this: He that faith, Nol/tc targcrc Cbrijlos meos (dhh Htcrom inv'if. M-ilch.mofi.) touch not m'mc Ano'intedy^'i^ certainly point out their Relation to the chief Anointed Chrift i nor is there any now Anointed but in (ubordinationtcHira. For my part, I W'U not fay, as our great School- Doftor to his Pnnce,Di/c;/^ wc by the frvord^ and IrviU defend thee by the n'cd : but whether they Defend me,or Cfftnd me,l under- take to provc^ that all true Authority is from Chrift the Mediator^ and to defend the Royal Prerogative and Dominion of my Lord, whofe name is K^niofi^jdgSyXnd Lord, of 1,0, ds (not only the greatcft of Kings, as fome Mallgnants do interpret it, as if others were, though Itffer, yet not fubordinate) before whom nil eafi down their Crowns ('as re- ceived from him, and held under him, and to be ufed for him, and rtligned to him ; ) uho hiHh the KO'^ of Death and Hell ; who becaufc he humbled himfelf^ and became obedient to the death of the Q'^fs, huh therefore a uame given him which is above every name, that • at the name of 1 '£■ s U s every l(nee fhould bow, ofthin^i in heaven, and in earth ^and ««- d:r the ca/th 5 and that every tongue (Ijoiild confefs that Jcfm Chrift is Lord,to the G'ory of God the Father, to whom the Mediator (Jjall then give up the liingdom^ and he (Ijallbc all in alltivhoni angels and Samtsllullgbrifieby evcrlafliHg Prajifcs^atfd wbofe is the fQngdoffJ, the Power 3 and ibe Glory fey Ever, Amen.
A
A
CORRECTIVE
For a Circumforaneous
ANTIDOTE
Againft the Verity of a PafTage in the Epiftle before my Treatife of
REST
Mark lo. 14.
But when Jefus faro it , he vfm much difpleafed , and fald unto them, Sufer the little children to come unto mCy and forbid them not : for offuch ii the Kingdom of God.
Auguft. T. I o. Scrm. 1 4. de Verb. A poft.
B^ptizandos ejfe Parvulos nemo dubitet , quando nee ilii hinc dubitant qui ex forte aliqua contradicunt. viz. ( T*eUgiani,)
amwm
London^ Vnnitdy Anno Bom. \6^i»
Infants Church' mmhrjhip and B^pfifm, a j 7
D^ Twiffus ill Pra^fatione Vindic. Grat, adverf. Arminium.
£ placid^ CoWtt'iane qiiam fpondct.n'thil dice, ifeque en'im ab ea qiio' ties (jiiii dtflcUitJib' cut fa* caupe piodc(l, fid petius adverf ariai fu<t vcro tanto maz^u obc{}, De fiobu hac iff p.irtc non eft quodfpon- dcam : lam trajifaha fmit partes mea. aA ;/?.j cnimfere tauquam ad cxtrctna devenio. Cenpdo autem nufquam a. m£y vcl cdlutmiat Jirucndoy vcl contiimdioi evomendo cxtrA mores pie Chrifli^nos ex- cu'fuin c(fe. Agiofco fcrid non/timquavt tnc fervidim incafefccrc j nempc quoties dcLcxenrnfraudcm homlnis atq; impofluran'.Indigfior eniw,& quUvcn mcrho liiA gnarttH!\ cinfam RdigionncM/ijuftiiratienibifsmit pojju e- 7icrvayif doln fnltem id?" (oph'iniatii obriii. Etiiimco^rfiovcrifoi'eeqnotiespytejidcntcm ho. tninii audiciam pompofa quad^tm ar^nmcntationc in o'.cjccmcm arnmadvcrte j examimia vci 0 & P^'ffl't, & "^ cxainen > cbolaflciim rcuocatay lUa fpccie tarn magnifica djfcrtatio dt- frchcnditur re inanii cjjc & vana. inter c.% mc limites vcrccir/iditc ctiam in hoc minimc fx- ccffiffe cnnficio. ViYumftcin quid hie pcccatiimvidebitur, fiquid Intumuit pietas^ fiquld flagrantlus adiim eft quam i^tcxxk, primam mihi gratiam fecerit Lc^or ft ignoverit j nam d^ me ad igfjofcendum aliit pa/atum effe deprehcndet'a Si ilia obtintri non poterit, at fccun- d^m gratiam ut obtincam aqunm erit j ea. vcroe(i, ut hocfMim mcum mihi duntaxat vi- tio veriaty non autem caufa damno praliruat.
Synodus Dordrecht, in Art.i. de Prsedeft. Canonc 17.
CEcing we muft judge of the Will of God by his Word, which tcftifieth that the Chil - dren of Believers arc Holy fnot by nature but by the benefit of the free Covenant^ in which they are comprchenckd with their Parents ) therefore godly Parents ought not to doobc of the Eledion and Salvation of their Childien^whom God calleih out of this life>inlnfancic.
Spanhcmius in Diatrib. Hiftoric^ dc origine, progrcffa, &c, AnabaptiHarum. §. 5,<?.
TA7Hen by this means ( oi the Anabiptifts Treafon and Rebellions^ Satan had V y endeavoured, not only to Divide, and to caft dirt in the face of the newly- revived Church, bur alfo to render the newly attempted Retormation oi the honfcof God liatefullto Auihority , as if by it the pojrer belonging to Princes over
Hh a iheic
2^S Pldirf Scripture frofff of
their Subjcds were abrogated, and the New Gofpcl did but lead the way to Tamults and Seditions j it cannot be exprclTed.into what a hatred tkat holy work of Reforming the Churches was brought with mm that were yet fiftned to their old Iiiperftition. For thofc Tumults began to be imputed , not to their Authors , v'ljj a few heads of Seditious men, but to the rery Evangelical (Reformed)doarine,and to all ths Teach- ers of it. And that ib much the more, bccaufc thofe new Uadcrs of the Aijbuptijls bad been formerly famUia:rs to thofc mcHy ivhofc cnihvjoun God had ufcd in tb: Reforming of bii bonfe ; and they boafted that l.iitbcr was of the lame opinion with them. And more- over, the common people whom they had lUrrCil up, did feem to be ^rofefjbrs of the Gofpcl, and to ftick only to the Scripture , and thii they would vrndicaic the Liberty of their Conftictices by thcfvpord.
But thofe Worthies, who had approved abroad to the Churches their Faith and In- tegrity in re -meafuring for reforming) the Temple of God , that they might wipe off that blot tha;wasc3ftbothonthemfelves,&on the 'preformed) Dodrinc of the Gofpcl, did think it meet to maintain their own caufe, and Gods, by publil^e ii^ritiiTgs. Which was (harply performedjamong others by LutheryMdan^lbon^Zuingliuij'BuUmgcriMeniusy Rcgitii and others, who flrongly inveighing againft the Seditions, and Seditious, and warning Rebellious Subjefts out of Gods Word of their duty to the higher Powers, and reprehending thofe Tribunitial Preachers, and exhorting all to quietnefs, and to due Reverence to their Princes, did leave nothing unattcnipted, for the flopping of the violence of thofe men who with raging minds wcr» running headlong to villanles and mifchicfi
Bradwaidin.in Epift. ad Merton. antcli. dc CaufaDci.
ALiqiiotics accidijfe compcri, nt in rcrum difficilium tra£iat]one, ant inftpientia relator U audit orcm corrunipcrctyain temeritas aiiditoru rclatorcm infa.mxrct. ^lapropter aquc cavcndum tnibi vidctur ut potijfimum illtc nbi fine periculo aliud fentiri non potefl, ticc facile frtefimamui affercrc , ncc aliC7ia ttmcre dijudicare. Noz-i c^o quanta , ut dicit B.Aug, f omnia cor hiimaniun pariaty aiquceo jud'cioqaoinfui cngnitioncfalliiiir, cttc/ti qitoque qua propter ipfum [unt,nonrcUc fiifpiccitnr. ^ad cmm hoc cffc putatis, quedde
rcrum vcritate tarn diver fa Umire folent homines ? Nunquid non una c(i Veritas i :—
Nunquid non omncs novertmt unum id quod cfl,& amore fillcndi divcrfafinxerunt ? Nen fccgoputo: Scdnarr ant qtiiqiie [omnia fua^ &eaqua primum ipfi in fc opinionc decepti
fum^poflmodum alios ncfcicmcs fcducuKt. Quiacnim de longe Veritas videtur. judicia
parit 5 & tantum de ipfa poteft quifque quantum ipfe eft. /;; nobis qiiippc quod dicrum cogniticne pocipimits, co moio cordis wtcllalus de his qux extra funt ad vcrintcm judicn^, quo fc i'ltcriui animus in r cpr £ fentationc figiir at. Vndcmccffc c(l , ut dum mcas intcrius piave afficitur, intcUiclut quoque injudicio corumqua furisfunt^ dccipiatur.
Dr. Whitakcrus corK.Staplcton.de Aiithorit. S.S. l.i. c.p. p.Cmihi) 128.
WE receive not t^ie Baptifm of Infants from the Authority of the Church, neither do we defend it by the Authoiity of the Church againft the Anabaptifts. The
i^cripture
Infants Charch-memherPii^ and B aptifm, 239.
Scripture i$ abundamly fufficJenc for us for the defence of Infinfba;t!fai , withouc ImerpoGng even any mention of the Church.
Idem lib. 3. Cap. i. pag.482.
tF thou thinkcft that Infant baptifm doth reft on no other foundation but the Judg- Xmcnc and cullom of the Church, and that the Anabapcifts can by no other Argu- ment be refuted but by the Authority of the Church, thou hadft need to be fent thy felf to the Catcchizers, l^ho may teach thee the doftrine of Baptifm, and the principles of Faith- And what doft thou elfe now buc betray the Chriftian Faith to the enemies ? who, vvhtn there are moft ftrong defences again 11 Hercticks left us in the Scripture, wilt give them all up to the Hereticks , or wilt mikc no ufe of them ? 1$ this to refute Heretics and Hereticks ? firft to confefs that the Opinions which they maintain can by no Scripture be confuted , and then to urge the Authority and cuftome of the Church ? But both the Herctick and the Devil may be conquered by the Scriptures a» lone. And we have long ago overcome the Anabaptifts by the weapons of the Scri- ptures, and have trod them down with weight of Arguments, while you in the mean time cither lay flceping,or endeavour to fteal away our weapons.fo far were you fiom af- fording us any help in the fight. For now, as if you were forry for the Anabaptifts, and would fain revive their almoIt«buried Herefic, you downright affirm that Scripture no where teacheth Infant-bipcifm, &c.
Let the late 0.v/(nci Convocation (which Mi.t. gloiieth In) read this and forward j and the like in DoAor V.iv:n.riU de Jitdicc controver, p- 17.-8. and maoy more, ani confider quidfeccrunty & qnanam ymtate, & quo ammo.
Dav. Chytrccus in Dcdicat. Enar. in Numer.
'T'He Members of the fame Body, faith Tv'/T^^aw^r/;, do make war upon one another. . They all pretend to be s^edly by this one Thing ^ Tb.it they condemn others of tfngodUncfs : and he is the Beft man am^ng them , not that lives quietly in the Fear ot God, and medling with h.s ownbufineis, fpeaks not an idle word ^ but he that
heap? up moft evil fpeeches againit his neighbour. They obferve one anothcus
errors, not to bewail them, but to upbraid :hcm ; not to cure thenijbut reproachfully to object them j and that by (iirring m other mens wounds, they may cover and defend their own wlckednefs ; and what they praife to day, they difpraife to morrow , and ad- mire what others difcommend ; and as inafigh: in the night, and by Moon-fliine, we know not the faces of friends from foes, but run headlong upon one another, and are confumed one of another. Yet I commend them that undertake conflifts for the truth, and pvofefs my fclftobeoncof them. For a Laudable war is better then a Peace that feparateth from God. But now there are fome that unlearnedly and boldly fcold about fmall and nnprofitable matters , and draw all that they can to their foclety , and then they make Religion the prerence of all their fcoldings , and abufively wrcft that Vene- rable name to all their private contentions and hatreds. Hence we are hated in other Countries, and which is worfe, we cannot fay that wc are unjuftly blamed, even by the more moderate among our felves. And the wicked they build uoon our backs 5
Hh 5 * and
340 PUiff Scripture proof cf
and that which wc imcnii againfl one another, and cbjcftagalnft one another, they make ufe of againft us all ; and (0 we arc become 2 nt w fpcftaclc, not to Angels and men, but to all the wicked at all times and in all placr $, in markets, at their fcaft« ^c,
-I lewn and profcfs Divinity,not as an inftrument of railing and oftenration of
wit, but as the Art of true godlinefs, and of Faith and Obedience towards God, and of Kindnefsjuftice, Gentlcncfs and well-doing toward my Neighbour j and I had rather (hew my felf a Chriftlan and a Divine by Ardent Praying and Doing good, then by fubtlc Difpucing and contentious brawling.
TTO this Refoluxion of this peaceable Divine, ray very heart unfclgnedly fubfcribcth • But yet, as hlmfclf was an accurate unf jldc r of truth (and able for it bciir' Maflcr of Aris at fifteen years old, and dcfervedly, in McUnClboTii judgment ) fo I delight in fhofe that are clear difcovercrs of the myfteri.sof the Gofpel , and being unavoidably compelled to k,as now, I dare not betray the truth of God under pretence of avoiding contention. 1 remember Mclanfihgas Poems,
Non cafufmurmtura fuie ord'nc, fed Mens
To-f matrix, yebtn figtiaque vimqiie didir. fiuflNi Am!gd.iJ:ni<i for if cfl linug'ne cinflju.
Dura magn fub qua Vgnca chklha f.uent. Niuleui Inmcdio (u^vis htct, atque fdub-ris^
^jti cibui cfl fiobis,<i^ mcdidna fmu'.. B'gofchola f/milis crcd-itur Anvgdaltu effc,
tn qua DoUiinct vox jonat uha Dcif Sec.
D. Rivet, in Dedicat. Apologetic, cont. Grotii votum
pro Pace.
TAxta cum animl mpottntia fegerit, ut ah co viro qnem pler'tque ( inter qum ego ipfe fui) humanmis & pacavorh ixgenii nomine laniabant , tantum-& ammtudinu ef- fimdimrum videripoffit^ nifi tUudfuctHncrct^
Fr^ectpites agtt ha ifddtUy & fcllea terqucni Lumina, contemnit humiles vatiortu habenas.
Sea.
Infants church-tnemberjhif and Baftifm,
241
Section I.
Ikrc is luclc in this Writing worth the repeating, but what is in his Valcdiftory Oration, which is already anfweredj and ^ I have no time or words to fpare. They that judge his caufe beli who fpeaks moft and laft, Ihill be no Converts of mine, nor fhall I judge my felf guilty if they mifcarty by their Er- ror. Yet bccaufe that may be needful! to fome men by rca« fon of their prejudice and expeAation, which is necdlefs as to the matter, I ftiall adde fomcwhat co thofc paflagcs which are eaft medlcd with before. The greateft of my trouble is, that 1 am forced to deal with a Writing which is filled with fo many perfonal mattersfwhich it is pitty any Reader ihould bcftopt & troubled with) and fo many angry words, and fo msny hiftorical untruths j that as I know my very mentioning the latter will be ill taken, fo I know not how to deal with the former. For if I (liould pleafe my fdf in overpafling them, I know fome will fay his Book is un- anfwcred, who take the ftrength of it to lie in fuch words ; And if I anfwcr it, as I fliall but weary a Judicious Reader, who looks for Arguments, and loaths altercation, fo I (hall be forced to fpeak according to the matter J and having naturally too harlTi and keen a itile in writing ( even when I am moft free from paflion) which a long cuftom of a keen way of preaching for the moving of dull hearers hath habituated me to^ 1 am jealous of my felf, left I fliould tranfgrefs before I am aware j And then I know it will be taken to be in I'pleen and difaffiftion to Af?-. T'j perfon, whom Iprofefsun- fainedly to love and honour i and the Lo'd that is fearcbcr of my heart, knows, that If he would but be a friend to the peace of the Church, and live quietly, without making attics and Schirms(whcn we are fo deeply wounded by our Divifions already)! could, or all his Op nions, live as lovingly with him. and take as much content in his focicty, as in moft mens in thefe parts.as I did as long as he fo lived near me. And I never liked the pradice ofthofe men who do as fome wild bcalts when they are hunted, who whca they are quite tired and can run no further, will make an odious ftink to drive away the purluers (a Camera fpeaks m Eoifi ante Kcfputt'.ad Epifi-vin do£li.)
ThcArgumenrtaivepart of of /Wc.T.'jEpiftle is confuted before; And though the Hiftorical part hare fome latent corruption in it, yet dare 1 not lance It, left it itfhould caufe a fmarti and fo a conflux of more humours to the grieved place. It the complaint
ef
I
342 PUift Scripture proiff of
of his fuffcrings which Mr, T. begins with, be mecrly to raife a compafficn in the Reader, I will be one that in partlnall anfwer his cipcftation j but if it be alfo thereby to draw :hcm to entertain his dodrine, I am not one that can be moved bv fuch argu- ments. For the tire things he complains of, he mufl give me leave ro rtj-^ycc inhfs happinefs, that they « ere no greater, as much as to compaffionatc him that they were fo great. I. His frequent flittings, 1. His much coll. I am glad they were fo Imall in cempatifon of his Brethrens: 1 dare no: imitate P.:/// in laying mine and his in the ballar.ce together, by comparing the particulars. Itft it favour of Vanity in nie. 3 And for the impairing of his bodily ftrengih hereby, I congratulate Ms evident ftrength and healtbfu'ncfs ', and according tomy little skill in Pbyliugnomie, 1 hope he may live yet manvaycar, if he endanger not himfelf by going too oft into the cold water j and if the p3(rv)ns of his mind be not to his body as a keen knife, too big fcr the Oicarh, which therefore fiiould be drawn the more feldom and warily, 4. And tor the impairing of his outward ftate, I cannot fo much compafuonate him, both bccaufc thcfc things are very low in the cftccm of every Chviftian (for he that loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him ) alfo bccaufe to remove from lefs means to more is no great lofs ; or I had hoped that by this time all had been repaired. 5. And that he was hindred from returning to his former Uation, I hope it was no grievance to him, becaui'e he faith it is a grievance to him that he rcmoveih from Bnvdlcy, (unlefs it be a grievance not to have both ) Bu: mcthinks a man lliculd not voluntarily bring. a grievance upi n himfclf, nor rcfalc one people, snd choofc another, except he ddircd it as a more eligible ccurfc, I would have nogooly man be over-quuulcus, when God hath dcne'io much for us, . and brought us into an eftate far better then ever we enjoyed. 1 fpeak this in reference to many faicomplalnts alio in AJr. T.'f other writings i and verbal^ againft the hard- nef* of mens hearts for not repaiiing his lofles*
For the content he mentions in the eti joying of my neighbouihood , I Hiould have been as much rejcyccd in his , if 1 misht have had it with the Churches ti:3cc and my own j and yet lliould be. And I hope ihortly to rcjoycc in his neighbourhood in heaven^ where we fhall have no diverfity of opinion, nor pride, nor paflion. to raife jars and difaffedion to the interrupting of our Joy. For all he fo ofc threats men with the blood of their fouls, if they yield not; yt: I hrpe his way and mine may both end in Heavcnj though I think mine be the diycr, the nearer, and the furer.
Fcr thepaffages which he citethx/iK of my bocks, T undciftand the meaning of them better then he. I hope he will no: go about toperfwademcn that I nm of his mindj If he do, I doubt not but I fhall prevail againlt him in that, and by this book perfwadc them of the contrary. The fenfc of thefirft paflagc is this, [Scripture makes rcmifllon of fins to follow Repenting, Believing, and Baptifm] therefore it goes not before as an im- mediate fruit of Chrifls death, I never intended the connexion of Believing and Bay- tiling : if I had, yet to the profcljted at age it is true and found.
The fenfc of the next pafijge, /jppoidi p-^i. Is, [ Pcrfons know not into what they vvere baptized 5 and many profelyted ones baptized at age know net into what they ace baptized ] which Ignorance, as following after baptifm, is mens fin among us j and as going before baptifm, is the fin of thcfc bjprizfd at age.
To the third, Z'*?^. 5 6. I would have him know, that Parents have authority to ac- cept the Covenan: for their Chilcicn , and enter them in it , as they have to put iheir names in a Bond or Leafe, Or tife I provoke him to tell mc if he can , how the Ifrae- lircs children were in Covenantj and the Profclytei children. For I hope he will not jtili fay that the circumcikd were not in.Covcnant, though he ftifly maintaiaed In
our
our difpute , that none could erttor Covenant, no nor be a vifible Church-member butbylbmea^ of their own which lafarits then perforniecl not J
The place he fo mgcihthem to take notice cf inmy Treat, of Reft, p. 651. he might eafily have dilccrned doth fpeak only of the aged, and net at nil of Infants. It will not follow, that becaufe Church-membcrfliip is a fufficient evidence to the aged of their interell in the Lords^Tupper, except they blot that evidence, that therefore it is afuft'icicnt evidence-ot the intcrefl of Infants, and thatto theadual ufcofit i which they are naturally uncapableof. ^vety Peer of the Realm at age might have fate In the houfeofthe Lords-, will it follow that therefore they may do fo in the fwadling clouts i" Moral qualifications fufficient inthcit kinde, do prefuppofe thofe natural ones which are prxrequlfuc. That may befald to be fufficlent /« fuo gcncrc ^ and to producing of the cdcct fuppvjiti* /uj>pofie»cii] , which yet is not futficient :n ommgc?icre. Bvery BurjiefsatagCi as iuch, hath power to trade, :and bear office, &c. in the Cityj :^ViU it follow thac therefore every Infant may do io that is born a Uutgefs? Yet this is Mr. T $ potertt Arguing. For the reft, about givmg Ihfants the fupper, 1 have anfwercd before: as alfo the ill confequents of Infant- baptifm. Which 1 defirethe Reader to turn to, and perufe impartially (in thefecond part) where he faith, that [Baptifm is more necelFarily to be retormed then Epifcopal Ceremonies , againft which, though much more excufable there have been fo great contendmgs]he feems to me to fpeak as if he had yet fome of his old Epifcopal ceremonious fpirit, though I hope and believe verily that he did not turn meerly for the times though with the times, Ifhe do in- deed think Epifcopal Ceremonies more excufable, 1 Willi him to anfwer what is wtic- ten againft them, DV /*wf Jj Biwc, Brad[h^WjB.irl{er, Jacob, HildcrfJjam, M-S- CJrc. Wright, Didoclavc AHare Damaft.Gcrfom, Buccr, with abundance more. If by [fo grcac contendings] he have any aim at mc, Imuftfay. i. I proceeded as groundedlyas I was able in that bulinefs j I read over all for Ceremonies as well as againft them. I writ out with my own hand "Do&oiAmes frelhfuit, in the broad margin of Burgefs (for the fubftance) and deliberately compared one with the other, t would I had fpent lefstime in fetHng my judgement in that point, fo I had it now for greater works : X. Yet was I never a hot contender, nor difaffefted tothe perfonsof my Brethren that were comformablc ; but difcerned clearly (as My, Bill and others did) In fome turbulent cenforious non conformifts the fame fpirit which now carrieth men to fepa- ration and Anabaptiftry (though thecaufe was better, yet the difpolicion and motives much like./
But the fouleft of the corruption is in the bottom of the fore. He faith [ his Jealoudc over theai, is, left their averfnefs from thedodrine he taught them, occalion their ad- hering to meet formal Teachers, who may cxtinguilTi that power of godlinefs that is among them.] But i . Are others befides Anabaptifls meer formal Teachers, and ene- mies to the power of godlinefs? z. Should M/'.T.boaft of his own power of Teaching and godlinefs in comparifon of whom others are meer formalifts ? j.VVKy fliould averfnefs to his doftrine drive them to formality ? who more avcrfe to it then the old non-cconfornaifts? and yet wholefs addidedtoformality?or!«hohad more of the pow- er of godlinefs? K^derminiler is more averfe to his dodrine ihen Bcwddy and yet I hoo** the power of godlinefs is as iar from being ex'.inouilhed as there j and that they are not addided to meer formal ' eachers (for 1 have found that favor Inhis eies as to be ex- empted from that number.) 4. Was there no power of godlinefs tljere before, M/.T" came thithcr?or is it much increafed fince ? fure the beft of the people that I fpeak with complain to me,that it is rather much diminillied> and their profitable converle turned Into heart burnings and Jcaloufics^and fiuitlefs contendings j where he foiih tha: [he
^ ^ netcr
K^ TUin Scripture prfiof tf
lUYcr moYwl. diem to ukc his tenet for hij fake] 1 believe, if they had not tajten it for bis fike.or upon truft from him, few would CTCr take ir : For they that rcfufe to difputc or maintain it themfelres, and confefs they be nat ab'c. no nor to examine the books that are wriitcn, do furc takcit upon rtufl. He conciudeth that if he undcrftand any tblngjhis opinion is according to Chrirts ini^iiucim } fo that if he be miftaken in this, he will yield that he undcrftands notliing .• and then they arc too blame to take anj thing on his truft. And that he is mittaken hctc ^ bcfides all that is faid , 1 prove thus. That pradicc which quite overturns the true end of BaptiCn, is an e roncous pradlce, and not of Chrift. But the pradice of baptizing the children ot Chriftians. ordinarily at age of difcretionjOverturns the true end of Baptifm; therefore it is no: of ChiA^&t, The Minor I prove thus, The true (principal; endof Baptifm ii, tobe Chrifls'figa for folenanadmiffion of Church members ( or difciples..) liucthu/"nd is quite over- thrown by the ordinary baptizing the children of Phriftiansat age,thereforc,^c. lAe Major is plain, il^r. 18. 19^10. and not denied, (and if you name another cnd,is to be a (ign of Rcmiffion of lin, the Argument will hold as ftroigly, ) The Minor I prove thus. If they that ordinarily b 'ptize fuch at age, do not baptize them till long after they arc inftalled Church.membcr$,then they qaice overthrow the forcmcncioned end(x;i^. to be the hgn of their Admiflion into the Church ) But the AHtccedenc is true: there- fore the confequcnt. The Antecedent 1 have proved already on two grounds. t.That it is certain they are Church- members in Infancy, as the whole book almoft proves. 1 However they cannot otherwife have any knowledge when thofc that are pit}uiiy cdu^ cated begin to be Church members, no not of fome ytars.
Mr.T. fliuts up with his ufual [but dangerous] artifice of working on their AfiedL on$, wheahemiltruftshis ftrengthto wo k on their underftandings, and thcrcfoteto terrific the poor fouls into his nets, he beats the waters with the moft drcadfull. threat- ning, and bids them [beware that for difobedicncc to Chrifl the great Prophet you be not cutoff from his people.] From that text /4(3f J.i5i he had thus thundred againlt them in the Tulpit ; But doth he indeed think it a matter that will prove a mans dam- nition to differ from him in the point of ■ nfant-baptifm ? or not to be baptized again ? Is not this the man that hath. preached againft Papilis placing a necefficy in Baptifm ? and isnot this he thatwas angry with mc when he did but imagine that I had caled him an Herctick ? what can befall an Hcretick worfe then to be damned,or cut off from the people of Chi id ^ and this he threatneth to thofe that will not yield to his opinion. Is it thofc that would know the truth, and yet are not of his mnidc,that he threatneth ? then I hope his threatnlngs will return to him (not on him).igain. And why then was not Bap*- tlfm in the Creed called the Apoftles i But if he threaten only thofe that believe his do- ftrine, and yet will not own it, 1 hope it is but few that have fo corrupt a belief, or a heart foloofc from their own principles, l-ormypit having diligently obferred what hath become of thofe of my acquaintance who have been R^bapiized, I have fcen them fall to fo m:ny defperate opinions and praftices, and fome to make a Religion of fwear* Ingand blafpheming, none to grow better, and moft to giow prefently woife as if a vi- fible judgcnient of Go*i did follow that Adion, that 1 cannot believe that men fhall be gQ* oflPby Chrift from his people for want of being Rcbaptized.Moft that I have known do qu'^^^^W '^^^ off ihcmfelves (asfoonas they have been waihed ) from the vlfible- focicty of <50ds people where tbey Uved, aad with whom they before converfed.
SECT.
Infants Church'trtemherjhip and Baptifm. 245
SECT. II.
Your Fiffl Scaion (I miift needs fpeak it> if I will f^eak truth; begins the Anfwer »fith an untruth. Th3t|Da(rage was neither Intended folely nor mainly agalnft youV felf. It waiagainft all that take that courre. Alas, you need not fet year felf alone, youhave too mioyaff^ciares in £?7g('^zi; many and many bouts of that nature have I had, before I had to deal wi:h you ; And why may not every one that I have argued fidthTay as wcU^that [ foIely or mainly meant them^I Indeed lingled you out for com- m:nda:ion, as the moft learned and moderate, hut not fordifcommendation. For the term [A nabaptifts] I hive fpoken to it before. The Baptiier of Infants you fcornfully call [Officiating I'ricfls] If by this you would imply thcanlawfulnefsof MInifters callings, then why did you never endeavour firft to prove It unlawfull ? I feldom hear the term [Prieftsj (poken of my Minifter In fcoi n, bur it is to intimate that they are no true Minifters of Chrift, but as the Popldi Priefts ; If you mean thus, why hive you concealed this all thiswhile,who will not conceal a fuppofed truth for peace iy'io^. theChuches ) Nay why did you never yet renounce your own calling to the Mini, ftry ? How long have you been fuch an Officiating Pricft ? Methinks you thrive a. pace ^ and apace) in your profeflion 5 Your language begins to found like ^4/ r;« Mar-priefls. It's another untruth, that I faid, That dipping In cold water 1$ Murder and Adultery] I fald that the ordinary praSlce of baptizing In cold water ( in rivcrsj with us Is a breach of the fixch Commandment, Thou ftjalt not murder. And the ordi- nary praftice of baptising naked,is a breach of t!ic fcventh Commandment, Thoujhalt not covunit adultery. I am forry that you are not of the fame opinion. I conjeftarejthat by that time you have baptized half as many maids and women naked in a cold river as you have baptized Infants like an Officiating Prieft, your feet will el. thertakccold, or your heart will take heat. If you would be ruled by me, youfliould not endeavour to Introduce into the Church , a caftom for every young Minifter of neighbour fo much as to look on a bathing Batb(heba or Stifanna, left 10 thofe without, the name of a Church and a Stews, and Presbyter and a Pjndcr,a Chriftlan and a For. nlcator do prove Synonimaes. I eafily yicld,that in TcituUiaas time, and Cypria)Js,Aip' ing was ufuall. But withalll believe, i. That It Is more then probable that the ailor in the night in hishouft, and the three thoufand|by Pf/c/- were not fo dipt. X. That the praftice fpruog up in the hotter countreysj where cuftom had taught them to go almoft half naked in comparifon of us, and therefore it was there fas it would be among the naked Indians ; more civill or Icfs immodeft, and lefs dangerouj to their lives J bathing being there medicinal , when In thefe countreys It may be mortal j Aai. fo It was brought by little and little into the colder climates, upon a fupcrftitlous con. celt of its neccftity or conveniency. I doubt not but on the like erroncoas grounds, de- lay of Baptlfm begun to creep Into the Church even in TertaUiam tlme^ and confining htoEaflnndH'hitrundsy, or fuch times j when according to Chrifts rule, they muft be baptized at their farft folcmn aJmiflion j B.iptifinum initintloncm & quaft januim no(lriCh,-}(llan'ifmicQc docemm , inq-at DoStot Humfrcd, Jefuhifm. page 14^.5. And I doubt not but there was fprinkling then as we'l as dipping ( though I never faw any fpiinklcd with us ) therefore TiTfw/i^. faith. Lb, def^tettit, ^uU cnimtibi tarn i«fid/e
1 i i pflr»j-
5
2^6 Plain Scripture prffof ef
fcen'ncm'i/t vho asprrgmem unam cujrifllbct atfua cotfimodtibit ? AnJ that Baptifm was thcnofc byfprinkling , appear* in Of /V J/.' J Epift. 76. r,d Magnum. See 2U0 Pjr/ic lint ^ AiinoL>tioHs,n.AA- ^^;/7/Vj might hire hclpt you to this as well aj to fomewhat for theciiftomof dipping. You might in hi"n hav; found that the ApoUlcs fomctime pou cd water on [hem, as in the foic-^xprifl.d cafes, as ^ijuifui and others judge, and that Lauicntiui and LuciUiu were fo baptized ; and Corneliut apudEufeb. and irjla^,i~ d/s Strjbo's juJgerrvcnt ( which you could there fpie wich y.v.s, fo far as was for you^ Is not pourin^-warer (moreorlcfsj on them a vvalhing ? and is not walhing (rothc right ends y baptizing? where you fay [had I minded equity or peace, Ihadcbofcn rather to ftileyou Antipaidobapiifts.] I anfwcr. i. That's an unuiujl wordjand I will not bring new nick-names on you or any ; I will the fcr.ner were not known • but *vh.n a people are known by fuch a title, wcmuftufcir, if we will be undcrftood or life a Pcriphrafis or adefcription of them inftead of a title, aslhavefaid before, i. You know the title is taken from Rebaptiiing.'uponthe denyal of Infant- Baptifm and not the other additional opinionsj which have ftill varyed according to the (everaj Seftsofthcm. ?. I fpoke njt of you cither only or chiefly, and tlicrefore was not to fit a title to you alone : How few of that title are known that are of any note that erre not in other things more then you ? For the Churches in London that difclaim the title , I have named you already fomc of the fubfcribing Paftors, whofe writings are rank with Antinomianifm, Socinianifm or other evils. Where you adde that [many Preachers charge them with pcftilenterrours to make them odious to the pcoplej that they might drive them away out of the land , if not deflroy them] Let me anfwer for my felf in that once for all. I never moved Magiftrate or people either to drive them out of the land or to deflroy them. I may peihaps fpeak more vehemently to you , or others then is meet i for I confefs my ftile Is naturally keen , but if I oflfcnd in point of good- mannersj and be too rude with you in my language , yet I can truly fay I am fat from fuch uncharitablenefs , or perfecuting difpofition. My judgement in that much de- bated point, of Liberty of Religion, r ha veal waies freely made known. labhorun-* limited Liberty or Toleration of All : and think my felf eafily able to prove the wic- kcdnefsof it. And I have heard you fay as much your felf. Though I confefs if I were of the judgement that yoa and fome others are of [that the Migiftratc is not un- der Chrift the M.diator, or holdeth not his power from him] then I fliould be for Li- berty of Pagans as well as Chriftians. but as I believe that the Magiftrate holds his power from Chrift, fo I believche muil excrcife it for him, and not be indifTrentto iJhrifl and Satan, to Chriftians and Pagans. If every man fliould have Liberty under pretence of wordiipping God, to preach up Mahomet, or preach down Chrifl , and blafpheme that facrcd name by which we muft be fav(jJ,yea,or to preach down the fun- damental Articki of the faith , or to draw people all to pieces into liccntioufncfs and difobedience, I fliould abhor that Magifttate, who pretending to be a Ch-iftian, fliould grant luch a 1 iberty , and ihould rather 1 ive in the wilde Aincria then in Engl.vid. On the other fv-ic, I believe that many are inclinable to a contrary cxtream, and that if we forbear not one another in many points of difference , no two men on earth will live peaceably together ; 1 abhor their difpofitions who in difficult, doftrinaljControverted points, far from the foundation , muft needs have their own judgement the ftandard and rule of all other mens, and none to be tolerated that difF;i$ from them. A greater latitude there muft be left in doftrinals then pradicals. In a word, The Toleration that I would have, is for the Churches and my Brcthrens Peace, and therefore I would hothaveunpeaceablenefsand dlvifion to be encouraged or defended. If men will ei- ther keep their opinions to themfelves, or modeftly and peaceably make them known, I
would
Infants Church'memyerjhif And Baptifm. 247
would have no rigour ufed to fuch ; but if they think they arc bound in confcience to go preach it at the M'.rket place, and importunately to folicit all to it that they can come near and violently to drive it on to the diviiion and overthrow of the Church, and to make themfelves parties in itjl think the wantonnefs and violence of fuch men (hould be retrained, nctprefently by driving them out of the land, but by a difcouragement and penalty proportionable to their ofFence.I think alfo that truly tender confclences Hiould be tenderly dealt with : But no man flwuld be fufFered openly to make a known plain finhisprofefTionand praftice. The Kings that fufFered the people to worlhipat the high places are reproved, though the text faith that yet they worlhipped only the God of their Fathers,3nd though It was alfo a controrerted pointjOur fathers fay in this moun- tain, and you fay at Jerufalem men ought to worfhip; faith the Samaritan woman, /o/;.4. To conclude, I thinly if the good that an erring Miniftcr dothjbe greater then the hurt^ that his encouragement for the one fhould be greater then his difcouragement for the other. But if the hurt be greater then the good,then his difcouragement (hould be great- er then his encouragement, and the Magiftrate fliould by wife and convenient means hinder him from doing that hurt. This is part of my judgement in this point- So far am I from feeking to banliTi or deftroy you,that I never wilht you hurt. And I meet with few godly Minifters, but will fay as much. They will be glad if they can keep in the Land, and enjoy theproteSion of the Laws and exercife of their Miniflry themfelves. I pray you Sir caft up your accounts, and tell me, whether the number of MIniQers and Schollars in the Univerfities, and people who arc againft y«ur Opinion, that have beea difplaced or have fuffered of late, be not far greater (yea, far indeedj then the number of Minifters or Schollars and people of your Opinion that have fufFered. And if all be executed which Is enaded and refolved on ( which we muft rationally cxped ) tell me who (hou\6 talk In your language ? I have left all I had for the publike caufe, and ferved them fmoftly on my own charged from the firft day of the war to the laft, and hazarded my life over and over, and almofl lofl it (for I do but live) and after all this, you tell me of my danger. And yet I do not fpeak in your language.nor fay, they would deflroy nie, when no body medleth with me, but I live in peace. For your own part, I am ftill oftheminde, thatyouhavenocanfeof fuchfad complaints j nor totalk of banifhmenc and deftrudion:! never heard that you fufFered any fuch matter,or were likely fo to do: And yet yoa have as much footing in the Land asmoft of your Brethren ; and far more then I would Arilli. Your Brethren will be content if they may enjoy one place,and do you fo talk of Baniihment and dcftruS ion while you enjoy fo many ?
What you fay of my z/irulency, imnw'dcratcncfsy and not heeding what I wrote In fay- ingj you play the devils part^l have fully before anfwered.If it prove true(as I dare fay, 1 have proved it true) then is it worfe to do it, or to tell you of it ? Had you rather do ill then hear ill ? You accufe tnem (znA that without reference to their (in) to have no Right to be MembeiSofChriftsvifible Church ('which is, not to be fo much as vifibly or feemingly Members of the invifible Church) not to be Difciplesof Chrift, not to be Chriltians ; this you do by your fclves and by your inftrumenrs, by word and writing, violen'ly and patTionatcly, before God and before men, in lelfer and in larger Aflem- bliesjby preaching and by Difputing ; And yet dare you fay fo confidently that you do not accufe them? The relt of this Sedion is anfwered already.
H J SECT.
^4^ P Uin Scripture f roof of
SECT. III.
IN the fecond Sedjon Is nothJrg but what ii before anfircrcd, worth the repeating iNor yet .n the third Sedlon : There being bur 3 vain citation of a p.ffage ou^Sf my' W of Reft P.J49 Imleknowl to what purpofe ; and an addition to thcheap of nJ- orious untruths i.Hefa.th he could not hare'liberty ro exprefs h.mfclf without check! •ng. «hcn being but Refpondent, he fpake very far more then my fclfand ufually inter- rupted me, though I entreated him to doocherwire,as loarhingrhat courfc : nor can N: Sr.M7 y\ ^7 '^' '"<Catechizing]which t conceive was no more then meet! Much Icfs any hinderancc to dim to fpcak. A fecond untruth is^that [all that were pre- fent,know he could not have in the Difputation liberty thus to cxprels himfelf] I will give him three hundred to one of thofe that were prefenc, and let th?m judee of the trutli kL fi )i Ik'' '""r' ' '^'t '^'[? ^^°^^ ""''^ '^°"^ '^ J"^Se dean contrary, that he had fl?n /!f' f'f ''"J'r? . '""^^ wichlcouldnot pofllbly crave, but was fa.n to let fail my fult, and fpeak by parcels as he would give leave, j . Another un- truth is, that [ifhc might have had liberty, he would have diftinguiihed of a *ateo£ feparation.to God.] ybi fdcs ? ubi from ? Did I ever check you Cas you wUl needs call my entreaties,) but for not dlftlnguiftilng ? When you would needs ftill turn by qac - ftionmgs aad long difcourfcs to the people, I entreated you to remember the Laws of p. putatlon 1 1 befought you over and over to diftinguHhof any term that was doubt- full to youiand dare you now(havIng fo many Witneffes of the untruth,) tell the world deliberately in print, that you would have diftingullhed if you had had liberty ? If vouc Opinion lead to this praftice, I will none of it. ^id Romafaciam ?
SECT. IV.
jHe fourth Seapnisanfwered before j only here he adds [God faith, the children oUhcirrae/ita are Gods Servants, LcvU.i'^.^ »,4i,^5. 1 fay (faith he; our children are not : Is there any contrariety in thefc fpceches where the fubjc^s of the eropoficion are not the fame ? ] To which I anfwer. i. Lut this proves that Infants arc nor unca- pab!e, m point of Age, of being Gods Servants: For clfe the Jews Infants would have been uncapable. 2. How have the b<;lieving Jews loft this priviledge ? ^Or ProfeJytes of the Gentiles } 4.1f God took the Jews children to be his Servanti.by your own con- feflion, much more ours, who have greater Mercy and Priviledges. c.Where you talk of . ervants m this fcnfe and that fenfcthey were fo Servants as to be vifible Church-mem bers, and that is all the U nfe that I conteft for.They were reckoned among SMo/es Difcll p es, anJ fo are ours to he among Chriits Difciples or Chriftians, ^As WfJ Difcides alfo in feme fort were Chriftsdilciples.) ^
SECT.
Infants Church- mmherjhif And Baftifm, 249
SECT. V.
•yTo the fifth ScS ion. The Text in Dr«M9. wasbtoujht to prove that God cn- tred in o Covenant with Infants to take them for feis People , and \o be their God J and confe^uently made them Church- members. Let us fee your exceptions. I. You fay [thou] v.n, doth not neceffarily comprehend the little ones,] To which I fay. I. 1 doubt not but you have weighed the Text deliberately ^ and if you here fpeaknot contrary to your own judgement and confcience,! am forced to tell yoU;that I fet a very low value on your judgement; and if you interpret all other Scriptures thus, it is great pity you (hould be that way .imployed : But if ycu do fpeak contrary to your confcience, then I mull tell you, that 1 fet a low value on your confciencCj and loath that Caufe which did thus proftitute it. 2. Do not you know thi- [^thoii] is a CoHcftiv^ term , ufually through the Books of Mo(cs fpoken •f all the people , except any bepartkalarly excepted ? 3 . Arc not little ones here named ? and yet are they excluded? 4. Why (hould tMofcs fay, Hen ^.vtdyour Childrett and ifivcs^'thxt not thjy but you might enter the Covenant ? J. Doth not Mr.T.confefs that the Jews Infants were in Covenant ? Why elfe were they Circumcifed , which is the Seal of chc Co- venant ? 6. I defire no means to convince any man of your ftrangc abufe of the Text , but only that he will read it , [Tc fiand thU dxy Alt of you before the Lord your God, your Captaius of your Tribes i your Elders ^ andyouiO^ce^s , tvithall the men of ifrAcl, your Little Ones^ your ifivcSy and the Stranger that ii in thy Campt from the Herv cr of thy ti'ood, unio the drawer of thy ifater , Th.it thou (houldeft enter into Covenant vfith the Lord thy God , and iat$^ his- Oath , whifh the Lord thy God inal^cth with thee this day jt hat he may eflabtifb thct to day for a people to hitnfelfand t hat he may be to thee a God."] lie that can confidcrately believe Mr.T. that the word [//;o«] v. 1 1. doth not neceffariiy comprehendthc//r//c 0/wi, if I knew him, I would tell him, that Iwillnot under- take by Scripture to convince him of any thing at all. And I fay again infobriety, that if the Papifts had as plain Scripture for their Religion , as it differs from ours» 1 would not delay a week,but wouU turn Papift, and deteft all feparation from them ; I fay, if they had as plain Text as this to prove that thefe Uttk Ones were entered into the Covenant. Ani where he faith [I fought to fuggeft to the people as if it were his impudence to deny this. 3 lanfwer: i. Did I ever ufe any fuch terms tohim'f He" will not fay I did. What then was the fuggeftion ? Why I told them the Text was fo plain, that I knew not how it could be plainer fpoken. He may as well tell me, that every time I confute his Arguments, l fuggeft to the people that he is a liar,and fo for- bid all oppofing him as unmannerly. Wherehe faith. that [)^9«] V. 14 is diftinguiflied from [tbemt^Mt tiandi&cilldAivttt ^ i. I think not ; but from them that were ab- fent J q.i. Not with you Ow/y, hut (both) with him that is here ("that is, you,} and hira that is not here. z. Were k other wife, yet it were only from the people ofothtf Nations thai ftood among them. Where he faith [fome entered into Covenant in be- half of the refl, ] lanfwer 5 i. God entered into Covenant on his part Immediately, or by Aiofes the Mediator, with them all, aiid not with fomc only, a. I doubc not bat
the
2 5© Plain Scripture proof of
ihc. Parents entered their children into the Coveninr, and not the Infants ihcmfdves, which (hews, God hath given Parents ihis intercll and Authority, j liut that any o- iher that had the ufe of reaion fliould net enter their own confcnc, is a fidi<'n not to be admitted; And yet Mr. T. in his Confutation-Scrmonj cxcludcththc W ivcs frcm a perfonal covenanting as well as the Infants j but barely on his own Auihotity .Nay, he faith, it was only the Captains and OlTicers, though the Covenant is made with the reft,
>. He faith, Mofe? made thit Covenant wl:h him that was not there that day, that is, their pcfterity not yet born ; IhiU it therefore b: laid that they were viliblc Mem* bcrs, &c?] lanfwer; i. It is evident the Covenant fj-okc Ji? f/cfcnu to thofe thac were there j but defutic/o only of thofc that werenot in being, but fujure ; i hey that were not, could not be Mcmbeis vilible or invifible. As they had a Being, fa they had a Membcrfhip J that is, inpofjc, & iuffituritionc^ fimmejjc. By vertue of this Deed of Gift, they (hould be born Church- members. If a Lanalorddo by Leafe make over any land to you, and your children! and your childrens children, paying fo much Rent } Doih it follow that your children ('who are born) are none of this mans Tenants, becaufeyour childrens children (who are unborn^ are not bis Te- nants aAually, but potentially > Or, if a Kingbefet over us and our children , and childrens children (bycompad.) doth it follow , that cur children in being arc not, his fubjeds in being, becauieour childrens children in po^I' are not fubjeds, in ejjh^ bw in pojfc only i Ah here is good arguing! j. Your next Anfweris, that, [an en- tring into Covenant by Parents doth not make avifible Member in the Chriftian Church, thoughit did in the ]ews.] But Sir, this is but to beg the Quiflion, I have fully proved the contrary. You cannot ihew a line in Scripture where thac Priviledgc is revoked or repealed j which is the great thing I ftill urge you to. Your reafon here added, I have manifefted to be moft vain , and a compofition of fidions (about the different Church Call and frame. I intreat the Header to turn back and reade it,becaufe you lay the main ftrefs of your caufe on It. Mofcs gathered no Church de novOj but found it gathered to his hands,only be added their Lawsj and caufed them frequently to renew the Covenant. /4/;/<i/;/7w?gath(red no Nation, bu a Family, and taught them too, if God may be believed ; Yea, Abraham had no new Church.framc In his Family, much lefs did he gather any Church in a new frame, but in Che fame as was in Sims Family; before him and in his time j Circumcifion was anewfign o^ the Covmant, butnotanew Church-frame. Were the Profelytes then gathered witlj,- out teaching ? that is a foulfidion. And hath Chrift commanded now to teach aiW;. before wc Baptize them, but Profelytes (as it were?) Where read you that cverjaK Believers childe was Baptized at age, in the iJcripture ? What you cite of mine in your Margin, is to no purpofe. I fay, that God fent not Mae^iftrates or Commanders to bring in the world to Chrift ('as M.ihomadidzohim,) but Minifters. Would not a man wonder what you can gather thence ? Men that arc born out of the Church, maft be taught^ and by confent brought in : I know tharjordinarily. liut it followeth not, that iheicfore thofe born in the Church, or born Members; muft be fo. But,you fiy, that 1 fay, p. 3. that [the Jews and all profelytwl L»entiles were holy before.] Before, When ? bef6re ChiiUscomming. True: but they were broken off for un- belief, moft of them. Such an Argument as you hint at, I find to another ufe in the l^refaceto .he Ad* of the Nevp-England Synod. But do not you know, that whcQ Chrift had added anew Article to their Creed, [If ye believe not that I am he, ye ihall die in your finsj from that day forward, they that would not believe that Ar- ticle were cut off; and fo the body of the Jews moftly unchurched ? If any few
Jews
Infants Church- memherjhip andBa^tifm. 251
.]cws did believe that Article at the firft revealing, then prove If you can that their chil- dren were ever Baptized at age. But ff the believing Jews were firft unbelievers, then they were firft unchurched, and To muft be brought into Chrift as Profclytes. It is no Church, nor ii he any Church-metnbcr (at age) who pcofcffeth not every Fundamen- tal Article.
4. You add [this proves not the Covenant a pure GofpeNCovcnant, not including peculiar benefits to the Jewifh Nation] I anfwer, i. If by [pure] you mean that it is not only a Gofpel- Ccvenanr,but that and more ; it yceldcth as much as I need j for if it be a Gofpel- Covenant, no matter though there be more. But if you mean that it is not Effentially a Covenant of Grace, I could heap up abundance of Arguments a- gainft you j you may finde many in Mr. BsE of the Covenant. I add : That Cove- nant wherein God taketh them to be his people, and engageth himfclf tobe thtir God, is a Covenant of Grace : (For fince the fall God entreth himfelf intono fuch Cove- nant with any but in Chrift, and upon terms of Grace) But fuch is thit Covenant madewiththe ifraclitcs zndikdr little Owjjchcrefore this was a covenant of Grace. z-That Covenant wherein the Lord promifeth to Circumcifc their h<ar£$,3nd the hearts of their Seed , to love the Lo d their God with all their heart, and with all their foul,th.ic they may live, was a Covenant of Gi ace ; (for the Apoftie to the Hebrews fo dcfcribes it.) Cut this was fuch a Covenant as is written Dctit.io.6. Therefore this was a Co\'e. nam of Grace, i- That which S.Pj/// makes the words of the Righteoufnefs of Faith, wat the Covenant of '--race i But this is fuch^as is evident by comparing, Rom. 10.6, 7,8. with Dc«^ 30. It, J 3,14. But to this you give two forry Anfwers, being refolved to fay fomewhat. i. [It is fpoken of the command] Anf. i. And is ic not alfo of the Promile foregoing .? i. And is not this from as great a miftake as the other, ro think that Gods command is no part of his Covenant ? Th^t [he will be their God] is his promifc: but is that all the Covenant ? That [they flizU be his people, and fo take him for their God, and rcfign thcmfelvv's to him] thisisboth commanded by him, and covenanted by them- i. You anfwer [ it is frequent with the Apoftie to accom- modate words to his purpofc, that have a different lenfc in the places whence they weie tikcn, from that to which the Apoftie applyeth them, as Rom. 10.18,] Anfwer : A man would think here you plainly mean, that it is frequent with the Apoftie to wrcft and pervert the Scripture to his own tnds from its true fenfe ; and you can mean no better, except you mean that he alludethro the words, making ufe of the meer phrafe without the fenfe ; and indeed that is ufuil in common fpeech ; and fuch is that Rom.xo. 18. or elfc it istruly intepreted byhim. But that he doth not barely allude to this inDcut.io.h left undeniable: i. Hebringcth it in, t/f;-.6 asGodsdefcriptionof the Righteoufnefs of Faith, SiC. having before faid, Mofcs dcfcribeth the Rij^hteoufnefs which is of the Law &c. z. Headdcth the very Hxpofuion to every fentence, [Who fliall afccnd into Heaven] that is, faith he, to bring Chnft down from above? And [Who (hall defcend into the deep,] that is, to biing Chrift again from the dead? 3 He fully expreflkthitjV.S.But what faith WtTbe wovdis nigh tl:ce.,&c.r}\^i is, The word ofF.vth ivhich we prcJih, th.it if thou confcfs with ihy mouth, Sec. Is not here a full dif- covery that the Apoftie cxpoundeth, and not only alludeth to thefe words ? Name me cncplace in the New Tcftament that more evidently fpeaks in an Hxpofitory *\ ay of 3^^y Text in the Old ?
Your laft Anfwer is the worft of all. You fay. If the Covenant did contain promjlcs purely Evangelical , yet the Covenant in rcfpcd of them cannot be meant ofall and every of ihs If,\iciites , that God would bea God to them, that is f naifiea juftifie, and adopt them to be heirs of eternal life.] Anlw.i. God faith, Tauijiandall
K k hefe^
252 Plain Scriftnre proof ef
hcrc,8cc. to enter into the Covemnt andOnb^Scc. And you fay.it cannoc be Ali ;whoin (hill we bcllcvCj.God or ycu > 2 You fouly mi:-interp:ct the I'romi/V, Toot to them a God,3.i if ir were fuch as could be verified to none but the Eled. God hath promif.d to others to be their God, whoarcnot Hied, as is undeniable in the I ext : Thcicf.rc in a larger fenfe, as 1 have before in due place fuUy explained ir. And why mav not God . promile Jnitificationj Adoption fajid Sanfiiiication in the (eni'e a Divines and Scri* pture moft ufe it, for the work following Faith J and eternal lifw, and all on the condi- clon of Faith, and this to more then the Eled ? and hath hcnot fodone ? But of this and of Infants condition before. '
" You would tain fav fomewhat too to that Deut.io.6. but like the reft. i. You con- fefs it Is a promifc of fpiritual Grace but to the Jews after theli- caprivity. z. And upon condition of Obedience ; ?. And not performed to ali their Seed, bu: only to the E led:] Anfwer, i. But did God promife fpiritual Grace to the Jews atter the Caotivitv" and not before?W3s not the Proruife made to them that then were? Were not they cao- tivated oft in the time of the J udges, and fo it might at Icaft be inadc pood then ? If God would do as much for them before they forfook him, and b; oke the Covenant bv Rebellion , as he would do afterward when they repented , then he would Circumcife their hearts b.f.\'e as well as after i But the former is true; therefore the l;.tter. r. And if it been Condition of Obedience, then you contf.fs there aie conditional p'romifes • and then it was made to more then the bled. 3. if it were not performed to any bat the Eledj no wonder^ when it was a conditional Promife, and the relt performed not the Condition .- Which God will caufe the Bled to perform.
SECT. Vf.
TOthefixthS.aionj About the fenfe of. V<?if. iS.io. M/.T. i. Thinks he hath the fame advantage againft me as I had in another cafe againft him; but he is mifta-" ken, I. Bectule I affirm that in other places as well as this, Infants ai e called Difci- pies, as.^t?. II. i6. Where it is faid the DIfciples were called Chnftians fi, ft vt A/itf. och, Infants arc there part of tke Chriftiansand Difciples, and fo in other the like pla- ces. a.Honrever, I am certain if wehave not thename eifcwherc yet wehwc the defcrip- tion, and names of the fame (ignification. They arc Chi)rch»mcmbvrs, Gods people, hlsServants, and therefore Difciples. j. But efpecially /W. y. ftvuld hare confidcred, thit I argued with him about the meaning of a word, [whether Holy, be meant Not- Baftards] but now we here argue not fo much about the fenfe oi the wo, d f for we arc agreed that a Dlfciple is a Schollar of Cfarift, or a Member of his School or Church ; ) but about the application of this term , and th>; fubjeds capacity fur the Title. The • term we are agreed fi^nihethone foRclaicd to Chrift as their Maftcr, Now our Que- ilion i'-. Whether Infants r,re fo related.
And your bringing fotnc piffagcs of the Chapter not applicable to Infants, doth not prove that therefore the reft is not i no more then fcveral paifages in Dmt,. xp. applicable only to the aged , will prove that //^/^' Owe? were not taken in to be Gods people. The reft following iianfwered already } Where you fay, [All my colour from
this
Infants Church-memherfhip andBaptifm. 253
this Tex: lies in taking the yoak for cutting a little skin] I muft fay it Js but one of your fiaions. Did you ever hear me talk of any fuch thing J Cutting that skin is not Circumcifionj as the word is ufed in Scripture for a Sacrament. It you be put to de« fineDaptifnij will you fay it is nothing buc wafhing the body ? Orwlil youiay, the Lords Supper is nothing but eating a little bread, and drinking a Ifttle wine ? thtfc arc wildc dtfiairions. You know many thiogigo to the definition of a Relation j and a- mong the reft,the end muft be one ; And fo muft the fignification and engagement go into the c'efinition of Circumcilion ; And if from hence you would infer, that it is on- ly the aged that are capable of fignification and engagement , you may thence ftrait conclude, that no Infant wjs ever Circumciled.
And where you fay,that [all this would or»ly prove Male.Infants to be Difciples and not'Females] I anfw'cr ; i. i hat is as much as I needed, when my Pofitlon was, That fwnc Infants arc Difcipks, and fo to be baptized, a. I Ihouldfoon thence prove(to my own fatisfadion, though no: to yours ) that if Males are Difciples, then certainly Fe- males, both being Chuich-mem'iers till Chrift^ though but one Circumcifed. Indcei acco-ding to your Dodrine, that plead that none were vjfible CfcQrch.memberSjbut by being Circumcifed , it would follow, that never any woman wasa vlfible Church- mcmbcr. And for your conclulion [that the Reader may perceive the lleightnefs of my Argb-ments, and how fuperficially I handled the bufmeh] 1 eafily confefs he may^ fo he do but fee with your eyes, and through your fpedadcs , or at Icaft be a Reader of your own education or tutorage.
SECT. VII.
iNthefeventhSeftion ; i You believe that if I were required to fet down who the A« nabaptifts 3iC, that fay, Children are no: holy as feparated to God, and where they affi.mit,! would be hard put to itto freemy felffrom overlalTiing. I anfwer;i. Though Ikept notaMufter-RoU of their names, yet I am fo well acquainted withtliem, that I could fill paper enough with them,if it were favory and ufefull:But why muft I tell where they fpeak it ? In many a field, houfc and Pulpit •, All that they fpeak is not in print I hope. 2. And why ihould you think that your felf is Angular in this point, from all youc own party Mf you fay fo,why may mt others ? I have fpem many and many hours upon this with others,more then with you. Do notmoft of them Interpret iCor. 7- H-as you do? and conlcquencly deny my interpretation ? But fuppofe I have overlallied, and you arc lingular in thisi why then Ihould you be fo angry with me for not being of your Opini- on, andthreaten the men of Bavdc'y for it, to be cut off from Chrifts pcopL'i and fayj Their blood be on their own headSjWhen yet nont of your own party are of your Opini. on in a point fo necr the Foundation of your canfc ? But you are aflurcd.you fay, that I wrote this paffage in hifte and inconliderately, not well weighing what 1 fald, and that however 1 name Anabaptilii in the plural, ye: my only inftance would be your felf. I anfw. 1. But how will you afra;'c another that you fpeak trach In this ? z. But if J: befo,! will not be the firft that (hall take up your Opinion,and joyn with you. I will fee fomc body clfe lead the way.I marvell that you can make none of your own Followers of youc
K k 1 judgeaaent I
254 Plain Scrifture freof 9f
judgement I But you fay, you did not fo rawly cxorefs ir. I anfw<r, But you flatly dcnyed the affirmative , without the diftln6tions which you now put in, i'/':^. [that fome Infants arc Holy by a flated fcpasation to God.] And to what ul'c are the diftin- fiions you now bring In ? i. It is reparation by Covenant or Promifcj or Oods appro- priating of th>;m to himfelf, which 1 told you I meant ; and this by his written Law; cvcnaj he fanftihcd to himfelf the ihaeliia from other people} and the fiiil-born from other Sons. Piofcffion and Vows of Pareiits which you call fandifyingj is not fanftifying in fo full a fcnfe as that. It is God that (anSifie^h in the piopetcft feofc j though thtlc aii'u remotely. But for the fcparation by Election \%hich y^.u mention^ it Is no rcall proper fcparation, but only Gods pu'pol'cto fcparntc tUem iiercafter. Whea you fay a man is juUificd , fandified , or faved from Eternity in Gods Decree, You inuft mean, that he is not really and truly juftified, or fandified at all, bur only God did Decree to juftifie him and landific him : which proves it is not yet done j clfc how cou:d God Decree to do it hereafter ? Neihifig cannot have a reall aduall Mjd.Uf or Affedion , or Accident. Klfe it were a foond arguing abcfl tertii adj.,ccniii ad c(i fe- cund/, fcpa,\itnie(l,tx^oc(l, i( (cpxiatui were not te* mi fiiii dimmucHs. So that your fcpa* ration by Eledlon is but a purpofc to feparate hereafter.
In the next place, you la fall many uatruihs together ( if the Reader have a defire toknow the number, let him coun: hirn'Mf \ for 1 have no mindc to it.) Y, u intimate i wculd not tel! you in what manner children are holy J which is unrrue. I would have you truft th.i: memory no more. You back this wi:h another, that you would have told me more fully what you deny, c^c Yet ycu add m ire, ihu I ch:cked you, and all along the Difputelcarriedmy felf magilkriaily, fcornfully, and unbrcherly, when you cannot inftancc in one fach word ; All vou name, if, thatwh-n you overturned tlicDifpatadon by turning it to divers Qj'ft'ons one after another, I Mid, that was not Difputingjbut Catechzing : and when you turned to long Difccurfts to the p.o- plei and faid yoa muftfatisfie the people, I told you I came to Difpute with ycu, and not to fatisfie them, /.?. by long Difcourfcs to fruttrate the Difpute : And was there 10 much evil in thcfc two words , when [ faw no other remedy to prevent the loling of all our labour and expedations ? Another untruth you add , that I did no: [ as ore that minded the clearing of truth ] when I can from my heart fay^ it was my urmolt aym. But my judgement was, and is, that your popular dlvcjlions for the hiding of your Errors did not tend to clear the Truth; but that the ftrideli argummtation is moA conducible to clear it. Another yet you add , as ifl aym d [but to diminilli your c- fteem] when certainly Sir, I deiirc the advancement of your cfteem fo far as it hinders not the advancement of the Gofpcl ; and where it doth , and you will needs involve your own eiicem with the credit of your il; caule , as if ycu were refolvcd they Hiould fland or fall together , I confefs I had rati^er they fell together then ftood together : Which hjth caufed me to wrie here fo much as 1 have done in reference to your l"elf.
Next you add, ihat I did it to gain an Opinion to my fclf, as having the better } wbJch as I was a fcivaiu to the Truth, and as that Opinion is meant of a true Opini- on, lacknowlcdegc to be true ; that is, it was my endeavour and defire that 1 might fully vindicate Gods Truth from your Sophifms : But (though in fuch contclls I dare not fay that there Is no ftirrings of pride or vain glory in me, it being fo natural a fin, and flicking fo clofe to us al l,yet j I can truly fay, that 1 fought Gods Ti uch above my own reputationj and that I can be gladly vile in the eyes of men, if I might but know more of the Tru;h of God ; as 1 have evinced by publiflu'ng difgraced Truths. Did Ithlnk Anabaptifm were of God , I would entertain it , withrejoycing. Where you sicxtadd, that the Auditors will teftiiie thcfc things, I fuppofe yoa mean one among
many
Infants Church- memherjhif and Baptifm, 255
many hundreds-, who (hew alio what their principles are by fuch teftimonies You next add, chat [tor this reafon you obtained not from me to know in what manner and by what means every Believers Infant is holy asTeparated to Godj] I anfwer, i. Can you for iTiame fay fo, being fuch a Difputanc ? Could not you hive forc'c me to ic by dittingulhing,which I entreated you to do ? i.Did I ever deny to tell you that? 5. Nay, did I not tell you over and over without your asking f' occalionally ) thnt I meant net that the Faith of the Parents was a caufe, but the condition, and that Gods Covenant or I'romiie, or exprefs appropriating them to himU-lf by his word, is the Caufe ? You have nothing but the weaknefs of your memory and notaries to excufe all thefc palpa- ble untruths} which yet do but cxcufe them a t.wto.
For your further Difcourfe here,l pafs ic over, as being punftualfy anfwcred already. Only where you fay Sandification is taken for Chaftity, \Thcf. 4. j, 4 and that is near to the taking [Holy] for [Legitimate.] I anfwer ; 1. Chaftity is mentioned but as partof theiv rcall fandity, and mt the whole, in i Thcf. 43. 2. Chaftity is a Ver- tue and Fornication a hainaus fin i Legitimation is no Vcrtue, nor Biflardy any (in
at all J How like thefe are ? but any thing will ferve. Youfay [God
faith children were holy, but not as feparatcd to God,] when I convinced you, that Holincfs is taken for nothing tlfe in all other Scriptures , but for a feparatlon to God.
YouaddfourReafonsagain-ft my fcnfc of this Text, \ Cnr. 7- 14. Thefirftisan- fwercd before ; The fecond is anfwcred by iW,-. iW.i-/fc,j// and others 'long ago. That my fcnfefuppofcthasyou lay, the fandification to be from the Faith of the Believer as the Caule , is untrue. Did I not tell you that I dcnycd it to be the Caufe , but only a condiuon-? Your third alio I have anfwered before. Yet do you here give up in my judgement the whole caufe about this Text. You fay that this p: opofition [ I he children, whereof one of tV;e l^arents is not a reall true believer before Godj are none of them holy as fcparated to God] is falfe,iake the fepararion to God, what way^and to what ul'c I will. Do you know what yf>u have faid ? Why then you yield that fome fuch children are Holy and feparatcd in my fenfc ; that is, that they arc Holyby rcrfuc of Gods Covenant, claim and gif:, as being leparated fromthofe without the vffible Church, to {land In the Relation of Difciples ,Chriftians,or vifiblc Church-members ; This Is ray fcnfe of Holy ; andif you yield this to any children , fure it will be to tKe Seed of Chriflians ; And if to any, why (hould not thofe be bapiixed ? Bur I fup- pofe you will recant thefe words. As for your cojafcquenc, I have Ihewcd you before the ungroundcdnefsof it. Your fourth Reafon alfo is before fully anfwered; What you cite out of my Append, needs no other Anfwer, but to wifli the Reader to read the whole.
As for the four Arguments, which you fay I ufcd agalnft your Expofition, the three firft ate imperfedly txprtflcd , and the fou' th is none of mine, Grotiiis mfght well Expound kSxTl'.oaVTZ'y \ Cny.io.i. by (juafi bapti'^^ti f/t)it ; ¥or k wzsiC\rn\\i:iide or Type J but what isthat to this Text where is no fuch thing? He tcUyou^Vfufpnt ift.ifn voccm ut CO magis fiflcKci-U umUram rcrnm mflrarum : Dcmdc in eo qtiod confpicitur eft aliejmd fimilc, Mcthinks then you ihould rather conclude , that as all the Iftacl'itcs , even Infants and all were , qiiafi B.ipt'i'^^ti in umbra & fmiiuudmc nofla B.ipcifmi, fo All the Church now, whereto Infants alfo mufi be annumerated , (liould be initiated byBaprifmj Efpccially when the Apoftle puts fuch an Emphafis in the word AU; and TcrtuUianthQitck'cdhy G/otiiis, faith, ^n.e figura mmifefliorin Biplijm'i Saf;\u mcnto} Sec. That whi<h 1 called an irrational fancy, was not what yoU here i^ancy mc to fpcak of, but this ; v-hen in the Difputation \ asked you^ HoWthc Comtlnans could
Kk J be
5 ^ ^Uin Scripture proof of
be furc that thcuch^dren were not baftaids, when yet they doubted afthehwfulnefs of the.r marriage. You anfwcied as it they might be due the childrtn begot before the Convc.nonoftheBd.ev.rwtrclawrully begot. I told youthac then the Apoftlescon. lequcnce had been vam and unlound, it he bad argu.d from the Ltgitlmatfon ofttieir children before, only to the awlulnc* of their cohabitation or marriage after, fpeci- a.Iy when the doubt was on y of the ftatc after. And the confequcnt [clfc were your chJl- drcn unclean] uould be falfe, taken of thofc before the converfion of the Believer and taking uncleanefsin your fence; therefore 1 told you that Expoiition did put upon xaui an irrational fancy. * '■
As for thofe whom you cite for Expounding it of baftardy, ycu fhewnot where they fo do. and I have not time to read whole Books for that. However (chough for Papifts I could gratifie you with fomc more, as Bruno m locncU^mmc, and others that put in that Lxpofit.on among many others, yet) for Proteftants you know there i. zo. Jo one agamltyou. To your confident application, I reply, that the Chriftian that would not delude his confcience (ai youfpeak) methinkllhould be afraid to go againrt the plam Inftimcion otGodi who as you confefsdid Ordain that Infants fflouM be Members of the vifiblc Church, when you cannot yet bring one Scripture, nor (in my judgement) one word of fenfe and tealon, to prove the repeal of that Ordinance. You adde. that Lyou may now freely fay, that however (my Arguments) feemed fomcwhac at the tirlt hearing^ ytt now upon exad conlidcration frivolousjd^f ] 1 anfwer, i It is rather an addition to your courage and boldnefs, I doubt, then to your judgera'cn: that maKCs you lay lo. z. How can you cxadly conlider them, that cannot remember or repeat them? 5. If they fcenied fomcwhat at the fiiil hearing, did not you grofly before multitudes dilfemble , when you fpakc very far more contemptuciifly of them then, tlien you do now ? h not this to confefs, that you did but fct a good face on it, and word it our, to delude the people, and make them believe that thofc Arguments were nothing, which rrow you contcfs did then to your felt fcem fomewhat > whe e you fiy [yc^ doubt I urged them liktr.afSophiilenhcn a lover of Truth] fliali I tell ycu my ve- ry heart, if I know any thing of it ? It poirelVeth mc with an hundred fears, Icil 1 make 1 ruth my Idolj and I never doubt of the Sincerity of my heart, but this is the main occafion } I know that the firtt point of true Religion is to take God for our End and chief Good; ('Add but Chriftrhe only way to Ood. and Faith the way to Chiift, and Obedience the way in Chriit, ci;- omnc tulifii pundiiK.) Now 1 know as this is the firli great ditty, fo Idolatry or takir^ fomcthing for our Hsppim fs inftcad of God, is the firll '^rcat damning fin (as Infidelity is the fecond, &c.j Now as fomc make their honourj:iudfometheir,pvofirs,audrome their fleflily delights to be their Idol and hap- pinefs, fo when I fearch my heart, I tinde my deiires after the knowledge of Truth lb ilroDg, and my delight in it fo great, that i am morcjealcus of my heair in that point, then ill any one in the world 5 left l (hould prefer fuch truths before the God of Truth, and^leif //i.///7f fnarc of deliring too much knowledge fliould prove mine, and Icfl I neg.e^ God and my delight in him, by my over- bulie- fearch after Tiuth, and too much delight III it. Which I the rariicr difclofe^ to give warning to ail Students to take heed of this fnare, and left when they have overtuined other Idolsi they Hiould be over- turned by this iait Idol thcmfclves. Ceuainly to fome feaiching Hudious men, it is no Imall nor contemptible temptation. So that Sir, when you arc pU.ifed to dcfcribe me as ot excellent abiltie5,bijt a Sophjfter, and noca loverof Truth, if I know myfelf, vou have quite mill it 3 and all is clean contrary, ^■/:^.my abilities but mtan, but my love ©t Tiuch too gteaf, and daagerouflv too great, by this my corruptioii ypuhave advantage to win mc, it 1 could difcern the Tr wth wich you.
SECT.
Infants Church- memherjhif And Baftifm, 257
SECT. viir.
I
N your eighth Scdion, you afliulc my words , whlcfiyoufiy have a nunlfefl tin- ftureofieviUng andlktle reafon. What are the rf riling exprcflions ? why, mycr.L lin-^ Antinomians, Socinians, Sec. Scds. And is that an untru-s or an unfit cxprelii- on ? BuL about InJepcndents you deal with mo as you ufe ; you fay [Lctrealonbe heard / why (laould men be any moic called a Sed , for denying th.u it is of Divine appointment , that a Synpd of many Churches rtiould hive power to excommunicjte then others called Presbyterians for holding it] I anfrtf. Let common honcfty be heard too.
Why fliould fo notoriout an untruth befo infjnuated by a preacher of Truth ? a$ If I called all Independents a Sed, or any Independents for that reafcn , becmfe they deny the power of Excommunication to Synods ? When as I fpeak of none but Scpa- ratills , and of no Independents but thole only that are Sepiratifts , and as they hold the doSrinc of popular Church .government. Sir, I meet with many lndep?ndenrs (commonly fo called^ that would not have the people govern by vote ; therefore did I diftln^^uilh fuch from others, and far am I from vilifying or reproaching them , bu: reverence and love them as Bietlircn. My words of them are only thefe [T/; ?; Inde- pendency which gives the people to govern by vote, is the fame thing In another name] *i^ as Separatifm. Could I plainlier limit my fpcech to thofe only that give the people to govern by vote? Do I fpeak of any other at all ? And yet do you come in with an infinuatlon, as if I caliedeitherail Independents* Sed, or any of them, becaufcof their denying Synodicai Excommunication? yaa to a Synod of many Churches? That confcicnce that will fuffer you to deal thus, doth certainly leak^ or hath aHiw la it.
2. And doth this infinuation cfpcctally befeem you , who have twice told me In conference , that Independents if they make a party, are Hereticks ? This is not f ilr dealing.
And for your next Queftion^ Why Anabaptifts ihould be called a Seft ? [ anfwcr bccaufe they do make parties, and feparate from the Church in the maintainin.^ of an error, 1 would you had Cyprians little Traftate ic Vn'itatc Ecclcfi.t wricten in your heart, and as it would help you to anCwer this Qjeftion your felf , fo it would recover you to be a blcfllng to th: poor Church of Chriit^ too mach already torn by Scds and diffcntion, andcaliing for your companion and help, rather then your mercilefs widening of her rents and wounds. You again talk o^ my ralh and hafty reckoning you among Heretick$,and I again ttll you thjt you mift.ike me I did not fo. Or if you will needs face me do>vn th.u I did, as better knowing my meaning th;n my lelf then do I here recan: ic, and unfay it agiin to make you fitisfaftion, I confefs I would hive men take heed whom they call Hereticks , it being no fmail fin and danecr to be fuch-
You ajaJn complain that you cannot get my Arguments j Why, did you not hear them in our difpute ? But to fatisfie your importunity, here you have them, and much
g ood
, 5 H Fldin Scripture prcof of
gt>oc! may they doyoujand O that I might bcfo happy in them,as that ycu might there- by DC convinced and icd.iimcd.if not from your error, yet at Icaft f:om your dividing 2cal for the propagation of it. You (ay, I was willing to blatt your reputation. But I kavc more truly told you my ends I could heartily with you and my Itif thar vidory ever ourpride, which might caufc as to be lefs tender of our reputation then wc ate. [ have told you in my Preface the untruth of your imagination [that my oppofuion to you took oft my neighbours from being your auditors,] And I have told you in thcfe- cond part of this book, what judgements of God I mcani bcfides thole in iVfjv-E;?^- land. I could name you multitudes more if I thought tit. 1 had reference to fome of their fricndj and mine that upon the change of their judgements have turned to moft notorious wicked lives, and run on in their errors till ihcy denied Chrift and the truth of Scripture, and made them but a fcorn. I had reference alfo tofoinc friends of ou'S, that i: is not fit to name to you^ that on their death bed have cried out of ihcfe opini- ons, as that which was a great caufe of their ruine.' Where doth yopr opinion dwell a- lone^ without other errors ? ycH know that even thofe in thefe countries round about, teachers and private perfons that are Rebaptized , do few of them continue of your minde,but moft turn Arminians,and many far worfe.Is it not fo with twenty for one ? and is not this a vifible judgement ? For thoic in Na: • En^b/id , lamrefolved not to fliut up my eyes againft the convincing light of extiaordinary providences, whether miracles or wonders. I doabhor your ftorics of the Earl of H'7/i«t/f daughter, and DuaflunCj and the reft (not like to thefe in New England) whereby you feck to c^arken and difgrace the wondrous works and teftimoniesof God. lake heed how yoa difpa- rage and fpeakcontcmptuoufly of thofe works which God commandeth his people te keep in remembrance. This is fomewhat worfe then taking his name in v.iin. What judgements have befaln the undei valuers of Gods woiks ' and how jealous hath he al. wayesbeen in that point ? Molt that will not be conrincedby won-Jers of ju gemcnt^ hive pcrillied by Judgement.l believe Chrift to be the Son ot God for his miraclcjjYet would I hinder none from trying dodrlncby the Scriptures, nor fet up any other rule, as I have before told you. Nor do well relilh your exception againft that one ftory in theBook,entituled,Gods judgement onSabbath-breakers,as being jealous that ith from no good-will to cur dodrinc of the morality of the Chriftian Sabbath : Lut your ar- cuirg is againft the fcope of the bock, though you except but againft one thing for the verity; as alfo againft Dr. Bcj/^x Theater, and the Fathers frequent making ufcof fuck providenccSj and agamft all other that fo obftivethem j 1 akehced o{ I'lwr.whs fin.
What you fpeak whether Mrs. Hiilchinfun and Mrs.DjC^- were Anabaptifts, I anfwer, I.I knew divers of their company that were. -.And 1 intended that paflage only againft the Antinomifts,apainft whom Gcd plainly (pake by them j And agaii.ft whom! con. fefs my xtal is far "erearer then againft Anabaptifts. 1 conceive Antinomianilm the moft dangerous pTaufible error that ever invaded the Chuch, insinuating them- felvcs into well-meaning minds under a falfc pretence of advancing Chrift and free Grace ; ar.d if you would have given me leave, I had fpcnt this time againft it, which I amnosv by you compelled to fpend againft Anabaptifts. For any that macie ufeof my name and word> in the Pnluitjl apprcvt no- of it,as thinkini; my name ur.ti: matter for a Pulpit.difcouife. And v-heic you again think I intended chiefly to make you odious, I agam tell ycu.it wai only to make >our crro s ociiciistu iny hiendij md again 1 wilh you Icfs foliciteus for your honour. For what you fay of my dofttine of Juftification, I have anfwered before. .
SECT.
Infafits church' wemberjhip and Baptifm. j J9
SECT. IX.
_ 'T^O your ninth SedlonJ know fome interpreters expound it of Dodrine; every faire J. teacher is not a Herctick^nor the f.ilfe Prophet that Chrift aims at.I think thefe muft fubverc the very foundation. I dare nor fjy that Vchg'Ui or Aiminius were fuch(thougK I like not iheii- dodrincj For ought I know, ihcy may be both with Chrift. And fo I fay of many more whom the Fathers called Hcietick.vjand fo of every honeft Anabaptift. To what elfe you here I'ay, I have anfweicd it fully before. Where you fay,that [in my Lftgick then falfc dodrinc and falfe prophets are the fame] I anfwer,that it is but your fidion. Inmy Logick, a falfe prophet and a teacher of falfe dodrine are the fame ; To make the form and fubjcd.as you fay,the fame, may well feem falfe dodrlne in Logick. You ask [Are the whJ:enefsand the thing white, the heat and thing hot,alI one> or doth a man that knows hot water by heat, cpld water by ice cold, knovt Ucin per idem ? '] Anfwer. Did 1 ever think to have found you at this pafs in your Logick too i Can you know the fuppofitum,evcn the Subjed and Accident by that Accident alone ? Can you know both that it is in water, and that it is cold by the cold ? or that it is cold water rather then cold milk or whey. when other things are cold as wcllas wate!?And can you know it is both water and hot by the meat heat.when other things may be hot as well as water ? Doth not he go about to prove idem per idem, who will prove tiiis water is cold bec^ufc it is cold ? or this wall white^becaufe it is whire ? Or if he will prove alfo that ic is a wall becaufe ic ii^hi e, he will taend the matter fairly. Chrift never intended to prove (or teach hi: followers how to prove)thai the falfe prophets were men^nor yet that they were prophcts^but that they wcicjalfe prophet* And it it not 'dem per id.m to prove thattheyarc/.i/,'c teach rs, becaufe they /C.7C/7 />/,'/)' ^ that is, rh.y are falL teachers, be- caufe they arc falfe teachers. I leave vjU'- Logick and mine to better Judgements, And if you confidered hut how the ApoiUes ever afiir this , wt.a ;hey write of Here- ticks and fallc teachers^do itiil iccn: ihrm of wickja lives, you might fee this In part expounded I know thero muft be ( ine fair lliewb whkh are the lheep>; cloithing, but ftill the men are raving wolvjs.- Aiiddoih [a lavcning wolfj ligni'tle fitljer the er- ror of dodrine, or -he viticufnefs ot cheir nature ' And fj I may lay ot the fruit of a thorn or a thiftle But for the Application, if you would not needs force my words to a fenfe I never intended , we Ihonld not be at luch odds : For b; it known to you and all men bv thefe prefcnts that 1 tak,' not a mecr Anabaptift for a Hcreticb iiu nor '.iofc that 1^ old greater errors then 'hey, except they aUo divide and rent ;he Chu:cb. I like Mr. l^.'Tjes his defcription of aHeretick in his Sermon againft Hertfies. Scriprure and Fathers place very much of the nature of Herelic in Schifm andleparation ; And f.) do the moft accu-ate of our Moderns, as Voffiusy GJCd^er, &c. Though cuftonvc had ilmort prevailed to place it only in an erroneous opinion, or cbltinacy in that o. pinion BuUirgcr's is this, Hxrcitcimquum dico, intelljgo Scfl.zrum uutlmcin qui Ec- iiefi-m^'cindit^ tjui falfa &ey>»>icj dofi,im pcnmaci e- fc^gu umtatcm llcLU'fh<infr,>:• %erc& turbafc. Diaiog- cont. Catabaft. page 24. When I q^k of a Hctetick , I mean
Li , an
26o Plain Scripture fro»f ef
an author of SeSs who rendeththc Church, who pertinacioiifly procccJeth by falfc and erroneous doftrinc to infi inge and trouble the unity of the Church. I: is not much out of the way which yiguciim finllltut.p.i iij faith v»as the definition of many then, vii^ Hxrcticui c(l qui YcliCl.ifidi!& EccUjix dij{liin.i, alicufm tcrapora'is cowmoJi gratia. cb" mxximc g'nyia, falftn & nivjs sPininncs ggnit vclfequitu/y tu vcl fic ninncal ab E'-ckfi.i div Itii. Yet 1 know fomc will flitter tht-mfclves with this, that while they ci- ther into Churches, themfclves, It is nn forfjkiag the Church \ if thfy leave one Church, they go to, or gather another ; To whom I will now fay no more ^ but what TcrtuUi.m(ii\\i oi\.hz M.vicionites (jdv.cy/.M.ricifl>i./.'^.ca.<j-) Hal}Ctf/a/,e & il/ud Ec elefias, fed /u.zjy turn [oflcras quani adultcras j quantm fi cotfumrequiras^ fuCiHui A' pofliUicum invcma-s qriam Apo^olutm ; Marcioncfciluci cvtiditorc vcl aii]uo de Afarcionii tx amine. FJciunifavoi & vcfpx', faciunt Ecclcpas & Mvctomiie. 1 he wafps alfo make Combs, anfi the Marcionltes alfo make Churches.
For my Qucftion which you make an afhrtnationi you put a filfc fenfe of your own upon it, and then call me Dog for it, and fay [like a right Englilh Maftivc, I fiy In the nee &c.^ 1 he Qiieftion me thinks carrieth my meaning very plainly with it. It is neither onntno dubitanii^ ^ nor yet dcmwinamis : but only fpeak* what a rarl^ it is according to my reading j and yet becaufe I will not therefore affirnoitrare (for a focijty of Anabaptiits to end well) much Icfs that never fudi a thing was, there, fore I provoke thrm to look over their own Intelligence j As if I had faid in all my reading it is a rarity j fee whether it be not fo in yours. IfaPhyfitian ask, How many lympa-Mcs have you known cured, or where have you known one well cu- red ? 1 he Qiitfticn iniiir.atcs the rarity of It «n the enquirers obfervation , but not a determination th It never fuch a thing was , or that it is a rarity In every mans obfervation. I have fcen necr a dozen cured within thefc few weeks, and yet Ftenut de flitibits Cikhy he neverfuwa confirmed one cured, and others generally make Ic a rarity. And if my obfeivation fail not, yet aqueftion is not capable of being falfe ; bHt brcaufe you fay [you may boldly fay, that I here play the Devils part with awitnci'i] truly 5ir, mydelireor intent is not to make them feem one jot worfe then thiyare, but only to cbferve the ftrange hand of Godupon tbcm in giving them up fo ufually to molt wicked opinions or converfations j and agalnfi this judgement I dare not ("hut mine eyes, nor harden my heart. Sure I am the good lives of the Par- liaments friends, wa.' the grcatcft means to increafe their party j and it was an Ar- gument that many a thf)u(;ind ventured their lives and fouls upon ; Tbey thoughc fureGod would not give up the generality of the godly , except here and there one, to be fo far deceived, as to b^on the wrong (ide In ib weighty a cafe; and in the meantime give the generality of the mcil deboift . to know the truth. And the Argument is probable too in the prcfcnt cafe. But let us hear In all your reading where you can name one Society that ended well ; and fo prove mc to play the pan of a Dog or a Devil : All lies upon the proof, i. You inllance in Cy;n/^«, thcHc- metobaptifts and the Picards, which you well know were no Anabaptiih : for we take words accoi ding to 1 heir common ufe. Nay what a ji ft it is that youfometimes com- p'ain of f}'/7(7iJ« and his brethren as the fiilt or gre.itcll introducers of Infant-bap- tifm. decreeing for it in a Ci,uncellj and yet now bring them in for Ansbaptifts? Ycur next inftance you have more confidence in, and therefore uOier it with a vaunt [that 1 may learn to order my pen better hereafter > I may take notice that befidcs the probability that Bercfrgirius oppofed the Baptizing of little enesj notwiltanding what Mr. Mai (hall alledgeth , it Is more then probable by Bernards 204. Epiliic, his.. 6(>. fern* on Cam. Petrus Cluf?iactnjishh Epifiie s^^inii Peter de Bruit , and Hen/idis
Ecl{knus :■
In f Ants church' mcmherfhif and Baptifm, 261
Eclihcrttufe/moH.7. adv. Cath, that there were many hundreds of years finccja very great number of godly Societies that diddciiy Infant baprifiTij e>c 3 1 anfwcr, if 1 learn by this youi- example to order my pen, it will be a fearfull ordering ; vir^. To jnyn wit^ flinderous I ap<fts againft godly Reformers in defaming them contrary tothtirown confi ffions, yea and the acknowledgement of the moft inpenuous of their adverfarles, I have told you my thoughts ot this dealing before. You that dare, I fay dave,3g3in and again obtrude fuch a chcac upon poor ignorant people that cannot gain- fay you^ have a cjnfcience fo ventercus fora caule To bad, as 1 dare not follow you, nor learn by this example lo order my pen, except by taking warning by your dolefull mifcarriage. Foif Bccngui/ftt, as he was but one man and no fociety, fo wt mult take it for a flinder of him, till you bring bet cr proof.and anfwer what M,-.Ma;(l} U an J Dr. vfljcr fay agalnft it. 1 he world may now fee what a caufc you put fuch a face upon, when i. You can- not bring the lealt proof for ought yet 1 hear h om youj fo mach as, of one man ('much Jefs Societies i and le.:ft of aW, godly Societies ) that did once oppofe or deny Infant- biptifm from the Apcftles da)es till abou- /,«//;? .rttme : i. And yet acknowledge that Infant- baptifm hath been ufcd ii\ the Church lincc Cy^'rtuns time at ieaft, if noc Tcriuf' luns (as 1 have proved before: ) And d.d no body contradid it for fo many hundicd year? and yet is it an iwnovation ? you flillmifrcport my mteirogation for an af- firmation. I do but provoke you and others to cnqaire whchcr they u'.ually have nof proved wicked. And i again p:ovoke you to prove the contrary: for certainly you fcem to )Meld up thiir credic as loft, when you cannot bring one word of tolerable proof to the contrary, out of all youi reading. I have told you the reports of the godlielt Di- vines then living of them, who methinks when they concurr founanimci fly, maybe belcevedinHiftory. ¥ot Alftcdiui, you know he concurrs with the rcfl, though be acknowledge them their rtiecps clothing ( vcftem bona vita ) and no more ; adjoyn- ing them to Pelagians and Novatians^ and concluding that they are not to be received J And no doubt they, ma.y of them, profefs godlinefs, even thofe that now preach down the godhc A of Chrilt. And A^flcdi u in the fame place expounds Matj.vf the fruits of a» evil life.
¥or C^ijjojuier, i. He fpcaks of fome appearance or profeflion of godllnefsj which none denies :hem 3 no doubi they are moit prof^ffors , and godlywords are in their fiffuingj , but v< ha: is that to the lives of the Societies, and to [ho end? ^. Ca(fandct in all likelihood never faw a fociety of them in his lifei nor perhaps one Anabaptift. For he lived at Cotraia Agyipptna among the Papifts, where Anotapriih wt'* nor ; and beiides he was a man for long tinrie of foex<;eedlog weak and coufumed a body, and troubled with the w4/////Vi5 , andalfoot a folitary dilpafKion , that he lived continu- ally as in a Cell j fo that when the Hmperorfent to three Princes to fend him to him, he could noc flir towards him {isGrotiuiantc C^pud. confidt.) And Cilvin faith he was ab homlnum confiietndmc rcmetui i &cx (oUtHdmcAu^^. aav contvaxcrat j and that he was lamia^ vcl krva, t juo antrg, iibi haSlmiu bane latuUinm cxtrah.udui i quod Colonize tot annos in ilcrquilin'iofuo ad hunc ufj^ d:. m {niquit) jacuii^Scc. Kcfpenf, adBtldvin. InTraHat.rhcolog, Page 508. And how was C^/f^»^f>- l-kc then to know the Societies of Anabaptills ? j. And C^/fiwt/tv could not fcethcendtng of any So- ciety of them , feeing they were then bu: new fprung up in his age ; thofe being the firfl , for ought I yet hear , that the world ever knew. 4 And beiides he was a man thacberK all his l^udiesto^reconciliation , and therefore fpoke the beft>f all parties, that be might diipleafe none. y. Yet being a Faptit, be went about by cxcufing the Anabaptilts to lay the blame on the Doarirre of Liith!r, arid by marching Other Sods with ihcm , to kvdl the ProtelUnts ; as you may fee In his confult. jiftic. 8. de
LI a fact.
262 Plain Scripture pr0of »f
facr. Long! (firHc h ic ProitUxnKcs ab iiifivcrf all E.cc'cfir int' Ik flu, immh vch acommuni fcnfu rcctjjrrunt^ &c. J^HaprapUrhiC a/or oMfjuiif rtfcUcJidHs efiy ut qui primtu Ana^ bipujljjHin aroii occfioacm dcdciU : cum enim Luihaus afjcrcrct fjt'ius cjjc noN b^ptir^e inf.wtciy fivcrum ^t C9i noncndcic, iiij iiiietd/iclnderet me b.ipilxin parvulusy idii vcrc iUo$ credo c : lUi contra hum in modnm ratiocinaii funtf Atqui manifcfium i(l cos noa c/cdcrc^Hov. I'liUt iz^iiui bjpt'XJndi.
We fee then what 3/)-. 7 'j witnelfesare, both for the Antiquiy and Piety of thffc men. I liavcl'uvebiou^hc b. iter proof rt the An'iqiiity of i'-fia-baptlfmc, and yet moiccoulti do. 0//gfA' both in/.i*. 5. incpi(i.ad Rom. and en Lr w/. is cited already by Mr-Mijii^U' LAclahtUts '\a lib ^. inp.itiit. ( :ii BiiUingt, c'ltcshwn) i>}^u'l ^ bapti/mnm locoLt'Cimcifiofis v:n':^e^ quo congicgarcntur ad fidcm & E: ..'e/iam ar^n y gcntcu And I finde hioi fay if.g,/;/i 4.f. i J M quem..d:. cdinn Judteos (nicepta c'lrcumcfmi: Jlc e i,w; gentes baptij^no^id cjl,pniijici lorii profufionc filvaret. And he feems to refer to J nfint.baptifm, when he faiih, ^uodtum fit cumhomo calcfli lavdcybpunficatusy cxportit i/ifAntixi/,, cum emm (abe^Scc. In(lit. lib.7. c.j. Ukromc ptoveth Iiifrnt-baptifm at large ad Let.& ad- verf Pclagianos. So doth AiilUn contra Dunatiftji^ & .;d ^itrceUin. & yetilun. Epifcop. AfaEpiji 90. inter cm quxfunt in opcribm Angultrnt, J^iticunj^ ncgat parvulos per Bap. tifmtiHt Chri[li a peiduione libeya.i & falutcmpcrcipcre tetcrnanii mnhcma fit. Fugcnnus dc fide ad Petyum : Firmiffune trnc & nuUatcnut dub'nes, purvtt'.Ut qui ncc propria volim- tale credere^ nee poenitcntiam pro peccato, quod oyiginalite, trabunt^ agcrc pofjhili facr a- mentum Fidci quod eft fanflutn bapiifma/}Ha.md:u rationn torum alas capax c^c lion poteft^ fufkcrc ad faiuteni- Pontifu PauHniu (tnqnit Rbenanui in lib, Tertull. dr Co.ona mi' liiii ) bafiifmim fic dcfcribic (zs you may finde In his Poems in Gryncl Onbodoxegra- fhia. )
Inde parens facr 0 ducit defunte facer dos Infantes nivcos corporeycordeibabitu^ &c*
And it Is evident that they baptized Infants even in anclenteft Churches , in that they both judged them ordinarily faved, and fo to be viGbly of the Church ; and called Baptifm ini:iaiion j and affixed it to all Church-mcmberSo For TcrUiUian maketh it an argument to prove we are of one Churchy becaufe wc had cidcm bvM.if.icrtimenta j de virg.ve'and. page izi. capi. edit.Pame!. which cxduncs th"fe rhat had not that Sacra- ment. But the ordinary falvation of Infants they ordinarily aflcrt (it were enJlefs to cite, them J And of thole without the Church, ihey had very bird thoughts j Therefore tcf' tuU. in carmnedejudiciodommii brings ihemin among tht other mifcrable ones ac judgement^ faying,
Befanfli^ fenes anmis vivcmibus afianiy lafautimj^ gmcns rejonat vagitibus orbu, &c.
That is faith Pamellui , not as then in an Infant age , but thofe that were In- fants on earth. And if LaUantiits call them tencras atj^ mnoceJiics anim.is, qua maximc efl tetas parenttbus dulciory&c. ^//2//«/.lib.i.C3p.ii Sure then he though: no: that they were to be excluded the vilible Church, or that it was an age th.it Chnft would hate or rejea. And lijiidln IMirtyr lay that the Chriliim Religion fuifereth not men to cxpofe their Infants ( nofira vero doSlrina non finit qucnqunm cfj'c molcfium'nitt injuriitm, uc nc infantes quidemfoi putat exponere. Apolog.z. Page 19*. edit Gclcn. ) then fuicthty tboueht it nefoi to exclude thera out of the vilible Church of Chrilt. For the Anci.
^ ' entcft.
Infants Church- fnemlfcrjlip and B aptifm. 2 6 J
emeft and pureftF?.'^hcrs were far from M-.Ts judgement [chat his a mercy to In-i fantstobeouc oftheridble Church] They rather judged all \f ithouc to be without faivJtion. For all Chriftians and onely Chrlftlans a:c vifible members of the Church (jviftbllheiffon v/fa) and only Chiiftiius (C^y ihey) are laved (except ClaKcns AlcxMd. and irmc few that fay Pajans are fav( d.) Y. t further let us hear fome more ofthe AncJeiK' CJUciUim Mdrvitamnt (utvulgo) vclpotiu^ Canbagtmnjc (^utvoc) Anathema dix u . ■cgantibus mfantcs Baptism m rem (fioncm oyi^inalU pcccati ; & fubjim- git jfta canonc z. J^uou'wm nen Miter inteS'goMim eft quod ait Apofio/us, Per unum bo- minem pcecatum intravit in r/.Hfidumy & fo pcccatuvi Mors, 8cc. nift qucmadwodum Ecclefta Catholica ubijj diffufa (emper intaUcxn 5 Propter banc mm ngiUam fdci & Parvuii qui nibilpcccatorum'tnjemttipfisadhuccommhtcYcpotueY lint, idco in pcccatorum rcmiffioncm vcracitcr b.ifti%antur ^ ut in en regcneratione muftdetur, quod gcncratione traxcrunt.
Caleftiui the Pcligian was forced alfo to confiefs this (which he might better have de- nied then Mr. T. now can do, if there had been any ground for a denial) vi\. I/f [antes Bapti^^iiinremiffioncm pcccatorum%tc\xnA\im. regulamUniverfalis icc\^(ix& Secundum Evangeliifententiam: ut Augujtin. fcribitU. z. contra Fclag.& Cx[cfi,qui eft dc pcccato origin* cz'f.^.Porro Auguft, operis imperfcCii Cont.Juli.H.i.ap. ^9. ait: fi Veum colk in quo/peravu &fperatccclefia primitiverumt qute confcripta eft in ctelu j cur roncrcdis Bapti-^indos parvuhs, cruide potcflatetcncbrarum ? &c. Et idem Aiigufi. ferm. lo.dcvnbis Apofl.Accommodat iUis ecclefm aliorum pedes ut veniaat, aliorum cor ut cied.mt,alioYum Unguam ut confitcantur, quoniam quod <c^rifunt alio peccante prag/avm. tur J ftc cum li fam funt, alio pro eis conftcntc (alvantur. Nemo ergo vabis fufurrct do£ld' nas tilienas. Hoc Ecclefii fcmper h^ibuit, fcmpcr tcnuit. Hoc a major um fide accept 1 1, hoc ufj^ in finem perfevcrantcr cuftodu. ^uoniam non opu* eft f/inU mcdicus, fcd<tgrotan.tibu4> ^uid nccc^urium crzp habct la fans Chii^um, ft non 4tgiotat ? fifanut eft, quarc per cos qui eum diligant mcdicwnqu^erit ? fiquando poitantur Infantes, dicuntur omnino nullum pro- paginii habere peccntum, & vcniunt ad Chriftum i cur non en dicitur in Ecclefta qui cos apporunt, Aufcrtc hinc innocentes iftos ? non eft opusfnms med.'Cus ; fed male habcntibus : tionvcnit Chit ftus vocarcjufios, fed pcccateres. Nunquamd:^ume[},fedncc aliqmdo df- cetuy.
And that 0/7gf« (whoelfcwhere affirms that the Church received Infant- baptifm ffomthe Apoftles^ did acknowledge it as unqucftioned then, appears in that being a leader and Patron of the Vciigian cno: (after waidfo called) he jives this rcafon of theic Baptifmjthat it was to wafh away thofe lins which that loul was guilty of while it was in fome other body ( according to Pyhagorashnck') before it came into that^ zs Hie , Kowc affirms of him \\\D'iabg.adTiCi\. PelagAi-l-comlufione. Reticius Epifcepus Angufto- dunenfts qui Qonft.mtim MM mpo; e vixit^ait-^Hanc igitu,- c(fk principalem in Ecclefta inditl'* gc«fi(JW, nemincm preterit, {loquitur dc baptifmo") inqitaantiqui criminis omne fofrdus cxponimus,8(.c. Cit.uur abAugNft.li. cont.JuUan.c^p.i-& ib.i, ultimi opcyis cont. ^uU- nn.cap.$i.p,;g.6i^6:Jh^ Cimt Auftin (iitk (j;b ^.ad Bonifac- cont.z. Pelagii epift.cap, 8.) Abfit ntaliq.iarulo fides C Mjolica dubilavcrit uf iin: mkentts trahcrc?tt originale pec- catum qnod Renafcjndu deluv-ient. So th.t in his judgement the Church never doubt- ed of Infant- Baptifm anji' more then of Original (in j & inUb,^, dc peccmer.& re* niff.cap 6.(i^ 7. He nunlioneth it as the I'tre icks novelty , tha: Infants were not to be baptized for Rcmiflion oMin, bat that they might be fandified in Chrift : buc their Baptifme it felt they durii not deny. - .
Hicrome lib.-^.cont.FeLig. laitfi, J^ui pa, vulus eft. parentu in baptifmo vinculo folvit ur^ Ac no me pules hxYCcicofcafu bocinicllig:ie^bcatus Aiarlyr Cyprianus^ drc. And fo he rc-
11 S hcarfeth.
2^4 P lain Scripture f roof ef
btarfeth C>;'iij»: words, which arc thefcj as you may findc them, lib- i.tffi. ad Tidum.
Si a B-tptifhiO alfj a gratu ncmn piohibdui- : quanlo mjgu p; ohibdi hon debet Infans Qui
r cccmnHui nihil peccuvit^ nfir^uodfecuhdii-n Ad.im cjyn.i[itcr natuSf coiHigiumthoytis tJitiquti prima nativitate conu-jxit ? qui cd remiff.im pcccatorum accipicndam hoc
ipfbfuil'HS accrdUf quod iBr.cmiilurt.ir, non propru, fed aicnapcccata -^ which tefti.
monyof C),'?);a^( v»ith thofc befoie cited cu: of 0 !fcn, Tcrtiilluir^ houius, Jufli/:) I value more then many latter, ycr I addc the latter, bccaufc Au(h/j was likcr to knew
the tr-uth of the Primitive Churches pradice then Mr T. And W;</?« faith, T.io.J^ vcib.Apoll.S('m. 14 Bapu\ihd'ii c(fc pj<vu.'os retro dtibit.it y qna;:do ncc hific iUi dubuatit qui ex parte cliqud. contr«dtcu7it And in diveis places he tels us that t he Pdog'am thcm- fclvesduiftnot deny ir, ut com, JuIuk. U l>c i. S^tta^ quifiuAm} 0^, um vos dixcrit neg:tfep.i>vulos B,ipti':{ariopoitcie ? Noncoi dieitisvQnd:bc;c bnptix^iyty led pro magni. tudiacfapicntiavcfirxres n.imbihs dxitif, &c. Sicii. i7. dcp(c.or:g tl m ncque paf» vulancgant baptifmifacramefi;nm, mque dbfquc red^mptione Ch,ifli Mquibusregna cet- lorumpiomiltunt. Et Epijl. ^^. ad Hilar. Coa^^iS e(l confilcri proptey b.'pti'^idosp.r/: vu-lesy &c. And he cites Pt/.j^i^i own words thus {dcpcc.or'f^.c.^i. & ti.d<'gra. tia tini(li c. 5 a J BJptifmJ unnm ieuemuSy quod iifdem facrnr/iemi verbis ifi irifantibus^ quibus eliam ininajorihus^ d civms rjfe celcbraadum, Et l.de fcc.orig.c. ig. j^uis iHe ttm impius efl Qnquit ipfc Pchgius) qui eiijufl bet ttttitit farvulo interdicat communem buPiani generis redcn-ptieaem f And A ujli>2 (sizh Epifl. ij, ad Volitf. l- Confuetudi rr.atru Eccle[ne in b.ipli\t:!idis parvu'u nequjquamjperrenda e(i, nHjue omunffuperftua de^ putandHinecomnineeYcdojdintfiApuflolicaffettrait'.o: All that I have cited out of Aiilii}2, wkh abundance mojc, you may findein ^<;^«5hisPf/j^<<«iHiftory, and his Jhcfes de Pttdopapt.
Yea itfccmsthe Heathens by the light of nature difcerned both Infants corrup- tion , and Gods re-acctpting them. Of the former fee Dn TlejJiS verity of Chriftian Hel.c 17. Of the latter, I///«i Giraldus Syntitgm. 17. dc d/is gentium. Hiewj out of Plato^ PcrfiuSyPhutiiSjScz. that the Gentiles had Rices for the expiation of Infants. And that Baptifm fuccecded Citcumcifion, and the Jews Bipcifm prefigured cu. fpirituall wafhing, and fo our Bapiilm ; fee Macayius mho</>it. 5 ^.end Hnm. 47. And rhe moft ancient of the Fathers infift much on the purity, innocenry, mcckncfs, <i>e. of In- fantSj as being fuch to whom all thar will be faved muil become like : and theicfore they fure judged them not to be all caft or kept uHt of the vifibk Church j fee Dorotkeus in Gryrei Orthodox agraphia J pag. a 14- find Clemem Alexandnn. Padagrg. lib. 1. cap. y,and 6.
He that would' have more tcfllmonies yet of the Fatheri Judgement for fnfant- baptifm, efpecially AuflinSy may read enough in Pifcatorim, and Cyijpines Bibliothcca e Patribus.o. 1 1 f,i 16,1 17,1 18, 1 19,110 ^c^c. And of theCouncel of Canh.igcs tcftimo- ry, fee more in Bibliothcca Patrkm (by de la Eigne) To. i ./><!. 87. And in the third Bibli. othcca,\iz. SixtiSenenfs Biblioth. SanQa,yQumiy Haic (lib. p.p^^.JM- ) 'hat when gF«//4« brought Chyyfofiomcs ttftimonyagainlt Infants original fin, Au^in tels him, that Chryfufiome maintains the Baptifm of Infants for the remiffion of finne, or clfc he fbould goagainfl innocentius.CypriaH^Bafi'.yCreg.lia^an'^cnyAmbrofe j but he goes with them in this.
See moie of this alfo in Schlufburgius his Epiftle before his lib. 1 1. againft Anabaptifts, and the whole Book; As alfo wigaadus de Anabapcifmo, Chytr^'
MiMC.
Now do but compare all thefe Tcftimonics with thofc which Mr.T. brings for the Antiquity of Anabaptifm. Bernard was a Popilh Abbot of latter times (though a
pious
Infants Church-member jhif And Bajfti[m, 2 65
pious man *, ) and I have lliewed the falfnefs of his report , and the ground of his miftake. The like may be faid ofthe reft. How fierce and llandcrous,and foul mouth'd a Papift Pet. Cluniacc?ifisvi 3iS J is apparent, not only in the Book cited by A/^.r. but iKotnhisNucfeiiidcfacnficioM'Ifet efpecially the Chapters for Tranfubftantiation, in Au£litafio BibUothcc. P.Urum Vol. i .p i lOO. &c.
And for his new witnefs EclikrtMs Sckonaugimfts ( vd Colonicufn i) i. It being the A'b<genfcs whom he terms Caibari or Pu,itans , I have proved before his repoit to befalfe. ^. He wis a Popilh Fryer , and lived but ^/wo 1169. fub FriHcruo Impe/a' tore I. as it is faid in his life, and as I finde In t.\it Epitome Btbliothccte Gefneri per Triftumy p. no. J. He telis us that Infant- baptifm hath continued from the Apoftles umz t\\\yiii i\m^ (AMitartoBibl.Patr. p.SjfJ and why will not A/. T. believe him in this as well as in the other ? 4. The fanae writing of his which faith his Advetfaries denied Infant- baptifm, doth alfo fay of them as followeth; i. That they impionfly taught, thatall aredamnedthat die before theyears of difcretion; ( At fi itaejlut f radical imptclas vctlra, viz ,^nd omna qui ante annos difcrctionU moritmtur,coadem~ tiantur &c.ib}d.p 8 55.) z. That Marriage was linfull,and continuance in it damnable, (Ncmiiicm po^e f-^lvm qui cum conjuge fua permaneat ufj.^ adfmcm : O D<e»wHcs .' nnde vobis i(ij ih^rim} page ^^41. 3. That they taught it was unlawfuil toeattitfli ; whereupon he calls them Devils again •• 4. And that all created flelh is from the De- vilj {p'ge^')i-^ f. That they deny baptizing by water , and would have men bap. tized onfy by fire. 6 That they denied the humanity of Chrlft, 7. Thatfomeof them held the fouls of men to be nothing but the apoftatc fpirlts that fell from God at the fii ft, fent into bodies. This Is the Charader that he gives of his Ad verfaries. Now cither Mr.l's Fryer Ecl^bcrtm fpeaks true or folfe. If true.then all the reft of thefe crimes may be as true, the credit of the accufation refting on the fame witnefs ; And then it is a fair cicdit that M'- T. hath got to his caufe, that a few Hereticksand Devils about 1 16a. years after Chrift, did take it up! but if the accufation befalfe ( zs I have proved thjt Ic is ) then indeed it is a teftimony fit for Mr, T'^ caufe j and no wonder if it caufe him infultingly to tell me^ that he produced ic to teach me to order my pen.
And his former witnefs (which he had from yajjltu ) ifaUfridus might well be c\\\cd Strabo 'inihi% i For i. when he denicth Infant- baptifm to have been iii former times, he fetcheth his p oof from Auftins pradice, (miftaking his age t:n years J when Mi.T. knows that it was in ufc divers hundred years before Auflimtime. And 1. he forgeth a wrong caufe of ^«,';iw dcl.iy of Baptifm. And 3. yet hcwitneffeth that In- fants are to hi Baptifcd J and brings for it , Afncana concilia & aliorum patrum documcvia qiiam'^Uuim.i. 4. In a word, either he denies that Infants were Biptizcd be- fore Cy/'/ww'i time ^ orfinceths'. If fincc, ihtnMr-T. knows that it is falfe. If be- fore, thenCy'^/'W with theCouncclofc.7;7&j^f, and 0>igc»y Jrcnttm, &c> wercliker far to know the Tru«h of faft , then St>abo that lived fo many hundred years after them, fpcaking contrary to all Antiquity. And yet if ^IZ/.T. had \ookz,page 6^1, of that ' A-idu.rr. he might have found his own witnefs, faying, That ConcUio Geruadenfimins du:i liifijm^ fiindifcimiric fu^bapiiT^t/i dcbd. & page 691. that Laurence was not biptized by dipping , h\it tiqna-.ndcfitpcr fiindttido. Andthui you fee M?*. T J ftrength from Antiquity. And , as I faid, the Fathers generally affirm Infants to be faved ; and they generally (except as before") tye falvuion to the vifible Church j and there- fore mull needs take Infants for Church- niefubcrs. Concerning this latter, hear for one, what CyP/;-!/; faith, Lb. d: itn:t^tc EcckfutEdt-Jcr.Stcphmi. page 14^15. Av:!Le YAdunKjolii d coTpoi-e, d-vi/iOuem lucli iimtas nmcapit i ab a,bore [range rarf.ut', fra&m ■
g:rmin.i(e.
2 66 PUin Scripture preef of
g rmimre non potent \ a [one pr<ec'>dc rivum, p/ttafm arefcct.Sic & EccUfia Domini hue
pcrfufa, circ* lOiUsfttu nafcmuYi iO:us laflc niitrimur, (p'ritii ejits amm.imur. — •
H*c ms Deo fcr^at j h^c filios rrgrjo quei^tncyavit jffig».it. ^tifquu eb Eic'cfidftgrrgf tus adulter* \ufig'tui\ a promiijls Eu cfi* fcparatur. Ncc pervcnict ad Cbr:(li pramu^qui YcUnqu'n Ecdc/tifn cUr.jli.A'unus cjl J p,o}h.mus eft; ho[i.} cft.H.ibere )ap)nnn poteft Dcum patrem^ qui Ecclefiam no7i hibct matron. Si pntitit cv dec quifq.inm qui cxtr.i aiCAm Koe f»}t,& qui (xlri Ecc/ifiam fori! fHcrit^cvad'l.Et f>ag( 30 e(j' M.alyr nonfotcjl^ qui in Ex- dcfiatiOHcf} i .id rt ^nnm pci vaui c non potcri /lui cafP.qine , c^natura cjl, do chnqii'itM ^ny doub: whether Cy/>^i<j;;rpc:?k chis of the vilibLunivrfjU hurch, the whole Book wHl evince It j Che fpcaks not of the Church of Ron.e^^^ the I'apilU wuvild hnvc all uaJeftand the word Church.-)
Lut I forget my intended brevity. I am fully fathfied that Af/. T. cannot fhewme any Society ^ I think not one mm ) th.it ever open their mouths a^ainft P.iptifmof Infants till abou: loo. years ago or thcre.ib 'Ut 'VNh.ch confirms me much ihat it it from the Apoftles times, or elfe tome one would have been found as an Oppofer of it | Even as I profefs ferloiifly, that i: much fatl.fitth my confciencc, that Chriftandhis Apoftles did never fhut the Infants ot beleeving 'ews f and confcquently not of bc- lecving Gentilesj from being Members of his vifible Church, in that I never findcin all the Ncw-Tcftament one word of exception arguing, murmuring, or diflatisfadion againft it , when as it cannot pofllbly be conceived but fhofe Jews who kept fuch a ftir before they would let go Circumcilion the lign of Church -memberlliip , when yet they had Baptifm, another (ign^ would undoubtedly have been ^rnuch moic fcandaliied at the unchurching of all thcic chi dren, and would much hardlier have let go that pri. vi'edgc of their Chorch-memberflup I or at leaft have raifcd fomc fcrupletbowit, which might have occafioned one word of fatisfaftion from feme one of the Apoftles j Efpccially.whenPj/// calls them Holy, and Chrift faith, Suffer them to come to me, and foibidtbcmnot ; for offuchisthe Kjngdom of God. I know nor how Mr. T. and fuch others think on thefe things -, but for my part, ihey ftick fo clofe to my ConfciencCjthae I dare not fay Chrilt would have no Infants received into his vifible Church among the number of Chriftians, when I finde he onceplaced them in the Church j ansi neither Mr. T. nor any man breathing can fliew me one word of Scripture where ever Chrift did put them oat again J and yet thefe men pretend to ftand to the determination of Scripture. 1 would this one thing were impartrally confidercd. I conclude this in the viotdsoi Pet. Murtyr (^Thef.Argent-ex,.i6 & I j.GfW.T'"-/. 3. page (//;/?/) iooijoc.com.) Chri(iiano-rum Infantes quando nafcuntur^ non minus ad Oeum pertinent quam Judttonun plii t.ntiquitus pcrtmuerunt • ideo ita bjptifmo t^ngpidiy ut lUi cricun.cidcb.intur.
Wellj Af/-. T- for all his ange-*, cannot yet name me one Society of them (outcf any good Author,) that proved not wicked. H." nexr rheicfore is fain to come to thofc in Lo;7<5fo« ; of whom the Hiftorics uf this age will i^jeak more freely to PoUerity , then is convenient for me now tofpeak to Mr.T I tfcmble and grieve in itcad of fpeaking j Alas, to look upon the face of Er.gland after all my prayerSjlabors, hazards, tears, hopes j Ah poor En^Jaid ! Oh that my head were a tountain of tears for thy fake ! I think my approaching death will be lefs grievous, tothinkthati muft go from this Landof finand mifeiy ! Do I need to tell £;?j5/.Zfl^how Anabaptifts have proved ? Surely to this Age it is in vain , whatever it may to the Ages to come, tlicy did not fee and feel what we do, and far more yet exped to do. Y^tdoth Mr^f. talk of their danper, and faith, [were it not for the mighty over-awing power of God, andthe Migiftratesjufticc they would fall on ustodeftroy us] To which I anfwer j 1 . 1 never hcardof any luch danger you were in i what have yoo
never
Infants Church- member jhip and Baptrfm. z6j
ever fuffered, and from whom ? Are you not more afraid then hurt i and afraid where no fear is ? When your Antagonifts are one after another apace turned out of houfe and home_, and feparated from their dear people, for Non.confoimity, are you yet afraid of them ? What, af aid of a profligate triend, mlAakcn for an Enemy ? andof thofe that never hurt you when you were in their power ? a. But foppofc you were in danger from the lude Vulgar j fo have I been, at leaft, as much as ever you were : But do we encourage them to it ? or would wc infringe your Liberty ? I hope you do not think that every man that difputeth againft you, would knock ycu i'th' head. When I was in the Army , thofe that fpcke againft che Migiftrates power to rcftrain fins againft the firft Table, did yet freely acknowledge the lawfulnefs of fpeaking, preaching, and dif- puting againft them. 1' ut thofe ate paft • as we grow older, we gtow wifer.
And for what you f.iy of the Anabiptifts Orthodox ConfctfioiiJ, I anfwer, i. The fame men that fubfcribe their., have many of them written other kind of Doftrine elf- vrhere. 2. We are now enquiring whether their Lives be Orthodox (as one fpcaks j ) and for their Profeflion, I lay to my friends, as Cyprian dc unit.Ecckf. pag. 42, 45. Confejjio in exordium gloiite c(i, non mcritum j.tm corona j nee pcrficit laudcmy Jed initiat dignitatem: cumqucfcnplum fit, ^ni per fever averit ufque in finew^ hie falviu crit i qukquid ante fi/icm fueritj gt.idiu eft quo ad fafiigium faint u afccnditur^ non tcrmuuu quo jameulminis fummatcncatur-^ — NoJiopcr confclforis excmpUim pereai ^ neque lnju&.L tiam, mqac infolcntiam, ncque perfidiam de coufefjoris moribm difcat. Confcfjoy c{i\ fit humilii & quietus J fu in a£lu-Juo cum difciflina modeftiiSj ut qui Chrifti Confeffor dieitiirt, ChriftHm quern confitctur imitctur. Namcumdieat, quife extoUit humiliabitur, & qui bi{miliatfecxa'tabitU'i&ipfea.Pat,eexaUatuifityquijfc in terriifcrp}t& virtm df fiatientui Dei patru humi'.iavlt , qu.nmndo poteft cxtnllcntiam diligerc, &c, ConfcQur cfi cbrifti; fed ft nonpoftcaptr Ipfum blafphemetur majcftas & dignitas Chriftl. Lingua Cbrifiumconfcffa non ptmalcdica y non turbulenta , non cenviciis df litibui pcrfi/epens aiidiatur i non contra fratrei cJ> Df' facerdotes, fo\i verba laudiSy ferpemis venena ja- culctur. Cctcrum fi culpabiiU & dctcftabills po(imodum fuerit , ft Confeffionem (nam tnala Converfationc prcdcgcrit, fi vitam fuam turpi f^editate maculctur i fi Ecclefiam denique, ubi ConftfTor fafius eft, derelinquenSj & unitatis concordiam fcindens,' fidemprimam perfidiapofteriore rautaverit , bUaini [ibi per co7ife[ftonem non poteft, quaft (it eh Qui adg'oyia prttmiumy quando ex hoc ipfo magU erevcrint merita pcenarum. It is WvU worth the Englifhing, but I have not time. And certainly mc-thinks many
in England (liould fee their faces in this glafs. Look a little further yfit
what fome of the vices then were, pag jo. in nobis vera ftc unanimitas diminuta efty ut dflargitas opcrationis infr(i6lac(i. Domos tun^ & favdosvenundabantt & tbe/auros fibi in ccclo reponentcSj diftribucnda in xfus indigentium pretia Apoflolis offcebant. At nunc depatrimenionecDcctmasdamusi &cumvenderejubeatDominus, emimiis potius ^ augemus : He doth not Uy,f^cndimus qn* Domini funt. & p. 13 . H; ftint qui fe ultra Apud temerarios cnnvcnas fine divinadifpofitionc prttficiunt^ quije propofitos fine utla. Ordinati* onis l(ge conftituunt, qui ncmine Epifcnpatum dcmtc^Epifcopi ftbi nomen alptmunttfcdcniet in pcftilentite eathed'a, pe[}es & lues fidci, ferpeniis orcfal/cntcsy & cormmpcnda veritatis ariificesy venena lethaiia Unguis peflifcris cvomcntes j quorum ferm^ ut cancer fcrpit, ^c. And [ entreat the Godly to obey what he further writes, pag.^^^^6 Stat Confejjorunt pars major & melior in fidci fu<eroborCy & in legis ac dijc/plina dominicte vcritaic i Nee ab Ecclefix pace difccdunt , qui fe in Ecclcfu gratiam confccutos dc Dei digijitiene tneminernnty&c. Op to equ'idem dileilijfimi fratrcs, (3* envfuh par iter ei^ fuadeo ut fi feri poteft nemo ex frairtbus per cat y & cnfemiemis populi corpus unum grcmis fuo
^ ni gaudcns
268 Plain Scripture jirodf $f
giudcns mater mclud.it. Si tamcn quofdjim fdnfmalum duces & dijfcntiotiis Autores , in Cdca & obftinatA dcmcatia permatientcs, vaupoiucrit adfolitth viam confiitumfalubte rC' "jocarcy catcii t.^mcfi v:/ fimplicitJte ctipti, vclcirore iuduCli, vd aliqua faUcniis aftut'm caUiditatc drccpti, a faUacia voi bqueis folvite, vagmics ijc(f:u ab crrmlbui Lbcyale iter
rcdum "jiit ccclcjlis ngnofcitc Dcui unsii eft, & Chnftm naiiSy & una Ecclcfu ejus G»
fides una, ^ pubs iu to'idam corporis unitaictn concordl-e glutim copubta i fc'indi iinitas Tion poic(i^ Ticc corpus imum dijjidio compjgmis fcpat-ari, divulfis Uecrationc vijccribus in fruflra dilcopi.
If any (hill now dare to make an ill ufe of thefe mens v'ccs , anJ fhall hereupon be fcandalizcd • and grow inco a difl.ke of Religion ic fcif, bccaufe of ih' i mifcarrjjges, I wnil J hive fuch confidcr, that they thereby give the Devil the very thing he defircch ; This is thit he aims at, and would have; to have men turn from gadlmcfs b.caufe of fcandals. Remember what Chrift faith, noctp the H'srld bccaufe of njfiticcs (be- caufc oft'.nces ufually hinder them from believing , by making them diftalle th^- truth and ways of C hrift ; ) iind tro b; to him by whor/i njf.ncc c mcib : And b'cffed is h: th it is Tiot offended in me. If you will read but Mr TomUcs his Treatife of Scandals, peihsps you may receive a Prefervative from his own hand againft the danger of his Dodrlne. Were it not too tedious , 1 would tmrfLribe fomc of thofe Anfwers which (lemens AkxM'dinus (StrottnitumVih.j.utLX t)\<t<.nd) gives to their Objcdions, who then caft in the Chriflians teeth the divetfity of *)pinion$ among them ^ and thereucon were kept from embracing the Truth. He ttls ihcm, that even among the Jews/ and the Greek I'hilofc pliers of greateft cfleem, there were n;any Scds ; and yet none of them reruftd to be Jews or Philofophcrs for that. Alfo that Chrift foretold that HcrefifS fliouid be mixt wi'.h Truth, as Tares are lowed with the Corn ; and therefore being foietold, it muil needs come to pafs. If therefore any fliall not keep thiir rf^rfft/Corc- TiantSy and (hall tranfgrel's the Confefilon that is among us, fliail wc alfo abftain from the trurh for his fake that ftocd not to his profeflion ? But as an honeft man mult be no Lyer, nor fail of any thing which he hath promifcd, although fome others do leap over or break their cgrccd Covenants : and elpecially that prof^ffion which U of the preateft things, we keep ic, and they leap over it or tranlgrtfs it. hofc are to be believed and. regarded, that firmly adhere to the Truth. And v.e may tell them for our defence, that Ihyiitians do all cure ^ though of divers opinions agreeable to thtii S.fts : And (hail any Patient that ncedethhelpj refufea Phylician, bccaufe of the Herciies in Phylick ? Neither (hould he that isfickin loul, pretend Her({ie$ againli his health and converfjon to God. Certainly, Herefies a'e for ('to manifcfi) the Appiovcd, that is, thofethat come to the Lords Dcftrine with difccn^ng, difcovcring councerfcit ccyn by the falfe imprcflicn •, or thofe that ace already approved in th- 1 ai'h, both for Doftrine and Lite. There is need therefore of fo much the greater care and providence to examine how we muft live exadly and pcrfeftly, and which is true Pitty^ and the true Woiihip of-God. tor it is evident, that by occafion of the ditficulty of Truth, arofe Qiiefti- ons ; from whence thofe that are lick of over-much felf-lovCj and areamblti us^ and vain-,gloriouj , arc the .SeA of them who have not learned, or rightly received (the ■"Iruthj but only taken to themfclves a perfwafion of knowledge. We muft therefore with the greater itudy andcaic ica.ch after that which is the Tiuth indeed; And a fweet difcovery and remcmbiance will be the conUqucnt of Labour. Becaufe of Herefies, therefore we mull endure this Labour, and not wholly give over all If there be lee before you fome fruit that is true and ripe, and other made of wax^ as if it were true; you mull not for the likencfs jbftain from both. So if there be one high-rodc,and oiher by-ways that lead to precipices or gulfs^you will not therefore forbear all^but keep
the
JnfAnts church- metnberfljtf and B aptifrf, 2 6^
the beaccn rode which is free from danger. So when fome fay one thing and fome another about Truth , you muft not therefore give it over, but the moft exaft and accurate knowledge is the more exaftly and diligently to be enquired after. So far Clemens Alexafidi-rms j wheic you may fee much more, which I cannot ftand to rehearfe.
If on the other fide, any man of knowledge think I fay too much either agalnft the Opinions or perfons, I refer them to StblulJdbuygiHi Epifile to this firft Book, where their Objcftions are fully anfwered.
And for xMr. T. if he will needs find out more Companions in his error, Sadccl will • di;e ^ him to fome, (advaf.Monaclws Biod'^g.ttcnfcs^r^.'^ h9^) who tels the Papifts that they have little rcafon to joyn the Proteftants with th^- Anabaptifts, feeing it is our Di- vines and not they that hive confuted them ; and that the Monks fhew ihemfelves A- nabaptifts in baptizing many that were before baptized in our Churches. So much for the Novelty and Schifm of the Anabaptifts.
One word more againft juftifying the wicked. If yet Mr. T. will appeal from Hi- llory to the Bnglilh Anabaptifts for the credrt of his party, ( not to fpeak any more of the Blafpheming Religion ) let him but c.^rt his eye upon the Levellers, We know the Maftersof the dtfign to be Anabaptifts of the higheft form. What the four men that lay in the Tower were, is no fecret i and what the Leaders of them in the Field were, I partly know ; Their (lain General Toniffonwis one of our Corporals j and all the profefling part of the Souldiery of my acquaintance were of the fame way : And I be- lieve Mr. T- knows what Cornet Mr. Den was. And was not the bufinefs of Munflcr inferior to their Dcfign > How fair a way were they In to have drawn to their party moft of the Army, and fo to have overtlirown both Parliament, General, Common- wealth, Religion, and all that was worth the having ? 1 hey thought themfelves, that a few dayes ( if no: houres ) more liberty would have done the deed.* And then the v\hole world might quickly have fcen in the face of Rutland what Anabaptifts are- ^,Gcorgcs Hill, and their pi intcd Pamphlets fliew whether they were for Community, or not. I« there any Kingdom on earth in that fearful plight as this would have been brought to , if they had had their way ? And becaufe Mr. T, caiinot bear plain Engiilb, let him hear Spbl7ix (Hc'df.) and let him be Oedipus j and if no body elfe be guilty, let him fuppofe we fpeak only of the Levellers. It was an old Rhyme, Omnibus rebus jam pcraflii, Nulla fides cfl in [hj^is •' Mel i/i ere, vciba LaClis : Fcl in cordc, Frms infaelis.
You hate read, it may be, the Story in Melw^lhon^ Vialefl.lib.^. which produced the faying, A'ter refpondtt xqan-fr^ fed alter hnbet cqimm. He is not alway the bcft man, that is on horle-back. 1 hey are ill principles that lead men Sacei/ma perpctrandafa- cinorJi . to get themfelves nomen Vhi'^lralc, a great name, as big as their brothers in Plaut.Curcul.ThcrapOfiiigoKoplatag'drruSy (as one reads it ) Or, as a Divine gare the Papifts, Bnmbardogladiofuhh.ifia-fl.v/'miloqucr.tcs. In this 1 have not the leaft rtfleSion upon any Righteous Defenders of their Countrcy, or Nurfing Fathers of the Chu chr much lefs do I dil^aftc the Works of God, or rcpineat his proceedings, or dtflreto eblcure the glory of any of his Providences ; having oft btheid them with admiration. God is known by the judgments which he executeth, P/I1/.9.16. And 1 would have none fliut their eyes when his hand is lifted up And I have learned to diftinguifli between Event and Duty j the Decretive and Legiflative will of God j and will love the Jewes malice never the better, becaufe of the Redemption of the world by Chrifts death, Hn!'.i./\, 1 1^ ;,'». 10. 1 J, 16. 1 like not thefe men that Hcfiod calls "^ci-jSiKOii that for Ju^itiaj tranfpo/iu lucra^put yijluia i and fay ui Lupus t/f-fopicUi
M m z emu
lyo Flain Scr/ptnre proof cf
contra ov.culam, Tu quidcm Jufluia cauf^e me fuperaj ', rp ve>o te vlnco robore dcntiuvi* According to the olU Problem,
ViC mlhi quid, qtnefo^toto jam regnM In orbc ? Die tiibui hoc verbis, liuoiUijj^ ir,bui'
Rcfp. Kon verbis tribusy a/1 una rcJpovdco voce^ -.
JUS, vcl tYan^tfitif, VIS ma'.c litterulU. J US eb" VIS apices pArvo dffcn/nim difl.vit :
JUS nu>ic munditi hubct^ VIM quiafempcr habtt,
Ptutiichln CmtUo tchus oiBrtiinui his Anfwer to tht Romans , that asked him J^n.mimrat'ioneC!UjkimobfidionepYeme-ci? R.^ortdit, Juenaturall, quo n qui mlnui fartis cfi potcnilon cedcrcjubetur. Hoc eff, non aqtn L "^ce^fcdftev ; Lancet Judiiiam rr- b:b:fe. Sic Vmbrici armati de controverftis contender nnt, ^ Ju/iiorem eos caufam h.-ibere crcdidcruntquiadverfayios fuosinte,emifJenl, inqutt Hvdfe'd. Z)t c.viit Ennirn I'b.i. AfiiiAl. PcUitur c medio fapicntijy vi ge/it/ir res. Ch y'oflomes com^\i\m Is , 'yaitas terram rcliquit, Calumniatorcs vendunt mcndnc!umdccp:e/ido fc inviccni, jur amenta con- fuwutit, non aliter quam jurando folum Dei njmurcs. Plutarch in Dionc tels us that P/j/tf lau^hc at the timorous Tytznt Dionyfi'0, cumvidjf-t ipfum aliquaudo mulus cir- cumfeptuw cujlndibui : J^od t^intum milum (inqu>!) fcafli^ ut a tam muUnlateB'tibus Tjcccffc habeas ciiftodiri ? It was Luihcrs faying, (SUidMb'.io.) cum audijfn An.ibait'.jias Ycgnum moli/i, rapere arma^wunire urbcs j^acLirc v:Cl' riam antequam dcbcllafjon, Cian'um ilium cjje acyitdcm d^emonem rcfpond.t, qui non diufn hmimbus impnfiarus: But he that pretended holinefs was a more ingenious Devil. Many Anabiptiftt now pretend to a gift c( Prophtfie. So Eyajmus faith, our Heury the Seventh had, who calling an Aftiologer before him, asketh him, Art thou an Aftiologer > the other amwers Y^aj Apd (faith the King) canli thou tell where thou (lialt be .u Eaftcr ntxr ? He anfwcred No. Why then I can tell thee(faiththe King,)Thou flialtlie in fuch a Prifon; whither he prefently fenthim , and made gcod the Prophefie. But yet I would net have you cxped to fee thefe Prophefies fulfi'led on every man that kerns in danger. What will you fjy, if men arc brought into danger only to try their honifty and then to countenance the heneft and faithfull , and difcountcnmce the r<ft ? when it Is Jr.own wh) it is, J^ii Icgii, Rcg'fve mctu pcccf-y rccufut ; and men can diffin-
guifti betwixt him that fweareth , and him that fearcth an Oath Who
Icnows but ConJIm tines defign is driving on ? Eufcbiu^ tels us, l/b.i-c.i i.devit. CO-ft, That he made an A€t, that all that profifled the Chriftian Religion, Ih old give up all their Honours and Offices, and lay down Arms ; whereupon thnfc that were finccre injhe ChriHian fairh, dcfpifing Dignities and Honours gavt up all j on the other fide, thofe that were but Chriftians m name, dcnyeH Chrift,lclt they Ihould Ufc .hvir places. Which when Confiantine faw , and bad made his dlfcovcry , he prcfcn-ly put thi; Re» folved Chriftians into their Honours and Offices again, and cxpe.lcd from about hini all the reft, faying, ifihiy ivce notfaUhfuUtflGuay ivcn to Chnfi vphom ihcj ferved- neither tviU they be faithfuli to me , nor wiU be trii(ij in defending mc and wy Go. ve-inment.
h is an ill Opinion that is a cop of forgctfulnefs , as foon as It is drunk j the man jidrunk with it, and forgets his former friends, kindred, profeffion, promifes, felf, iif q>oc God, Non babUtts^ nun ipfc color non gfeffus euuu j Nun (penes eadem qua
Infants Church-wemlferjhif and Bapt^fm,
27 1
fuit ante mmt. Buc alas, complaints are ftuitlefs ; we feel, we fear, but God only
can remedy. . „ r ■ „ t
Non eadcm ratio efl [entire ac toller c mo)bos.
Scnfus incjl cunHis : toli'tur arte tna'um, Ovtdl.^.dc Pont. Only I adde Prov- 10.25. It Is a fnare to the man who deroureth that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry.
Yet for all this I doubt no: but many a godly man is an Anabaptift ; and that it may fce faid of fome of them as it YtMo( Sihivcncl^fc'dius, Caput rcguLitum lUi dcfuiffc^ Cor bMiim nm difiijjc, ( eoenim c'ngi.o cohomftatui eft, intiuit Sjt.vihcm.Dialr'ib. de Annbapt, feB 14.) They want Regulated heads, rather then honell well, meaning hearts. Whom I can truly fay.I heartily love,and can live peaceably with them (and hare done) if they will but confcnt to a peaceable life j So far am I from ever deliing them any hurt. But little know they whither that way leads, nor where it will leave 'hrm ixccpt they return J Or if many particulars efcape , yet what wrack it ufeih tomake in focietie; ? I conclude with the words oi LaCldntius, fpcaking of Satans way of tempting , ^iios auteffipios vidcrit, vanii implicit re/ gion/bus, ut imp'tosfaciut. IvfiitJ.b i.cap,^. The Devils way to make godly men ungodly, is to infnare them in vain Religions,.
SECT. X.
I Am tlad I am come to the laft Sedion j for this altercation is a weary work. I faid, [They have confident exprt-flions to (hake poor ignorant fouls, wJiom God will h ive difcovaedin theday of tryal] And I fay it again, bec^ufe I wouldhave itremembred. "I think on TcrtuRiA/is words de Prttfcrift. (cited alfo by Dr. Hitmfrcyj Jcfu'-tif p,6^i.) Hxrejei a^ud cos vdaitfqui in fide non valent; where faith is weak,hcrefies(3nd fo errors) p.evail and are ftrong. Thefolid men that MrTM^ih perverted I never kncw^nor could hear of. The greatnefs, power, and valour of the Capiive is a glory to the Ccnqurrour J commend him when you have overcome him, though you dcfpife him before ; That's , the way in war to animate the common fouldid s, that are led all by fame and the policy of their Guides. Whether Chrift and his Apoft'es were againft Baptil'm, we have en- quired already. You adde, [ That you cannrt:ell how ro conft-ue it any other then 3 judgment of God on men that hold Co earni.ftlyagainfl Papifts Prtlats,and Presbyteri- ans too, that in Gods woifhip humane inventions are to be left as will- worlhip, and yet contend fo much for Infant-baptifrnje^-c] Anf, i. If you mean me^as I conjedure,rhcn I muft tell you,th3t aflbrtion is roo crudely exprefled for me to own. I never though: all thingsof humane inv ntion in Gods worlhip, cither will worship or unlaw full j many circumftantials muft be for the//?ca<:i of humane deteimination or inventionj which God hath determined only in gcaer: j that is the dodrine of the old Non -coiiformfts. 2.1 am tully convinced that I Ihould grievoufly (in againft Jtfus Chrift, and undervalue his free grace and full Gofpel- Covenant and mercy, It I ("hiuld keep Infants < ut of his Vifible Church j And therefore whyfhouldl reckon their admittance among humane invention? > ;>. You have faid fo little , and very no hing to prove the rei/Cal of that Church memberfhipj which you confefs they once bad, that \ marvail yr,u can fo con- fidently call it a humane invention. 4. 1 never heard Presbytcri ns fpeak for humane inventions in worftiip , if they know it to be fuch. j. Mc-ihinks a man /hould be
Mm 3 never
272 Pl^i^ Scripture pr oof cf
never the necrer Gods judgments for being againft will-worl'hip} butherlut Is a- galnft it in all other points, is likcft to abFvor it in this : I (hould rarhcr fear Uft thofc that havefAallowcd down humane inventions in other points , fliould be in as Preat danger of Gods judgment in this , as they that have nor. But I dare judec neither That the Papifts ?.nd Prdarical party do, as you fay, urge Infant Baptifm to be a tra- dition, is no wonder, i . In that we cannot look they Ihould be of cleareft ludiimcnr." 2. They purpofdydo it,to get credit to Church-Tradition. J. Yet they areofF..nd on' as their intercft carries them. You know that BiUarmhic himfclf, when he u diiputinz for Tradition, fays as you fay j but when he is fpeaking for Infant- Baptifm, he makes it fully proveable from Scripture. For your Tcftimony of the O.r/^r^- Convocation in their Declaration againft the Covenant j i. 1 fee ftill^ be the men what they will fo far as a Teftimony is for you, It (liall be valid, z. I confefs my felf for Learnin*' unworthy to be named with many of the learned men of 0.r/b/<i of the Prebiical party^ and I heartily willi that thefe Times had dealt mare wifely and moderately with th^m* improving and cherilhing the Learning and great Abilities of all of rhem that are of godly and fober lives : But yet in reverence to them I will net fliuc mine eyes ; Muft I needs fay, that without Tradition I llijuid be at alofs about Infant- Baptifm , becaufc the Univcrfity of Oxford fay fo ? and ail for fear of Arrocancc If 1 fhall think my felf wifer then a famous Univerfity > No j when you have clearly and confcionably anfwered this Book , then I (liall be better able In modefty to ftoop to the learned Univcrfity. I do not think but there was many a fin' le mm in O.xfeid that could then have proved Infant-Baptifm from Scripture^ though all to- gether could not.
Ycunextcometo that which mentions your fclf and the Difpute ; wherein though I fo praife you, yet I do not pleafc you j For you feem to be of F.ivorni/is mind,CGr^///j No^eAtt/dib.ip.c.^.) Tur plus eft cxigue & fngidc Jaud.irly quam infca.mter v;ti'.-, perm. But you think that my end in mentioning this , was to glory in my imagined vidory, and crow over you in print. To clear my felf in a charge upon the fccret ino tcntions of my heart, I have no way, but denying your charge -, and how will you prove it ? But becaufe I know God that fearcheth the heart will have the hearing of this caufe, I will deal freely and open to you my very heart. I dare not fay my heart is free from pride in any work I take in hind j I know it better then fo. But, Sir, if 1 have a heart that I know, then the end of my mentioning your Name and the Difpute, was this.. I am a man almoft fpent in a Confumption •. 1 thought with my felf ( when I wrote that Epiftletomy deartit people, as the words of a dying man/ what ruine and defolatlon Anabaptiftry hath btoiight into all Churches that yet entertained it j how neeryoulived to them, how confidently and zcalcuflyycu prefs your opinion ; and that when lam dead, who knows what Minifter may fuccced me? perhaps one thac may cncline that way ; or at leift, one that may not be able to maintain the 1 ruth a- gainft an A dverfary : therefore left they Ihould fall into fo fad a call, I thought with my fclf, pcihaps at leaft the yery remembrance of this dayes Difpute ( when ihcy heard how little MrT. could fay, and with wlut poor lliifts he would have fupporttd his caufe^ may be a iKiy to them hereafter i and if ever he triumph over any weak pcrfon in con- ference hereafter, they may remember this^ and know that it is but through the De- fendants wcaknefs, 'i his was my very endjsnd to this end my very conlcience requirCil me to do it.
And for crowing over you, alas, Sir, it was but over your III Caufe. Haye ycL- :-.A read Foliuam iliort F pilf le ? Doles qiicd Amicus in difputatiom ic ViCenm ? Dolcr Km dcbes. Ham ft fum amimum (ommuma mma> non magis quam tn, "viCloY cf^o ^ ;ice
muus
Infants Charch'memberjhif and Baptifm, 2 75
mhiui quam tu v'Mus. Scd hoc tufartajfc doles, quod'hac amiconm leg; ncc (gepUr.c fu»t u'lHor, qui le vk'i. This pride makes us all fo tender of oui- credit, and to complain of our difgrace when Truth hath the Qedit. I am deeply fenfible of the truth of c/;7//rf«i his words, ( tit Melth. Adam incjuivlt.i) Contimdiis qu£ vulgo talcs bi- bcntiiry n'lmio otio ingcnia mflra infirmn & muliebrity & Inopia vera wjurU hfcivi- entUy commovfituy Vcnlt tandamnw/s <f)a.^t/.^K-.vTiKt} KcD^.p^n ommum malo/im^ qine omncs pari!, fjciti & v'i5lo v'i6loiiquc fiHcm ^quc mattirum ajjot'
Where you fiy, [ The moft confiderate and godly Auditors thought meet to mourHj as perceiving it to have been my houre of Temptation ] I anfwer, 1 believe you may foon number thofe Auditors on your fingers. And it conh' m$ me in my apprehenfion of your partiality in judging, that you ihculd take your party for the moft confiderate and godly ; when for thofe of them that I am ncquainteJ with , I never judged them to be of the hi}>heft form for confideratenefs or godlinefs, either before they were of yourmind,or fince J at leaft me- thinks others fecm at Icaft as confiderate and godly in my eye as they.
You add^,thit [1 have been abufcd to become an inftrument to hinder the receiving of truth, and the Rinc-lcader of a party of men, who neither tnind the things of Chrift, nor regard me, faving wherein they make ufe of the keennefs of my fpirit and abilities to oppofethe tru h, and uphold their repute ] There's many of your mift kes. Sir, in thcfe few lines, i . Who be they that thus abufe me, as you fay ? Truly, Sir, no man in the world th.K I know cf, but your felf> and iomz of the moft godly of my own peoplej I mean, none elfe did ever provoke me (that I remember) to that dilpute^bu: what ycur neighbours dii for their fatisfafticn. You were incefTant in calling for my Arguments; and my h^aicrs told me I would be £;uilty of much wrong to the Church of God in tHtfe parts. If I did not fomething. r. What party h it that mind not the things of Chrift, that I am become a Ring-leader to ? If you mean that all that are not of your judgment arc I'uch, this were the cenfure of intolerable pride : If ycu mean any un- godly party hereabouts, as 1 know them not, fo I am a Ring- leader to none. I live al- moin perpetually in my bed,or chair, or pulpit, as Calvin faid of Coffti-ndcr ; fuch a l.r/va am I that am here celled up j and how can I be a Ring, leader to any ? Bcfides. if 1 had be.n for parties, I hadnever come to conteft with you : I am wholly for the Churches unity,againft all that would make parties by divilion. j. And whofe repute did I, or do 1 uphold ? Did I name any, or plead for any mans credit > Some-bodies repute I perceive you would fain have down^whofefoever it is, But this paffige makes mc fe.ir left you mean the generality of Divines that arc againft your opinion, feeing I medlcd with no mans repute in particular : And if fo, Oh coniidcr whither you arc fallen, if ycu fhruld think that none of us but you do mind the things of^ Chrift ! and fu' e fuch have no ffced of mc to uphold their repute. 4. Whoever you mean, whether they regard mc or nor, is a thing 1 little regard. Ah Sir» either I am a bafe lying HypocritCj or elfe I came to plead for God,and not for men ; and did I once believe your caufe were Gods, I would not fltep till 1 had cryed you mercy ; But my full pcrfwafion of the contrary, m:kcs me deal the more freely with you. And /muft confefs there is, as you fay, a cer- tain kcennefs of fpirlc in me, partly from infirmity , (hr imbed lies pkruftqt/c f/:orofi ) partly approved of by my judgment,which tells me ] fhould fpeak of every thing accord- ing to itsnature,and not b- remifs in a caufe of God. But yet /know not tha: illuwtd it that day ; nor is it f j fatal to-my ftile of fpcech- as of writing, where /conftls / .im fcarce sblcto reftrain or avoid ir. But, Sir, / confefs my fault, and withall dciirc you to conlider, as Hadfcld fai;h, Ycu hare not the Bee for her fting, but cherilh her for the hoRcy.- If my ftiU be too (harp, ytt fee whether my matter be not true j nt ml nl-
2 74 Pldin Scripture predf of
ccrata tantim mmdct & lurgat^ alioqmn duke & iitUe •, fic amci libcrtas non merdc.^ nil' fiqnidcfl 'v'ltiofum. It is only the ulcerated parti that hony doth bite and purge, being otherwife fwcct and profitable : fo the f ce fpecch of fu.h a friend frettcth n' t, except there be fomewhat faulty. No lover of truth (liould rcjcd it for a harlh ftilc. lam forry you can no more patiently endure tnc
Auricttl.is moUci mordaci radcrc vcrtf, ut Pcrf.Sat.i.
I fpcak tfic mere freely, I confefs, ( though 1 know I fhall incur the difplcafure of man) becaufel remember what language tht Apcftks ufe to Chu ch dividers and diftuibers J and how the Prophets fpeak of the hns evtn of chc bcft ; and becaufe I have read Ijn.^ zo. ji'obc to ihcm that CdU evil fjood, andgood cv:/; luitinf^ Da-i(nefs for Light J and Light for Darl^ncfil which is common in thff; times wherein Satan hath transformed himfelf Into an Angtl or Light, and his lervants into Miniftcis of Light, and hath deceived men fo far, as that there is fcarce an error fo vile , but it is pretended to proceed from glorious Light. 1 fee alio that this Ctincer is a fretting and growing evil. Thofe of your Brethien in thefe Countries who a while ago laid out their zeal againft Infant baptifm, arealrcady preaching as zcalouflyagainit the God- head of Chriit. And fome of them are grown fo far , that the Parliament Is fain to make an Ad lately againft them that call themfclvcs God, and that fay VVhoredome, Murdcr^^T-c are no finjbut he is llkcfl God that committeth thtm^&c. ( We may thank ill manners for good laws ) I hop« their zeal will at laft be raifed a little to befriend Chrift the Mediator, as well as God as Creator; and to put in one daufe againft them that lliall deny Chi ift to become in the fltlli, or deny his Goilhead , or that make a fcorn of him openly , or that prefer Mahomet before him , or that call the icripiure a bundle of lyes, O'c. I hope at laft they will , not only honour the Father, but kits the Son left he be angry .and they perldi in the way : for if his wrath be kindled, yea but a little — ) The difeafe therefore being of fo dangerous a nature, I think will not be cured by fmoothing and fliccry. 1 remenibrcd Prof. 14.2.4, Hr that faitb to the wiclicdj Thou art righteous^ himflj.iH the people cur fe, Nations flnll abhor him. And for your felf, if I be in my ftile a little too keen, it may mitigate your paflTr n to remember that it is the fruit of your own importunity, and of no ill will in me to your pcrfon. Let me fpeak to you in the words of famous Dodor Reigno'di in his laft t pifllc to Albericiii Gentilis about Playes. ,^uarc quod mihi o'f.cis tc a tfic traClxii pcfjimc-- id immcrito mihi a tc objeUum cffe tua ipfitts voce corivinco, &c. J^tod f plus Aloes quam mcUis mcdicamcntis men admifcui , vcl cum acritnonia potius m^jorc tavquam ad fccaKdum & urendum acce/Ji , tamen hoc quoque a. prudcnte monim n.agiflro fen prob.ni, quum nutl.t reperitur alia nicdicina. Ciccr. ofiic.l.i. Ac ego medicinam aliam fapiufcule in te c.vpcrtus fuftra, banc unam fupercffe faluta>cm diixi^ alioqui di^cr.mdum. And r^adbutthe ftile of famous Calvin (as I know you have done) a"ainft Baldwin and Cnffmder (adv. verfipcU.) and fee then whether / have the tweneieih part of his keennefs.
Where you next tell me again, that [/reckon you among Hereticks] J can but tell you aj^ain, that it is your miitake.
But you have found fome Opinions of minc,which you fay [may and are taken to fa- vour moreofHercIie.] And what are thofe? Fain would iknow them, if they be as bad as you make them. The firft is my dodrineof jultification: iheharfhcft part whereof is dtlivcred in the very words of Chrift & ^amcs ; but to this ; have faid enough before;
i would
■ ■ '" I I I • _
Infants Church'memherjhif andBa^tifm, 275
I would I couU but get you to try your ftrength in a candid difpute about ft. My next opinion favoring more of HercfiCj Is (.univerfal Grace in Amyralds middle way avowed by me (you fay) in this place of my Epiltlc] To which 1 anfwer, i. Call this a miftake or a tallhood, which you plcafc, for one it ij, and the more Jaulty in that my words were plain printed before you. I onely faid, that [The middle way which Camc-iOj Lud' CrocinS) Amjrald, Davcnant %0f 1 think is necreft the truth] I do not fay they are the truth, but necrer then any that yet 1 have met with. And to tell you freely my thoughtij it is the point of univerfal Redemption wherein I think Jmyrtld doth belt,and in that (as I ha«e fald in another book) I approve of moft he faith. i!utaboutth« Decrees 1 differ from him i dpecJally the phrale of a condition* all Decree (which he hath forfakennow^ I diflikc. And 1 nowhere fpeakof his judg- ment about univerfal Grsce in general, but only about univeifal Redemption, as ap- proved by me. z. Arc Bifhop H..//, Ri(hop C,v, It e/i, Bi\hop Davcmvit^ Dt.fi^aYd,Dz Goxd, and Ealcanquall, and Dr Pteiion, and Mr. BmU Hereticki ? what Herelie (hould this be that this dodrine favors of ;> unlefs it be Chriftianicy, I cannot tell- If you fhould mean Aiminianifm, Ipiay tell me, was it not the Synod of Dorr that co..- dcmned Acminianifm? hath any &ynod done fo much againft them in the world i* And were not (he Brittilh Divines taken for the chief&ll flower in that garland? If yoo know not that they go this middle way about univerfal Redemption^ read their judg^ ments in the Synod, and you will know. And vveic rhere none fo quick fighced in tbac famous learned Affembly as to difcern the Dodrlnes which favor of Herclie in the ve- ry points which they alfrmbled to extirpate ? And why have all thcfe Divines been le- patedthe raoft Orthodox and excellent oppufers of Arminianii'm ever lince till now ? And was learned Marcinius an Armmian j and Lui. Crocius an Arminian / iure tf.ey were taken for (ingular and eminent men in the Synod of Durt again-it che Arminians. Read but their excellent Thefes delivered in the Synod, and you will fee that tuey maintained the fame dodrine there which they do in their books and as plalnly.and yec then It was not accounted to favor of tiereficjWas not Camero taken for the abkft man In all thofe Churches againft A.minianifm ? and do no: his writings witnefi ic ? And yet you may fee him in his Epiltle to L. C. affcrting the fame doctrine as AmyralduSm Are the generality of the Divines of the Univeriity oiSdmur'iwniOi Bremey of BcroUne^ all Armmians ? Yet Rivet and •>pj)nhcm will tell you that they go this way : yea (-f c«- rfc/i«e fpeaks of reformed France in the General) And a revcrejid, learned, eminent Dodorof Camln-idgetdsmCy that Biihop vjhciisoi the fame Judgements and he was never taken to favor of Arminianllm. And to confirm me in it, 1 have lately re- ceived from a pious judicious Gentleman, a Manufcrlpt ot Bifliop VJJjcrs in refolution ofthequeftion of univerfal Redemptii.nj determining juft as Martinius, Davcnant and the relt^ moft f^ Iidly an j excellently ;lhewing the two extreams, aud the danger of them. And from the fame my much honoured friend, I have received a Wanufcript of Dodor Staitghtom^ being a Litine difputatlon ia Cambr'idij: of the manner of the work of Grace in converfion, wherein as he difpuces for a njiddle way, below that of a new creation in the way oftheSpitits Regenerating, fo about Redemption he hath thcfe words^ RcdcmptiO ex abfoluta mcnlionefalv.viidii'id Ek£los folos pertinctt licet JufficL entia pyetia (kWniwUic Reraediumi voluitque Dcus ut uaejj'et^ ncquisinde exclnjum fe (juercrctitr : lumen Voluntate Propofiti («/ toqu'Uuf J^evcrefidm Sxiisbiincnfis) tUius cfjiciic'j. elcElii tantum dcfi.naiur^ &c. And that Dodor Prcflon goes the fame way, you may fee in his treatife of faith, psg. i, 9, 10. And let me tell you that Judging by weight and not by number, (becaufe as Pemblc faith in the fearch of kno>vledgf, «c is as defcryingathingfar off, where one quick fight will fee further then a thousand
N n cUai
I'jS Pldift Scripture proof of
clearcycs^ inmy cftlmatioa, Cumcro, Mith. Mjrtinius,C'ficiits, Capel'ns, AmyrtilduSy D.ivcnintj Picftofiy Siaug^bton, Vjhcr, BjU, do weijjh down five thoufand of our vulgar Divines.
Yea I think It will be found that the Synod of Do;/ thar were dcftroyers of Arminla- nifm, went in or nccr this middle way which youfay is ncerer Hercfie; As may be feen In Cauoa i,J.4,T><f. j4^tic. i. de Rcdcmpt> Though miny you iger hot fpuis of late do quite out'go the Synod, and look on /^.Y|?,//T Doaitneas ^/i// «did onihe re.agi- ans. Yea when Rivet himfclf repeating Camc^us own words (D j^.S uci io,j i.j , j^. cludeth that thofe that go that way^do agree with all the Orthodox in ftnle, and differ only in the manner of expreffion. And yet is it fuch a fault ? However in my judg- ment if any that ever breathed in the Church of Chrill may ciiinri the privi'cdgeof be Ing thought free from Arminianifm,it is DoftorTn'///ejIf I (hou'd fay more then he hath done, I mayexped (and hape^ that my book ihouli be bu-ht ai MuAichcrs was And yet 1 believe you know , that Doftor Tiv (jl- is down- tight* for univerfal Ke- demption in this middle way ; yea and that he maketh very great ufe of it to anfwer all texts brought by the Arminlans. I think I gaveyou inftancesenoagh in theendof my: Aphorifms. Confider of T/Zf ««j reduAion of the Synod ofDo,t, Ike. p.:g. 6i. p.ig.- 14^^144. I willingly profefs that Chrift died for All ; inrefpcft of procuring the benefit (of pardon and lalvationj conditionally, on co'idition of their faith. So he hath many times over, Thac Chrifts death hath pr'jiur^d tor All men, pardon and falvation if they will believe j and fo he dyed for /Ml j but he hath fuithtrr procured Falthfor his Elcd, that they may believe J fo/>. 154,161,164,165,170,194- And in hi?difcovcry of Doftor/jf^owi Vanity, pag, <,ij. 551. kw^xw^vs VittAit.Gfai.Ub. z p.irt X. Crimu<,. [cR. 6.pag. mihi 441. And againft Mr. Cottunyp.:g, 74. And if the higheft Antiarminian that ever had the happiiiefs to be reputed Orthodox, he yet but in that middle way which Mr. T. /aith favors moreof Htrtfie, then I nii*<t go higher then ever I intend before I (hall efcape his c^nfure. When Mr.Thach aniwered folidly and fatisfadorily (I mean bciter then the Pofthumus v'nuiic'iie hath done, and .as wel as M. Oven boafteththar he can do^ eiiher Atpyrnldm. or Bilhop DavcnxntsAiit folid, ju- dicious, excellent Diflcrtations , or both {xohf notKm'goi M.ht'imus,Croc'iu'iCaMcrei the Bri:tilh Divines, muth lefs TeftarduSi whufc name ii enough to make rhj f^me caufc bad that is good in another, though a learned, pious, pi actable manj thenwc Ihall know more of his mind and have more caufe to hca ken to his heavie charge.
MyThird I enct ihit favors more of Herefie,is,[Thst the Magilhate is under Chrift 5s ^lediator] lo this I have faid enough before, though fo much more lam able to fay for ir, that I dire provoke him to dilpute it, as 1 have Jonc in vain.M.f;.^//, and M. Kiilherfordiye no Hereticks. I think, who fay the fame as 1. O that I could fee our Ma- giftrates heartily own C-btift for their Lord, and acknowledge their coir.mifiinns and authority from him, and imploy it fi-ithfully for him > and not oncly fupprefs fins againft Nature, but fins againfl the Mediator alfo, and build up his hjufe, and main- tain the power .irid purity ofhis Ordinances \ 1 hen I date undcitiketo p ove thac Chrift the Mediator will own them for his feivants, and bear them out. '. know the great Objedion is [Chrift himfclf would not divide inheritances, and faith his King- dom Is not of this wcrKi] Anf. You mull diilinguilli i. between Chri.'ts Title and the Excrcife of it. z. between thcexercifc ionntdiatcly by his own Perfon ^ and mediat!y by hi? i'ervants. 3. Between Chrift io his humiliation, ft.uiding in the room of finr.cs in the formofa fervant j and Chtift inliis exaltation, when the debt was p:ilJ. And fo I anfwer i. Chrift was not to rci^.n in vifiblc pomp, us Kings on earth do, not to exercife his Dominion then fully by his own humane nature,bcdaufe he was
* in
InfAtits Church- memherfhfp and B aptifrf. 277
in our ftead, fafFering all his Hfp tigie for our fin : And for his humanity to reign adu- ally and to fufter at the fame time, is inconfiftent. You may as well argue, that he was not'' Lord of his own Difciples, bccaufe on the Crofs or in the grave he did not vifibly govern them. Or that he was not maflcr of a little meat and drink ^in rightj bccaufe in the wilderncfs he hungred and faftcd. How could Chrifl fufFer as the fnrety of fin^ ners, and exercife his Kingly power vifibly by himfelf at once ? z. Yet at that time heexercifed it by others; I undertake to pvove , that P;/j^e had all his reall Power from Chrift whom he condemned ; As Chrifl tells him, he could have no power except it were given him from above ; fo there is none given from above under the Cove- nant of Grace, but from the Mediator j all things being delivered to his hands, and by him given out to the world in fubferviency to thecnds of his defign. 3. And fo far as Chrift did not, or yet doth not exercife his Rule ( as he dothnot over the world fo fully as over the Church ; thefe he Rukth as voluntary fubjeds, the world he only over-ruleth as Rebels) yet flillhchaththe Title, and is their Rightfull Lord, even when ihey deny him. Let Mr. T. but peiufe all thofe examples which EhndcUus brings out of antiquity, efpccielly in En^.Mid and France ( de Jure plebii in Rcgim. Ecclcf. peg. 51 5ji 54> 55' 5^' ) of Princes being Prcfidents of Synods Eccleliaflical J and then judge whether they took themfelves to be the fervants of the Mediator : And let him rea>j(if hehavenot) vih\i Grotlui (de Impciio fumw. potcft.ctrcificra) faitk for them j and judge whether that power come not from Chrilt, J^ure as Crotm himfelf, fo ^^- ^/fl«^c;/,and the Bohemau confefTion cited by him.p.7«f 80. do all fay as I } which tak« together. SpniaUiiUAClrrijiiprovidcnt'ia pro Ecckfiacxcubans y Vicarias fibi adfcifcit eafdcm protcft.itcs v.ye fidci patronas chnfium ofculantcs , qitibu4 ipfts ChrifLus fuum qusj^ nonicn impeitit: Hifimt Regcs & pyoccrcs, quos Narf^ari'^i^cnus ait Xinu o-imA^xi^'t Xei « ffuv^ioiKHVy 7101 arjuali confortio potcftatis (abfit tarn impia cogitntio) fed Vicarlo Jure. J^uomodo &• lUiidfunicndunt Bohemicte Confc(^jms, Magiftratuum communem clfe cum agno poteflatem,&c. And were all thefe meer Hereticks ? Many the like tefli- monics out of antiquity might be cited; particularly in the trcatifes dc JnyifdiHione prin^ cipitWi coiUdU by Smofi SchjidiuS' I will name but one of them, xnEp'iJlola Lcodieni piitn coni.Pafclulcm.Admoneri qutdcm poJ]''unl{lmpcra{Oyes)':ncrcpari,argniadifcrciii virit (excommunicari aut min'imc aut difficile) quia qttos Chriftus in terris Rex Rcgum vice fua ctn^ituitidamnandos & falvi/tdos fu6 JHdicio rcUqhit.Wett all thefe Divines neer Herc- lie in this ?
Dodor Fojv^jMfecmstocwnbothmy fuppofcd Herefies togctlier, when he faith [Chrifl is called a Lord for his eternal power before all time : but the Lord and God of thcivorldandofhii cfe«/-^b after the Creation and Redemption thereof. There is nochangeor new thing in God ; but as the coyn in filver without any change in fab- ftance , beginneth to be the price of that is bought ; fo Chrifl Is Lord of his creature, not by any change in the Deity i but the ncwnefs^ the change is in the Creature: Ha Bumoiuiy is Lord of All creatures \iyt\\t perfonal union to theGod>-he3d , and the right fif hu merit. Dodor Forvncs of Chrifls threeoffices lib. 5. cap. z. It is a brave world when it mufl be accounted Hercfie to flly that Chrift is Lord of AH J and All Power in heaven and Earth is given to him, and fo All derived from him 5 and to dt" fire Kings and Judges to klfs the SonJeflhe be angry and they perilh. Whether is worfe, toputMagiftratesout of the Church as the old Anabaptifts did ^ or to put them from under Chrifl ? And what ihould they dd In the Church if they be not under Chrifl ? If Migiflrates have not their poncr from Chf id , why fliould they exercife it /d/- Chrifl? If they govern us not as Chrlflians, bat only as nScri, then theymayno more encourage a Chriflian then a Turk , whereas they bear the fword- for the encou-
N n 1 ragemenc
278 Pl^ifi Scripture proof of
rajememcfthtm that do well, Rom. ij. And donor Chriftians do well In vrorHiiping Chrift ? Elfc if the Magiftrate as M<>'(s , fee an ifraclite and an Egyptian ftriving, a Chriftian and a Pagan , he may not take the Chriftians part anymore then the other*-, nor may do any thing towards the fct:ine up of Chrlfl more then of Mihomct In the land , as a Migifti'atc I Sarc Mr, Vd i i>ermon againft Reformation came from this fountain I Then it fcem* brings muft be no more nurfing Fathers to the Church, then to any Heathen foclcty , contrary :o the prophefie. And if the Magiltrates govern us not as Chriftians,, but as men only , then they may not punilh men for offending a- galnft Chrift , nor for Blafpheming him , or drawing men from him , nor may they reftraln any Herefic or fin agatnft him ; whereas they are fet to be a tetror to and exe- cute wrath on them that do evil. Rom. II. And Is not Blafpheming Chrift, or teach- ing fairedoSrlnc evil ? By what right then did the Magiftrates take down high places and falfe worlTilp formerly ? Doubtlcfsthe very morall Law now Is the Law of Chrift, and thewfore if the Magiftrate muft not fee Chrifts Laws executed , and rule accor- ding to them, then according to none : fomefay, thty rule only by the Laws of the Land : Bnt they firft make thofe Laws of the Land } the fupream powers are above thofe Laws j therefore if the magiftrates govern us not as Chriftians, but as men, then they may not make any Laws for us as Chriftlans,'nor againft men as offenders againft Chrift, feeing the Legiflitivc power is the chief of their power. But I forget my felf, t will fay but this, All magiftrates (hall find at Judgement that they are under Chtift the Mediator.
But Af/-.T.hath yet found out In raeHerefie lndeed,as he thinks,and that is for being againft him for Infant- Baptifm. He faith, I am more juftly chargeable with Hcrefie for altering Chr Ifts way, e^f . Anfrvtr, i. So he told them in his Pulpit, That It was Here- £e to maintain Infant-Baptifm from the ground of Circumcifion. See the partiality of this man I he may call our Dodrinc Herefie In Prcfs and Pulpit blameleflyjbuc he may not hear his own called To in a Dream. Again, X tell you, I never called you Heretlckj nor doth it grieve me to be called fo by you.
You proceed to the difpute and fay, That [they might hear bow little you rfi^/ fay ,' but furely they could not hear in that difpute how little you could fay> much iefs hoft little Anabaptifts can fay, &c.'] An[reer, i. Wc know none of them foable as yourfelfj and therefore if you cannot fay it, we may well ccafe our expedation of it. 2. And when will you make us believe , That In fix hours free difcourfe you did nor fay what you could ? But you fay, [That we may know by this, and your other writings and Sermons, that you can fay more then you faid then.] By this ? Why, what is in this ? a fair bufinefs to boaft of indeed 1 I have read your writings, and heard your Sermons repeated for the moft part, ( for truly I could not Intreat my felf to lofefo much time as to hear them all,) aad I muft needs fay/omc weak arguments you eafily anfwcr j bunhey that will be brought to your judgement by fuch difcourfc»;,are in my eyes very ignorant or tradable fouls. But wc fee now,I hopc,what you can fayiand if this be all, I dare fay, Men are in more danger by their own wcaknefs, then bj tbejlrctjgth of your arguing.
But yet you fay [you anfwered enough, notwlthftand ing your care to fay no more then was neceflfary (j.f.to fill the peoples ears,leaft they fliould think you at a lofs^ and your natural hefitancie In anfwering an argument at the firft hearing. ] Anfwcr^ This hefitancie muft bear the blameof an ill caufe. But why then faid you no more after- ward in your Sermon , and here in this writing upon deliberation ? Are you not here hefitamalfo? Butalas? what a ftlj- is hereabout the Credk of a difpute ! Ratherthen we wiU differ about ir, Salvfivcrime, thcvi^ory fliall be yours. Heidficldtclhyonoi
two
Infants Church- wemhrjlip and B aptlfm. 2 7^
two brethren that had lived long together, and never fell our, they were of fuch meek difpofttlons : at laft faith one of them, Brother, tvhat (Inft do men mnl^e to fall out ? let's fee If you and 1 can do it. irby faith the other j wc mn(i tai^e this tile {orfomcfuch tbirg ) andfct It betrvixt us, and Imu[l fay it a minet and you mufljay it isyours^andfo ive mud grow hotter and hotter : fo they fet the Tile between them, and one faid, it is mine, the other faid, it is not, but »t is mine; why then (quoth the other^ it is yours Brother| takeicj and fo they could not fall out j forhe could not conttadld but once. Andfo Sir , if you will, the honour of the VJftory fhall be yours, faving the Credit of the Truth.
And for the Packing you fpcak of, to cry up a Baxter ^ as I profefs to know of no fuch packing, fo I am confident it is your fiftion ; and if youpleaie,yon (hall cry him down again, and let them cry up you ; and then all is well. I will take the name of Heretick, and MaftifFDoggCjfo we may be but frJends.But you co.ne on with the full ftrength of your reafons, why I could not argue from the Church-MemberJhip of the Jews Infants to that of ours^ And what is the fumm of all your reafons now upon deliberation in full force? Why, [bccaufc the vifible Church of the Jews, was the whole Nation brought into Covenant together by Abraham and Mofes without previous inftrudion ; but the Chriftian vifible Church had another Sate and Conftitution, being gathered by Appftles and other Prcachers,by teaching them the Gofpel ; and thereby making them DJfciples J fomc in one Countrey, City, Family, fome in another 3 no one Countrcy, or City, or Tribe together, Sec] This is your ftrength : And, Sir, can you be angry with a man for not being converted to your way by fuch ftufFas this ? I muft defire the reader to fee all this anfwered to (hamc of It in the beginning of this book, i , Did A' krabam bring a whole Nation Into Church fellowfhip ? or a family only ? a.Nay when will you prove that Abrahams family was not a Church before circumcifion as well as , after? 5. Did ij^o/ej gather any new Church ? or were not jfraclin Egypt zChuxch bMotc MoCcs } and did he not only renew the Covenant,and give them Laws?4 When you fay. They did bring them into Covenant without previous inflruftion, either you mean the Infants, or the reft, or all? If the Infants, that's but to beg the qucftion ; , why may not we do fo now Ceven by our own Infants and others that are made ours .? as Gc. iaiixtta faith Epit. Thcol. c.de Bap. ) They were brought into Covenant but by others. If you mean the aged, it is fuch an untruth as methinks the fiUyeft preacher of the Gofpel (hould never have uttertd ; Doth not God fay, He knows that Abraham will teach his houfhold J Doth not /Wfl/tx teach them fully and frequently? Doth not the Covenant Imply krwwledge and confent ? Do they Covenant to they know not who nor what ? And is Abraham and Mofes fo barbaroufly uncharitable that they will force men to Covenant, and never teach them what they do, nor who that God is thae, they take for their God, nor that there is fuch a God, nor that they muft heartily fo take him, nor what he will be to them, and do for them ? or could they be compelled to Co- venant whether they would or no ? Is not all Mofes writings and Jofbua's Inviting them to a volunta-y covenanting contiary to all this ? Or is it not a (hame to mention fuch a thing ? and to feign men to be fuch blocks, and God to be delighted in fuch woi Ihip and Covenanting, as to have men engage thenrfclves, to take the Lord only for thcic God, and love hiai above all,and ferve him(whlch was their part of the Covenant) with- out knowing beforehand whither there were a God, and who he is, and what it Is to Love and ferve him,and whether they muft fo do,or no,and foto promifc they knew not what, to they knew not who? this Covenant fomade,was like to be well kcpt.Thefe kind of fiaions are the ground of your opinions.
5., Sir , if you were my father, I would tell you, that when you fay [Chrift makes
Nn 3 . na„
ago PUin Scripture proof fif
no OHC City, Countrcy,Tribe,his Difcip'es] you fpeak moft mali-^namly and wtckedly agalnft the Kingdom and dignity of niy Lord Jclui. Hatii he not commanded to Dif- ciple Nations f Hath not the Farhcr promifcd to give him the heathen oi Nations for his Inheritance, and the tsttcrmoft patts of the earth for his poflcflion ? Pfa/.i and that Nations fliall fcrve him ? And that the Kingdoms of the world (liall become tht King, dom of our Lord and his Chrift ? And do yuu not fee it fulfilled before ycur eycsMre not Bnvdiy, licdcrmiti^cr, &c. anei Er,il.ind (till of latcj as fully Chriftj Difciples, and io Church- membcrs,as the Jews were,in Covenant with Godjand lb Church membcri? Wc arc not all fincere ; True, no more were they j for with many of them God was not well pleafed, but fhut out all that Nation of Covenanters from his reft fave Caleb ind :foJhi(j. We may have Pagans and Infidels lurk among us unknown • Rut they had many among them known. In the mean time, wc as generally profcfs Chrifthnity as they did to ferve the true God. And are you fure there's never a City or Town that are all fincere f I think you be not j Or at leaft is there never a godly family as Abra- h.ims was ? You cannot be ignorant that the term [Difciples] in Scripture is given to more then the fincerely godly.
6. I have told you enough before, that Mofcs and Abraham did no more in thJs then Mafteis and Princes may and Ihould do now} andiamforry that you are one that would not have them do it ; and that the Apoftles were fent to profelyte thufe that weie no Church- members, and fo were the prolelytcs made before Chiftrs time j and fo as they received in Baptifm an cffc novum & rem novam pn- (juam cfficUtir homo novut^ ha ctlm & nomcn novum ChnftiAm j ut RA^muvdiu dc SabunAis. Thcol. nac. t'u.
28i.
You conclude that this was enough to anfwer my main Argument : And have not you a commandablc rather then a commendable judgementjthat can bring your felf to think fo ? and prtfcntly put from you all your abfurdicies too? I remember Mr. Hedc's words in his Contemplations jiagc 1J7. [P///i:f hath walhed his hands, and he is free and b lind too, and leL them fee to it : Defire, it is the itch of the heartjand if not ftopt) 'tis catchingj and at length infedis the brain too.How cafily do Indalgence and felf-lovc claw D([t e into Opinion ? The fool would fain have it that there were no God, and at length he dare fay it in his heart; Pilate would fain be free from blood, and now the de- fires of his heart have waflied his handsjSnd his tongue have wiped ihurx: I am f<ee'] Ycu think you have nov/ hidden the (hame and nakedncfs of your ill c2u^c^A.iCa!v;m faid ad Tfeiiaonitodcmos page {mihi) 71^. Idem lUn acciditquod perduihus qu^t icbcnelati» tare putant invents lateb-ra ad Caput occult avdutii fo you.You fay,I rticwcd you not yoar abfurdicies in private conference ? That was^ becaufe it was not ray bulinefs or purpofc to make ycu angry. You fay £it (hews a very great height of pride in me^to take on me to judge your fpiric, and uncharitablenefs or malignity towards ycu, who would thus cenfure you.&c] Anfw.Let the reader review what's faid to this beforehand judge,whe. ther it be not as clear as the light.
For the delay you ufed before you wrote J I anfwer : i. Many other reafons might move you to thar. i. I doubt not but your confcience was tenderer then, then now. Or, It may be it is the nature of your Opinion to bcnumra at the firft , and Incite afterwards, as a blow on the head , ora wound in thefleOij doth not firft raife fmart. Matthlolutytnus oi zn Ms (do not miftakeme^ and think I compare you tothebeaft, for I do not • It Is bu: the nature of the difeafe that I fpeak ofjthat having eaten Hem- lock was caft by it into fo.dead a fleep, that the owner took her for dead, and begun toflay off the skin, and the Afs never wakened till the skin w's half flayed cC and then flic ftart up, and tun about with a hideous noyfc and loathfom fight. I have been
acquaioted
Infants Chttrch-wemberjhif andBaptifm, 2 8 1
acquainted with fome Anabaptifts, that when they were firft infefted, got their "Books in private, and kept all fo clofe to themfelves, while they were ftudying the point, and fctling.upon their Lees, that no body almoft knew It for fome yeers.and then they ftarc cur, and have ever fincc been IWtSampforis Foxes whh firebrands at their Tails In - the'ChurchofChrift; even fuch is their labour intheHaivcft, to^/<>-?; inftead of gj- thcrivgi to divide, andfodcftroy: not confiderlng, that Conncxa omnia & ordrndtn hiibcri upoYtcty ncqundadfobtiumcfly adtortunim fit : hiittilin hornlogu (unl d'lffoluta, A C/ock or Watch in pieces will be ufelcfs, faith £«/^ Nirembcrg. dc arte volmt. lib ^,
cap. 7. P'% -<?8-
For your [delaying to preach at Bnrdhy that you might be fatisficd and d«fift from preaching what you intended, or go more furely to work, &c.] This is untrue, or Itrangc. Sir. i. You never fent a word to me ('as manifcftcd) fcrany thing towa ds your own fatisfaft ion, i. Nor cculd that be your end, when [could never ptrfwade you there was a difficulty in ihe point, but you faid we all difl"Jred from ycu throu:,h wilfulnefs or negligence. You mads no doubt to defend your judgement againft all men whatfocvei ; you called the contrary [Herehe] in the Pulpit: you wondered ftill that men did not fee y:ur caufeto be the Truth,being as clear ai the fun ; And yet did you dcfire to be more fure and fatisficd by mc ? and never expref'- fuch a d^fi e i* For your next faying, [thit I was refolvcd to lie clofe till^&c ] it containerh but a ma- ny of untruths more, notworth the naming, or confuting. Yourfurthcr blaming mc fornot givingyoumy Arguments to keep you from error (unasked, as to that end) I have anfwered before. Dut fee the moderation of the moft moderate of thefc men ! Mr T. faith, that tny fpecches prov. ked hirsi to Preach what he did. I never fpoke one word againft his Opinion in my Pulpit to this day ; I have baptized none ' here at all : Info nauch that many of mv own Heaiers did veiily think that I was an Anabaptift, till the very day of our Difputc : and yet, becaufe I did but in private be- fore thre^ or four exprefs my fclfuiifatisfied with ^f/ 7". Papers, he faith 1 piovokeel him to Preach, w:^. 8. or lO. Sermons againft Infant- Baptifm. 1 know no other words of mine that he can mean : And I believe he could not for ftiame name what words they were, Mr.T. concludes briefly thatffie is forced to exprel's it as a grievance, that ke hath neither found that Love of Truth^Candor, nor Love to him either before^ in, or fincc the Difpute as he expefted from me.] Apfwer. i. For Love to Truth, the Lorci grant I do Hot over, love it ; To what I have faid of this before, I add my hearty fub- fcription to3/.'(f(e«j his wiilij lik.^.dc /i[fc {utiiiAm tnm con/a lU mufiibus conipcrtam compY(hcnfamqHC vcrit.ttcm fcmcl reti?7c;c folj'cmn quam protinus agnitam fiHivn octila liihics cxofcuhr/iur 1 vuLu'tr.) i. And for Love to you, 1 do here fiUmny pre", fefs in h."s light that knews my lieart , that I do intirely and unfcigncd!y Love you : ( But what the better are you for that ? ) and all the foul miftakcs that 1 meet with in you, I impute i. to you. bad caufe, z. to the common depraved nature of man, having by fad experience in this age, found it in almoft all men that 1 have tryed, and moil inmyfclf^ that the fccart of man is dcceitfuU above all things, and mortally or defperaxily wicked ; And therefore all thefe things do not much diminilli my affedions to ycu , becaufe 1 finde wc are All naught., cvtn all almoft (l.vil^e naught y and that Saints have lefs fandity,and more fui in them then ever 1 imagined j and that the pardoning mercy of God, and daily need of Chrifts blood, is far gr<'3tcr to the Saints then ever I dteanit of j. which , mjkes me haxc moiC ccfiloiiom Ounghts of depraved nature in goic/aU and Ufs ccnfoiiuufnefs of particular per fans as corr pared 0)ie til nncthcYy then ever I had in my life i and more and more ftiU to abhor the Anttnowian dotages, that would take us eft' from confeffion J humiliation, and bcgeing pardon.
Why
3 8 2 Pldin Scripture frtef of
Why may we not write plainly againft one anothers judgement by a loving confent? at Ludovic.CapcUm(v;d.Ep^(t.aKtc Bjii i///«janci Cloppcnbtirgius, and fo wkers have dene ) that fo each one producing his ihoui^ht5,thc I luth may appear ? May it net be your own indilpofition or mif-appickcn(u>n ihat may make that fcem unlovely and unfriendly which is not fo ? Fit cnim ui qui ^. ill t, urn & 'iKgu.im multo Abjynthio h.-Jfent lufcd^mju qmcquiddande gufiarintyjapiat Jbj)fith.itm i lu res nonfupiunt idquodfunt, fedidquoi fecum afflruntjinquit CDMcriciu AttLiquitat. B.bt. Dcdicationc. Vi Pucri quandoque p«- Hcium baujluu amaram» fr/efcntiu/it accikt.;!cn>, fv/midnc bumn/em inquinjmc Imgute. itaqicr ncn pu o accrb:ii.f:d opinio.fuvat extfimati.<ncm malorum dcponcre &c. 'wquit Euf, 2iiicrr.b(<g (Seneca ficundut) dcaru voluni.au,iib.i.caf, 19. page ni-LcpideperitutcO' quM McdiolamTjft Duel po^lfiUian ihfcdxitCY giflum cum Floancinii. reprobanti cqultu, rcjpondit : Si Flwentim ttbi gulium aujcrmt^ tpfe in culpa non cro i Cibi jucundijiafi Sci te mn.ium cencaUfaciunt & afpctnu bo[ksptiv:int.I(l'.MNiyctiibcYg.Ub.6.cap.'^^.^3ge 4.0, 4ome men arc fo hard to be picaltd.:h2thchadneed to bean higher Aicift in man-pleaf- ing then I, th.it can do itiwhtn ] fay nothingyou ae difplcafedjand mote whcnl Ibeak. Scnccdclra.^iib.i.cp t- fpeaks oi LcUm the Urator,that being mo-nal'um iyacundij^mut-, cUemifuo m ommbuifibi conjentlcnti imfans exclarnavu j Die aliquid contra me^ut Duo fimus.
For your felf, Sir, I yet Tcrlly take you as a friend to me, and believe you wiih me •relli yea, both your felf and many of your judgement I take to be friends alfo to the Church , and heartily to deli! e in general its welfare , though you miftake in the particular means thereto ; Bnt yet let me tell you , that as it is wrictea of Anligonus^ thithedaily prayed God to difcnd him from iiis Friends 3 forbedid not much feat his Enemies J ^odol; efpecially, forthispoor State and Church, OhthatGod wouldfaveus fromfuch/'/icwdli J to whom all our Enemies are as nothing j I mean both real miftaking friends, and alfo fecmlng ones j ¥otTnta ffcqucufque viaefl, fcramkifi'.U.'enomr.i Trha f requcnf que Licet fit yiUy crimen bahct. Ovid, lib.i.dt a-fuAm.
What a jcft Is it , th« yoo Ihoald expeft that Jn iny Epiftle I flioald hare mention- ed your Letter about Truth and Peace , or elfe I deal not faiily with you ? when ycc I make no mention of you at all: and if I had intended you , who could know it ? You give mc too high a commendation , when you can produce nothing but mana- ging this bufmefs with you, to tcftific my ways to be far from Truth and l-cace. I fliall Uifpleafe you to tell you this plain truth j how far Anabaptiflry is from the Churches Peace ; Germany ha:h felt, and kngland is fee! ing ; and how far the men are fi i .nds to ,Truth, both Theological and Moral Hiftory hath already begun to fpeak i and I truly fear, that the I'upplement of this Age will turn the Viosti^o^ FtdcsGr tea & Fides tnnicji, into Fides A nr.baptifika. For [myNeigbuurs danger in their high cfteem of me] which you fpeak of, fo far as it is faulty, I am as ready to help on the cure of it as you would have mc; but hitherto I think it hath not occafioned much their hurt. Cer- tain 1 am, that a high eftccm is by God commanded, i Jhc[. j 11, 13. and full cer- tain that fuch a high eftccm of the Minlftcry is not the coarfe that the Anabapafts (of my acquaintance^ ufc to teach the people, nor thcmfelvcs topradife •, and that the difefteemof Miniftershathbcenthepjtentpieparative to the ru.ne of many afoul and Church.
For the private Letters you mention between you and me, you- frequent miT-reports have made it almofl ncceffary that I hereto annex them, for the world to fee what caofc I had to hold off from writing, and who was the importunate folicitor heieto ; but that X am lo(b lb nuich to trouble the Reader.
To
—>"— ~--n " I — I I II ■^■~— '^^''^^'r-™ I I li— ~— »-^— 1 Ji null _ _ii._.iiwiii Ml
InfAYits ChHrrh'fttemberJhip Avd Baptifm, 183
ToconcluJe j 1 here folcmnly proftfs. Sir, as a dying man, that I have weighed yotir rcafons as faithfully and impartially as I was able , and if I Ihould not (peak another .word, I muft needs fay. that to my bcft apprchenfion they feem to me but mccr ralflakcsand v.inities 5 I am not matter of my own undcrf^anding, and thuc- forccinnot be of whit judgement 1 will} or if i could, yet I am willing of none bur the tight You cannot yet drive ic into my head, that it is a meicy to be out ofth.vilible Chiichof Chrift, nor a mifcry to be in it ; nor that it is a brnefi: tr. the Parents tharall their children are kept out: Nor yetihat Chrift ii a hmdcr miftcr then Af )/fj or lefs mer.iful unJer the New Teftament, then under the (>ld ; Nor have you proved tJ me yet that he hath Repsaled t*ie Chuch-membcrniip of In- fants; nor fhfwcd me the Scrip'u-cs wh^re any fuch thing Is written* Wht-n I thi'ik of Chrift taking infants in his a mSj and faying, (uffr them to come tit ru^ <tnd fjrbid ih m j?o/, I cannot think he would have them all left out of h(s vifible Church. M:thinksratherhJs bowels of love ytarn towards thcnij (\d.
■ Alpicc vultui
Rccemeoi, ut'inamquc oculos bipi^orepojjcs •Infocre, & patriosintiu dcprcndere amr^s- \
He that made his Covenant fo lai^e, and his Grace fo free, hath not left out tfte Infants of bis people, who as is confefTed, were once In, And he that compa. reth his love to his Church, to that of a woman to her fucking children , no doubt Istcndererof fuch then we j for he carryeth the Lambs In, his , Arms and gently driveth thofe with young, and he defpifeth not the day of fmaH'ihings. If I be mifta- ken In all this fas I confidently believe I am not) tfie Lord fhcw me fpcedilymy lAiftakcs. If you be miftaken ( as I verily believe you are ) the Lord bring you back to his truth, and keep you from further renting his Church 5 and make you more profitable, then now you are hurtful, that there may be no more death In the potofyour Doftriflc, to be a grievance to the Godly, and a bindcrancc to the fuc- cefsofyour more commendable labours, Rt ' ' '. ^ V\ /'^ '
Sk wngc princif to -grata Qoronii criu ''' '■' "' ■ >> ^
Go AN
'^l.^ •<',V. 'i-'i : ' •) 'i
284
An Advertifement to the "Reader.
THoHgh I hxvefoHH^ Godfo crojfing me infuch refolutions , that I cannot promt fe to write no more on this Subjeflyjet I thinkjiteet to let yotikj^w that I <im fully fo purpofed. My Reafons are thefe, I. I am unlikely to live to fee Air, Vs Anfrver to thi4. 2. ff I fhonld^ jet 7 find the Suhjefl is not of that HAture, m to be very feafdnahle or f^eet to 4 dying man. Oneferiom thought of my Refit doth delight me more then a hundred of Baptifm. 5. I find that all fuch Contr over fief occafion difcontents and heart- burnings ^ andfo both I>urt thofe that '^e oppofe, and tend to di-fcompofe our oWn (pirits, and much unfit us for life or detth. 4. / find atfo that the) lead to vain flrivings and exchange of'^ords^ and dimi'^ nut ion ofChriftian Love and Peace ; but When oncetheTruth is T^ofitivelj averted, and backj ^ith fttfiicient Arguments, all Vcritings after that, TvtU do but little to the information of Readers, but mmifefi only the parts of the (Contenders, and fill the world with firife. He that cannot fee the Truth in thti, W'ilinotfee it in twenty Bookj more. $. It is more like a Scold then uChriflian tofirivefor the lafi word, and thofe men who Will jtfdg him in the right that fpeakj Lifi^ V^ill lightly be on hi^fide that lives lon^efij and not on his thatfpeakj truefi. 6. If God fi^oulJ further pro- trail my life, I have work of far greater moment t$do: and I knoW it to be a fin^ to be doing a lejfer good^ When I Jhould be doing a greater. 7. idifcern already what Mr T. can fay, by his writings^ his Difpute^ and our private Conference : and having propounded many of thefe fame Arq^um cuts to him, he can give no better Anfwirs then thefe ■which I have here already confuted. Therefore I being not fo long- winded as he, h ive no reajon to contend with him f«r meer number and length. Thi4 which I have done , His importunate calling for
my
aSy
m] Arguments, hy Meffengers, Letter?, Pulpit, And Prefs, h^ve comfeld me to, left I Jhonld have betrayed CjodsTruthy andL^feris Souls. It U'/ty contrary to my refolmion ; but now 1 have fatiffied my Confcience, in leaving the world thu'Ycii'imony for the Truth, and againfl the mifrar'- riageiofthefemen. 8. Jn a word if Mr T. infiead ofafatiifaElory An- fwer, do but multply vain Vcords, as hitherto he hath done, to what end fjould I reply? If he give a fatufaliorj Anfwcr, I defy e not to reply -^ butifllivetofeeitt I promife the IVorfd to publi(fj my Rectintation. J kno>^ a man may fay fomething as long oi he canjpeak,; and the worfi caufemay -be born out \yith the greatefi confidence and pretending to the Truth: Jknowalfo'thatit rsagVQdit encouragement ro Mr T. to (iAn- fvter, when he k^o\\>j hejhall have no Reply ; but little care f for fcem- ing to be conquered^ when I have once difcharged my duty for the Truth.
That \\<ordj fyould dogood on Mr T. (ef^ecialty fuch as are fpoken in oppoJitton,and feem to him to diminijb h^' refutation) I have fmaU hope : But th.1t Gods Judgements (Which he noW' -makes fo light of) may at lajl convince him. I am not altogether hopelefs. For^ 04 1* fee and hear of di' versofthek'iders of that way. who, when they have run themfelves out of breath, ant^ gone through every form in the School of Sedud:ion, and taken at afie of every faljewayy do at Lifl retreat, and come to themf«lv4* again (When they arc Weary ed with the vain purfuit o/feeming truth, and have perverted more SouU then they can ever recover:) So alfo (fod doth fo flrangely follow the mofl of them With his Judgement, giving them up to that height of dt\v,^\ov\ and perverfnefs, that they flop at no mean degree of Error. The late leading Teachers of them in thefe parts, are already preaching doWn the GodhGjd of Chrift, and poor Souls begin to believe, that they cannot be faved except they deny the Godhead of their Saviour {by nature:) (Be/ides thofe that turn Ranters or Blaf- phemers, and thofe that have gone dtfiraHe^, of which We could give a fuller account. then is noW feafonable.) God may give Air T. a heart to conjiderofthisatlajl, and to return : Effecially when one tWelve years more experience hath taught him, that his labor to bring men to his judg- mfnt, is mofl ly vain ; it being but a preparing them for fome further Er^ rors, and an opening the gate to a longer jdtirney ^ except the extraordi- nary Metty of God, or the late Aft of Parliament rf/?r/M'«/AfW. and then they Will be further front his judgement then I am, or then they were before. (Or if this mj Warning may be a means to flop them, IJhallthink itfeafonable , though ungrateful.) 9y4'ndforme^ifmy Do^rine be Herefie,
0 0 'i- and
2 8(5
a^d t here ^enoKe in Haven hutfuchm )vereagainfl Infant- Baptifm (at When he filth [[Their blood be on their own heads Jwf« may eafily thlnkJoemeanSy)theis Heaven « very empty ^ not one having entredtiU a' boHti^ojears ago: Or^ ///jjifiindcrous Fryers wrretrue'vvicntirLS, mt till about ^Oc or 600 jears ago^ he being net able to name one m,i» that ever before gain- faid Infant- Bapcifm {for ought I can yet learn by him or any oti er, ) nor any jcwfo malicioiu xi to churge Chnft with the unchurch- ing of iohnts, even W^henthey rake ftp all they can againjl hii Dod^rine : Even when the) moji bitterly complain of him for teaching their children Hiould not be Ciicumci fed, A^s 21.21. yet do they never once open their mouths againfi him for offering to/hut out their children//-<7w the vi- able Church : ^'hich yet Ufo much greater a matter then the former, that it iito the utmofl of my reafon an utter improbability, that thofe fame Jews fhould allpafs it over without ojfence, and neither thejt nor any one Chri/lian, fo much 04 raife one doubt or quejlien about it ; having beenfo many thoufand'years in pojfejfion of it , and thei r chi Idren being na-. turallyfo dear to all.
AN
APP eV D I X,
Being fome brief
ANIMADVERSIONS,
Gn a Tra6tate lately publiflied B Y
Mr. T: H. "B ET> FOT< ©•
And honoured with the great names,and pretended
Confent of Famous, Learned, Judicious Davenant and VJhery w'-' an Epiftle of Mr. Cranford^ and a Tradate of Dr. H'arr^ which alfo fome Animadverfions are -*'*
ALSO
An Addition to the fifteenth Argument . this Book, concerning the Unlverfal '' Mr. Sam. Hudfom moft '
Some Arguments agiinft the c'
tinucd ufe of Baptifm tr cmptlf
For in Chrifl fefut neither Faltb rrhuh worl/th by L
I thar:lf God that 1 bapt,\c nottobspt'iT^^bitt to )r>
Simon hitrfclf alfo bclii matter j for tl-y ben- in the gaS of bate'
288
For the Covenant.
Bafil. Amph. cap. p.
Sicut credlmm in Patre, Filio, & SpiritM SanSlo , Ua Taptizamur In ttomixe T^atrti, FiUi,& Spirit t^ SanSli. £t ConfcJJto cjuidcm Dux adfa- Intern pracedit : Baptifmt^ fero Pa^ionem nofiram vbfignans^confeqmtHr.
Chryfoft. Tom. 5. Hemil. ad Ncophyc.
Z^tinam congrue perg^imHi, ^ SjmboU ilia atq^ PaBioms quibm con firiBifumWy Cordibus inhttreant Coytfejji fumus Chrifti Imp'^rtum ; Di~ abolienmnequvimHs tyrmnid^m. Hoc Chirographumf hoc ''PtiSlum, hoc Symbolum docetur ejfe coufcriptum. Vidcte ne ^hirograph^rio invemamHi^ ' ^ebitores.
'ouftin.Ii.qq, fuper Levit. q. 84.
''ntf(tf2flificatione7n^uibufdam /tdfftijfe, atj^
'Hs ; qtix pro temporum diver fi tat e mm a-
ralianem quafieret per vijibiliafacr/t-
nonpojfe prodejfe. T^c tamen adeo
T^m com emptor ejusy invijibi-
'^uod Cornelius ct t?m cum eo
'%nllo fanllificati apparerent^
1 eft vifibilis fanUificAtio,
l\ 1, -which 1 have cited
rein of the Primitive ^mcnrs adminidred 'part ; and chink xprcls Engage- he Covenant,
%^9
A Premonition to the Reader.
S I\<Mda)lj thlrjliytgAfternen> B&okj, I lately met rvith the Tra^ate here e vamwed. It came te me Of under Dave- nancsw^wf, which made me ^reedtlj take the bait -^ but chc^'in^ upon it bejore I fivallowcd it, 1 foon ferceivedthe hook^. Befides the Reafons folio\ving in tiif entraMce , my great love and z^eiil to the n.ime of Divct^int ( with thoje other PVorthii'A ivtuld not fidffer me te let it fo ^a[s[ur,le[s I could have ho» pedfome other \<v?:ld undertake it. ) But though mj time prohrbited me the lezyirg nf.in equal farce , ytt I rcfolved tofo/IoW? after with my hcH'Piold re' tintte (oj fiibrshim to refcueLoi: ) rather then Jland jitll and fee the name anA excellent labours of fuchu Prince in Ifrael to be enflavedto attemi the fervice offuch an erro-^eom defign. B»t my^ealtothe Covenant of God, And Faith of hi< peq£le,and O^fetj of the Church rvhich I conceive oM rvtmnd^ ed in the TraHate loppofe, did yet give me a louder Alarum to this enter- prize, 7"/7f great ignorance of the true Nature and Moral Actions of Codi Laws, ftanding at the top of our Ethicks fas the Decrees de even- tu at the top of our Phyficks) determining de omni T>th\r.Q.of nur Rij^hts (both in D«(y, ReX'^ard and Puni/hment) andfobeingthe Changer of oar Relations (m Gods Phyfical Operations are of our Natures and real e- vents > hath lofl not the vulgar only in the main bohy of Divinity^ but, alas ^ eventhofeth.it fay, Are we olind alfo f / choofe rather tofeem arrogant infayingfo, then to be really injuriotti to Gods Church by my flence, rC' membrwg that of Auftin : To boaft of what knowledge we have not, is Pnde^ and CO dcnv that we have, is Hypocrilie and Ingratitude.
9^/ndifthii had not be fain the Authors of the Opinion rrhich I oppofe^ they Would never have given that to a Ceremony (though of Divine In- jiitution) Which is due to the Covenant iiiidto Faith ; and moreover have added to it a natural Impoffibility, viz. to bean Jnjlrument mpre then Moral, to Worhji Real change in an Infants SouU For my part, I am much againfl thofe men, that fend every man to fearchfor his title in Heaven, in the time andfenfible order of the fpirits fvorking in his Con- verfion: 04 beingnoW certain (after many afidjear upon that miflake)
both ,
2«P0
both hj the experience of mj C^'rt Soul , anci mtdtitHdes cf gx^c\0)i% Chri- flians, ^hom I have exnmined herein, unci esfeciuHy bj t-e Word of God, that Gods firj} time itt hts ufnal cott' fe to rvo}\ on the Souls of the feed ofh:f peopleyifin their Childhood to Which end He hath appointed the diligent godly education andinjlruilton bj the Parents to be a mcins fore- goingthe pftbliejue Minijiry , and will not be Wanting to h:so\\n means (though the IVord convert many th it hAve ncf^lefttd their. Parents . or been neglecledbj them. ) But oi I l^oW not the time oft he Spirits cajiintr in the feed, whether immc:di3cly before the Ailing or long before it : fo if I did ^oW it to be the latter, it jlould not m ike me deny the efficacy of the Covenant, or the Priviledgesof Belevcrs leed, nor to affix a wrong end of the Tea I, nor to overlookjhe fecret differeficing wori^ofthe Spirit, which proceedethfrom Eledion, anJt^ proper to thefaved. How exceeding prone are we fiepAy men, tofiePjly doHrines and wor (hips ! v^s we are ledbj lenfe, fo we turn our eyesfitlltojenjible objeSls. Hence all /fef Ceremonies and Formalicies that We have weary ed God with. And when we are driven from thofe of our own invention (which jet ii not eafUy done) We will lay all upon the externals of Gods own prefcribing. The Lord fend forth fo much of his Spirit^ oi may teach us to worfhip in Spirit and in Truth -j and to k>*orv what tht6 meaneth, 1 will have Mercy, and not Sacrifice.
Wick.
Infants church- memherjhip and B dpftfm, 2^1
WicklcfFin Trialogo.lib.4.cap. 12. pag.iio.
E(pondco {de fahte InfantU non'bapt\:ti) cmcedcndo qnod^DNm vMueru ^puteft d <maare ufantem taltm jme injuria fibi fa^.^ (^ f vo!uciitfpotc(l ipfum /aivaie:Ncc audeo partem aUeram dcfiwrt { ncc laburo circa reputaiioncm^ vel evidenti&m in ifli materia acqui' rendum, fed ut muttu fnbticeo , eotifitem humiltter meam ignoran- tiam, verbu cond't'ionalibui uptando .quod non claret mihi adbuc ft talii infans a Deo fdvabltur/Bve damnabitur j SedfciOyHuicquid in ifto Dcia feccrit nil ji;.(lum,& opus mifericordite a cun£lu fidf-
libuscoilaudandum, lUi nutem qui ex authorttate fua^ fmefcicntia in ifla materia quicquam
defintunt^ tanquan pr^efumptitoft & [lolidi non fe fundant.
ZulngUus dt Sapt,Tom.i,p,6.2'^'
ANd when this opinion was everywhere To rafhly and without confideratton recel*- vcdjChat all men bclievcd,thar faith was conHrned by (i£ns {that isyeffkientJj : much mofevobcn they fay it it tfifirummtaUy -wrought by thematfirfi) wemuR neccffuily cxpeft this fad iflue that lome (hould even deny Baptifm (o Infants. For how (hall It cooBrm the faith of In^nts, ('much Icfs infufe the fced>> when It Is manifeft that they as yet have not fiirh > Wherefore 1 my fclf (^that 1 may ingcnuouDy confefs the truthj fome yeers ago being deceived with this error , thought i. better that cliildrens baptifm (hould be delayed till they came to full age ; Thou^li [ never broke forth in that imaiodefly and Importunity as fome now do who being young (raw) and lgnorant,more then is meet for fucha bulincfs, doufetoput forth themfelves, Crying out that Infanc-Baptifm is fiom the Pope and the Devil, with fuch like curfed cruel and horrid fpeechesConilan- cy and fortitude in a Chnftian, I vehemently approve : but this kinde of madnefs and rage, void of lore and of all order bf Chi iftian modefty.methinks, (hould be approved by no godly man, but onely by fierce and feditious difpoHtions.
irhtt.jlfrriu (referenu V.Sam.Hudfon f^indic.elfcm.& uMit.Ecclef.CathoLp.iti.)
Infants are to be bapcized, not that they may be Holy, but beciafe ckey
aieholy.
Anima enim non Lavatione^fedRe^enfmefamitur.TtrtiU, de Refurre^.c^t.
THe four famous Leydcn Profeffors, in Synopf^ur.tke 609 We no not tyc the eificacie of Baptifm to thn moment when the body is walhed; but we do with the Scripture. prcrequirc faith and repentance in All that are to be baptized ; at lea ft, according to the judgement of Charity : And that as well in Infants that are within the Covenant, In whom by the power of Gods blcfling,and of tlie Oof- pel-Covenant, wc affirm, that there Is the feed and fpirit of faith and repentance } ai in the aged ; in whom the profeflion ofadual faith and repentance Is ncceflfary.
So that tbcfe learned men arc fo far from taking it to be the end of Baptifm robe
Pp an
292 PUin Scripture profif cf
an Inftrumcnt of operating this feed and fpirit in the hearts of Infants , that they ever cxpeft it asprcrequifice. z. And that indnccrity (in them inthcficd, in others In the Ad ) at leaft in probability ir muft be fuppofid : Though for my part, 1 tike the pa- rents faith to be die ordinary condition pvctcquifite, and that this itedof grace flows from Gods decree, into the Elcd oncly.
Thcologi Sabnimcnfes Thcf.Thcol.pa/t.i p.1^9. dc pcrfcvcranlia.
THcir fixth Rcafon they mightily put on, i/;^. 1 hat fiom our Icnet it followetfr, that all belicTcrs Infants that arc baptized, muft needs be favcd. And why fo?Bc» caufcby our Doftrine, Remiflionof finand the Holy Ghoft is conferred by bap- tifm to the children of believers } which two benefits are fuch as he that hath once received cannot fall from. As Remifllon of fin is beftowcd on the aged, on that con- dition that they perfeverc to believe, which if they do not, they lofc the benefit / fo re- miflionof Original fin is given to the Infants o' believers alfo on the condition that when they come to age they do nothing for which they may be deprived of the benefit. As therefore if any after pardon received fhould tall from faith, he would fall back into thccurfe.fo if any Infant of a believer fliall when he grows up,(hew himfelf unworthy of that benefit, it is to be though: that he hath obtained nothing. This one difference there Is between thcfe two j that true faith is never taken away from thofe to whom it h once given : but many to whom baptifm is glven,are deprived of the benefit j For the gift of true faith comes onelyfrom Cods ElcClion j and Gods EleQion is fuch, that by it is de- termined, that all to whom true faith is given (]iall be brought to falvationj And that is not done without perfeverance.Baptifm is not therefore given becaufc of Eledion j but therefore becaufe God will have the fame to be the condition of the Children as of the Parents, fo they do nothing that may render them unworthy that prerogative. But that they fhall do no fuch thing, is not neceflarily included in that rcafon for which Baptifm Js granted. As to the fplrit j feeing its efficacy confifteth in this,that it may fit the mind to behold,and fo imbrace the Truth (hining in the Gofpel ; and the mind of Infants is In that ftatc,that it cannot put forth that Ad5i/7(? beany fone of the fpirit do affed them, it is whoilydifferent from that efficacy which produceth faith in the underftanding. I his therefore is nothing to the perfeverance of faixh.
THus ocuUtifJimuiyadmiYahllii Jmyr.ilduiyOne eye of that Univefity which in Divi- nity is one eye of the Chriftian world.
He inclines rather to think there is no operation of the fpirit. And indeed, be- caufe the miraculous gift of the Holy Ghoft was promifed and oft given in Baptifm ( whereof yet baptifm was no Metaphyfical inftrtiment ) in the firft times,thoughone- ly to thofe who had ( or were probably prefumed to have ) the Regenerating gift of the Holy Ghoft before,raanifefted by their Repentance and Faith j therefore many Di- Tines thought that the giving of the Holy Ghoft in ordinary for H cgeneration, was one ftated en J of Baptifm. which from the cwiftant prcrequifition of repentance and faith b evident to be a miftake.
Cnlvin.lnfiitut.Hb,^.cap.i6,Se£i- ii.
T Here Is no more prefent efficacy to be expeded in InfantBaptlfm, then that ic confirm and racifie the C^ovenani made wit!» them by the Lord. Thus BlcflVd
Calvin,
Some
Infants Chnrch-mcmherjhi^ and Baptffm,
t93
Some brief Animadverfions on a Treatife
of Baptifmal Regeneration, lately publiflied by Mafter ih. Bedford
iT Is not any dtfire of contending, or contradiaing my Brethren, as the Lord knoweth, which is the caufe of my medling with this Tra- date,and ciifcovering the failings of lucli LearnedjRevercnd, Godly men ! but the true Reafons are thefe, which I fubmit to the judge- ment of the Readcff, whether they are enforcing or not. i . The Dodiine it felf which I oppofe. I conceite to be dangerorss, as well as erroneous, as Ihill be anon manifcfted. 1. 1 conceive it as likely a means to make men Ambaptifts, as moft know, if it go unrefifted. When men fee wrong Ends put upon Baptifm, and too much given to It, they are ready to fufpcd our Doftrinc concerning the right ends,& to give as much too little to it. It is hard rcfifting any Error,wUhout being driven into the contrary extreara : Efpecially to vulgar fpi. its. And I fpeak not this upon an uncertain conjedure, but upon much fad ciperiencc I hive known too miny of my fpecbl friends that have cither turned An:.baptifts,or been much ftaggered, by occafion of this DoSrint of Baptifmal Regfner3tion;vvhen they had difcovered once the error of that, they prefently began co fufpeft all the rtii , thinking that we might as well mift.ike in the reft a? In that. And indeed, I was once in doubt of Infant- Bapcifm my lelf J and the reading (and difcovering the error) of Dr. Buigci anJ Mr. Bcdfords Books of Baptifmal Regeneration, was one part of my temptation. I cannot but think i: my duty therefore to endeavour the reraoral of this ftumbling ftone out of the way , which others may ftumble at as 1 have done.
?. And I conceive that if it go unrefiftfd , the error of this Doftrine is far likelier to.fprcad and fucceed in thcfe times then ever. i. Bccaufe of the llcentloufnefs and vanity of this Age, wherein every miftake that hatha man to vent it, hath many to entertain it. i. But efpecially by reafon of the contrary error of the Anabaptifts, which having brought fo great diAurbances and mifchiefs to the Church, m ny
Pp z iocautelous
2 94 ^^*^^ Scripture proif fif
lociutelous mealndiflikeoftkelr ways, and inheacof oppofinoB^wlllbeaptco run Into the contrary ncrcme. And thus Ertors ufc to propagate and ilrcogthcn one a- noUicr.
INdecd at the (irft broaching of this Dodrine among us, it was Co much difrellllhed (notby Dr.T'^.Vonely, but^ by moft Divines and godly people as far as I could learn, that It did I'uccecd and fprrad as lircle at almoft any Errour chit ever I knew fprJng up in the Church ; Infomuch as th;^ B joks ihat milntained it, were tiot judged worthy an Anfwer. But Mr. Bedford htiknonhk on a more fruitfu'. feafon and foil for the fowing of his fecond feed. And to make it the mote p-evalcnt, he hath adorn«<l it with Aich venerable mighty names, which any humble man wi;l ft -iof co, arwl nrach fufpeS that Opinion which contradideth their judgement. But whether all chsfc ar< truely on his (ide, I hare caufe enough to doubt.
In examining this point, I Ihall firft (hew you the Heterodox opinion . %. And tien that which I take to be the Orthodox, j. And then give you fome Arguments agalnft die fortner. 4. And laftly, Come brkf Animadvcrfions on Mr. Bidfoids Treacilc, an4 Anfwer to what he and Dr. ;rjrd fay againft that which I judge the Truth.
1. Mr. Bedford! Opinion is , £That the Sacrament of bap'ifm doth as an Inftru- memat Efficient Caufe, confer and iffcd in all that duely receive it , not putting a bar by their unbelief (whichnolnfntdo'h^ the grace of Regeneration of naur;, even Aftual Regeneration, at leaft m iHu fiiiiaio &YadkaU \ out of which Radical Rege- neration and Seminal Grace, the cxerifcd Aft of Faith and G.aces is wont to be educed when the Spirit comes to work by the Airullcy of the Word ; And that to thil end Baptism is Inftituted, andthisit iff dechonall infanrs 'led or not Eled duely baptized j yea, though the Paren'ilhould ncgU<a heir duty, and make but a Church- formality of It j yethe rather incl(nc.kt> their c;pini n^ thatthinkche cAcacleofthe Sacrament is not hindered by th^r ptrf mal nega'd > I^'Borance or misbelief of the Parents J but the Infant Is freed not onely from the (juilt, but alfo from the Dominion of /in; that the Guilt is not only removed, but thepower of fin fubducd to them. *l hat as fin is purged awayi fo the Spirit of Grace Is (to all thcCc^ bcftowi.d in liap- tifm to be as the Habit, or rather as the Seed whc.ice the fwurc AAs c-f Grace and Hollnefs watered by the Word and good Eilucation may in tine fpring forth. That In the Biprifm of Infants, the Spi; It worketh not as a Mo'al Agent to pnfFer (jtaccto the Will , but as a natural or rather fupcrnatural Agt nt to work it In the Will- to put Grace Into the heart, conferring upon them Seminal and Initial Grace , which doth not prcfappofe Fa/th, but It it (elfthefeed of Faith. That to this end the Sacrament is fo generally ncceflaryjCommonly and in ordinary, that if the S^i it do convey Grace to any without (and fo before) theufeof the Sacraments, this is to be acccuuted ex- traordinary: For the gpirii is not wont to convey the Seed of Grace othctwife; and that operation of the holy Ghoft cannot be cxpeded but only in the ufe of the means, /ci/. the Word and Sacraments (that is , the Word to perfcd , and-- the Sacrament of 3 iptifm to regenerate radically^ without.which the a^ of Grace 1$ neither c£F<-ded, norperfeded: For Baptifm is appointed to Giveos our firft Title and intcreft In Chrift J andc^'en thofe that believe before Baptifm, have at to the b^mfits of Bap- tifm, but/M ad rem. J but not iiuifi re. Alltbi^you (hall finde in Mr. Bcifo/ds Tracl. prior e ^ page 30^ 40^ ^i, 94 95,96,86187. And Treatifeof the Saeament) pag€4H,9i, 110. 116. 1*9, in, '4?« *7 5i *9*' ^^^ '" ^'^ Way to Freedom, P^gc $^i $>iSi4 53)&c,] D.. A»r^ejinthlsd>ffi:rsfrooibim^ tkaihcal&rm'onW
that
Infants Church-memberfhif And Bafti(m, a p 5
tTiat Baptlfm Is the ordinary means of conveying the Seed of Grace, or the Spirit to E* left Infants onely, but not to the Non- Elcft ; yet he judgetH,that though men lire in open wickednefs 40^ or 60 years, and then bi converted, that thefe received the Seed of Grace.or the Holy Ghoft In thelrBapifnijwhkh rcmaineth as the Seed under ground ail that while ; and Co he affirtneth not with liU. Bedford, that the Holy Ghoft fo givea to Infants may be loft.
BEfore I come to lay down what 1 hold to be the Truth In this Controverfic, I muft premife fomewhat of Diftbdion and Explication. I. We nuftcs'^erullydiftingui/h betwixt i. The new Covenant mutually to be entrcd and enjiged in between God and man, containing Gods promife of Remif* fion, Juftification, Adoption arul Glorification to maniif he perform the Coodltion,and mans promlfc to God that (by his Grace) he will perform the faid condition, z, And the meer p edition or pt omifc of God,that he will give to his Elcft (onclyj new and fofi hearts . and grace to perform the forefaid condition.
1. Wc muft carefully dillinguilh betwixt that Grace which makes a Real Pbyfica! change upon man ; and that which maketh onely a Relative change. Of t'lc former fort is Kcgencration, oi fandificatlon, ( as they are ufually taken for the work of the Spirit Infufiiig the fi; ft principle or habit of Grace, and afterward increaHng and exciting It.) and fo in Glorification. Of the latter fort, are,Rcmi(fion, Juftificaiion and Adoption, and ^an<fi(hcation as it Hgnificth a Dedication of the man to God, or rather the ftate and Rc-larlm of a man fo dedicated and feparated j and alfo Regeneration at it Hgni. ficth ou; niVYRcIat<on.
g So we murt dift^nguilli betwixt a Donation Phyfical,which works the faid Phyffcal Efftds(as when you pu: mony into a mans h.ind;) and a Donation Mor3l,which gives ■or any Real I^hyhcai being lmmediatfly,diredly of it felf ; but onely fo gives a Right to fuch a Being or Good,a» you give awriy your houfe or lands by a word, or by a writ* ten Deed of Gift, without moving the thing it felf.
4. Accordingly we muft diftinguiih betwixt a Phy^cal [nftrument,which is effedive by a Real Influx or proper Caufality of the forefaid Ihytical Mutation; And a Mjc- ral Inft umenr^as a Deed of Gift is.
5 We mu't carefully diftinguiih between the fiift. chief, and moft proper Aft and laftrumemo^ Donation: and the fecondary, leHcr improper A&, and Inftrumenr being but ihc Ceremonial folemnization.
6. Andlsftly, we muft diftinguiih betwixt perfons that hare true Right to Baptlfm in fore D»,and ihofe rhat the Mintftcr uught to i3aptize,thougk they have no fuch right In foro Del ; bu' onely in foro Eale/I*.
Aiid now upon thefe Diftindious thus laid down, I (hall give you my Judgement in chefe following Portions.
I. Baptlfm rvM ntViT infltutedby God to be a SealofthcAhfolute Proni/i ofthefi-fifft' c'lal Grace, but to be thr Seal 0f the Covenant properly jo called, rvherein the Lordevgagetb bimfeifcondititnaPy to be ouv Gtd,to Fardon^Juiiifie.Adopt and Glorifie lu : and wc ehg-^t ourfelves to Ic hu People^ nndfo to pn form the faid Condition. Of which, could 1 have leifure to be large, I ccu'.d give abundant proof.
Argument i. If Bapifm be the Seal of the fi ft abfolute Promife of the firft Grace ; then it fealeth either before that Promife is fulEiicd, or aitcr j But It neither feateth be fore nor after, thtrcfore not at a^j.
I fuppofcnoaevrilLquariel with the Major Propoliiion, and Oiy, It Is juftatthe
Pp B time
2p6 Plain Scripture proof af
cimc of fulfilling (orof infuSn^ a ncwheart ;)forth3ti$ impofllble. And forthe Mi- nor, 1. Ifitfeal ro that Promifc before the fulfilling, then it is not a mu;ujl enoaeing Sign or Seal , (For thofc to whom thit P/omifc is yet unfulfilled, are uncip^blc of prt. fcnt engaging themfclves to God, being Aliens and Enemies to him.) But ic is a mu- tual engaging Seal : This 3f' B confdfeth; And the Sacramental /.^ion? manifeft ; Receiving the Elemcnrs is our engaging fign , that we receive Jefus C h, ift co be cur onely Saviour and Lord j «5 giving Is Go; s fign that he givcch us Chrift.
a. Ititfealco thatabfoiurc Promlfc of the Hrrt Grace before the fuifiUing of It then no man can lay claim to the Scil, nor any Minift.:r know to whom he may Ad- minifter it, and to whom not / For that Promife is neither made to any peifons jumed nor marked our by any quilifications, (as the Promife to BL-licvcr$ and their Seed is ;) nor is it fulfilled upon condition of any prcre<3uirKe qualifications: but onely fig- nifiethwh.it God will do for his Mcft, whobeforc the fulfilling of that Promife have not the leaft note of difference from any other men.
But thcreare fome men rhar may claim the Seal of Baptifm, and whom Chrifts Ml~ niftesmay know to be capable fubjefts : Therefore it is not thatabfolutc Promife of the firft Grace which Baptifmfealeth.
z. That it cannot fcal to that abfolute Promife after the fulfilling of it, is evident. Forelfe it lliould feal toacomradiaion, andfallhooJ; As if'jodlhuuldfavj [I will give thee a new heart, and to this 1 feal,] when the partyhad anew heart before. Or [I will take the hard heait out of thy body.] when it is taken out already. Or [I will give thee the firft Grace] when he had it before ; and fo it cannot be the fi ft that Is afterward given. For of the Promife ofincrcafe or ad«litional degrees, wen?wfpcaknot. Moreover , If Baptifm were a Seal to the abfolute promife of the firft Grace, chcn it ftiould fcal to none but the Elcftj (For all Divines that I know who acknowudge fuch an abfolute Promife, do make it to belong to the Eleft onciy. ) But ''aprifm doth feal to more then the Eled ; (This Mr, B. confeffeth J Therefore it is not to the ab- folute Promife of the firft Grace, that it fealeth.
Again, if Baptifm be a Seal of that abfolute Promife, thencitherofrhat onely, or of the Conditional Promife of Juftification, d'-f. alfo j But neither of thefc i Therc- forenot of that abfolute Promife at alt. i. Not of ihe abfolute Promife only j for I. then it fhodd not Seal up the Promife of Ad .-prion, juftification and Glory j (for thefe arc all promifed but on C'onditlon, whatfoeverthc Aminon,ini fay to the contra* ry.J 1. And ii it fealed that abfolute Promife of the firft Grace ordy,th?n the 'eal (hould belong to no Believer j ( For all believers have the firft Grace already , and fo that promife fulfilled to thcmJBut the Seal doth belong to Believers j thcrcf-re it is not the Seal of that abfolute Promife.
3. And if it fealed that abfolute Promlfc , then there fliould be no Conditional qualification prerequifite in the receiver j But there are conditional qualifications pre- requifite in the receiver (either inherent in himfelf, or relative, the foundation be- ing in the Father or others) as Mr. 8. conftffeth. Thercfore,c>f. a. And that it fealeth not the abfolute Promife and Conditional bo h together , m^^ijpks every man fliould grant, who well confidereth i. The exceeding d iff rent natur^^thefetwo Co- venants ; One being improperly called a Covenant, being properly but a Promife or Piophcfic ; and the other a Covenant properly ; One being tha Ad of God alone,3nd thcotherof both parties mutually ; One promifing one fort of Grace, and the other anoth r j One being made to the Eled only, the other to All. 1. And the Inconfiften- cy offealing thefe two at once j One faying, i mil gvc a New hearty ( and fo Faith.^ The other, 2 mil give pardon, &c. if thou do believe^ or fuppoCngthou doft believe.
Laftly
Infants Church-memberjhif and Bapifm. 2P7
i 3iUyt If the Seal be applicatory to particular perfons, then it is the Seal of a Pro- mif«" that may be applyed to particular perfons, that they may receive the thing pro- mifedr But the abfolute Promife of the firft Grace may not be applyed to any parti- cular perfon, that he may receive the thing promifed : therefore it is no Seal ot that Promife.
The Minor is evident , in that no man can know that the faid abfolute Promife is made to him, till it be firft fulfilled, and he hath already received the good therein pro- mifedi'no man being either named or dcfcnbed in it,^ and then it is too late to ulc an exhibiting Sign, or iezl.
Pofition. 2. /is Baptifm was not Infiitutcdto be the Seal of the Abfolute Covenant, fo neither to be an Jnfirumem to confer the Grace in that Covenant promifed.
I need add no more for the confirmation of this, feeing all the forcmentioncd Ar» guments do beat down more clcerly the confcrringj then the fcallng ufe of Baptifm as to this Promife. And therefore I defire the Rcaderto review them, and apply them to this Pofition . If it be the ufe and end of Baptifm to convey the firft Grace promifed in this abfolute Covenant , then the proper fubjeds of it fliould be Infidels and Open Enemies to Chrift, who have not received the firft Grace ( of a new and fof: heart and of Faith.^ But Infidels are no fit fubjeds of Baptifm, much lefs the proper {ubjed .♦ therefore it is not the end and ufe of it to convey the firft Grace. I ihall add more to this anon ; Firft, in the mean time, I fuppofe that none will affirm that it is an Inftru- menttoconvcy the Grace of that Covenant whcrcofitls not the Seal. And indeed it it were fuch an Inftrument, I fliould eafily believe that we muft Baptize either all or none: For that Promife being made onely to the Eleft , we muft either Baptize all , that we may meet with the Fled among the rcftjor Baptize none, becaufj we know noc the Eled. What means hath any man to know according to this Doftrine whom he (hould Baptize?If they fay,!: is Believers and their Seed, to whom the Promife is made, it is truejbut then that cannot be meant of this abfolute Promife of the firft Gracej For doth God promife to give the firft Seed of Faith to them that are Believers already?And their Seed are taken in with them, and on the Conditionality of their Faith, and into the fame Covenantjand not into another .-And the abfolute Promife being made onely to the Eledj is not made to ihs Seed of Believers as fuch ; either to all them, or them onely ; and indeed no man knows particulai ly to whom. Therefore I muft needs fay, that the Authors of this Dodrineof Baptifmal Regeneration,do err through the confounding of thefe fo dift'erent Covenants.
Pofition. 3. Baptifm is bjth a Seal of the proper Q'^nditional Covenant »f Grace^ and a means of conveying the good therein promif€d,accordmg to the capacity of the fubjcCi. This I eafily grant.
Pofition. 4. Baptifm ft infUtutedto Seal even to Infants the Promife efPardoriy JuJlU fication^Adoptioniriiid Glory ^and hereby to be a. mans ofmal^mg over or conferring thefe be- nefiti upofi them.
What is faid againft this fealing to InfantSjI Ihall touch anon^in my Animadverfions on Dr. n'ard. Jd^
Pofition. 'i^Kptifm ii fuch a ft:.:! and means of conveyance in probability to all the Infants of truWelievers , ilnir Churcl^^memberfhip andviftble chriftianiiy being certain: Jnd if any mil add that it certainly conveyetb thcfc Relative benefits to ihem aUj tviU not ttnt'cdiCl.
Pofition. 6, Be fides thefe Kcht'ive Benefits^ B^pt/fm h a means ofincrea/inginrvard Grace, and fo matfing a Real change upn the fouls of tbofc that have Faith and the ufe of Kea/o/i.
Pofiticn.
3p8 PUm Scripture froof ef
Pofitlon 7. 'BxfUfmw9 t^nh all ibU encly at a Moral Infirumcnt , ky (iga.fpKg and fo wording on the foul, auduy fc^ivgand focovryngi Ugal Right to the benefits of that Covenant f but not at Thyficai Jnflrumcnts, by proper real efficiency on the {OHl-y ncc datur tertium.
^ That they arc no Phyficil Inrtrumeats, Dr.jr<jr</and Mr. B. acknowledge : and the former faith, Thty arc but Moral mltrumcntj j though the later addej Hypcrphyfical ai » tertium, which we (hall anon examine.
Pofit. 8. B^ptifm IS not the fi, fl principal Injlrument of the forefaid conveyance ibut onely it complcateth by fo\cmni%ation and obftgnaiion that conveyance ivhi.h *»« before ijffcClually cunamly and certainly made by the Covenant.
This I (hall confirm anon, when I come to Dr.ff, who op,->ofcth it,
Pclition 9. Saptifmdoth convey, andfeal the aforefaid binr/ui to auneiut the children of true believers, and not to thechildren of hypocrites,
Myrcafons arc; Firft, The Covenant proniifeth Rrmiflfion .Adoption and Glory to none but true Believers and their Seed ; Theietore the Seal can adure and convey it to no other. For the Seal cannot go further then the Ccvenanr. Se. condly, That Faith which cannot help the proper owner to chefc benefits cannoc h Ip his childrcm to tkcm : (Fur their intereft is but for hi fike , as they belong to himjj But a falfe Faith cannot help the owner to Juftification, Adoption, or Glory } (as not being the Condition to which they are promifcd; ) Therefore not others. Yet It will not follow the child' en of Hypocrites (hould not be baptU zed) For we ought to baptize them 1 though they have no true right to Bap- tlfm J becaufe we are to take all for true Believers that mike a probable pro- fcffion of Faith- They may have rl^hc in foro Ecclcfte , that have none before God. ^
Fofit. 10 Though Baptifm thiu feal and convey the Relative benefits of the Covenant t$ Infontsy and a Right to fame real benefits, yet xoas it never infittiUed tobe an Inflrumem for the rvo-rl^iiig of the firji real-giacioHs change upon the M^«r for the tnfufing the firfl habit or feed of fpecial jrace into the foul j no nor for the tQe^itig of any real mutation m the fouls of Infants at all, cither by infufing the firft or fubfequent gr:JCe,
I put the word [Real] herejn contradidindion to [Relative;] And I fpeak of work, ing the grace it felfon the heart, and net of giving a Right to that Grace j which (as to fubfequent Graced Baptifm may be an Inftrument to do.Here I have two things in this Pofition to prove, i. That Baptifm was not inftituted to bean infirument to work the firft Grace, or Seed or Habit of Grace, i. Nor any Real ' -race or change at all on an Infant. Thefe arc the main points wherein I dififer from Mr. B*s and Dr.S/ogaDo- drine: Efpecially the firft j which is fufficient. if proved, to overthrow the fubftancc of their TreatifeSj though I faid nothing to the lecond. And the foimcr branch I prove thus.
Argument i. Jf Baptifmrvasnot inflitutcdio bcthe Seal of the Promife cf the firfi KealgracCf (but onely of the conditional Covenant of Grace j ) tl/en it w.^s not inftitntcdto be an Inflrumcnt to convey the firfi grace. But the Antecedent is true i^crtf ore fo h the tonfequent. ^^^
I fuppofenone will deny the foundnefs of this Confequence , nor^ fo abfurd as to affirm that Baptifm was inftituted to be a Seal of one Covenant, and to convey the Grace of another to which it was never intended to be a Seal. And for the An- tecedent, Ihaveproved it before; and add thus much more: 1. If Baptifm were the Seal of that abfelute promife , then all that are fo fealed (hould be faved, ( For it Is ^caerally coofofted by thofe that acknow ledge fuch a Promife , that all are faved to
whom
Infants Church- ntemkrjb/p and Bapti[m, ap9
when it is made.) But all that arc fo fealcd, are not faved , ( as Mr. « confcfleth ; ) Therefore, &c. %. If Baptifm be affirmed to be the Seal of that abfolute promlfe of the firft Grace, then it is affirmed to be the Seal of a promife, the very Truth of whofe being is very obfcurc and doubtfull, and dcnyed by many great and learned >and pJoMS Divines ; But Baptifm (being the badge of Chriftianity, and otthe plain Covenant of Grace) is no: to be affirmed to be ihe ^eaI of an obfcurc doubtfull promifej Therefore, &c. Though I be not my fcU' of their Opinions, yet I will tell you their Reafons who deny that there is any tfuch abfolute p:omife of the firft Grace, i. Eccaufe there is but one or two obfcurc Texts in ferctfiy and E^liicl pretended to be fuchr 2. Thofc Texts do mention fome mercies, which all othw Scripture tcls us are given but conditionally, aSjTo remember their fins no morCj H^i.S 1 z. -Therefore, fay they, we mnft accordingly expound the reO' j. The very fame mercies which fcem here to be promifed abfolutely, are in other places promifed conditionally ; therefore by them is this to be Intctp ctcd ; for it isnotnecefliiy alway to addethecondicion. Dent. 10.6. [And the Lord thy Go4 will circiimcife thy heart, and the heart of thy Seed, to Love the Lord thy God with all thy htartj and with all thy foul, that thou mayft live.] This fcems to contain the fame mercies i and yet t/. 1,1,5. it is promifed but on condition that they return and obey the voice of 'od J which fnews, i. That it was not the firft Grace that is here meanc by circumcifing the heart but a further degree, i. And that it was conditionally pro- mifed. 4 And the Ap(ftle in reciting this Covenant, H.^^S.fecms tofaave re^ed to the excelkncy of the mercy promifed, rather then to any abfolutencfs In the promife 5 and not to expound it of the fi;ft Grace, but as a Promife made to fuch as are already believers. But I leave this to every mans judgment 5 whether the fitft Grace be ab- folutely promifed or njt. I doubt not of thcfe two thjPgs, i.That it is abfolutely given,' without rcfpcd to foregoing W«rks or Merits ; and not as the Pelagians thought. 2. Such a promife is, or would be but of the nature of a meer Predidion what God means to do to lomc men^whom pleafeth himlelf i but no man can have the leaft com- f )rt from it upon any knowledge that it belongs to hira,till the promife be fulfillediand the good p omifed beftowed already j And no man could claim the S:al of fuch a pro* inife, nor any Minifter know to whom he may give it.
■ If any fay. that the firft fpecial Grac? is promifed conditionally, and it If that condi- tional Promife that Bjptifm fealeth j I anfwer, i. Shew the promife. z. Shew the con- dition. 5. That is puie Pf/.i^M»//>;f r For that condition muft be fome work of man, 'and fo grace Ihould be given upon mans works. Yet I yield thus far, i. That there ara previous woiks which God wo:keth in fome men, as preparatory to the fi ft fpecial Grace; 2. And theic are fome duties, as to hear, prayj c^c. which God commandeth men that have no grace, for the obainiug of grace ; 5 And ihjt he makethfome half- prnmifcs (as lAx.Cotionc\\U ihcm) to men, upon fuch duties which they may do with- out fpecial grace : As Fctcr faid to Simon. [ Repent and pray, if perhaps the thoughts of thy heart may be forgiven : ] And [it may be God will hear, &c.'\ buch probabilities God gives men,wlikh may raife their fpirits, and be a ?;ood encouragement to duty and induftry in the^^f thofe gifs they havej but he hnh made no full certain promife of the fi ft Tpeciayprace. upon condition of the good ofc of mens naturals. And Baptiftn cannot be the Seal of luch a half promife as rhcfe.
Afgum. z. If both in the inSantion end every example of baptifm through all the Bible^ the firfl Grace be pre-reqmfilc m a condition, then the 0/ imance ivas not infiuutedfor the co}ife. ringofih.it firfl Grace. but in the in [i tut ion, and every cXjinple of baptifm though alL the B be, the fii(i Grace i^ prcreqmjitc as a cond'tion j thcyeforc the Ordmanct W<u not i»- pUutcdto confer It,
3 oo PUifi Scripture proof of
By the hift Grace here I ftill mean that grace which confifteth in a real change of the S)u!, wtethcr habitual or aaual,or if you will call h Seminal or Radical, you may. By [ prc-requifitc J as a Condition] I mean, either in the party, or another for him.
The force of ibc con.'equcncc ts eviJcnt , i. In thatothcrwiie Biotifm rbou'd b; Jn- flltuted to give men that which i« prc-requtrcd in ihcm, and I'o which they have ahcady (as to all them that are capable of it.)
The Anrecedcnt is undeniable, as ml[,ht he manifefted by i occital of the partJcu'ar Texts, could wc ftay fo long upon It. John required a protcdlon of repentance in thofe he baptized. Jcfus firft made them Difciples, and then by his ApolHcs biptized chcm, Jjh.4'\. The folemn inftitutjon of it »$ a {landing Ordinance :■) ihi Cha-.chj which tell us fully the end ^ is in M.tt.i%.\ 9,10. G«, and Difuplc /»: .^U N.-t:3>is , b.ipti'^ng thcmy &:, Now for the aged, a Dilciple and a liellever arc all one, M.iylf 16, 16. Hi that bcluvcth and if baptiT^cd^ fh.iU be favcd, A (^. 2 j 8 . Rf'pcni ar.d be bapiii^cd i vcy one, Sec. V.4I- They that ghd/y received hii word, -ivcrc bapti':^d, Ad.S.ii,!?. Th". Samiri. tans believed, and were bajHi^d both men and wnmen ; Simon himfelf believed and wji bapti'^d, A(S.8.36,37. ifihau bclkveft ivith alt thy bc.irt, thou mayi (be bapti-;^cd) and be anfweredj I believe, Sic. Aft. 9. Paul believd nprn AnanU'. I'ifliuclion 3 and then jvas bjpt"{cd, Ad. 10.^7348. & 16,1$ n. ic 18.8. & 19,4 j &c.
You fee it is ftill required, That all at age co iirft bclievCjand then be baptised : Now doubtlcfs thofc that repent and bclievejhavc that firft grace, which it the condition' of the new CoVv-n:nt already, and fohave thatabfolutepiomifc fulfilled to ihem. There- fore God did not inftitiltc Baptifm to be an inftmment to give men that which they haVv! before« Indeed if it be onely^ght to a thing that is given by a moral way of Do- naMOTj fo Baptifm may compleat and folcmn'xe that gift which was cu.rant before,an(l fo it doth, but in regard of inherent habits or qualities, it cannot do Co.
This Argument is fufficient alone to all that Mr. B, faith, when we have but anfwercd his one great exception. Ht granteth all this to be rrue as to men at age ; and that to* thera It is not the end of Baptifm to confer the firft Grace ; but he thinks that to In- fants It is otherwife. To whichi anfwcr,
I. I require fome Scripture.proof that God hath inftirurrd B.iprifm to infants to ond cndi and to the aged to another , where the aged arc cnpablc of both. Indeed it may 'a- to fome ends to ihe aged, which to infants it is not -, but that is nor from any difference in the nature and ufc of the Ordinance, but from the natural incapvcity of infants : but that it (liould have fo high an end to infants, and not to men at age, who were at leaft; as capable of that end , this no word of God fpeiks j And to feign fuch a thing wi.hout Sciipture-prcof , is to feign a Covenant and Ordinance that God never made..
a. In re!::tions, fuch as Sacraments a' e, the end cntetcih the Definition j therefore If (not through any natunl Incip7.city of the fubjed but G^iis meer inftitution) bap- tifm hive ends fo exceeding difF..'rent in infants and the aged, 'henvou m«ft have feve- ral Dcfiniiions of baprifm, and (u as it were feveral baptifms. B^^ Apoftlc faitlj^ aj there is hat one Urdywd oncfaiih, fo but one b.ipufm, bph.4.f . ^^
3. And according to thi? Doftrine, Baptifm Ih uld leal up one Covenant to the- Parent, and another diftlnft Covenant (vi-:;^ the fi ft Grace) to the Chi!dFen,which to die Parent was never fealed ; when ver the ! nfaf.ti inreieft is for the Parents fake, and comes in as an Apoendixto this ; which is mnft gicfl^abfurd. If God have not made th; promife of the firli Grace any more to infants, then to the aged, then k is not the end 9f the feal CO confer the Giace of chat promife any more to iftfams, then to the
a£cd:
Infants Chnrch' member jhip and B apttfm, 3 ©I
a?ed; bm God harh not made that promifcany more to infants, then the aged ;
Therefore, e^c. , r ^ .
4. 'If the parent and child do enter one and the fame C-ovcnant before Baptifm j then it Is the benefits of one and the fame Covenant , which by Baptifm is fcaled and conferred. But the Parents and Child do enter one and the fume Covenant ; There^,
fore,d^c.
The Antecedent is evident through all the Scripture. Circumcihon was the Seal, or fign of Gods Covenant^ and is therefore called the Covenant it fclf ; but this was not two Covenants but one. Abr^h-inani his f-mily all cnned one Covenant j and /f- ^•jjf^dw receivcd'CircumcilvoHj a fcal of the righteoufnefs of that faith which he had being yet uncircumcifcd. The aged and the infants of all lfrael,Di:w.9.iOjii. do all enter into the fame Covcnan:, which is the fall mutaal Covenant, wherein the Lord takes them for a peculiar pe. p'e, and they t-ke the Lord oncly to be their God; It is not Gods abfolute promifc. That he will give them a heart to take him onely for their God, Thepromifeis toyou, and to ycur children, AlIi, not twofo diftind promifes, buc the (ame. And the child coming in for the parents fake, it rauli needs be into the fame Covenant.
* Obj. But Infants have not faith when they corae to Baptifm , as the Parents have j and therefore i mull confer :hi' feed cf ic on them.
Avf. I. We muft «ot take liberty upon our own fancies to adde new ends to Gods Ordinances.
^, Infants have that faith which is the condition of the Covenant in their patents ; the Parents faith i> the condition forhimCelf, and his children; till they come to the ufc of reafon themfelvcs.
3. It Is utterly unknown to any man on eauh^and unrevealed in the Word, whether God give Infants ufually any inherent fpecial Grace or not.
4. Bur if he do^ it is far more likely that he gives it before Baptifm by vcrtue cf that Covenant which faith, Ihe Seed of the Rghteotu is b'.tffcd and bo/j i then that Baptifm Ihould be inftitstcd to conferre it , which is inllituted to other ends tp all others.
J. The aged being, i. The moft fully capable fubjeds.z.And the greater part of the w-rld when Baptifm was inftituted, who were to be partakers of it. 3. Andthcmoft excellent and eminent fubjeds. 4. And of whom Scripture fully fpeaks^and but dark* iy of Infants j Therefore It is moft evident , that the full and proper ends why God Inftiuted the Ordinance , is rather to be fetched from the aged , then from Infants.
6. Ifthevery Baptifm of Infants it fclf be fo dark in the Scripture, that the Contro-' rerfie is thereby become fo hard as we find It, then to prove not only their Baptifm, but a new dillinft end of their Baptifm, and a far different Covenant by it fealed to them, and far different grace by it conveyed to them , this will be a hard task indeed. And efpecially fuch men as are fain tc flie to Tradition for proof of Infant-baptifm (as
Mt.B. doth ) methi|ks fliould not fo confidently obtrude on the world fuch new differ
and uld-^Ti Scripture, that Wptifm fcalcth to them another Covenant, or confene h another Grace
ent ends and uld-CT ihtir Baptifm j and that as from Scripture. They can prove from
then ever it was intended to do to any others j and yet muft go to Tradition to pro^ tha: they muft be baptized.
And to that end to over- magnlfie Tradition, and intimate a charge of infufficiencic on he Scripture ; as thefe words plainly iniprrt in hisTreatlfe ot Sacraments, paj. 9i.9l- [ ^' Traditions Apoflolical arc Au:h( ntlcal, and not to be rcfiifcd becauic noc
ftgx " " "written
5o>
?Uin Scripture proefof
written, i( found to be Apoftolical Anoft^l,>,l n n. " '
« cure, havea more u.qucKab" cerufnrv Vh n l r"*"" 'l'^'^"'°"«'l •" the Scrip- •^ rity.Nurhcr » thi. cult up 1 radi bn ^ h P.oift "•°"'' ^"5 ''^"^^ greater Auth^
Authority of icriprmc, aVrcportin. hcZac „ wh!rV ^'^'. '°f "»^^'" "^ in the Irs H.aory, or tailing u. v»l,?ch a.^hc Can n" rB *^^^^^^ ^"l :" ''' "i ""^^"'"S any Scripture-dt drine ; 7 fay this 1 raHirmn , 1 . *^^ '^'""''S a'l'l coi, filming be valued, then moil do im^e z I m X ^^^"'^"''^'^g^ "»0'^ ncceffary and to dit.on. Apoftolical, vvhic^rAurh;n icl and Tai; '"Tr'' V ^''^'^^-^'e Fra- An ftolualCufton^.. z And that inrmatea^'a'^ 2b. ut the proper fubj.a of fo great an Ordinance. 3 A^fd a ? " ^ '£ ™' '"^ ^° that we admu none concra.y to Scriptu e-Cuftcm or whirK t*'''"' "*^"^'
He./.../,/. , rem Scripture j ^ m«ft Eeds thin Z ^r uS tTSttV^"'/" ^' " plying w.th the Papifts, though you deny ir. If the^^c-ip-ures L° r ? ' /"J;' com- fure determines ofaJI materfal parrs cf Uuh p , or cl f^i "as n^^" ^eV ^""^1 Kule concerning worfliip, and pofitlve Ordinance. La ( r ""^^.^^^^ = P^-'e^ ligh: of nature ^a.ls fol/ort, then fur k U a e FeftVule t nn"h- ^°' '^l^' **^'"'" ^''^ cumftances are determirx-d of but in Pen JT? ? . r T'''"S- i know metr cir- Jpecie. r. But that is^be^^lf^!'" "c &Xt^^^'::Z'"^''^'^^''''' for all times pbces.and perfons.becaulc thcc is a nee. ffi7v f .'^"'^'"'"'^ '" ?P' c'c , neccfTuy or fi^nefs of a dc^termin;cio"i;d t s no p^o' tZTa'l ' Vc'f. "° to dc e, n^ine them 5 othetwifc if it were nect fTi, l ,n?T I '' \P"^f^<^'on o^ ^c ds law tern^ined of, then how can G^lVarbT;,?. d"o b' I -^^Im pc^fT t
be an Anabnpt.ft then it is with me 4 An Vor ,n '".^r<^.'nJ'f 'HU wuh you to
but w.ll fay a^s n.uch 'ary'^uTfor the l.trat't 'Z::^^^l2 'T ^^^'^^
Limitations as (if ; had time) I could fhcw you eaf/ly f^om , "^c ^wn w"^^
indeed if all that is not contrary toScriDture/Cuft,„^c ... u 5' "^"''
reafonabiefromSc.p:ur.muUeadE;d^"n";^
pcure, .f they do but take it for a Tiadition Apoftoiical thcn^i ,r wM ?l i "
aworic to make God a wor/hip or judge of the cur an n fs oHt 1cc1a7.1\ '"r *"''
and one man will think it reafonabie , and .nol ^t ^ And ^t?. ' ? "f " 'r
Ceremoaies w.ll this admit Into the Church, to the bunheninfof J^ n r r •"'^' °^
and the polluting of Gods woilhip ? Is not hJs he doo i" "fhcfcv of Pnn^'"^'
rnrthis'd^r/ And^r^"^ '''''i''''''' '^- '" '^ ^^-^^^^^i^l:^
Traduioniuthbrought down to us Gous book,or written Law it fclf^and thematter
Infants Chnrch- member fhip and Baptjfm. 303
nf fad which may confirm k5 authority in a certain way ; but thefe prctendd addtti, nnc arc by Gods wifdom left wholly at uncertainties- Yei, what contradiaion is there K«wcen thcfc pretenders to Tradition ? as there was between thofe that contended
thii.k that (o many It-a! ,
Traditions and fo icaloiifly cleave to any Ceremonies, Vorn.ali-if j. or Conuptjons InWoifliip' which they can but find that the Fathers hive ufed I when fume ct them the very l-'ap'fts thtmfelvcs havecaft cff ! Methinks men Ihould delue to go on the furer lide ot the hedge ; and feeing where there is no law, there is no tranfgrcflion, lin bein^ nothing elfe but a tranfgrcflion of the law, they IhiuM conclude, Thar it is cer- tainly no fin (and therefore fafeft) to let go thofe Additions which no law cnj..ineth. Bur en the other fide, That it may be a dangerous fin to ufe them, both as bt ing an ac- cul'atlon of Scripture as infufficient, and an adding to Gods Wor/hip If wh.n his wrr« fliin was 10 mochC^remonioujjhe yet laycth a charge to do whatfotva hecommar d d, and adde nothing thereto, nor take ought thercf.om ( that is, not to^ cxf.om x^^^xfo.di (ommanAni onely, but alfo the Jvor/fc commanded) is it likely then thathewul bekfs jealous in this now ? . , , j. . ,
If we mi^ht not adde one Cetcmony to an hundred, tnay we adde to two or ihrce ? Did e hritt take down all thofe of Gods own inftitution, that he might give man leave tofct up others of their own ? I fpeak not of-mecr circumftanccs, ncceffaiy in Ccncyc^ but which murtbt d>ftcrently and occafionally determined j butcfmyftical.Dodrinal Rites, or the l.ke Ceremonies not nccclTary in their Gr««j. Why could not Chtift have determined I hci'c himlUf, and that in his hue written word, if he would have had them determined ? Haih not God made us work enough, but we muft make our felvcs fo much moic?Yea,thofe men that arc the moft backward to Gods undoubted wotfhip, are the moft forwa-d to make more of their own. Is it not the priviledge W the Go- fpd.Church, and xcellency of Gofpel-wrrtilp, that Rudiments and Ceremcnits are down, and God will beworihippcd in Spirit without fuch avocations? In vain do they w'orihip him, teaching for Dodrincs the Commandments of men. Who knows what will pleafc God but himl'clf ? And hath he not told us what he expefteth from us? Can that be obedience which hith no command for it => Is no: this to (upcreiog3te,snd to be righteous overmuch? Is it not aifo to accufe Gods ordinances of infufficiency as well as his word ; as if they were not fulficient either to pleafe him, or help our own Graces ? O the pride of mans heart,that in ftead of being a Law obeyer,will be a Law- maker ! /^nd inftcad of being true worlhippers, they will be worlhip makers 1 And that arc fo little conlcious of thJr own vilencfs, as to think themfelvcs fit for fuch a work as this ! And fo little fenfible of their weakneCs, and difability to obey what is already cnmmafided,and their too fnqjcnt failings, that they will make more work for themf.lves.'and f< i^i more Laws to be obeyed i For my part, I will not f<.ar that God will be angry with me ior doin^ no more then he hath commanded me, and for flick'- ing dole to the rule ot his woid'in maaer of worlhip : but I ihould trembL to adde, or diminilli. To the Law, and to the ftflimcny .• it they fpeak not according to thefe, Itisbccaufe there is noli-,ht in them. God is wifcr then 1, to know what is acceptable to kimldf, and fit for his ctcaturc. I ihall but make my fclf unexcufabic at judgment
Q.<} I for
304 PUift Scripture f roof ef
for all my fallings In known duty, when I will needs fupcrtrogatc by adding of mo.e.
I fay the more of this, i. In compa{tion over ("ome learned Divines ( whom I (hall* not name ) who arc more deer in many Doftrlnals thtn mcft of the world bcfidet and yet ftill arc fo ftrnnjjly addidcd to unwritten TraditionSj Formilirics, and ^.Cere- monies. Doubtlcfs the Church of Ka>nc themftlvcs are not near fo blameworthy fot their Hrrors in mcer DoArinals, (mittakes hath made them kern rtorfe in fomeof thefe thin they are) as for their horrid unreafonable confufion, vain pompoui ihcws and childilh j(.fting formalities iu worfliip : The reading of one of th>.ir Miffais or bocks of Devotion would make a mans heart life againft them more then the reading of their DoSrinal controverfies. 2. And I fay the more ot thu to M: B. bccaufc he is leafed (Treat, of Sjcr.^zg.i?iO.) ro fpeak to the Anabaptifts argumenCj from Chrifts faith- fulnefs, and SciiptureperfcSion, thus ^ [ Thii u ibe!r:umph .-g Argumat: of ail Schif. mat/c^s rvhomi[I:l(Cthc Ceremonies of the ChHrch^vphcthcr Naiisru' 0, C^ihul'i.{ ] V\h re I. any Reader that looks to know a mans mind by his word*, muil rhlnk iha; he ra.ans that all thofe are Schifmttickj that miflike the faid Ceremonies. And if fo, then i. This Is very hard, high, uncharitable cenl'uring , feeing m ny hundreds of fuch never fepa- ratcd nor made any Rent in the Church : and are men Schifmaticks that never made Rents ? 1. Yep, multitudes of thtm that conformed not to thefe CeremonicSj were as holy, learned, judicious, peaceable men as thefe ages h^ve known Ic befeems not fuch a man 3$ Mr.S- to brand-fuch as Ragnolds, B.iin, Ei:glHmaf!, Aims, Partner, Sa>idfo,d Badfb.Ttv, Bill, Hi'd(tih.:m, Dod, Rogers jHool^cr^ with hundreds more, wich the ti;leo^ ichifmaricks, who did more againftSchifm by wtiting , then all the contrary-minded \n Env^'Md J. And even of thofe that conformed to Ceremonies, ( as inconvenient burthens, which yet mighi be born, rather then foibcar prcachtng ) «hat a multitude of the mcft learned and godly mifliked thtm, thcfc times have flu wed ; witnefs our Re- verend and learned Affemblics judgment againft them : and arc thefe Schifmaticks for a meermiflike ' 4. But efpecially one would think that there fliould more refpeft be due to all the Churches of Scotland, HoU^nid, Fr'^mCy Helvetia, &c. that arc known to miflike thefe Ceremonies,then to judge them Schifmaticks. j. Luc for that phrafe of [ Ccrcmo^cs nf the Caiholicl^ Church,'] k is very rank, and fuch as is no: ufual with Pro- teftant EMvines.
I hope this learned man doth not take the particular Roman Church for the Caiho- lick Church and if he do not, 1 am utterly ignorant what he means by the Ceremonies of the C.uholick Church; 1 would he would name what Ceremonies the Cathollck Church holdethjWhich thefe men miflike, ( yea, or which //)fyrfo wo/, being unwritten.) Are all the Churches of Laft and Weft, even the Ethiopians complies, and all agreed on any one unwritten Ceremony, and that fuch as thefe men miflike ? And are all thofe Churches or pcrfons that miflike them, no parts of the Catholick Church ? Sure this is no Catholick Dodiine. God will teach us before he hath done with usj to be more gentle and tender of one another in fuch Traditions and Ceremonies.
But to return to the point in hand- Againft this Doftrine of Mr.B, I argue thus ; If there be Traditions ot'cqual authority withSciipturc^/'o/2o'/f.i//'/.'/?owJ3then there arc Traditions which are the very laws-of God by which men mufl be judj^.uflificd or condemned : but there are no Traditions unwritten, that arc the very Laws of God j therefore there are none of equal authority with the Scripture Apofieiica! Ciifiums. The Major is deer . in that thofe Scripcure-Cuftoms were part of Gods Laws , for though all examples of good men in Scripture be not direftly binding; yet when God hath given a Commiirion to fomc in fpccial co order the matters of his Church & worfhip,
and
Infants Church'nfemberjhif d»dBapifm, 305
and piomlfed to be with them, and direft them by kis fpirit In doing ic i (as he did to the Apoftles ) there the vety cuftom by them cftablifliei hath the force of a Law. £uc befides thofe mentioned in Scripture > there is no cercalniy of any fuch cuftomc efta. blidied by the Apoftles , except you will call every occafional ad of theirs the ^.ftablilh. IngofaCuttotn, it being the mind of God that his whole Law fliould be wiiiieOj and fo certain. ,^ n
Elfe whit a fad lofs were the Chaich of Chi ill at, concerning the knowledge of his will in matter of woiihip ? How would the generality of ordinary Chriftians be wholly pulled in difcerning trae ApoUolical Traditions from falfe, and reafonabic ones from unreafonablc ones ? it being indeed a thing to them impoflible j and needs muft it brin^them to the authority of ;he prcfcnt Church, to know what to take forcurranc Tradition j and what Chu:ch muU be Ju.ige, we ihould be at a lofs, there being fuch difFirence amonj the Churches. How fli!.y would this Dodrine of Tradition, equal to Scripture- Cuttoms bring us over in rime to Romc again ! and indeed of all iheir Do. ftrinalerro.Sj this and fwch other that deny the perfedion of Scripture, in being a fuffi- cient rule for faith, and the efiVntialsof worfhip,(and the acciiients in general^ fo far as an unive-fal determination is fi',) arc to be reckoned among che moil dangerous, and fc they are by moft Proteliant Divines.
And for the point of Infant- baprifm , whether the ScrJptute give us not proof of nyjre then the rcafonabknefs of it , upon fuppofitlon that the inftitution be firft proved by Tradition, I leave A//. B. to judge by what I have written, (though the practice of the Church be an excellent Expofuion , and confirmation of the Scripture herein.)
The like I might fay in regard of baptizing but once (at lead with Chrifts baptiun, into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft) and the receiving the Lords i>upper oft, which I undertake to prove fully both from Scripture, and yciMr.B, faith, Treat. ofS^u, [ " The ground of which pradife (why Baptifm is adininiflrcd,and ** received but once, and the Lords Supper oft times) binding m to obedience (under **corredionI fpeak It) I take to be not any direft Text of Scripture, cither command- ** ing the one, or prohibiting the other ; but the Tradition of the ancient Church, re - *' ceivcd and approved by the Conftitution of the prefent Church.] I will no: further digrefs to lance this palTage , and let oat the corruption. I have faid the more to this, becaufe If my belief of Scripture be once (haken,my Chriftianity will befliakcn .• and if my belief of Scriprure-petfcSion be once Ihaken , my belief of its truth will foon be (Tiiken; and if [once believed Tradition of equal authority with Scripiure-Apoftolical- Cuftoms,3nd that in matters of fuch moment as Infant-baptifmjmy belief of Scripture- pcrfedion were Ihaken already.
I now proceed to confirm the fecond part of my Pofirion, ( which is higher then the fiift,and fo will be a fulfer confirmation of the firft.) viz- That baptifm veat not mftitu- tcd to be an in^iumcnt^ by -which any yCal Gcice fljauld be wrought In 'Jjc foul of any Infant , or anj red'. chiNgc made in it.
Argum.i. if itbcanin(lrumcnt of fuch a change^ then either as aVhyflcal injlrumcKt, CYaMo-ral: but it /i as neither of ihefc ; thertftrc none at aU. Here ftill remember, that I fpeak of an inftrument effeding the work or change i: felf upon the Soul ; and that I deny notji.Bu: that Baptifm may bean inftrumcnt of convey ing Relative Grace. z.Or right to real fubfequent Grace. 3 Or that God may renew the fcul of an Infant at the time ofhis Baptifm .• he is tree to woik when he plcafeth. But i. He hath not prom ifed or revealed that he will do fo, much lefj inftitutcd it to that end. x. And if he do. yet Bapjifni is no inftiument of thic work. The Surgeon may lance a fore, or deanfe a
w«und
306 PUf» Scripture preof ef
wound in a mans body , at the fame time as he is walhing his hands i but the wafhine of his hands was not the inftrumcnt of ic.
Here, i. 1 will prove the Minor, That 1: wwkcth not this change as a l^hyfical noc as a Moral inftrument- i. Tht Major, Thar there is no Tcwum. *
I. Doaor/;'/7/^ In his annexed Trad, affirmeth it to be no Phyfical ii ft;umcnt, bat a Moral} and Mr. B. himfelf affi mcth it to be no Phylical Inft umenc , f-'i 40; (though In his Tr- ofSacr. pag.icpi. he faith, lb S-phit r9orl( ih net as a Moral cgcnt, but as j n.itural,or rather fupe> natural ; but that is ntjthing to the operation of the Inrtrumcm.) Now a Moral Inftrument may dircaly convey a Dtt;/a//>, or z Jm ad rem ; but In real changes it cannot dlredly cffta, convey or cperatc the thing it ic\i, fave only proponendo obj.e6ium,vcl fuadcndn (which moft judge to be cpcratio thctaphmc*a mgcsci e caufte finalu potiui qulm cffiaentii^ as Duftor TivijmiiQu ) and thu<i it can wnrk on no infant, nor any that want the ufe of rtafon. To piovc this further, were to waftetime.
^. So doth the nature of the thing manifeft, that It can be no Phyfical Infttumcnr, nor have any real proper efficlcncie on the foul. Aninftiumentpropeuy u Caula qua infiuit in (fcClitm per vlrtutcm inferior U raiionu, as Siian-^^Amilain, St/cnu^, &c. vcl Infirumentum e^ quod ex dire6li0iie alterm principals a-^cntis ihflw.t .id prudtiuadum cf- fcnumfenobiiiorcm, nt Sch.blcr,Scc. Now Baptifm can be no fuch caufe ; for the water is nota fubjed capable of reciiving Grace, or of conveying it to the foul j It cannct approach or touch the foul . norlntuf grace into it^if It could. \i\AiEadcmefl aClio iw ^rumcnti & princtpaUs cau/a, y\z. quoad detcrmlnationem ad bunc effiSlmn'i «f Aquin. Schibl. ^c. Therefore Danxm faith (Coiit, Bellarm. ad Turn. Com A- P- (*f>ihO zj8 J //^«.: corporea in ammas incorporeoi agcrc, & figuum impnmere, ex vi/'g.u/Hftma reguU Phyficanon poffunt. And Ameftiu in BcUa/m Enov t.Tom j /.r c.j- Baptijmin cxtcriiti nonpotefl ejfc Pbypcum inflrumentum infuftonis gratite^quia mn habct dtm uUt mode infefe. And in this fenfe I take it that Zuingliin fo frequently denieth that B.ipiim woikcrh any Grace,orpardonethfin,orrencweth ; as In Tow.2./>.izi,b.xi9jiio^e^/J-f<^, iJut £ need fay no mor« to this, becaufe It is confclTcd.
i.All lies then upon thi$,whethcr Baptifm be aMctaphyfical inflrumcnt.asjW.B.fairh? Ifhegive not this as a third Member then I have faid enr u^htohlm already. If he do, then when he hath (hewed the infufficlency of the old diflindion, and the nature of bis Mctaphy(ica.l inftrumentj and proved it, then he hath done more then any that ever went before him. I. But the water of Cap.ifm is a meer natural being, and therefore cannot be aay other then a Natural or M'^ral inftrument. z. If it were a pure Spi- ritual, Supernatural being, asGodhimftlf is, yet the kind or way of operation would be ftill either Phyfical, or Moral. The fenfe of which diftinftion is not to denote the matter or tlLnce of the Efficient to be Natural or $upc' natural nor the force in Cau- fation to be either by an ordinary natural way, or extraordinary and fupernatural j But as Sch'Mcr^ Ruvioj and all folid Philosophers exp'ain it, A Moral caufe is that which doth not truly and properly effeft, but yet is fuch as the ified is imputed to it, (and therefore many Philofophcrs call it Caufa imput.it/va \ ) A I^hyfical caufe is that which truly and really effdeth; d^ iffcHum piex:me afi/vitaic fua atti?/git, ut Schiblcr> Ex quo (inqnit lllc ) apparct quodrionfolum caufa'Fhyfiu dicatur ea , qute c [I corpus 'Saturate J fcdqiod caujte phy/ic* d'cantur (tiam Dcus & Angch quatcnus vc-re lYifiuHnt a/iquid produccndo , veluti Aagi lus dum fe mcvct , & Dcus dum rriat, Top.c c.j./ijj &P.101. &p 41, Sic ttiam Suari:'^ Mttaph. dij]>.i7. Se^.'i-. S.6, Lege eliam Rivcti d,!}.^ f,i6,i7,\9.p 164,165. fully of this. And do not all Divines and Schoolmen conclude,! hat not only the foul of man, but even God when he undcr-
ftandech
Infants Chnrch- mcmherjhfp and Baptifrf, 307
cth and willeth, Is Caufa phyficaailiu iliiiu iirmancntu- And lure if your Hypcrphyfica/ or Mecaphylical Tertlum would have place anywhere, it would be about the ininaancnt Ads of God.
M.iy I not therefore faftly conclude, That all thofc that give this for a Tcrtiuw, do either undtrftand the Terms iNtoral and Phy(ical In a way of their own, different from Philofophers that ufe them or elfe do not underftand the ftnfc of them ? For is not your Baptifm cither a caufe real, or meerly imputative ? Hath it not either a proper In- fluence and caufality, or not? Is there any middle between thefe ? or any third mem- ber to be imagined ? But the plain truth is, this is a common trick of men, that either know not what to fay, or know not what they lay, to call in Hypcrphyfica! is a Terliumt to ftop the mouths of the ignor3nt,and amaze men,inftead of clearing the truth to thfiHi when ifyou ask them the meaning of their [Hyperphylical] they will tell youno'more, but that it Is Supernatural, or above our reach .- The meaning is, they know not what it is J and therefore know not what ihcy fay J and theiciiore it Is not a ficfubjeft for difcourff,
Ihavc found this Trick common when I have difptited with men about the inflru- mentality of faith in juftlfication.when they arc forced to deny It to be a Phyfical a<ftiYe Inftrumcnt , they next fay , it is a 1 hyfical Paflive Inftrument j and Credere, Is not Agere, hwi p.itt j and yet faith is Nittu'ia,AlfcnJui & fiducia i but thcfcarc no ads, but paffions.
Feart'ull -Divinity and Phtlofophy ! And when they are beaten out of this, then the jaft rctufeis this of the ignorant j ic is a Hyperphyfical inftiument, and neither Phy* fical nor Moral. And fo Mr.B. fcemeth to do about the Lnftruraentality of Baptifmt in operating real Grace on the fculs of Infants ; and is it not a real proper caule of it then ?
THefc Pofitions aflertcd, do cut the finews of the main part oiMx.Bs, miftakes j yet I will examine fome more of his additional Doftrines, I. Where he faith, That [Faith may g\st mtnjm adrcm, but they cannot ordinarily have Jus in >r,without Baptifm. TreattofS.ur. page 91. And TrJ^page 86^87. where his Opponent faith^ That [the aged are regenerated before they arc baptized,] He an- fwcreth, [I grant it, as far as It may be done by the Word without the Sacrament, But when the cffcA Is common to two means Inftituted of God, it is not abfurd to fay, that it is not perfcfted by one onely. By the Spirit In the Word they are regenerate in part,by the fame Spirit working in Baptifm fully. We muft fay therefore,That to the aged Bap- tifm conferrcch a more perfeft ftate of regeneration. By their faith which the Word be- gat, they have obtained Jus ad rem, by the Sacrament Jus in re } that which is begun by the Word, is perfedcd by the Sacraments.]
r>i I conceive this Dodrine contrary to the very nature of Gofpel- mercies and Graced and to the veryfubftanccof the Covenant, and fo to the truth. Right to a thing is either immediately, o:fuh tcrmnOi^t the end of fome certain time : And it is either conditi- onal, or abfoluta and adual. Agaln,it Is either the firft adual right, or onely the conti- nuince,which is conditional. And the mercy to which we have right,is either a Relative changr, or a real,
I. Rig,ht to a thing fub termno,h at prefent an »mpcrfeft rightjbeing properly but the ground of a future right/as an heir to his fathers Lands ac his dcccafe) This indeed is not properly Jus in re.
Fv r Buc
^oS FUin Scripture pro$f of
But J. This is not the right which Faith gives to Chrift , and pardon of fin , and adopaon, but an immediate righc.
5 . As foon as the condition is j»etformed ( that condition wrhich is of ncceflliiy to the end, though ibmc accidentals be unpci formed,^ immediately the bent fi: is ours as truly as if the promife were abfolutCj in regard of the firft right. But the continuance of it is conditional (lili.
4. Methinks this learned man rtiould acknowledge, That as to the Relative bene- fits, fuch as Pardon, Juftification and Adoption, R'ght toibcm^ 3nd R/ght mi hem, zre bifeparable, (fpeaking of prefent Right to them. ) He that hath right to be a Father.is a Father, or to be a Son, is a Son ; He that hath nghc to be Gods bon, is his Son,and to beaMemberofChrift, isaMember. He that hath right to be immediately pardoned, is pardoned, or to be juftified, isjuftified. i. 1 he /;« (id >cot, and /« >f, are rdations here that refuit from the fame grounds, if not all otie. 2. Or if they did not, yet what fliould keep us from poffcfllon, where we have Kight to the thing ? Either it is an abfc- lute Right to it that we have,or but a Conditional, if an abfolute, God is not unjuft to deny any man his Right. If but Conditional, thin it is not aftuai right to it; it is properly bur a poflibility of future aSual R'ght^ and till the Condition be performed, he hath no more Adual Right to it, then any other man j nor (hall be ever the better for that Condition if he perform not the condition ; therefore this is not properly ///4 ad rem, $0 that I dare fay that he that hatha nuc adual immediate /«j ad rem, right to pardon and jullification, is pardoned and ji..ftifitd, and fo hath Jm in re.
f . This Doftrine contrfidideth the very tenor and lubftance of the Gofpel, which faith, That as marj as rcccivedlvm, to ihim g.ivc he power ta become the Sons of God^fven to them thai believe in h'v r.amc, Juh 1. 1 1,1 z. And all th.it believe la hnfj^nycjuflificdfrom aU thifgj, fiomrvhich they could, noi be ]ii{hfiidby the Ltavof Mofcs^ Ad. 19.39. Andto him z,^ve all the Prophets xviinefsf that n-J.o'uiver belicvcth in him ih,ough his namrjh.ill receive yrmijfton of fins ^ Ad. 10.45. And John 3. tS. He ih-ubclieveth onhim,is not - conderfimd. And verf. 56. He that believcth on the Son, hath cvcr/afting bfe^ &c. So alfo ]oh J 24. & 6,5 J 40;47. & 7 j5. & 11.25,16. Rom. 3. 26. &4. 5. & 9 3 J. vrith multitudes of the like Now i<thc> have not Jia in >r,thtn they are ftill unpardoned, and unjuftified, for all their faith In Chrift.
But where you fay, That the promiie is made to two things, v\. Faith and Baptifm, therefore one cannot pcrfcdly do i 5 I anfwcr. j It is made to one as the proper Condi- tion, of abfolute ncceffity > and but to the other as an accidental fol(mni23tiorr,though rtcciffity ncccfitate pvttccpti^^ medii(oriohmn\Zinon.<in6 lignihcation,< bfigaation (raking the word nectffarylimitcdlyjyct not ofthatablolutc necefliry,as thai wichout it the end cannot be attained, or is not conftantly attained where there is true fait|j,whicli is the proper Condition.
2. Biptifmi when it is mentioned as necefTary, is plainly undo ftood Rflatively re- ferring co the Ccvenant.whichby Baptifin we enter and Seal. Avwhcn a Proclamatinn isnnade, Thatwhcioever wililift himfelfaSouldicrunder fucha Co«imander, and wear his Colours, Hiall havefuch andfuch priviledges and pay : Now the meaning is^ if he will be his S-ou!dier and fervehim.* LilUng and Colours being fpi-ken of and ufed biJtitlatively .-It is ordinary for an Officer in hafte.to foi bear lifting; m-ny ot his men of a long time, ('andbutfor the wcaknefs of his own memory, might foi bear it ftill, j and many a thoufand never have Colours ; and yet they have all tht privlledge of $oul- diers. And why is that ' bu: btcaufe the thing intended as the Condition indeed^is his confent to be fuch a mans Souldier,and take him for his Commanderjand fo obey him^ an.d fight for him : but the other are buc^compUmentalj engaging Solemnities. So in
ihc
Infants Church- meml^erjh/p and Baptifm, 3 09
the crowning of a King ; in marrying a woman with a Ring,or the like ce;cmony .• If thtrt be confent teftified between King and people, he Ihall have Jtts in re before he ii cro.vned.And if there be confent between a man and woman teftified by Covenanting, they Hiall have ^ut in re and enjoy each other,though the Ring or other Ceremony be forborn. And fo I doubtjiot it is here in the Covenant between Chrifi and us j where the- c is true confent, and Covenanting, there is true pardon and Juftification (And fof the fitft ftcd of grace,I have pxov.d aheady^that Jt was no end of Baptifm to give cithet Jui 'id r em or m re.) ^ e
6. Andthis Doarinc bringeth in thcPopifli necefiity of Baptifm to falvation ; According to this Dodrine , we have little rtafon to hope for the falvation o^ any rn- baptized at leaft,thar might hjvebten baptizid.- But of this next- 7. And fo it would bring in Lay-meps Baptifm and wom-ns, or flrongly incline to it. 8. And would mako many a thoufand true believers robe all damned 9. And would leave todcftruftion the children of true believeis/or their fathers Qec;led of baptizing them,as tliail be next touched.
1. \ yT THcre he faith that [by the Spirit in the word they are Regenerate In part, buc
V V have not Jm in re ; and that Baprifm is neceflary as a means without which God is not wont to confer the grace of Chiift to falvation {Tra^l.p.^j ,) and that the op ration of the Holy Ghcft with-^ut whith the Ad of faving grace is neither cfFded no" perfected. may notbeexpefted bat in the ufeof means, word 3ndSacrament,(p. 69.) that is , Taptifm for ingrafting the feed of faith and graces in us , and the word for ex- citing and cherilliing it , and the Lordi Supper for confirming it ff-pj.) and that if the Spirit do convey grace to any without the ufe of Sacraments, this is to be account- ed extraordinary. Treat, of Sacr./). 14J ] 1 fayj all this fcems to me very unfound doftfinc.
For I. Wl-.atcana Papift fay morcalmcft for theneceffitycf itf then that God is no' ufcd to give Grace without it^and that we may not exped the Grace of the Spitic without ir.
X. What hope then ofthe falvation of many thoufand Believers and their children, that dye without Baptifm =• doth not this overthrow cur hope of fuch ? For either God hath promifcd to fave fuwh though unbaptiied, or not ; If he have, then we may expeft itjand that in an ordinary way,x','^.upon promifc>and then God is wont to give it } for lure he is wont to fulfill his promilcs If there be no promife of it, and God indeed be not wont fo to give it, then what ground of Lhriftian hope ofthe falvation of fuch?Thc promife is the ground of Chriftian Hope.Who date expett falvation from God for him- Itlf or others.ouc of Gods way? which were to tempt God and plainly to prefume.And therefore the moft thai we could do in fuch a cafe, were to leave all believers and In- fants that arc uiibaptizcJjWithouttrHc Ho e in the cafe of Heathens infants, concerning whom God hath n. t revealed his mind. I hough indeed that will not hold neither ; for if God have revealed, that he ufcth not to give faving grace without baptifm, then ac leail in all probability the unbaptized arc damned.
5. And can .inv h.ngbe more contrary to Scripture, then that believers In fincerliy are damned ? And can any dodrine be more deteftable then that which would teach us not to believe the grear promife. That whofoevcr belicveth Ihall not perifli ? butac Icaft tc (Jucflicn the falvation of the faithfull ? And who knows not that true Believer* may be vmbaptiicd ? And whereas you give them hope^ if it be in » cafe of neccfli:y.
Rr 1 lYbecc
3 1 o PUin Scripture protf ef
where Baptifm cannot be had ; what ground have you to give them that hope, if grace be not to be expcded without Baprifm, and God be not ufcd to give i: > your charita^ ble opinion of men, is a poor ground for them to build their hope of falvadon on, cicept you will diew them fome Scripture for It.
4, And confider what a multitude you leave to this damnation. What you will fay to the times before Circumcifion, and the Ifraelices fourcy years uncircumcifcd, we ihall fee anon. You arc not certain thit the twelve Apoftles were baptised, and Co ac- cording to you we muQ qaeftion their falvation. You know that even in TcrtuUims time, they begun to delay baptifm long, and lo down to A';-/.w^<« time, when they forb ire oft ^ except in danger of death ; and you know h- w long Qonflantin. him- felf, and Auflnij and many others did defer it ; and that the N jvarion error bred Aich a fear in men of finning after Baptifm, that at laft muUhudcs delayed it. and fome tiM their death-bed. And were all thefe unpardoned apd unjultificdj not having ^ui :n ,e? were they not truely pofTeft of Chrift and grace ?N ay, were they regenerate but in L\irti* And it muft needs be that many muft dye without it ? and did they pcrilh ? Or was it by an extraordinary way that Cenflantine , Ati(l;f?, &c. had the faid grace before Baptifm ? Yea, what fay you to all the Churches of the Anabnptifts in Germany, Holland, EngUirdt&c. Have none of them Grace till baptized ? Arc you fure lo many thoufands are all unpardoned, or that God is not wont to pardon them, and give them Grace.' I dare not think lo uncharitably of them- And yet they mi5ht have Baptifm if they would, and arc mt denved it, by any outward impediment, but only by che er- ror of their o\v.n mind ; bat who dare think that it is (uch an error as excludcth them from Grace > You fee hovi many thowfands of them are in Enz^latid already: And what If by their prevalcncyj and the ptopk's ignorance and inltability, An.ibaptirtry fhould become the common Religion of the Land (which you kn®w is too poflib'e;) would you fay that the Land weretxcluJed from Giacc^and might not expect the ope- ration of the Spirit f Or if they had grace, that it were in an extraordinary way ? Sure that way that God gives grace to f) many mi lions is an ordinary way. And fure the wo.'d is an ordinary way to faith: And fure faith is an ordinary way to Juftifica- tion.
f . BefidcS, yon do ill to exclude all means b:fidc£ the Word and Sicamtnts. No doubt prayer is alfo a meansjGod will givchii Spi:i: to them thit 3?k. If any man lack vvifdomi let him ask it of God, who givctli to all men libeallv, &c. fctk the Loid and your foul Ihall live, &c. I he like may be laid of Meditation, A iflictions^Mercics con- vincing wonders of prcvidence^ and the like. -
6. And ii you lay that you leave not all the forefaid pcrfons in eftate of damna. lion, then ycu ktm to alllrt a middle ftare, and then we may lock for a middle place between Heaven and Hell. For if a man be thirty ycais betwteenhis fiith and Baptifm (as many a thoufand Anabaptiftsarc many years) he hath all thu while Jm adrcr)i(^io Chrift, pardon, &c. y) but not /« /C. Now if he be fared v»ithout Right m Chrift and pardon it is ftrange j and if he be not faved when he huh Right to Chrilt and pardon, it Is ftrange too, and then he mufl be between a f^atc of falvatioAand damna- tion.
7. Again, you maie fo long and flrangc a work of Regeneration, as I never knew 2>iylnesdo. Thofe that deferred their Baptifm till ncer death, it feeras the workof Kegeneration was half done, perhaps fouity or lix:y years before, and partly then. For you fay the word d-:)th it but in put, and not fully, nor gives them Jm in fc, efp;cl3lly t« a man that takes Regeneration for the firft Actual Renovation of the nature by fpc» cia| grace ^ this is ftrange doctrine.
8. An<i
Infants Church'memberjhif and B aptifm, 3 1 1
8. And what confiderate man cm judge it crcdibfe, that the Gofpel rhould place Co great a neceflity in a Ceremonial Ordinance, when h hath fo gracioufly delivered u$ from themjyea when it in this fo eminently differeth from the Law? Even in the Infan- cy of the Church, God did fave all Infants that were faved-wlthout any fuch ordinance, many hundred yccrj j even from the beginning of the world till Abraham. And eyen in Abrahams time he made it not neccflary toall his Church, but only to Abraban:s fa- milyjto be circumcifcd. Scm and his family, who were then living, were not fo much as commanded to becircumcifedjNor Mckhe7^de(l{ nor any of the lubj.fts over whom he was Kins, or any of that Church to whom he was Priell. And to thofethac were com- minded'the ule of it, fo far was it from being of fuch neceflity to falvition, that God difpenfcd with it in their journey in the Wildernefs, and that to the whole people^ for fourty y eers tirae,(o that i.otie of the world (fxccpt the feed of }\cturnh, Elan or IjmacI) did then ufe it^to Ihew that even th; n he would have mercy ind not fact ifice,and would ever difpenfe wivh Ceremonials, when they were inconfiftcnt with morals. And can any believe that C hrift hath placed fo much greater neceflity now in his few Ceremonial ordinances as that men have not /wi ;« re without it, nor may cxpcft Regeneration before i: , or without it , now as well as then > What muti they in Nnv Eng't^rtdih^sz preach to thclndians.judge of this doftrine ? or any that live among Jews, 1 urks, or Pagans ? Sure if they baptize them before a probability of Repentance and Faithj they muft forlake thecondcid of Chtilt in the woik. And if they have Repentance and Faith, they are regenerated; And fure this mult be no extraordinary courfe, for it muft beufed with all thfir converts of all NatioaSi
A Nother unfounddodrinc (I think^ here maintained, is, 7h.U God doth ord/fjarily by B.iptifm give the Hn'y Choll^or ihc feed of Grace j or Regeneration to Irifants ih.Jt af- tcrrvardstifeit, and pen (Ij^ asiveE as to the Elefl.
I do not here fpcak of their relative grace of pardon or original fin , which being received on condition of a Faith without them, it is not fo abfurd if we affirm it may be loft ; But of the Holy Ghoft within them. What is here meant by the [HolyChufl] and [the feed of Faith] is hard to difcovcr. J)o6kot Surges con» fcfleth it is not the Holy Ghoft confidered effcstially and perfonally^ but opcratively. and yet faith [it is not only grace wrought by the -Spirit , but the Holy Ghoft dwelling in every true Chriftian, and working grace] Baptifw* Regem. pag. ii. But what middle thing between the efl'cnce and grace of the Spirit there is , I never yet heard. Is any thing [thcSpirit himfelf] which is not his cfTenceor perfon f ifhe mean the elTencc k given, but not conlidcred as the eflencc, but as operative. I Anfw. Confider it how you wilt, the Holy Ghcft is cirentiallv everywhere, and moveth not fiom place to place. So that what it cm be but an cf}'i;d and operation of the Spiiic , I never ytt heard. Yet the very pcrion of the Holy Ghoft may be faid to be given Rdativelyto work this in us, and fo metaphorically to be fent : As Chrift according to his Godhead was given and fent rohis Office for us ; But ftiU that which is given ReaUy into our naturei, muft needs be a created thing, and fo only [omc wo; l^ of the Spirit. And Mr. B. confeffeth this mr>'e plainly j for he fairh [it is that fame degree of grace which the Schoolmen call In^itfed HabitSy and which Scripture cals Seminal gmce^ and which is conferred in Baptifm, and is the Sacramental Regeneration. Trafl.p 56.] And indeed whar c'ife can i: be ? The word [Seed] and [Root] arc Metaphors. Some call It ipfinc'ipie : And then it muft be Principium (fued, vcl quo \ the principle which is received, or by which we receive the objefts of the foul $ The former is only things True and Good, as fuch j and cannot be it. The latter muft be cither the faculty It
R r 3 idi
512 Flain Scripture freof ef
fdfor Power j Or ell'cfome difpnfuion or Habit to qualifie and fie chat power. That grace infufeth no ntw power Dr. T\v:(fc In h s lace Anfvrcr to Co'V.nus will tell you in many places (as you may fee in the InJcx^ and that ic is only a Habit that is infufcd.
For^my part, I caiily acknowledge that we ai call at a great and rcmedilcfs lofs con- cerning the nature of our own fouls, their being, motions, and thcfe Habiti and qua- lifications of them. I'ut whitfoevcr you wdl call it^ methinks Mr. 85. Dodrinecan. not holdfound. Forthe Holy Ghoft or Siminil or Habitual grace which is given to them that lofc It after and perilh, is cither fpecial, effcdual, faying grace {pro tet/i' fore) in the habit and leedj 01 it J$ only common, uncfF^fiual not faving grace. If the later, then it would not be faving to thofc that dye in Infancy, a» Mr. B. thinki it is. If the former, then it would certainly and infilUbly bring forth fpccial, favin? AdsofGraceasfoon as theparty had the ufe of rcafon. Foi Habits are given for the facilitating of the ads 5 and to feign Habits or feeds of cff.dual faving grace, which yet will not at all bring forth an aft of faving grace, is new Dodrine j When Chcift gives the reafon why the hearers likened to the ilony ground do fall away and whither becaufethey had not root in themfelves , which intimates, that if they had had root, they had not fain away, M tt. 13. ii. And ^'//m faith. They cannot fin becaufe the feed of God abideth in them > fo that the Radical and Seminal grace which Scripture fpeaks of, is ever cffiduall in Ad, and wil' not be loft. Not that habitual grace will ferve turn without the Spirits continued alllft ince ; But things w nk accord- ing to their natures; and when Ood wdl change the operations he will fi: ft change the natures .• ifhe will have a ftonefpeak and rcalon, he will m.ki-ita mm; and if he make i: a man, he will hive it Reafon : wh.retht Spirit cives a n^w naruu- hewill not deny that conferving concurring grace which is nec; iFi y to rlie pe fom >iice of new Ads. Suppofe (aswemiy for difputation fik') that thifc Infants Iiad at that time the ufe of reafon; would that Scminall grace b. iff.duilltu p oi^uce (incerc Ad$, or not ? If not , how can you feign it tob: faving grace ? If it wmld ; then how comes it to lofe that efficacy, and not toput furth fuch Ads, when the party doih firft come to the ufe of reafon ?
If you fay , that it is an effjdual grace, which is ia ic felf fufficient to produce the Ads if other things concur I anfw. God giveth it either for the produdim of the faving ads AbfolMcly , or only Conditim.i/Iy: W Abfolutily y theniclliall do it; if Conditionally: i. Name the condition if yoo can ; cither the condition is expeded in the parent or the chid : Mr. B. makes it to be in both, Tra^ P-H5f> 5^,57. He faith [i. That the primary grace which baptifmconferreth is //a-o/ijv;//; Chrift } the fecondary Is regeneration/ wh'ch is but Potential, as an IngraflSiig into Chrift Qand fo is the fame with that he cals //?j;o«^ and lliall become Aduall , on condition the branches apply themfelves to the root, and draw juice from it ; If through their own or their parcius faults they learn not to draw from Chrift the juice of grace, it may ne- ver come into Ad. 2. He faith, it is yet more agreeable to the dodrine of the Chmchj to fay, That baptifmall Regeneration is Aduall , but only iiiitiall and feminal, not full and pcrftd j yet of the fame degree wiih the infufcd habits which the Schoolmen difputeof, and that which I'ddcd\s [the Spirit tif F.vth. 1 Cor. 4. ij. ^nd Peter {jihc'ruco/rHptiblcftcl'] iPr/. i. 4 and \j\\i:: Divine v. ntiic^'] ^nA juhn [the feed of God] In the conferriiig of this (he faith) baptifmal Regeneration is defined. But yet thii is fufFocable and loleablc ; 2nd therefore when it is loft^ it is becaufe the Parents ncglcded the education of the Infant,and the means of confirming it ('fuch as Confir- mation and the Lords Supper.) '.To all wjiich I anfwer, x. The ufe of Seminal or Habitual Grace is cfledually
to
Infants Church- memberfhip and Baptifm. 3 1 j
lodifpofeand incline ch« foul to Aft; the principal Aft for which it is conferred, is the Aft of Faith, or coming to Chrili and applying him to our fclvcs, ^no fo drawing grace from him : Now Mr. Bs. doftrine is, that God gives Infants by Baptifm thac Radical grace which lliill cncline their fouls to come to Ch; ill and draw from hfm, upon condicion they ccme to Chrift and draw from him, or which fhall enable and incline them tflldually to believe, en condition they do beliere ; How abfurd is this ? Ifyoulay the condition upn their will to ufc the means, or not rvfift the Spiit, [ Anf. The nature and ufe of their Seminal or Habirual grace is ('if faving and ifFeftu. all^ to incline their wils cff.ftually to i-ife the means and to obey the Spirit, as loon as they are capable in the ufc of reafon j Now according to this do6r.ne then, God gives them grace to incline the will eff;crin!ly to ufc means for incualc, and to obey" the Spirit, upon condition they do ufc the faid means and obey the Spirit. As if a Phyfi- tian ihould tell his Patient, I will open youi obttructions (oi give you a medicine thac fhall open them) upon condition thty be opened j or I will give ^ou that which (hall revive the pa' alytical tr.f n-ibcrs, upon condition they be revivec-
1. Moreover, when this condition con es to be performed (of drawing from Chrift, or ufing meansjornot refilling) the party harh then the ufe of Reafon), And then, fee- ing by vcrtue of the feed of grace, or the Holy Ghoft dwelling in him, he Is (tffcctu- ally, if favingly) inclined to good,why were not his firit Acts of Realon good ? Thofe finfuU Aftsby whichheUft the Holy Gholt, were either his firft Aftsof Reafon, ot fome after- Afts . If his fiili, then who was it long of that thofe fii ft were not good? There cculd be no actuall condition in him prerequifite to the goodnefs of them ; for It cannot be required that lie have any acts before his fiift ; And to what end hath he the Holy Ghoft or Koot of Grace to incline him to act well, if it do not fo incline him ef- fectually, no not to the firit acts, before he hath redfted the Spirit or forfeited grace ? will God give his faving gvace and Spirit to be wholly ufelefs ?
liutifycu fay, that itwasnotby his firft acts of reafon, but fome following acts, that he loft the Holy Ghoft } Then fiift, VVhy rather fhould not his firft right afts have confirmed his grace ? z, VVhy fhould not the Holy Ghoft wotk as effeftually in fol- lowing afts, as in precedent , feeing he is given for both ? If you fay [Becaufe the party will not obey] I fay again, what was the ufe of the Spirit within him but to make himniUasg^ And alfo I would have Mr, B. remember, that thus he maketh men not only lofe his Initial Seminal gt ace Cwhich yet he feemeth only to alTcrt^ but to lofe and fall from actual grace too. For if the former acts were gratious , before the party loft the Spirit by following acts, then he mu ft needs lofe alfo actual grace. And indeed, when Mr S. makes confirmation, by the Lords Supper, to be the conditlon,thlt thac I fay muft needs follow ; we ufc not to admit any to the Lords Supper, till fixteen^ or fourteenor twelve yearsof age j Now they have all the time before either afted gra- tioufly, and believed and obeyed the Spirit, ornot J If not, then they loft the Spirit,' or it was untfFeftual, even before they came to the condition of confirmation. If they did, then they fall from many years actual gi ace, as well as initial, when u^on the ncg- left of the Lords Supper they lofe all.
3. Efpecially 1 would Mr. B. ihould confider, that this doctrine which hangs the efficacy of the Holy Ghoft upon mans Will, and which makes God to beftow his firft actual (aith upon, or according to precedent Merits or works in man, is downrighc Pelagianifm. So muchfor thecondltionality in the Infant.
X. For the other part of his conditionalicy [w^.that this Initial or Habitual Graice (hall become accuaUf the Parents do their pardn education] 1 anfw, i. The
children
314 Plain Scripture froef of
children living under the found of the Gofpcl, will furcly hcarof the Doftrinc of Chrift J and then c<F;ftual Grace will fure produce Aftual, the objeft being rc« vcaled. z. And in the mean time thofc Graces will be A ded, \\hich require no fii- pernatural Revelation of the objed,but the objcft is known by the light of Nature : as LovetoHod, Fearof God,(Jbcdience tohim, &c. 5. It is acknowledged that God doth at fi ft tike Infants into his Covenant of Giace, as belonging to Parents that arc in it i and lo ihc Parents Faith is the condition of their entrance : but that the Parents faith or duty fliould be che condition of the continuance of the Holy Ghoft in the In. fanr, or of the operation and efficacy of the {eed of Grace , fo that they ihali be caft out of Covenant again without any fault of their own, but only the Parents- i\h is ftrange Dodrinc ro the Orthodox. 4. When they arc well educated^ yet we fee mul- tiiudes even of the children of the godly never come to faving Faith or Grac-. And who then did fall in performing the condition ? The moft holy, skilful, diligent Pa- rents that ever I knewj who have taken pains wiih their children day and nighr, by fair means and foul, have yet had wicked children, j. This ij nor i-nly i thgi- anlfra, butfuper-Pelagianilm, to affirm that God giveth Faith, or rhc firtt A<aual Grace, not only according to our own prertquiluc works, but eren according to o- ther mens. Yea and that he doth give Radical or Habirual G ace, or the Holy Ghc fl to men to be operative or cff.dual, on condition of orher mens A", ions. In /*/,/?/>, P,-i(pcr, Fii!goiiiHi, and in Dof^or Tivifje, and all other modern vindicators of G acr^ you may findc enough againft all thefe. 6. Where God gives tht greater mean-;, he ever gives the klTcr J where he gives faving Seminal Grace, or the Holy Gholi he will give the external means which is neccffary to the AQt, ani not let his Spirit he loft mtcrly for want of external means without any fault of cur own. If he give Pj«/ his ir- ternal Grace (jubjiCliVL') he will fend him to Anamas to reveal the cbjtft. ]f he give C9y72ciiui a gracious nature, he will fend Pffo' to reveal Chiift to him. And if he give the Holy Ghoft to Infants, he will provide parents, or fome body elfe to reveal his WiUto them, objectively j Elfe you may as well kign God alfoto give the Hciy Ghoft to the aged which yet fl\all never produce any Act of Grace for want of means to dif- C ver and excite. That love which caufeth God to give them the Holy G hoft, will caufe him to give them the revelation of the Gcfpd. Again 7. Thefe children b.ive the ufe ofRcaftn, when their parents muft teach them and bring them to the Lords Supper. Now either they have ufed their fi ft Acts of Reafon for all that time rightly (ac.or- ding to the degree of their capacity) or not- It no:, then the Holy Ghcft was unefT>;ctu- all before the parents fo failed of their condition, and fo was left before the mfans oflofingitj If they did ufe it right, then they fall from Actual grace as well as Se- minal or Habitual through other mens faults, withcut their own. And therefore it is vain that Mr. B. faith [ the difeafe is in themlflvcs, which is uncured, bccaufe the parent feeketh not the remedy for thtm] for the difealc fupon his fuppofition) is currd, fin pardoned, the party united to Chrift, the Holy Ghoft given, the Domi- nion of fin taken away, the nature Regenerated, and inclined to gratious Actions, andtheperfon in a ftate of falvation j Now the queftion is how he comes rut of hts ftjte and lofeth all this again ? Can our parents lofe our grace and ftatc offalvation? Laftly Idefire Mr. B. to review all the Texts he mcntioneth in Cnr.Jnh. Pet. and fee whether that [fpirit of faith] that [incr.rtuptible feed] that [feed of God] &c. bf not the grace which is no: loft but peimancnr, ifthrre be any futh. Doih not John fay, v.c cannot (in fthat iSjtod2a;hj bccaufe his feed remiineth in us ? And lure it will remain in uj then ; for nothing but fin(whifh that feed prohibitcthj can take it from us. I know the whole controvcrlic about the certain perfevqrance "of Btlitvcrs is of
great
Infants Chttrch- memberfhif and B aptifm, ^ i j
great difficulty J and I know the moft, if not all the Fathers within two hundred, il not three hundred years of Chrili^do fpcak as if they were againft ns^both in that, and Free-wiil, as thofe that read them throughly may eafily perceiTe, and as Scuhctut ac, cufeth them particularly inter Ntvos, when he mentioneth their errors ; and I know that all that call on the Father^who judgeth every man according to his woiks without refped of perfons, fliould pafs the time of their fojourning here in fear ; and he that thinkcthheftandeth muft take heed left he fall j and Lhiill thought fit to warn his own Difciplesof the danger of net abiding in him j and therefore I judge i: unbe- feeming foweakaheadas mine tobc too peremptory in fuch a pjint, and to cenfurc all diffenters fo leverely as fome do, who do but Uiewthat they never fludicd the point fofarastofinde out the difficulty. But yet, as I am patt doubt of the certain peifeve- rance of all the Elcd, and that the foundation of Gods particular choice ftandeih furc, the Lord knowing who arc his j fo I am perfwaded that there is a ftate of Grace here that none ever fall from j and it is yet my judgement, that none ever fall totally or fi- nally that have habitually or adually that tftedual grace which Chrift likt.nc:h to the Rooted fefd, Mat. i j .zi. andvphub pYevalUth fo far againft the inlcrcfl of the fic[h,as to give Chf.fl the ihrfcji room andinterefl^ andfupremacy : And 1 believe that no femi- nall or habl:uiil G. ace, which is not enough to bring the heart to this^or would produce this Aft, as foon as the foul can aft, is faving Grace. And therefore that if Infants have fuch in the R )ot or ieed, that God will preferve it j And if it be not fuch, they muft be laved upon condition or their parents faith, or perilh ; fur this cannot be called faving. Dr, Tir/iJt' againft Cfl'wnwciteth a faying oi Auflms ('though I confrfs he hath many thu Ucm to ru;i '.he other way^ that is downright for this certainty of per- fevtaace: Deui non prxdclhiiatorum vemimrn addiicit ad falubi ern jpirituaknxjf. fanitcH' tiam J qua homo Ycco>iciHatHr Deo in Chrifio, five illi^ ampliercm, jive non imparem pati- entiamp.tebciru- Cont, Julian. PeUg.hb.^.citp-^ (Trvi(fe Com.Corvintp.io/^.a.)
But for the former point ("that the efficacy of Gods grace dependcth not on mans will) Aufim is all plain and full as can be defircd. ('as Paulus Erynachus ( who- ever he be that fo nameth hlmfclfj in his late Triai Pntiumde gratii^mW fully certlfic you^ Kxc G, ilin qux occult e humanis cordibui tribuitHr divina largitaiCy a nulla duro cof dc refpuiiur f idee quippetribuiturt uC cordis duritia aufcratur primittis. Aug. de prx- dcfl.SmSl.lib. i.cap.9.
For my own part Crhoufh I take it for no Fundamental^ or Aiticle of my Creed) I judge thus. I, That God hath clearly made the parents faith the condition of the Infants {'not only vifible i-hurch-memberlhip, which is certain^ but alfo) pardon and falvation. 2. But whether their Habituali Grace be any condition, 1 know nor. I. Becaufe T finde no fuch thing in Scripture tAdual grace I flndethe condition to the aged, and habituali neceffary thereto ; but Habits direftly 2r\d per fe to be the conditi- ons! finde not. 2. Becaufe the very Philofcphlcal points are very dark and uncer- tain, which 3:e all fuppofed in thefe opinions : whether the foul be capable of Moral Habits, yea, or intcUcduaKor any fuch qualifications beyond its faculties and powers, before It be capable of Ading. ; , Bu: yet my opinion is^ <that the foul is fo capable, and that God doth give this feed of grace,or habitual grace to fome Infants ; but that is, 1. Only to his Eled^ 2. And thi: Eaptlfir. was never inftitured to be an Inftiu* ment of working it, I am paft doubt : But for the pardon of original finjand other Re- lative grace, I affirm that we are to judge it probably given to the childe of every Belie- ver (their vifible Church-membcrlliip being certain^ and if any will fay, that it is cer. tainly given to every fuch childe, even the non-eled, I will not galnfay him. My rca- fon of this difference among many others, is, in that Rcmiflion and Juftificaci jn are
S 1 given
3 16 Plain Scripttire preef of
given by a Morall A&oi God, even by thcpromifcor grant of the new Covenant which Covenant Is conditional and univciral : when any pcrformcth the condition (as Infants do by their parents fai:h) the Covcmnt prekntly pardoneth and jullifieth them without any ni-w A i of Oo4 (fo that it is no iinmanent Aft in GoJ from eter- nity) and if thisperfon do by unbelief dsp-ire himftlfafre-^.varj of the benefit, th- Co- venant which ftill remaineth Conditional, will condemn him, as before it die luftific him j and all this without any change in Gcd or the Covenant hw on'y m the party. Though tha: learned man that oppoleth my D.'ftiinc in thh point, take it for un- trufj tha: Gods Ad ofjuftifying is by the Covenant grant ; yet I drubt not fully tomanifcft the tiu'.h of it, and the great nectlTuy otfo concluding. •» Gnd mable me .* and wilh any ftudious Divine who doth not with the Antinomilts arfi; m Jultification to be an imminent Ad, and fo from Eternityj to tell me what other rranlknt Ad it iSj ifthi-ycan; and not to tell the world that it is an ftft of God and a rranfienc Aft, and never ti.ll them what Act It is. Z^/pi^Jw faith, and all the Civilians, That an ob igation is taken away by the fame klndc of means by which k was inuuccd : but ic was by an Act of the Law or Covenant that the obligation to pumlhrnenc wa> brought upon usj therefore it is by an Act of the Law or Covenant that it is taken eft again j (which is the formal nature of Remiflion. j
Well but now for Regencrationj or the fli ft Habitual grace, the cafe is far other- wife- This is not given by fuch a Legal Moral Act of Donation. It is indeed promi- fed, but in another kinde of Covenant, v'-t^. The abfolute promifcof the fiiit G'.acc> made only to the Hlect. Therefore no: only C^wf-o, but even D:y:«.7«r, and Di^'Ctot jr.nd, with the reft of the Biicilh Divines in the >ynod of D^// do conclude. That Conditional Rcmiffioncomes to all directly from th;- i ovcnant, but faith i> fmm E- lection and Chrilt hath given to all men to be faved, if they will bdicvc j but in that he givethfome only to believe, there the Myfterieof hlcction begms to open Jc ielf. Act- Synod part i. p.79 And therefore though faith bea fiuit &i Chiifts death, yet not fo immediately, nor in the fame fence as fome oih^rare (as Am^raldm hath ftiewed well 5 and the further opening of that p- int will be of(Xcecding ufe in the con- troverfies wiih the Armlnians ) And thercfoie to fall from faith according to Doctor jVardi D-^vaiMt and the reft, would be to fall from tleccion ; and lu-e the Holy Ghoft,or thettue iced. Root, or infufcd Habit offaifhmult fljiv as directly from Election, as the Act of faith. If Dr./Z'drfl fay contrary here, reconcile him to himfelf, and hi> brethren.
So that this is one reafonofmy judgement, why we may better judge it ccrtaJnJ' That all the Infants of true believers are juftified and pudoned (thouj,h (omefill < ff andpeiifli) then that they are regenerated, or indued with a finccre new na;ure, and the cfFeftual Seed or Habit of faith. Though yet for my own opinion, I have rtfolved no further then this, That we arc to judge the Rcmifllon, Juftification and Salvation of particular Infants moft probable,tiil the contrary appear by them j and for the full certainty, I leave ic as to me uncertain.
H
Aving touched the chief of the mlftakes of this book, I (hall now be briefer in my
Aniraadverfions on the by pnffiges.
" P4^-39. hefai.h, All grice is to be fought from Chrift as the fountain. From
^*Chrift it is not derived toman, unlefsaman be firft ingraflfed into Chi ift, as the
*' bxanch-imo the vine i the inO lumems of this ingraffing are the Sacraments, &c.
Anjw,
Infants Church- meml^erjbip and Baptifm, 317
■ — - fc_ — ■
jififvf. This cannot hold true, though it feem the caiife of other your miftakes. i.Is the Grace of Infition into Chriftj and union with him, no grace ? ;. Is the giving the holy Ghoft to work thiSjno grace ? j. Arc the Sacraments^which you think are Inlltu- ments to eftcd ic,and therefore before it, no Grace ? 4. Efpecially.is true faving Faiih no grace, which our Divines generally fay gocth before cur union with Chrift, as the means of it and indeed may be tully proved from Scripture fotodo ? Doiibtlefsjifall Grace come from Chrift,then all thefe come from him, and yet arc before our union with him. The truth ls,thcte is much Grace, both common and fpcciai that comes from Chrift before our union with him. All that Grace which draweih men to Chrift,3nd joineththem to him. is before this union, even from the decree and good pleasure of Gcd (asthe giving of Chrift himfelf was) and alfo from the Love and Merits ofthe Mediator. !
*' Pjff.44. Hefaithweiland folidly, that [the means of application on mans part is '' faith which worketh by Love' J the primary fruit of this Love Is to grieve for oft'cnd- '.* ing God. Faith and Repentance therefore are neceffary to him who delirech to have " Chriftsbloud applied to him; which it they be wanting, n£gle£led,rejcScd, what '' wonder if th. Sacrament be citftitute of its end and fruit ?
Anftv. But do you not fee then,, that if all thefe, vf:^. Faith,Love,Repentance be all pretcquifite in man to attain the end of Baptifm, thjt then it was never the end of it to confer them,and fo not to confer the feed of them? when you have proved that it is thw end of baptifm to Infants to confer all thefe which are prerequifite in all men clfc, ihca you will dofomcwhat, and almoft prove it another Sacrament to them.
The like I may fay to the following lines, which require yet more.
Pag.^^. And forward he comes to his proofs, Ail- z. & zz. which fpeak of Ba- p-.ifm for Remiftion of fin, touch not the Queftion of being an Inftrumenc of opera- ting a phyfical change on the foul. RcmiflTion is but a Relative change, and Baptifm! confefsa moral inliiumcnt of conferring it completively, as the crowning of a King conferreth the Kingdom^which was yet his before. The fame Anfwer I give to Ephefw 5.26. and Ifit reach to an efFeding of real Grace, that is only to the aged that are ca- pable of It by a moral inltument. The great place ftood upon, is T^/ 3.5. To which ifay, I. It may be the Laver of Regeneration, as //^«;/y.'«|; our New State, though it cffeH it not. 2. It may be the work of Regeneration it felt, that is called walhing ; which is anufuai phrafe, ^. But 1 fpecially give you this anfwer. Regeneration is noc ufually takenin Scripture in that precife fenle as our Divines ufually take it, for the implanting only ofthe fit ft Habits of Grace j But as PMil expoundeth itjhe that is in Chrift, is a new creature, old things are pafled away, behold all things are become new. A new Father, new Head, new Lord, a new Body that we are members of,new Hopes, new State, new Rights, &c. Regeneration (igaifieth all or moft of this new State. Now Baptifm giveth much of this, and the relt it lignifieth. 4. You cannot deny but in that firft Age, when men were converted from judaifm and Paganifra, but the moft that were baptized were the Aged j and you conftfs that Regeneration was in them prerequifite, and the Apoftle ipcke only to them, or chiefly ; Now if his meaning were that baptifm was thelnftrument ofgivingthem faith, ov the fitft grace, thenitwtre apparently falfe. Yet doth he exprefs of whom he fpeaks there, even of fuch as were fomttime foolilh, difobedicnt, &c. which were not Infants. 5. Your fclf add, that Bapti(m here is Gods I nftrumcnt in the very fame manner as the word is called [the power of God tofalvation.] But the word is only a Moral inlbument, and fo worketh inherent (jrace in nonebut th: aged that haveufeef reafon to under- ftanditj though It may promife One: to otheis^ and fogive them a right. And
S f 1 b
3 1 8 Flain Scripture froef $f
fo Baptifm can work inherent grace as amoral inftrunient only m the intcJiigcnt : though by fealing ir may convey to Infants a right to what the Covenant pro-* mifeth.
Ptf^f 47- He bringeth /fl/;w J. Except a w.vi be bom of witer and the Spirit, he tamot aiia\ Sic. which {r.vimi'] he cxpoumi ih ihus, That Bjptifm is a mcnns'not with-'U: which God cannot, but without v,hichhj is not wont to fne,d>f. ] Anfwcr I. BiirthcTexc rccm<;to mikc a flat ncceffiv, laying, [he cmne.'] i. Therefore not to mean i: properly of the fign, but of the :hing I g ,iti.d j. ^uch a multituJc of our learned Divines agiinft ihe Papifts have anrwcrfi th s , that I think it ncedicfs to fay more of it. 4. Only remember what I faid btfore, that Regeneration is taken for that nr w ftarc of Relations. Priviledges, and adual Holinefs of life whicHwecn. ter into when we come into Chrilts Kingdom, -which is to us as a new world into which we are bom. And fo Baptilm may regenerate^ and we may be born of It. jAnd Chrift fpoke this to N cod'.mwi who was at age , and of all the aged of the world then unconve ted, and thticfcre he could not mean that Baptifm muii givethcmre- penance, and faith, and love^ ail which your lelf confefs to be prercquifuc inthc agtd.
p7£P48.Thencxt Testis, I Cj-.ii.ig. By one ^Yit wc are all B.iptlr^rd into mc Bo- dy] ^fifxv. 1. \ he Ap( ftle cxp'cflrth himfclf of the Aged here, who certainly received not repentance faith or .ovc (I mean the firft ) by Baptifm and yet he fpeaks of that way by which All enterco into the body : from whence is an invincible Argument againft you, Tb.n mgr.iffig or (ntcmg mto the Bo.iy. whereof Bjpttfm is the meamji fuch as licom/nonto ^U ttjebjpito^ed: "But the itig'affl.gorcntf ring tbem myour fcn^e unot common to All ( but piopcr 10 Infanti, and cxcludeth nS the Aged, and thnfe to ivhom the Apfifllc then rvrote^for the chief part of them.) i h.refore the Apoftles fcnfc is not the fame with yours (but deftructive to it J Anfwer this if you can.
2. Baptifm is plainly a wor/j/lnftrumtnt of entering all in:o the Body, even as when all turgcfics and Officers are entered into a Corporation by the Corporation- Oath or Covenant, they may be faid to b- entered by killing the book, which ii the fign and means J but moft properly by the Oath or Covenant. Divines (let me fpeak it boldly) do to Chrill himfclf and the C hurch a great deal of wrong, by feign- ing fuch a Phyfical '.Inion with Ch;ift which is dangerous to hold, and then fitting all the frame of their Doctrine to that dangerous notion. The comparifon from the Tree and Branches hoideth not in all things, as not in the nature of thclnlicion and Union : If we bephyfically one with Chrift > then one what? One pcrfon ? That is blafphemy. One N.iruieifle tially ? 1 hat is as grear Blafphemv. They that will lay it isan Unio.iHyperphylkal, 1 believe them as to the way of tifccting ; but if they mean it is mjt by a real, proper m.ikin^ On in Being, Nature, Pcrfun, nor yet a Relative or Moral, then when they ttU me what they m.an , I will be glad to- Underftand them. In the mean time I believe we arc Members of Cbrifts xVlyflical Body, the grot Corporation of the iVciv Jc,uakni\ and have a fardofer Unioa with him in Afftcticn and delation, and moral Union, then is between a Husband and Wife, who yft are callcdont Hclh : and that our Communion hence ariling. Ureal, and confif^eth in communication of real and more then rditivc btntfits. ^ot 1 date not believe th it we are one ElTcnce, Nituie or Perlon with Chrilt and io Dcifie man, and make Chrift the g'catelt aciu.il (inner inth.- world; as the Herc- wcks of this Age Cfor fo I dare call \\Axa) fay, That mans foul is but part of the God- Si cad.
'1 kefe pbjfical^ ^'of*j carnal conceits of our Union with C hrift,is the vcty point too
that
Infants Church-niemberjhif and Baftifm. 3 1 9
that hath U-ft us in the Dodrifleof Juftification 1 and brought Dirinej to hy, 1 hat Paith is ph) fically a Paffivc Reception of Chrift himfelf, and no ad at all, but a
Ptfo/ Vnith indeea'jxT/^J/ this is n gnat Mypme of our Vnion tvhh Chi ft j but the fiml- lltude by which he opens the Myfterie, is that of Marriage. And A1,.B. hsre fccmeth to mc to fiy as I In this : For p.48 he faith, That without doubit it is the M) ftical bo- dy that we are bap: iied into : AndiftheMyftical (which is the Church) thtn not the Natural 3 nor are wc nude one Individual with Chi ift, nor conjoyned by any phy- fica! co»agraentacion But we are united to that 0;>f holy Corporation, whereof Chrift is the Head. We are not now enquiring after any improper remote Ufilon in gcncrc vel fpcc'ie, but a proper Uaion which maketh one Individual of two ; which wcmuft be Gjdtelous how we affert.
And pa. 49. faith. That [^It U our rcluion to Cbrip,a}id not id ChriflianstJut is fisted in Rom. 6. 4, 6. Col.i.i:.] whertby hefeems to interpret it but of a Moral or Rela- tive union : and if that be his meaning, fo in are we agreed : but faith (both in feed and aft) gocth before that union.
His fccond Reafon is drawn from the experience which men have of the efficacy of the Sacraments j to which I anfwer, i. Tho aged that are then biptized, have certain experience that his doftrine is unfound } and that totiiem Biptifin is not fonhecon. veying of Seed or Aft of Faith, which they mull have before, or not be baptized (could it be known ) i.Wc hive no luch experience that he Ipeaks of, of Infants. For his following reafons of the uneftl-ftualnefs of Baptifni tofome^ I have examined them alieady.
But P^g-^7. he concludeth, That lit U found by experience that Cmr Infants rccci-^ vcd Grace in B.tptifm,'] Anftv. I. A bare affirmation, without the ieaft lliew of proof. z. If they did receive true inherent grace in Baptifm, it followeth not, that Baptifm is an ini^rument of cffcfting it- j. The fruits you dilcern in fome betimes : but whe- ther they received the Root then, or fo long before, no man can be certain. 4. But if they do receive the Root in Infancy (which is my opinion^ it is far more likely to be by vertueofthe Promife, and from Eleft ion and Divine Love before Baptifm, ihen by Baptifm, 5. However we are furc God never tels us that he inftituted ISaptifm to work ir.
P7g;. 70. He faith, That [irithsut dnubt the fir fl end is exhibition, the latter ob» p^n^tinyf] and that {j'bcie isva pl-icc fo fcallng. but upon fuppofttion of the cxbibi- tiO/i'] An( I. If you me.in that exhibition is the firit end Intengjedjou fay true ('though not as to the Koct of Fii;h.) But the next words lliew that you mean it of the fiift efFeft, or end ob:ained. 2. And th n I fay, the clean contrary to your obfervation is true Indeed theicis no pi ice for fea'.ing, except thereby ei-.her an exbibition,or prepa- ricion to it,in and by the inftument which is feikd / Hut thu not the inflrument or writing but the Sea! it felf^ fhould firft exhibit utctfTnily under fome other notion, before it Seal, is an obfervation that needtth more confiimation then your word. All thnfcpifTagcs that prove only tlic ! fiP.ct cf !M.n-.iffi<'n ot (in, and Relative Grace, 1 (lull overpals j as alio all vhofe pjfl.iges that need no anfwer , or that are anfwercd before.
I'.'£'74- He f.ii h \_7hc vfitrt of B-tpti(m doth nit touch the foul, but th§ force of the b'uud !>f (h,/llf\ A /(. 1. Thenrhat wntci can be no infttument of tfTcting in- herent Grace on sn Infant; Vor if it'iouch not the fcul, then ir is no pbylical in- ilvument for at le.ift by (ome force fcnr fiom it reach the foul) And a moral inltru- mcnt doih butj i, Couvey arichtj and fo relative mercy, as the Covenant and feal
Sf; do.,
3 29 Pl'iifJ ScriftHre preof ef
do , Or z. Operate morally by reprcfcnting and fignifying to the eye and ocKer fen- fes , as the word to the car j And To it can work on none that cannot under* Itaiid it.
2. I hopcyou think not that Chrifts blood , or any natuial force of it doth touch the foul any more then water. Elfe fair fall Tranfubftintiation.Biit maially I acknow- ledge the force of thrifts blood doth touch the fou;, that is, thegrace whichhis blood hath merited. As the grice that Is paid to redeem a Capcive in Turkie doth by its force touch his body- Thefc phrafes necu explication ch.rctcre, that they may not hurt.
P(7f c 7 5. He faith [ The bread hath neither a natural nor fupernarural efficacy in it felf] Anf. Then it is neither a natural nor fupernaiural inlfru.nciit i-cperly, but mo- rally 5 for what it hath not, it cannot convey, except you mean only c!ut it hach it not principally in it felf; but furc you will acknowledge, that not fo much as derivatively, or as received from the Spirit ; the Elements have not grace in rhtmfcives.
1 am glad you interpret [the Divine nature] in us, to be [only rhi' cffl^^ds of grace and hollnefs imprinted by the Spirit] and nor with Doftor Bit-gvfsy of the holy Ghofl himfelf, as di ft inft from his grace. 1 hough I fee not but the text (forgive but the fingularity ) may be well interpreted of ^.Relative participation of the Divmt nature in Chnflj ivbich by thofc precious Promifcs we have intereftin, as our Husband and Head.
F/?^^. 7 9.He confcfreth[That Circumciiionand the refl of the Sacraments are called Seals, becaufe by the Covenant of God they confirm Faith.] Anfrv. Then they in fuch prefuppofe Faith j and therefore were nor inftituted to convey it, either in the Seed or f^rflAa.
But he faith that [The Charter or writing, is not a means of conveying^ as rvritteit, but as fealed.] Anjw. i. Doth not this contradift what was before, that the exhibition gees necedirily before the fealing ? i. Among men indeed, a Seal is to make the wric cunant.But Gods Word being as true as his Oath^and the Promife unfealed as true as fcaledjit conveytth even without the Seal .- Yet not barely as written, but as belonging to us i which it doth upon our Acceptance and faithfuU covenanting with Chrift, be- fore (and often without the Seal) the Scaljbcing to make our iaith more ftrong, and not the Covenant more true.
His Obfervationoniv')«».4. makcthitnolefsagainfthim (p.8o.) And he is there forc'd to acknowledge, that [God added the Sacrament for a Seal of the Covenant, and of coijlnifig further gt-ace by the Covenant.']^ Therefore not for conferring the firfl Gracc^nor for conferring primarily before the Covenant. To this defcription 1 wholly fubfctibe. *
His Obfervation p.8 1. I much approve [that feeing the Apoftle calleth that aSeal by way of Interpretation, which God had called but a fign, therefore we are warranted fo to interpret the word [fign] applied to the other Sacraments.
P.i^e 8 i. He faith [I acknowledge God is not tied to means j but I add,To means which are abfcnt.J Anf'iv. Means are, i. Such as he hath tied filvation to, as abfolutely neceffary (as is F.iith to Jurtificationj) z.Or but accidental, which arenccellaryjthac is, Due, or fuch as ou2,ht to be ufed, and ufcd ns means j but not Abfo'.ulciy uccclfrry J fuch is B.ipafmTt is not Abfc/it to all the children of Anab.iptiftsjand yet who doubts but thofe that truly believe are jultified ?
IthisiiilUndioa of a pcrfon.il and gMfi-j/ National RcmifTion fland ('p. 84. jit can be tiue of no RemiiTion but that of temporal punilhment. But the Apoftlc expoundcth this Text of more, H-.b.^.
Where he ihinketh,/>.8 j, [that Infaats perifliing arc condemned,onlyj for following
fin.
Infants ChHrch-memberj})!i> and B aptifm . 321
(in, and that Original (in dothnot retiiin] I am clean of another minde. MyReafon is } becaufe All Rcmiflion is, as to the continuance of it, but Conditional!, wiiile we are in this life : My proof is, We are no othcrwife Remitted, then by the Conditional Covenant [Whoever believeth, (hall be forgiven, juftified, &c.'] which Covenant therefore will juflificjand pardon no longer then wc believe. 1 herefore do but fuppofe a faliinp from the Condition, and it is evident that all the forgiven (in returns 5 be. caufe Conditional forgivenefs is of no force longer then we have the Condition. And the two Examples he adds, do contradift him, and con(irm me. i. Who can believe, that when the //Jvjf/i^fi fell in the wildernefs for their unbelief 1 that their unbelief did not b in^ back upon them all their former guilt ? 1 he Tex: oftchargeth all their former RtbclUon upon them, upon their renewed Iniidclity. z. And that in the Pa- rable which he adderh, is fully for me ; For the Servant to whom he had f >rgiven all the dibt. though he be calt iiuo Prifon principally for not forgiving his fellow fcrvant, ■yet this plainly brought back upon him all the dtbt 3 for he mult lie till he had paid the utmolt fnthing.
Pflgct6 87. Arc great miftakes, but I havetouched them al eady Yet I doubt not," but as a Kings Coronation, or a BurgeCTes kifling the Book at his Oath , or a S^al to a Charter, may be faid toperfed them : fo l^'aprifm may be laid mdre fully to contec our Kight to the mercies ol the Conditional Coveoanc.
Piif^cSS. He b^ngs the Example of the Angt Is and Adam for falling away froTi grace; But the Queition is , Whether all fpecial fandifying cffVctual Grace, which gives Chrilt the chief Adual intereft in the loal,do not now fl )W onely from EKaion^ and proceed from that Abfolute l^romifeof a New heart, and fa upon a furer Cove- nant then that with /^ijw = and fo whomhecalleth,he jufti(icth,andthemheglorlfieth; That the Apo Italic of t very Saint ('and even the Elect,J is polTibiCj I doubt not ; buc wlthall, it feems to me to be ^cwe nnnfuturum.
His Reafon of ihenecelfjty of Actual Faith in the Aged, rather then Infants, Is moii found (p.89.) B.-caufe another Law of juftifying is propounded to the Aged, to which, if they lubfcnbe not, rhey perilh.
Moit of his Summary Aphotifms, I have anfwered before. In his firft Corol. whac he faith of the Condltionality ot the right ufe of initial Grace, is anfwered : that Grace is given to afcertain ihofe Acts which he calls the right ufe, if it be faving, ef. fectual Grace. When he faith [chey may wholly lofe Hope of falvation ] cither he means by [Hope] only [the ground ot Hope] or clfche acknowledgeth that fuch do lole Actual G"ce, as well as Initial or Seminal.
The fecond Ccrol. were it exactly opened, would hardly be reconciled to what went before.
Where he faith in his ftcond Aphorifm ; [That Chrift did not Die for the fins cflmpcniiency and Infidelity of a wicked will : 1 If f'- "lean as he fpeaks , I am far from his minde ; For I know not how ^" ' '^-"'•'•tv of P^«' be-
fore his converlion, or any ot^p "" '"•rift
did not die for it. Bur ' and Infidelity; Anr' a learnt d, godly M ry, to humble hi this point J ar book.as if it • to have fur' between i
3^2 Flain Scripture pro&ffif
Gofpcl Is ) and fo, I f^y, Chrift died for it, or elfe wo to us. z.And as it is thicatnci by thencw Covcnin: or Law of Grace ( fur It hath its threatnings too, whatfoever Come fay to the contrary, as all irnpcniecnt unbelievers will finde,) and fo Chiift died not for it. Fo: Chrift never died to bear the Curfc of the N:w Covenant j or the punillitncnt which it thrcacnech And u threatncth Hell to none but final! unbelievers and rebels agiinft rhclr righ:ful Lord. And that which is not threa^ncd, Chrift need not b-.ar for us, as threatn-d. I am forry chic the children under my Miniftry fhould be igiiotant of this , much mo c any famous learned Divine. But if they will needs teach men that Chrift died for final unbelief and i.mpenitencyj their Dodrine may bringminyafoul todamna'ion J but when they come there, they will finde that Chrift died not for thofe fins. If they do not, ictmeperilhas a faU'e Prophet. Thofc that fay the contrary, do teach univerl'al Redemption with awitnefsl iuch an Uni- verfality as the Scripture never taughc j not an univerfal conaitional Redemption; but even Redemption from the penalty'cf not performing the condition .Indeed Chrift is faid to die for all fin •, but Conditions are alway fuppofed to be excepted in all con- ditional grants. He that fai:h he hath died that whoever believeth (hould notpcrilh, or for all fins, if we will believe j doth plainly tell us, that he died not for final unbelief. Excellent, learned ^iartinhci in his moft folid, judicious Thcfcs in Ank-r.zi the Synod of Vo-ft^ would in a few lines teach the conttary- minded founder Dodrlne, if they would but learn.But It is a harder thing to teach a 1 cacher, then one that knows himfclf a Novice.
HAving done with Mr.B's Traft itfcif, I Qiould nexf examine all the reft adjoyn- ed i Hut I fhall onely give abrieftafteof their Doi3:ine, atiJ that with all reve- rence to fo famous men j and I think,rather vindicate rhem from M'B's injurlcs^then cppofethem, except fomewhat in Dr. i^ard. And in him I (hall i. Shew fome things wherein he is againft Mr.B> and 2. Two or three points wheiein his own Dodrinc re- quires corredion.
I. In the main point, [thekindeof caufaliiy to be afcrlbed to the Sacrament.] he doth not feign it to be an Hyperphyfical Inftrumenr, diffc-ing both from Phyfical and Moral ; but onely faith, it is a Caufa fine qua non, (which is no Caufe, bur a condition or Antaccdent, ) or rather an inftrument in a generall fenfe, that is, a Moral itiftru- ment i as a Canonfhip is given by the giving of a Book, and an Abbots place by a ftafFe, and a BiHioprick by a Ring, and as upon the agreement ot the Cor.tradors, an Inheritance is delivered by an authentick Inftrumenr. J But who knowcth not, that aCanonfhip, Abbacy, Bilhoprick, are but Relations .? and we acknowledge Baptifm fuch an Inftrument ; And the Inftrument of Contradors, as it doth but perfect w»i" thecontracthadfirft d'^'^- ' ''••<« contrary to D. u'. himfelf) fo itdclivticth lyaEr*-* '" ' r^if, and fo caufeth only a Relative,
what on-
___ and
•■ Explication of Baptifms In- " -Derating any Phyfical
, But Byadwar^ine
s offering Grace,
'eft ilia rcfpcnfto
^\u*j vcl per
tur : as he
(.10. To
which
InfAffts Church- member jhif and Bapdfm. 325
vthkh end he heaps up abundance from the Fathers, I conceive this is deftructive to the Doctrine of [faving habitual Grace which (hall be effectual to produce Its Act upon condition of fomtwhat to be done firft by the party or the Parents.] So the fame BradwardiHC there concludeth^ (p3g.6 1 1.) that NuUfU Graliam pripyam mcrctur^ pcrdifpofuionctnpravlam^ nccpcralitmqu^ibctaClioTicm: of whichalfo, in//^. i. fully. And he confutcth them that fay , [That God offers Grace freely to every one, fohe open his hand, his bofonic, his heart to receive it ; and fo he that recelvcth Grace, therefore rccelveth it , bccaufe God givctb it i but he that rcceiveth itnoc, therefore receircth it nor, becaufc he openeth not, and fo God givcth not, bccaufche acccpteth not the Grace which is offered} as If one reach you a gift, and you ac- cept itnot, &c. ] (This helpcaks not of Relative Grace, but Reall Inherent. ) This he confutcth aUo in hb. 1. cap. jS. er-xo. (^ zx. & CcrfaUa; . cjfu& alibi paJJJm.
Page 100. Dr. Af. fiith, that [This conferring of Grace by the Sacrament is ne- ceffarily conditional.] Therefore it is not a Seal to th€ Abfolute Promifeof thcfiift Grace.
Page 101. What he faith of Chrifts death [ that though it b< the mo ft potent and cffedual remedy againft fin, yet it profitcth not , except it be taken and applycd] I truly approve of, as it referreth to the removing of Guilt .- But if it fliould be fpokcn of the conferring of the firfl Grace of Habitual or Adual Faith, Repcntance,&c. which are in fomc(enfc the fruits of Chrifts deathj then I believe there is no application by any Ad of ours that doth pi ecede. For if it do,then cither that Applying Ad is from the Grace of Chrift, or not j I f net, we have Grace without Chrift the fountain, or clfe we do it without Grace ; which arc both intolerable. If it be from the Grace of Chriftjthcn cither that Grace muft be received from him without a former applying Ad of purs, or clfe a former is requifite ; and fo we lliould ton in infinitum. But L have rcifon to believe, that in this the Dr. means as I, from his judgement with the reft in the Synod oiDoit.
And where he next faith that in the aged [Several Difpofitlons arc required to fit a man to receive pardon fand fo jtjftification^ x;/^. Catholike Faith, Hope of Pardon, ftar 6f punidimcnt, grief for fin, a purpofc agalnlt finning hereafter,and a purpofeof a new life, all which difpofe the Receiver] I agree to him, though all do not.
Page 101,105,134,138 He concludcth, that [The pardon of Original fin is the firji and ^riw,?;;); benefit, whereof an Infant is capable,] which is qtiitc contrary to Mr. B. who faithj that firft they are united to Chrift, and fo i. Regenerate , and a. Pardoned,
Page 107 , He faith, that the clcanfing, falvation,renovation,rcgeneration,in Ephef. J i6.r//.j.4.^oi».6.j. I Coj-.d.ii. cannot be meam of the jfr-721\egener3tion,butofa fuller meafurc j which is enough againfl Mr, B.
In his own Tradate he pleadcth dirediy for no more but the juftification of Infants, andpardon tothem J as bis Tk/ Hiews i and oft, when he comes to mention their Renovation, he puts it off, as being not neceffitated to affert it.
What he faith, page i zj. [of the New Covenant made with all mankind,] if it be meant (as I doubt not it is^ of the Covenant as enaded and offered on Gods part, to all upon Condition they will accept it, and enter it on their part , leafily believe thac fo the Covenant is made with all, at lea ft where the Gofpel is preached-
Moreover, Drwr. />/7^ zcp^iio^ii i,ii z^aij. argucth largely agalnft any infu. fed Habits in Infanrs, both out of the Ancients , and from Reafon ; And asketfi wherefore takm aniim ad agendum premptitudinQta ant «<^ adm vlrtHtim faciiita-
T c uo?t£m
^24 PUin Scripture pre$f of
tioncm ponerent.? Sec. And to whar clfe are Habits or your inhial or Seminal Grace, but to incline the foul to Aft when cjpible? He Ihews^ihit according to /^v/2/n,Baptif« mal renovation lieth In the RemiflTion of fin, but renovation to the Jmi eof God begins only a: adual Converfion, and no Habits arc iiifu fed into Infants'; And if your Initial GracCjbe not Gods Image, or part of it, i dare fay it isnot fiving. Nay he copcludeth that /ii^j'Z/;; frequently concludech, That the Adoqu.-.tteffen 0/ Bjptifm in l/tfan!s,it ihjt Renovation which conjUhLh Oay m the Rmiffion of O, igvulfin-hHt lh.it other Rcntn/JtiofijTvichu to the Imjge of Gi)ri J dotb not bcj^m but at the tim: when the heart IS tonvotcd. Auflin talks of no Seed ok Faiih in them, but only Credit in altera qui pcccavit in alte-fO ; Credunt & Infantes j u>idc cicdunt : quomodocrcdunt ? Fide pa- rentum. And he faith the like of all the Fathers and Councels, that they fpcaknot of the fandification of Infants (that is, by Inherent Grace ; Andthcrefore thit the elder ' Schoolmen, Halcnf. Tom. CerfoH (Eflius) alfo deny that any Habitual Grace ijinfu- fed into Infants. And none yet hath told us what that infufed Seed of Grace is which being faving, Is yet Ihort of Habitual. And that all our Divines do conftantly teach that Infants faadification is at death.
But feeing the T/jf//i which he defendeth is only for Retiiffion of Original fin to Infants, I will not ftand upon every by- paffage j onlythreeor four points wherein I fuppofe he is befides the Truths I fball be boldtoeximine a little further, i. In that he often affirms that Baptifm doth not J^eal toInfam$,bur only to the intelligent, i. That the Word doth not apply Chrifts Merits to any Infant ; feeing the word applieth not butwhenit isunderftood. j. That Baprifn ij the fiifl means of rerainion, and the Covenant before Baptifm' doth it not. The two former I hope are but mif-expref- fions of a tolerable fence, though intolerable as plainly fpoken But the third is fo in- ju ious to the Church and Covenant of God, and feemeth to be the very Core of rn^Mis afcribing too much to Baptifm, that I cannot without wrong to the Truth ovet- pafs I:.
ThefirQ ofthefe heh«th, pag. 1J7, il^. & p.ilffn. But he hath nothing for the proof of it. He takcfh fealing to be pmpcrly aftual affuringas to the minde of the party. But doth not our common ufeot fealing contradid him ? Sealing teftifyethche, full confcnt of the party fcaiirtgj which perfcdeth fometime the ratification of the Inftrument or Grant in Law ; that no Advcrfary may have any exception againft the parties tight to whom it is fttled : And this full Tcftimony of the Sealers Confent doth ftronglierobligchlmrclf to the performance of his promifc, and alfo afcertain the tenure or charter for the ofc of the party to whom it is granted, and fo prepare for his future aftual mental affurance j fo that the parties knowledge or mental certainty is but a remote End of fealing j or if it were the fp. cial End, yet not as prefcntly to be attained, but for futurity. Do we not make and Seal Deeds of Gift to Infants ordinarily ? and TeUaments wherein we bequeath them Legacies ? and put their names in fealed Lcafcs, wherein we engage our felvcs to them, and they by their Parents da again engage to us? And yet Hull we fay fo confidently, that there can be no proper obfignation, but to the Intelligent? God is pleafed thus to ratifie that Grant in Law Completivcly, which before was ratified as to the fubftance (as Marriage is without the Riii:!,ind an Oath without the killing the Book, and a Soldi- ers place by coafcnt without Ldhng.and Colours,and a King's wifhout coronation :) ^nd this for cur ofe before it is to our knowledge ; hereby all Advcifaries are the jjiore fully difabled from gaeilioning our right, and dilleifing us j and ic is not dif.
fonant
Infants Chttrchlnemberjhip and Baptifm, 325
fonant from Scripture language^to fay that God doth it to confirm his Promife (for fo it is faid of his Oath,which a$ this qucftion is all one with his Sealcyct we know Cjod may fwear to do good lo Infants. ) Hf^.6. 17,18. Wherein God willing more abun- dantly to (hew to the Heirs of Promife the Immutability of his Counfel, that by two Immutable things wherein it was impoffible for God to lie , we might have ftrong. Confolatlon. 1 he Confolation is not alway as foon as the Oath or Seal for confirma- tion • but immediately the ground of future Confolation is bid, and God is pleafed, as it were to bind himfelf , and engage himfclt more de< ply to the performance of his Tromife. And in the mean time^ 2$ it is by the Parent that the child belicvesj ( as it were; and hath interefl, and i» eng.iged : fo the Parent hath the comfort in the behalf of bis child , for whofc ufe the writing is Sealed. So that it is a moft obvious truth. That God Sealeth his Covenant to infants, and the contrary gives too much advantage to the Anabaptifts , and denyeth the apparent priviledge of the infants of believers : Doth not God fay, Circumcifionwas a Seal of the righteoufnefs of faith F And were not Infants Circumcifcd ? and therefore had the Covenant Sealed to them ? Doth not God fay that Circumcifion is his Covenant and the fign of it even to Infants ? And as Mr. Bcdfoid vteW notes, the Apoflle warrantcth us to interpret a Sign 10 be a Sealing Sign. So that I admire that this reverend man (liould fo dctrad from baptifm, undcc pretence of extolling it 5 and remove Gods cnds^ that he may add new ones.
HTHe fecsnd miftake [That the word doth not apply Chrifts merits to any infant,buc to the intelligent onely.] he hath page ic4,ii6^ci'-c. This is an 111 way of advan- cing Gods Ordinances. I doubt not but this Reverend man by applying^ means onely Applying to the Confcirnce for aduall comfort. And fo indeed if I were of the Anti- nomian opinion, That Jultification by fjith, Is onely infuro Cotifcicmite or (as learn- ed Mr. OjvfH faith, and alferteth) terminated in the Confcicnccj then I would alfo te'icve, That no njf'nt can be juflificd by the Covenant (andmdecdnot at nil) Nor that the word can apply Chi ifts merirs to an Infant : but till then, I (hall be far from bc- lievii»g cither the one or the other. For I doubt not but as one<lenieth Infants all Jufti- fication. (fori think no man wil fay, it is Terminated in their Confciences;) fthough I will not be too confident In this age , when men may fay any thing, If they have but Rhetorick to fill up the vacuities, and cover the nakednefs and deformities;) So the 0- thcr denyeth them all true Legal application of Chrifts meritsj there being none at all, If none by the word And what reafcn hath the Reverend Dodor to rake the word [Ap- ply] in fo narrow a fenfe ? That which conferreth a thing upon a man ('either named, ordefcribed) doth apply it to him. But the word of the Covenant or Promife doth confer the benefits of Chrifts merits upon Infants ; therefore it doth Apply them. The Word is Gods principal inftrument of giving right to Remiflion, Juflification , Adopr ion , &c. But giving right is certainly an Applying. If Infants have any right at all to thefe priviledgcs, and to the K ingdom of heaven, and to Chrift hlnifclf,it is given in the Covenant i and iht refore it Applycth. But this will fall under the next. I conclude therefore, That this Reverend man greatly wrongcth the Word, and the Church by this Dodrine, [That the word doth not apply Chrifts merits to Infants, ] and wo to Infants if he Cay true. ^For t.hc Sacrament conferreth nothing but what the Covenant conferred and applyed firft ; which is the next point,
Tt 1 The
^--^
j25 fl^ifi Scripture pro&f »f
THc third therefore I conceive to be the great miftakc of all , and the fountain of moftofthercft. vi^. That [baptifmls the fiift means of Kcmiflion, and not the Covenant bsfore baptifm. ] Thishehach divers rcafons for, P^^e 191, 191, 195, 194, 19^ Gods Covenant and promife being the ground of my hope and confola:ion, 1 dare not let pafs without examination, a paffigc lo injurious to it. 1. If Gods word be his written Deed of Gift by which he beltowcth Rcmiflion, and Jwftification, and baptifm the Seal of it •, then Remilfion and Juftificatlon is by the Word before it is by baptifm (for the Deed goes before the Seal in order.) But thcformec is true, therefore the later. z» If the word of promife be part of G "nii Law, whicb is both the fountain anddifcovercrof all rightor dne; then our right to Rcmiflion muftcomcprinnatiiy from this word of promife, rather then from baptifm : But the former is true, therefore the later. ?. It the word of promife be Chriits Teftament by which he beqacatheth the benefits of his blood to his people , then are thofe benefics conferred principally by that word of promife ; i!ut the former is true, therefore the later, 4. If Remiflion of fin be a removal of the obligation to puniilimant ( i.e. Guilt.) and all obligations be removed by the fame means they were induced , then Remiffion is principally by the Word ; but the former is true, therefore the later.
Thefecond branch of the Antecedent is cleared in that by the word ('ofthreatning) the obligation was brought on us : therefore by the word(ofrclc3f€ or promife jit mull be taken ofl. The branch it fdf is a rule in the Civil Law.
ObjcClion. True: it is the Word that gives the right : but itgiveth it upon Con- dition : and baptifm is that Condition- therefore it givcth it not aftually before bjptifm.
Anfwey. Baptifm is rather a duty , then properly a condition of Juftificatiqn j or ifyou will think the nirse of a condition befits itj then you mufldiftinguilh of Con- ditions; fome arc fo abfolutcly neceffiry (^ being principally intended ) that the right or pofleflion ill all depend upon it i others are requiljte as accidental to theftrmer which ought to be prcfent^but may be wanting without defiruft ion of the Right^or nul- lifying the Grant.
.. Qf the formw lore iiour .Covcnant^or engagement to GodjOr our faith. Of the later isbaptifai.
I. Pofit* The C'^'veniutt frequently giveih fuU Rty^J'/Jtiin wlthsut bsm/m. i.taptifm ■ncvir givtth Kcmifjion veithoia the Coven mt. 5 . irbai both go together^ the Covcntm is the fuU means or instrument 0/ Donation, ,rad Btpt'/m but a [ecnnd<iry for fo'.cmn complejt. ini it : Tviiicb yH would be valid if they were feparAlcd. 4. The ncrv Covenant, as it u ^rcnUdby.Godl^Chiifi^i dothbcjlow ch/ijl ami Reconcili.it/on, and RemiffioK, conditi. 'oijally on all, even thafcthat never are aSlually Reconciled. The abfolutely necclTary con- dition is our alTenting to the truth, and accepting the good here offered > and (0 Co- venanting with God, that it may be a full proper mutual Covenant j whofoever doth ihJs fincerely, (hall have the benefits of the Covenant. Baptifm is but the fign of this Covenant wbichfliould b; added ordinarily j but not to make our engagement acccp- t3ble,Qr Gods engagement viiid and effsftual j but asa duty prclcribed for folemnity, and for a more full, and. formal engagement.
All thefe, had 1 time, I would flay to confirm j Cut fomcwhac will be fpoken to ic jn answer to the D.o(3;qis arguments following.
Sc
Infants Church-mewberjhip and BAftifm, 327
^ So that when I fay [ Gsds Covenant Juftlfieth or Rcmitteth,] I do not mean the Covenant as made and written in the Scilpture , before our performance of the great ncrfffary Condition, 1 hat is.beforc our Accepting of it, and our Coycnantmg again with God : For till then, it Juftificth onely Conditionally, which is not an Aaual Juftification, but fo full a preparation to it, as it is^ ufually called by that name : As ,f a Condemned Traytor have a pardon granted to h.m (and oft.red by a friend that faed it out on his behalf ) on condition that he thankfully accept .t ■ this man is la.d to be conditionally pardoned ; though yet he may refufc it, and fo be never Adually
^^"^Butye't validity or efficacy of the Covenant doth not depend up^n the perform- ance of every duty required by it , or every circumftance , or accident of the creat Condition, ( fuchas fcalingby baptifm is, ) but ontheSubltantial and abfo- kitely necelVary part of the Condition. Whena Prince marrycih abeggar,and rcquireth nothing thereto but her conUnt i now this confcnt is all that the mitch de- pendeth on ; and yet there are many additional duties , as comely bthaviour , lolem- nizing the marriage by engaging Ggns,d;-f. which yet, if not performed, bieaksnoc
Tha' Baptifm Jufti-fieth mote without the Covenant, me thinks no confideratc man
flvould qucAion. And yet this Doftrine of [Baptifm, being the firft mcan^ of jaltity-
inel comes neer ic That the Condition juftifycth without Baptifm,and confequently
before it I yec further prove, thus. i. As to the Reverend Doftor, he conteflcth, that
[Solid repentance, conjund with true and lively faith in the Mediator, obtaineth pre-
fent rcmiflfion of fins with God, Tagc 146.] This is as much as I defire. For the Dr.
will acknowledge, that it is attained by thefeas Conditions on which ihe Covenant or
promifc conferreth it to the party : and fo it is the Covenant which Immediately ju.
ftifieth on thefc Conditions. And every man knows that baptilm is to follow taith^and
conftquently to follow Juftification as currantly granted^ though not as (olcmnly fcal-
cd) and not orderly to go before it. /• . , m r r
But he faith, '' that [the Initial fauh, which In the Judgement of the Apolties fut-
'' ficcd for the baptizing of thofc that dcfired it, was not ever fufficient in their judgc-
*'m«ttotheJultifying, pardoning and favin- of fuch, ACl. i. ?7- They who are
'^ prc^med to be truly pricked in heart for their fins , from their hearts to defire de-
" llverance from fin, who are taught to feck this deliverance in the merit of Chrift, are
*' judged ht to receive baptifm.and in baptifm remiflion of fins ; but are not prefumej
'' to have received it before baptifm, ver. 38.
Anfrvcr. This miftake hath dangerous confcqucnccs. If men be taught once that it is a faith that'ls thxt of juftifying and faving faith , whichadmittcTh men to baptifm (as having true right inforo Dei ) it will make foul work In the Chmch. i. When Chrift faith iM^k^mDifciples of allnations.hpti^iiigtbcm,'] he means [fincere Difciples] though we cannot ever know them to be fincere. i; When he faith. He tku bcUcvcth and U baptiTSdi (hall befaved ; here faith goes before bajxifm, and that not a Com- mon, but a faving faith . for here is but one faith fpoken of, and that is before baptifm. 5. That faith to which the piomife of remlflion and Juftification Is made, it muft al- fobe [ealed to ( or that faith which Is the Condition of the promifc, is the Condition inforo Dei of Title to the Seal. ) But it is onely folid true Faith wliich Is the Condi- tion of the promifc ( of remiflion i ) Therefore it is that onely that gives right inforo Dfho the Seal. 4. The Dr. palpably miftakes the Text, Aa. 1.37, 38, when the A- poRle faith, {Repent and be bapii^^edfor ihe Rcmiffion of fin, ] he plainly meaneth be- lieving, as intended before baptilai, and comptifcd as chiefly aimed at In the Word
[B;j;/;\ed3
2^ Plain Scripture proof of
fo by'Sacln " wSnb^^r''' .^" ^° f^^.^^e thing lignificd. proMlcJ, and engaged to D> tuat lign , which phrafc in Scripture is the occaf.on of thue mens miftjlc,- • fn^
faith at all , tor there is no other mcnt on of c. 2. And ihen Peter b^bn^rri ^„w (and that without requiring them to believe,) which is Life ^"^ '^ '^"Muvcrs,
■ whilh ;. '°"X'''r'^"J"''/'"'^ (ashe calls it) Cwhich is not folid and juftifying) which IS required before baptifm, and remiffion^then folid faith is required cither "tcr bap ilVn and j.ft.fication.or not arall.To fay that ic is not necelTaryat all,is unchrTftian
Z:a7 '^'^f'^i''^[^>'°^^^'^'^ondni^^ remiflion j orclfc 2 Thev
muftfay,Tjat fuch are juftificd by baptifm,without any juftifying f ith./ And "it is o nke away the necefsity ofa cue and lively taith. For i. According to t4 Deft i e a
Doaor d.ftinft.on ,nd terms ) For if the man that upon his initial faith is baptized
roml ?P '?'" '^ 'T"^*^'''y ^'>'' ' "° '^^"'^^ ^' ^'^""^^ b« faved^bcfoi e true faith whkhL%'InA? '^ condemn him,but unpardoned fin?i.And it this Initial Faith, r«7« « r 1'""°'*!'''^^' ""P'o'u^c ^'is firft remifsion ( which is the
h V.I V c, JV'.T' ^ r^ ^°J ^^^?.'^' continuance of it ? And fo what ufc for true and lively U.th ? 1 f any fay, 1 hat this true Faith is to be given in, and by baptifm and fo neither before nor after i I anfwer, i.Howcver the fo. mer ablurdities of the efficacie otabai.htoiuftification.whichi. not true and lively. &c. would follow, z. When will any man Ihcw mea bcripture to p:ove, that tiuc lively Faith is promifed to inen upon trie- i-ondition ofa common Faith which is not fuch?Or that baptifm was inftitiJtd to confer a true livel) Fiith,whereit wasnotbefnre.-The tunuch mult hdk\erv:tbaUh» /;fj>7 before he mull be baptized J And Simon that did not believe »7V/; aiy/;»)bw>£ did receive nenher a nuc lively Faiih nor remifsion of fin by his baptifm : Mark that. tor he wax yet m the gall of bitternefs, and bond of iniquity, and had no part nor FcU iowf})ip in that bufinels. And i( Simm Faith will not procure remifsion and juftifica- tion tor himielf.though it may procure himChurch.\iemberlhip,thcn it cannot procure reniifiion and juftifJcation for his Infjnts, though it may procure them Church Mem- berfljip. But this Keveitnd mans miftake arifcth from his affixing, and afcribing that ccrt.iin remifsion to baptifm, as its own immediate (fFid, which he fhculd afcribc and athx to Gjds Covenant and Grant, as the proper cftta of it j and theicfore btcaufe he finds, i- That the Apoftlcs baptized men that had no true lively Faiih, i. And that yet they biptized men for the Remifsion of Sins j therefore he concludtth, 1 ha baptifm Remittcth fins, without a true lively Faith foregoing ('intheaged3 for them heipeaksof) But this ve7 dangerous milbke would be rectified, by i.Dillinguirti- <ng between thecurrantjultification of the Covenan: or Prcmife, and the Comple tive by the -Seal. 2. Between right to bapiifm in foro t«,and right in (oro Ecckfa Mini- Ite.s bave iight to baptize thofe that before God hare no right to baptifm- For thev multjudgeofmens right by a probable profcfsion. " '
Baptifm
Jrffafsts Church' member fhip and B aptjfm . 319
"BTotlfm Is ordained to fignifieand feal, and thereby confer rem.flion of fmsibut not to all that have Righ: In the Judgement of the Church, to be bapt.ztd, but only to thofe that have Right to it before God,and to whoiii h.s word doth firft g,ve his rem.f- fion-that is>not to all whom we muft baptixe.as being probfy true belicycvs j but only to thofe who have true Right to baptifm and its bcnefits,as being true believers mdccd. The Apoilles did not admit any to baptifm who did not make fuch a proteffion which men ought to judge a probable note of f.ncerity (and the children of fuch; Let any man prove whereever thty baptized any whom they knew to be devoid of true fauh.^t if they had known Sif»ons heart by extraordinary revelation, that were nothing to the ooint (Though I nei:her believe that they had any fuch heart-fearching knowledge, nor That it becomes any man to think they had j much lefs to affirm it, before he can prove it') But this whole matter about judgement of /^roi;^/"///^' and of mrj/77/y m baptizing, I have fullicr handled againft Mr. Tombcs before, whither I refer the unfatisfied reader. So that I doubc not to conclude, 1 hat the Reverend Dodor yielding that [folid re- pentance loyned with true lively faith in the Mediator, obtaineth preftnt rem flion of lin fcvcnbeto-e baptifm;] isa fuU yitUing this whole caufe [that remiflion U f«>-- rantly granted by the Covenant or promifc as the principal! Inftrument, and ofi only by Irj andnoto«'yor prima, i!y hy baptifm] . , . . ^ . <• .
2. That the Covenant Juftifieth firft, yea and oft without the hgn, Is further pro. vedby example, i . Of all that were juftificd from Adjm till Abraham. ^-. Of Abr^i- hvn himfelf, who being the firft figned perfon, methinks wclhould In him difcern the ends and cfF.asofthat fign, and he was Juftifiedbythe Covenant and faith before it. ?. In all the females among the Jews that were uncircumcifcd (though the Ifma- clitesand Edomltcs, and afterward the Egyptians, asHiftory tcls us, were circumci. fed.) 4 In all the males that dyed before the eighth day. 5.1n all Ifrael for forty years in the wilderncfs. 6. In Chrifts own Apoftles, who if they were everbaprtzed (which is uncertain to me) yet it is like long after their Juftification. 7- In Confim' tiney Aaguflinc, with multitudes both yong and old in thofe times, who either upon TcnuUuns \iciik grounds, or the fears raifcd by the Novation errors, did long de- lay their baptifm ; forac of them till neer their death } and yet were Juftified by faith. 8. In the gcnetality of their Catechumeni, who no doubt were pardoned upon their be- li'evii% !ong before baptifm. For the Fathers generally delayed the baptizing of profe« lytes,or new converts quite beyond and btfides the Scripture- rule and Apoftolical pre- fident. 9. Inall the infants of Believers who now dye b:fore baptifm. 10. In all the Infants and youth of the godly Anabaptifts. u. And fuppofc that the error of the Socinians [that Baptifm is not necelfary to fettled Churches, but only for the fi. ft en- tering converted Hca. hens] ("hould prcvaile yet more (1 mean feperated from their other'damnable errors) which we arc fadly taught in thele times to think to be no im^. poflibility J if whole Kingdoms (hould take up that opinion, and thereupon lay down all baptifm, (hould we think that upon their entering the Covenant of God, though without that feal, they were not Juftified ? were they all unpardoned, and fo damned ? or fhould ihey have only 3:;oarf>rw,butnotia)r,as Mr.B.fiith > or muft we fay that Dcus potefi fed nonfolct. tales Juflificarc, and fo that we have no found ground to cx- pea it? It is no impoftibility that all the Church Hiould take up that error, or the greater part ; for it is not fundamcntall and certainly damnable. Baptifm is not in the Apoftles Creed.
But to the examples of the females, and the uncircumcifed in tbewildernefs, this Reverend man anf^veuth [that the means might be neccfTary ro one fexc,and not to ihs •ihcr for RcmifHon, a$ well asfor fealing.p.iy^,'??.] Anf. i. As aduty it was:
330 FUm Scrifturefro9f$f
bu: not of Abfolutc ncaflitry torcmifiionand falvation ; God not taking fuch dif- ferent courfcs for that great end. i. The difpcnfablencfs (liews ic was not of that abfo- lutc neccfTity. j. Obllgnation is not of Abfolutc nccefTicy ( therefore not the fcal ) but rcmiflion is.
Vag. 178. He faith [Ir is probable the parents dcfire or vow of circumcifion might fcrve3 AnfvY. That coofirms f»hat I havcfaid. Mens deCres or vows arc not //;,'/?-«- Wf'J'Jof Juftificatlonor Regeneration toothers: much lefs the only or principal In- ftrumcnts; before or without the Covenant and Grant,
But let us now come to this Reverend mans Arguments againft Covenant- Juftifi- cation and Remiffion to Infants, i. He mentions three Covenants, t/i^. i. The condltionallCovcnantof Grace to the faithful! and their feed. *. The Abfolutc of ihefiift Grace, jj. The Covenant of Chrifl that he (hall fee his feed, c^-r. Andhe faith it is none of thefe that Juftifieth Infants without the Sacrament (and confcqucntl, ly not before itj Pag. 191, 19a, 193. Anfw. It is the firft, vir^ The promifc made to all that believe, that God will be their God, and of their feed, andihcy fliall be hi« people j and that the feed of the Righteous are blcfled : and that he will be met- cifuU to them, Exod.> ^o. and that they arc beloved for the Fathers f.\ke, Rom. u. and that ihey are Holy, and offuchis the Kingdom of God,c>^f.3s I hive before produ- ced them.
Buthefalih, 1. [Thatthe words [I will be thy God, and the God of thy feed] contain no: this fentence, that [All the children of Believers ihall be JuUified] but only that theydiall be partakers of the fame Covenant, and have right to the l^me confederation with its benefits, &C.'] Anfw. i. The Covenant as offered on Gods part, not yet Accepted and entered on theirs, doth not aftvially (but conditionally) J uliifie cither Parents or children ; But the Covenant accepted (which the parent is to doforhimfelfand his Infant, DfW^i^.iOjii.) doth itfor both, at Icaft it is ftrongly probable that when a People have God engaged to them to be their God, and be mer- ciful to them, &c. that he )ufllfieth them. 1. You confefs as much as I defire,x//c^.that ic brings them into the fame Covenant as their parents, and to the benefits of it. For 1 have proved that thi parents are juilified currantly and fufficiently as to their fi»lvati« on before the Adoflealing, and oft without it i therefore according toyouihe chil- dren are fo too. ^
z. He faith [many children of the faithful fhall pcrifh] Anfw. i. That contradideth not the certainty of their Juftificatlon by the Covenant before baptifm, anymore then the certainty of their Juftification by baptifm as the firft means, which you affirm, i. Efpeciaily it is not againft my opinion, who affirm only a certainty of Church- mcmberniip.and a ftrong probability of juftification (not denying the certainty) till the contrary be difcovered when they coine to age.
3. His third Rcafon is [Becaufe if Infants b. juft.'fied by the Covenant, then they that dye before Age, and they that live fliould be all nlike juliificd before hjptifm.] Anfw- And what grearerabfurdity in that, then that Ail alike fliculd be juftilicd after Baprifm, whe:hc-r they live or dye (as you teach .?) ^. Ihc Anfwer to the form.r may funicc to this Reafon.
4. His third Reafcn is, that [rheprcmife Gr;/. 17. 7 is conditional , oncondi* tion of Ctrcumci(ion;,as the ordinary means of remitting lin ; therefore the Jews chiL dien weie notordinarily )uQ-fi-d by the promifealanc, without the Sacraincnt] Anf, This IS anfwered before by dillingaifhing of conditions, xi^. fu:h as the event de- pen Jcth on, and I'uchas ic dothnjt, but ire only ad ba/ccffc & complclivc ; baptifnj is of the later fort. lean name you Bi'-'ny apromil'e to the Jews on condition of
their
Infants Chnrch- member jhip and Baptifm, 33^
their obfervine each particular Ceremonie, ^^Ich yet were performed , though fome ^e^e omted?and the people not prepared accordm^ to the preparation of the ^anftu-
"^- ^H° 'fif l^ReaTon h^'^C^tautfrom thU promlfe Peter exhorteth the Jews,^^.
^ ""fi/^^^"t,r;hiU,^^^^^^^ therefore he fuppofeth that their I nfnnts
«c i.j9. |o bri"g their chidden to wpt ;„ the Corcnam.nor juaifird &c.
Anfw ThirxStTSch h^^^^^^^^^^ doth fo mightily n.iftake,I have fully an-
^ A k!fnr.C« calls in the Infants to baptlfm, but with their parentj.md not fwercd to before, ^^'^ "nant was but conditional! either to parents or children, fand before them, i ■ n.^^. ^ ^^c paients(for bothjperformed the condition. Now &" fon wSo^^^^ - -ke Chrilf for thctr Lord and aviour j
hfsp"?Mmplyedinthe word [BaptilmJ as neceffary togo before .t. Or e fc unbe- Ikvcrs mu^^^^^^^^ fot remimon of Im.lf I thought thefe few words made not all
fhis Plain, it were eafic to do it more fully. . pt ^ r
Next the Dodor faith[ 1 here is properly but two Covenants, w^. of Law,or GGf- „cU ^heformer it is not j Nor the latter •, Becaufe, i. The eed of true bel.cvers are Tf notfaved *. Unbelievers children are often faved.] Anfw. i. Accord. ng to h.s AlArlne rhcv mav be jutVfied with their parents, though not faved : And what «s ratfnft^S.^GorTeU If they be not faved. hinnfd thinks ic
s only if they dye not in Infancy>uc rcjeft recovering mercy at age.i.The Infants of unbel evers are not faved as theirs j there is no prom fe of thcr falvat.on, .f ,hey dye ?n Infancy,nor fo much as a half promife,or ground of probability andChr.ftnn hop : God hath kept it fecret what he will do with them. And if they live to age and be leve, thevar theX the Covenant of Grac^ So that I think I may
concCd that thefe reasons do conclude nothing againft the pr mary intcrei^ of the Covenant in juftification, nor for the primary or fole mtcreft of the fign.
And I marvell the learned Doftor would alledgc that of-C./^/« m Aas z. ? 8 as for Mm, which is as plain againft him as I can fpeak. nmctfi m contmuvcrborumbapur^
any thing be more againft theDodois opinion.then to affirm pardon o go before bap- ifm' The truth is, C./x.;«giveth too little here to bapti m fo far Is hefromgomg he Doaors way , for its fealing ufe is more then the certifying of our conic.cnces , as have (hewed x And affarance to our confclences is not Juft.fication Let the Antmo- miftsthat fay the contrary, (Tiew it out of Scripture, where we are fald to be ,uj}ijicd in Tur confciences bv faih? And the Doaor knew that Cdvin m the foregoing words doth purpofcly Qie w this to be the order of Gods proceeding, r .Repentance or a t^ue change Tto which next is added remiflion of fins , and 5 • they are called to Chrifts death as the ground J and 4- in the fourth place he puts baprifm as the feal by which the pco- miffis confirmed , wherefore^ faith C./".i«;in thefe few words we have the whole fumm a^moft of Chr.ftianity , v:-^. that a man renouncing himfelf and the world, do wholly eSi up himfelf to God. z. ^at by free Remi[fm of fm he be delivered from the guilt of deathTanTfo be adopted among the Sonsof God, C>..] And he faith that [therefor Lukektcnv^rdm Pauls Scmon. conjoyncih Faith to Rcpcntavce,m the fame fcnfcas here he putteth Rmif^n of fm.-] See Cdv'n.Amd^t. in Concl. Tndent Sefs 6.cap^. Saying the very fame that I do: and that if Infants had not the prornifc of life, and were not born holy or heirs before hand, it were a profaning the Ordinance 10 B aptae
them. T7aaat.Thcologp.ii9. ice alfo PtfcJtor inMai.i.n. pleading the fame caule.
Uu
k
351 PLtin Script tire ^roof of
Itwerecafic to adJe anhundrcdi'uch Tcftimonicsofihe Judgement of AuihorSi if I had nf ccflity and Iciiure.
Having 11 itcd what 1 diflk:h th's reverend mans Traftitc, 1 will not trouble my felf or oihcs to meddle wi h .he reft wnich J ipprove. Only I a-! k'j that though in this oncdnft.'ifjc I finde him go too tir, >cc i fo highly rerercnce :ind honour him, hit I take him to have been a Divine of ttu higher form, ^nd beyond rhe vulgar ftraln, even of th-sfe that vrc honour for their gtcr. learning and judgment : and tSac he was one of thofethu found cti: the middle way of Truth and P. ics. which this contentious age rejedeth. Let me inlhncc in two morepjints in ckis Tradatc cxprtlFod.
1. Pag. ii6. lAdm.indMdum JHtcm & jufl'ficandum taiilu caiija c{l Dciii ingcncre uu(* iihulicx, feu efficient ii ; Juflics enim & Jujlificvnnoncfimfi D'ut ^ diccnte Aii' guflino Epijl, J9. ad Bonifac. Vj; hac ip!a de re ayt & cap. 49. d U lib. 3 . conlAu. Pe- tlL&cont. crc/cT'i, \. i.e. 20, zi.] This diffcreth from them that dare fjy, Thcic own Faith is Phylically thecflicienx inftuimcntall caufe of their own forgivencGs and juftification j Yea that it is a pafsivc Reception of Chi itt himfelf foy the faid I hy- ficall inltrumeHtality) and no ad at all, but nomcn attorns. Yea and look on thofc as injurious to the Church of Chrift (and fo publilli them) chit deny this moft abfurd dodtine. It is not onely one, nor two, nor three chat have ufcd me thus.
1. Pag. ijS. * [It is certain that the conditional! Covenant is made with All man- ** kind,as it is not made with the fain Angcls;as God hath p- omifed to receive All men *' into favor on the condition of faith and repentance ; whence alfo All men may be *^ truly and ferioufly invited by the preachers of the Gofpcl^ to the participation of the •' falvation obtained by Chriit j but the fain Angels not^as being fuch as God will noc ** again receive into favor under any condition. Yet I grant that the things promifcd in '^ the Covenant, are not given but to thofe that embrace the Gofpel, and their feed.] This is the foimd dodrine of truth, which many bend their wits againft in vain, and which l\:. Tombs faith is in Amyraldm and me fo near to Herefie.
T He next great name that Mr. Bf^/i^v/ adorneth, and would fortifie his book with. Is Bilhop Davenant j which moft learned judicious man I have as high thoughts of f jr the folidity of his judgement ("wou'dmy eftcemaddc any thing to his name, or were of any valuej as of almoft any that this kingdom ever bred. The truth is,any that perufehis writings, naayfind, that as he ftudied to avoid cxtreams in Divinity, (0 was he admirably bleft inthefuccefs of thofe ftudies, God Having opened to him ((. think^ the true middle way in many weighty points of Religion. As to in- ftancein two. 1. TheDoftrineof univcrfall Redemption, as istobefeenin the fuffrages of the Britilh Diviaes in the Synod of Do,t ad Art. 1. Sec. And fpccially in his late excellent, judicious Differtaiions on that fubjtft, and onpredcftination. A- gainft which 1 find indeed a learned, godly man,whom fthuugh unknown, I much love and honor for what of God I fee in his ftudLs) I mean Mr. Oivcn of Coggcfhall in Effex^ to fpeak verv confidently, and undertake to demonftrate, that the main Foundation of his di(re:-ationa.iutthe Death of Chrift with many inferences therefrom , arc neither found in^ nor founded on the word] wih much more. But if I may judge of this confident un^icrtaking, by his fucccfs againft a man more weak, and not to be named with learned DiJW«<»«/, either my judgement is utterly contemptible, or elfe his attempt would be meerly vain, as to the undertaken iffue ; The fiuits of good learning , piety, quicknefj of wit, and very good Rheto? ick I (hould expeSj enough CO caft fuch a mift upon the Truchj that che vulgac ftudcnt Ihall noc difcern it j and
to
ln[iints Chnrch' member Jhip and Baftifm, 33^
to fer fuch a glofs upon his own notions , that fuperficiall Readers fliall judge him in the right. ( ^ox vulgar eyes behold truth only in the vefture of the fpeakers language, according to which dicy pafs their judgement, where error having oft the finer clothes, doth as ot't deceive them • It is only within doors that Truth is to be feen nakedjwhere none but painfull, humble, longing, pre(rtng,plercing fuitors have ^cctk.) But as the parts of this learned man , had they the addition of much more , I think would have found work enough in dealing with a Davcnant, fo I am much more confident that his ciufc would fail him more then his parts, and that Divenants czwk is buiJt on the impregnable rock.
i. The fccond Inftance of this famous Divines cfcaping the dangerous extreams, is in the docirine of Juftification.wherein he hath clearly difcoveredjhow far good works, xii^. Evangelicall, are neceffary ( -yi^- as conditions both in fome fenfe of attaining juftlfication,and more fullyjof continuing it^and how far not(t/;\.as having any merit or proper caufalicy ) dc f/tflit. Habitual'i & A6luali^ cap.^o,^ i, & Pajfim j For the af- ferting of which lame dodrine,! have been judged fo injurious to the Church by fome men, when 1 never yet heard it once blamed in Davenant.
And according to the ufuall bent of his fludies bath this excellent man gone in the point of Baptifm, giving as much to it, as poflibly may be.without giving too much : but leaving Mr-Bc^/tfrd in the point in queltion, as far as I can find, His Thefes are thefe [i.In thecontroverfie of Perfeverance or Apoftacy of the faithfuU or Saints, the queftion is of that faith or fandifying grace, which cannot be received, excrcifcd, re- tained, orcaftaway, but by fome Att or operation of free will interpofing.
2. InthiscontroverCe of thelofing of faith or Inherent grace, regenerating or fandifying, It is fuppofed, that they who are faid to have loft faith or fain from grace, have formerly received and had chat grace, which they are prefumed afterward co have caft away.
3 . The Paplfts acknowledge it not as a point of faith, that any Habits of faith or Charity are infufcd into Infants in B3ptIfm,nor do they teach It,as of faith, that any of them are made juft formally by the inhcfion of habituall Righteoufnefs, and hollnefs.
4. The Proteftants grant not, that juftlfying faith, or charity uniting to God, or Regenerating grace, which repaireth all the faculties of the foul , are In the very mo- ment of Baptifm infufed into Infants.
Wherehe cites Calvin. ln(iitHt.liby^.c<ip.i6.%.ii. faying [There is no more pre- fent efficacy to be required in Infant-Baptifm, but that it confirm and ftablilh the Co- venant made with them by the Lord] And he concludes, that [he knows none of out Divines v\ho determine that that Regeneration which confifteth in the creation of fpl- ritual qualities (which we call fandification, andthePapifts, formal juftification) is produced in the very moment of Baptifm. And that neither Arminiin, Papifts nor Proteftants acknowledge Infants in the very receiving of Baptifm, to be made par- takers of thofc habitual gifts ^ crfpiritual qualities, which properly are faldcoconfti- tute a man juft and inherently holy.
5. The Fathers acknowledge neither aftual nor habitual faith or charity to be given to Infants in Baprifm. And they teach, that converfion or the creation of a new heart, which is properly to be called Regeneration, is not produced in them till they come to age capable of 1 cafon ] To which tndjhe produceth many teftimonies of the Fathers.
Thus far what Intancs teccive not in Baptifm 5 now for what they do receive, he addeth.
I. Propof. All Infants baptized (^'i•^rightly) are abfolved from the guile of Ori*- ginal fin.
Uu i Thlt
354 Pi din Scripture protf ef
This (he faitli) is the rrimary cfffd of Baptifro, and the rcli follow ic, which he fhews in the particulars, i. Juftification of Infants is nothing dfe but the pardon\ of their originilfm. i. When Infants arc fa iJ to b: regenerated in baptifm, that alfo\ fodependechonthis rcmJffion of original fin, that it may fcarcCjOr indeed n jt ac all be \ diftinguiih:d from it. Renovation in Baptiim is by remifllon of all fin, faith A.igufl. Infants Regeneration confiftcth only In rcniKTion of (Tnjand acceptation to life eternal, faith CJ^indcr- The fame is to be faid oftranfliting Infants out of the old Aiam, and in:r3fflng3nd incorporating them into the New. Fo^thlsalfo is connexcd with re- miflTion of original (in. For as foon as guilt is removed from th: Infant, which he con- traftcd in old Admi, he is efteemed i/>/flpflfj tobc of the Itock or faoiilyof thefecond Aditm. For which he citeth Ect;ji and Aufi'in.
Much of this down-right agiinft Mr. Bcdfordsg Cand Doftor Burgcs) doftrine.and none of it for him in the point I oppofe : And herethofe that are fo hot, and high for a Phyfical union (or fomewhat equall) with Cfariftj may fee that this learned man af-. firmeth but a relative and morall (in Infants i and doubtlefs union with Chrift is of the fame nature in them, as In the Aged.though not on the fame conditions.)
5 . Again ('he faith)-that which is called the fandlfication of Infants baptized is con. ftituted, for the moft parr, in this walhing away of original fin. Though 1 will not de* ny that they are aUo holy or fanSified in other rcfpedi ; As in that they are dedicated to the holy Trinity ; for to be dedicated to God, Is in one fort to be faniSified, that they arc fprinkled with the holy bloud of Chrift for pardon, e^-c.
The onely word in all Divenants Hpillle, that hath any (liew (as far as Idifcernj of favor t J Mr. Bj caufe, is the next, viz. he addeth [that they have the Holy Ghoft dwel- ling inchem inafecrct way,and to us unknown] But confider here, i. He doth not fay that this is the cafe of all baptized Infants, as of other cffids he doth ; noi- of any non- eled but onely that Infants may indeed be faid to be fandified,befides the former rc- lacive fanftification ('which we all acknowledge) 2. He doth not afcribethis to Ba- ptifm, as b;ing a fruit of it. j. He denyeth all Habitual and Adual Grace In them by baptiOn, and doth not talk of any feed or root, which is efl'^dual faving Grace and yet no H ibit. 4. He affirmcth no union with Chrift but Relative. 5. He make:h remifllon theficftfruitjandthereftbutrefHltsfromth.it, contrary to Mr. B, 6. He faith, [it is the Holy Ghoft operating; bin J<lu'id aulcm hoc aut qu/ik fit^cxpUcctqiii mtcUign i e- zpfatcor mc non intcUigtve. i.e. What it is, or of what fort, let him explain that undcr- itandeth } for my part, I confefsl underftand It not] This doubtfull obfcure palTage on the by, is all the countenance to Mr. Bi caufe, that this modeft, learned man affordeth. 4. He (hews alfo.that Infants Adoption Is of the fame relative nature,And he con- rludethoffiU together,that [the Juftification, Regeneration, Adoption and Sandifica- tion of Infants artfeth from RemifTion of originall (In onely,by the blood of Chrift ap- plyed to Bjptifm] fo that here Is no grace, but relative given by Baptifm to them.
1. Prepof. is [That Juftification, Regeneration, Adoption, which we yield doth be- ] jng to baptized Infants, is not univocally the fame with that Juftification. Regenera* tion and Adoption, which in tfie Qaeftion of the Saints perfcverancc, we f3y,ls never loft.
And fot Regeneration , he citeth, Aufliii Epifl. ii- Parvulumj nnn RagcncratioiHi (]u € in Rcnatoriim volimtate co.;ft(lit^ fcdipfim Kci^mcratinnu facramottum rcgcneratum facti. And where fliould their feminall grace lie, if none in the will ?
l.P/opof. Is [ the Juftification and Regeneration, and Adoption of baptized In- fants, confcrrcth on them a ftate of Salvation according to the condition of Infants. 4 FiopoJ.ls [Thofe who in Baptifm were truly juftified, regenerated and adopted
fuitable
Infants Church'TnemberJhip AndBapi[rJU ZJ5
' — T . , .„f,„, ft,f-. when thcy'comT^the ufe ofreafon, are not juftificd,
fuiublc to '^'^'^fZfniJhV^^^^^ ftate of the aged, unkfs by repenting,
regenerated and adopted, ^r^^'^V^^^ n,ade in Baptifm.
believing and Abrenuat.ar.on, they ful^^^^^^^^^^ P; ^^ ^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^.g.
The laft Prcpof. ^^Whenwc teach the Perfe^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^ .^ ^^^
cation once ob«ined,wc do not deny ^^e q^^^^ ^ j^ ^h, j i^j lo^, vi-
sard of the rubjea to be -""b^ -,^^^ in Chrlft was juftified Z adopted to
God doth not perm.t, that he «''® ^y ,^' '"^ fanftification.ceafc to be a Son of God, be a Son of God.mould by Icfing that f'f^^''^^^^^^^^^ the do^rine o
and peri(b for ever 3 The fcope ot th.s >^!'°1^ J^^^J^^^'V; ^or v^eakned by affert.ng
that thole may pcnui dim lui a^ , airerreth not the point I oppole,but
alio became i am lo mucu u b „ nrobabi itv of what he concludcth as
(efpecially fo excellent a man^ay eafily fee ground for,though 1 do not.
HAvlne lliewed the great difference between Biiliop D^vcmns Ju-jgement and Mr 2>;Ksenquire='ofhiso.herwitn^ rle.fcd to make uteof the great name of that Rcverend,Lcarncd,Famous,bol.d 1 .o«
?e end m is'^not for him. Bat as 1 am bound to do my part for vindicating he repu^ tatlon of fo excellent a man, fo I believe that he ^^PP-^^^eth not of M .B 5 doarme M^ reafonsare,i.Mf.B'i wenk reafon to think the contrary j he faith [If he had n°t been of the fame judgement, he would no. have been fo caretuU for thepublication-lBut he mieh be o he lame judgement with Dr.r..^ in the Thefis which he maintaineth.and mnotineverypaff3gcontheby5 now Dr./W.^5 Thefis difters much from Mr.B. Kin anTf^doth^heinthehL'dlingo^ ^. Ic is likethisReverend man would have uuered his approbation of thofe thin§s,had he approved them.3 J find h^m in oth ?h ngs 0 neer the'^S.inde of Judicious D.vcnam, that I have reafon to con edure he I fo in this But Davcnant (though he go further then moftj yet not nc r fo far as Mj.Bs inafcribinetoBaptifm. 4. But efpecially lam perfwaded the folid judgement and grea par»^of thatLverend man.wiil not permit him to entertain Mr B s opinions ^ And indeed in this Preface Mr.B. feemeth to defert himfelf and his caufc : For he feems fully to approve of the Fathers opinion (which is D^venants and lyardsjmtvc Son of O iginall fin is the firft grace tha\ Infants receive in Baptifm. Bu: then «ha is become of his oft repeated doftrine , that it firft uniteth them to Chr.ft and fo Teg neat«^hem by giving^hem feminal grace ( equal in^^^^^^^ bits which the Schoolmen fpcak of ) and then remiQion of fin. The two fitlt arc here kft out, and then he and I Ihould be neerer to an agreement.
Uu s ^*
336 P/aift Scripture proof ef
AS for learned Mr. Cranfor/I^ whether he intend a full approbation of Mr, Bs do- -^ *wi;inebyhis Imquorcpcrin fcn'oiu.m vcram Thcfibia cxpltcaiam'] I know not-, though I rather think the contrary by his abiliticj.No man almoft that approves i book, in:endc:h to approve of every thing in it. liur if I fljonld be iniftakcn it doth but jufti- H: my endeavors to remove this ftumbling block cur of mens way, left in thefe times, when fo ra:'.ny deny Infant baptifm, wc ilioulu be ready to run from them into the o- thcr CTTcam. Sure I am, that till of late, I fcarce ever fpokc wi;h any Divine of note but miflikcd Dr. Buriesy and Mr. Scdfords dodrine, and h gave generall diftaft to the godly M inifters and People^ as cxpte fled in their books- Though 1 know that it is no good argument to prove it unfound. For my part I have written this mecrly upon the enforcement of confciencc, in apprehenfion of a neceffity of fo doing, feeing no one cUe inclined to it. And I hope this learned man will not take it ill ; feeing as wc Ihall differ while we are here, fa we may maniftft, as well as hold our diflfercnt judgements for the fearching after pretious truth, without any breach of Chriflian love.
I hive not anfwered exadly to every word, nor half fo fully as elfc I would J fchoughlthinkthe main miftakes arc fuff.clently difcovered) becaufe I have but three or four dayes to meddle with it (at vacanc hours^ the Prefs ftaying for it, becaufe the reft is printed off.
WHereaj fomc ftick at it , That I make the condition of the Infants Church- Memberfhlp, and Juftification to be wholly without him, in the Faith of the Parent i lanfwerthem, i. That it is evident in all the Scripture, that God puttetl* arerygrcat difference between the Children of the Faithfully and other mens. 2. That he maketh fuch promifes to them , and giveth them fuch priviledges, as I have expreft in this bock. 5. And that this is to them as they are the Children of his People, who believe. 4. And that he never requireth any condition inherent in the Infant, that I find in Scripture, And doth not this then plainly tell us^ That the Parents Faith is the Condition ? if the Parent be a be!'i€ver,thc child u entered the Covenant, the Father enter- ingitfor h'lm^ and his, Dent. 26. If the parent be not a bcleivcr, the Child is left out. And what other condition can be imagined ? That this is the judgement of our greateft Divinesj I will fhew you but In 2. or 5. fbefides what D.ivenant and ifard. have done out of the Fathers, &e.J becaufe I cannot ftay to adde more,
Ferkins on the Creed, P/7^. 127, vol. i. faith, [The Faithof the Parent doth bring the Child to have a Title or interejl to the Qovenant of grace , and to all the bcnefiti of Chrift.-]
And in his TrtztUe Hoivto live roeU, vol. i. pag. 485,485. he faith, [Thac be ihr ce opinions touching Infant i Faith \ i. That Infants have A^ua! Faith^Scc. Etit this cpinon feems to be an untruth. 2. That they are faved by feme unl^norvn and ur^ctjI^Me voay, -without Faith. I foniewhat doubt of this, becaufe, e^f. 3. That children have faith cfierafort, btcatife the Parents accordiHgto the tenor of the Covenant, Iwillbe thy Godyind the God oftbyjccd^belicve for themfclves, and their children j and tbe-reforc their faiih is ml only their s\but the faith of their childrcn.Uei\cc it is that the Sciipture faith,!/" the root be holy^thc branches arc holy, and if you bdicvdyour children are holy According to humane ia.Vj the Father and his Heirs are but one perfon,the Father Covenanting for hfmfcif and his Children ; what then fnould hinder that the Father might not btlicrc for his Cbild> and the Child by ihc Parents faith, have 1 itleto the Covenant and the
benefits
Infants Church- memberjhif and B aptifm, 33-7
benefits thereof ? It is alleaclgcd(by BcUarminelh.x Ath\^t.c^^.^.')rhAt bphu means Children Ihoitld be born believers y i?id fo be conccivcd.and born without original fin. Anfw. Belicviiig Parents fuftjin two perfons 3 one whereby they are men,3nd thus they bring forth children having nature,with all the conuptions of nature : The other as they arc Holy men and believers .- and thus they bring forth Infants that are not fo much their Childicn, as the Children of (iod. And Infants arc Gods childrenjHot by vcrtue of their birth,but by means of Parents faith,which intitlcs them to a'l the bltflings cf the Covenant. Children proportionally fuftain a double perl'on : If they be conlidered in and by thenifelveSj they arc conceived and born in Original fin : If thty are confidered as they are holy, and believe by the faith which is both theirs, and their Paicnts faith, and confequemiy have by this means liile to Chrift and his benefits, Original fin Is covtrcd and remitted. If it be faid, That by this means all children of believing Pa- rents, are Children of God J I anfwcr, That we muft prcfume that they are all fo, lea- ving fecrct Judgements to God.
To this j.opinion I moll encline ; bccaufe we are to judge that Infants of believing Parents in their Infancy dying, are juftified i and 1 find no juftification in Scripture, without faith, io Augu(i.Serm.\^.dc vcib.Apo{l.& Ei^ijl.xi.<i7 i\o<^Jc baptUib.^-cap.z. Bcrn.Serm ii.in Cum.66.Juflia. q-^6. Thus far Pcrl^ms.
Here is none of M. Bed fords Dcftrine ; nor that Baptifm doth all this as the firft means J but the Covenant, and the Parents Faith chiefly.
RIvet,ia Ccfief.Excrcite.92. Fa/i^e^iz. Noflri, certe, inter quos vcncrabilit Ben in Rcfp.adaflaCoU. Montiibclg, conccdunt Infantibm itatribid fidcm alienam, qua inipfismn c[i, itt tamcnpro fun iniUucx pa^oDciecnfeatur. Fidcm autcm intelhiunt earn qua parattcsynon fibijolu ,fed fiiu quoquc po^crli tetcmain Chriftovit^ jta, Deo fen," per iclifLs partuulariOui inhac difccrnefida fobole judicils ) perdci mifcrico'rdtam rcccpc- runt. Ncmpc qn<e mnititur promifsinni Divin*,Ero Dcwi tuus drfcminis tui : JiiXta quam Apostolus, f Radix fanlia^cttam&R.imi j fiprimititefan^a^crgo & Alaff^.i. Taluautcm fides non conftderctur vclU applicjns gratiam promiflam huic veil \\\ifiliu dum n.ifcitur j fcdtar.qu.m Aca^t^ns prowifsto-aem prnfcipfo & cxindc nafciturii. Hific c(l quod ji parens moreretur poll concepiionem infiir>tis,quod tempore nondum potuit ci aClu fidem rrp. plicarcy In fans tamcn nafecritur fanSos ex vi promifllionis.
ZVinglius I conjedure ftudied the Doftrlne of Baptifm as much as moft Divines 5 and he is fo large and frequent In proving, i. That all the infants of believers, dy- ing in Infancy^ are certainly faved, whether baptized or unbaptized. and that by vertue ot th€ Covenant upon the condition of their Parents l-aith , and brings lb full lefti- mony of it. i- And that Bjp:ifm doth no: RegeneratCjOor fandifie, nor take away (in fhe means prcperly and efficiently ) but only fignific and Seal it ( and fo cxhibire by theft j) that I mufl rtftr you to his books, they being too large to Tranfcribe. See Ttfw. a. /).ii9, 1 jo,iiiji:2. and p.i6.& alibt p^fsim.
DOSor Twifs Com. Coiv'mum Page zp, jo. ^uodfrinc ihi Hclcrodoxium omrcmhac ex parte abipfis amo'.icndam fufficerctiji modo Infantibus duntaxat fadcratts & inira. EcclefixgremiumprocreatU^ fdutarcm Chrijli gratiam acc»n.mod(ircnt———— At utlir
fantibus
338 Flam Scripture prodfef
funiihui extra fadM Dei mo/icntibia fdlm contingat ,hoc in Amimi fentcmia minime loU-
randum ejje \udicamus. Vid- u'tra,
' » More you may find to this purpofc, and contrary to Mr. Bs. doftrinr P.ioe t i j ? ?+.n.?^»?7,j8* &c. Only the learned Dodot Page jj- col. i. argues'' upon aii utter miftake oi Auflins opinJon/uppoling that if a non-eled Infant rtiould dye before the ufc of rcafon after Baptlfm, thenhelhould not be faved, bccaufe not Eled- nor damned, bccaufe pardoned. Bac he might have known that Aufims judgement Is That if he dye before the ufe of reafon, after Baptifmj ic is a certain fign that he is Eled V and fo tha: no Reprobate (hill fo dye.
THe ttftimonics of tfici(lijf^ Zuinglmt Jmyraldus,tht 4 Lcyden Profcffors in Synopj! purior.Theolog. I put before thefc Animadverfions.
/4«/?i«himfeif ( who in the judgement of molfjafcribes too much to Baptifm ) yet faith, Coftt.DeaauflAih.i. cip-ii. Baptifmi (ane vicem aliqiundo tmplerepjjlonem^ de latYone iUo, eui non Bapti-^ato di(lnm cflyhodie mccum erit in pandifatnon Uvc documcn- turn idem beatus Cyprianui affumit i quod ctiam atquc ctiam confidcrans^ invenio , non tantum paffionem pro nomine Ch/ifli id quod ex baptifmo deer at pjje fuppkrc^ fed ctiam fidem converfionemque cordis, fi forte ad celcbrandum mylicriuMj baptifmi, in angujiu temporumfuccurri nonpoteft. Neque enim lotro iUe pro nomine Chrifti crucifixus ejli/edpro meritu facinorum ftmtim \ncc quia credidit pafjia eft, fcddum patitur crcdidic.
To what I have faid^alfo the Doctrine of our learned and Reverend Adembly ic con- fonantjwhich being too large to tranfcribc youmay fee In Confcj[.cap. ij^iS.znd in both the Qaiechi/ms, ,
AN
I
Infdnts Church member jhip and Baptifm* 5 S9
mmmnwi-m}
An Addition to the twentieth Chapter of the Firft Part.
1 Take it CO be an Invincible Argument to prove that Infants Cliurch membcrfhip which thcv arc cont'eflftd to have had before Chrifts Incarnation, Is noc revoked, iu that Thuy were ;Otnibers of the UniveTil visible C htuch as wellas of the Jews' NationalChurch.5 Ye 1, and that more immediately and piniarily : which Unlvcrfat Chu'ch is not overthrown by thrift and therefore nor their {landing in It. Mr. T. confiir^ii tte Jews Church was noc then th^- unirerfal Church, and that Infants then were :^ embers of the Univerfalj but he fauh , they weie primatily Members of tlie Jews Church, and thertfoe thit falling, th'lr Intereft in the Uaiverfal fell with !c : And fome others I meet with, that deny there is any fuch thing as an Univerfall vilible Church. ■. • ■ ' ' :.' ' :' _^ .
Fo the full fatlsfadion or confutation of botVl»«fC' tfin:e.(i lo rtiich wf kt^ri, an4 clearly and judicioufly by Mr. samufl H/^dfon inHls Ir.'s 'Viiiikitlon o( The Ef- fenceandVnityofiheOnnch Calholitie v'lfibk^ that I could nor but jive this notice of it torcfeclhegam-fayerstolt: Seeing that which I did tnc flijhtly touch and, weakly perform, is there done with admirable ttrength andfuliKis, by abundance of found Arguments from Scripture, and the Natu.c of th. thing. Where alf) M,.T.myyke enough to confute and (hame his diminutive conttmotu-usexpreflions concerning the Kingdom ot Chrift, as if it were but here one in a Town^or there one in a Family that Chriit would have called.aod that he meancth by ^^AUNanons'l'toht DifcipKd. As indeed the ScriptUie is full againft him in that, and fpcaksch more glorioufly of the Kingdom of our Lord, as he may find it cited there by Mr.Hiiifon Zicb- 14.9. And thcLo'idihiUU Kjngovcr aU the earth; m that day {h.illthccbe One Lord, and his VaPicOiic. Dan.7. 14. The-rewat pvcnto him (Chrift^ DomnionandGlCy, and a I^ivgdom^ that aU Pcoile, Nations and Ungjtagcs (hould fcrvc bin^y lfa.2.2, 5,4. It (baU come to pifs in the lajl dtys that the mouutatn of the Lords houfc (huU be c(iail (bed on the top of the mBuntams, and (hall be exalted above the Hills , and all Natioi^sfh'U flow unto it i and mar.y people (hjUgo andfiy^Comeye^let ui go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the houfe of the God. of Jicob^ and be will teach us hisrvaycs^ and xvc wjl walk '^ ^^^ fiithi^^r¥i^\.^^ 9: /tU Nations n^dm'ihonFafl made, [hull come and n'oipj:f before thcc 0 Lord, and f^J M ^fon fie thy name, iioira.25.6. Pfal. zz, 17. AJi the ends of the Vforldfh.ill remember^ and turn unto the Lord, and all the l^indrcds of the Nations Jhall woiptp before him. Pfal.72.8, HejljallbaveDommion alfofrom Sea to 5f.i, and from the River to the Ends of the Earth.lh,^$ . j. Thou (Jjolt CaU a Nation whom thou l^newcll not, and Nations which l^n.w not thee (hall run unto thee i faith M/-. Hudton, Itlsffo- ken of Chrift under the Gofpel i and there is fet down both Gods Call of a Nation, and a Nations Anfwer to that Call ; and thefe two are fufiicient to make a Church. Pf.7 1. II ^17. AU Kjn^s (Jjall botv down before him,AllNatio?tspallferve himMa • 2 x .4 J •
X X Tije
34© Pi^fff Scripture fr$ef of
TheTjnidom ofGodfhaUbi tal(infremyou, and given to a Nation brin^irji forth fruits thereof. Rom. 10.19. Mic.4.i. M my Nations fhjU piy Come ^ tfc. If3 51 i^ HcfhaU ^rinl^icmany Nationsy Jcr4.i. The Nations (haU b'.cfs tbemfeves inum and in hm {haU they glory Ifa.65 1. Rom. 4-1 7. Rev. 21. 14. Zech.i.ii Many Nations (hall be joyaedtotbe Lo, d m that d.iy , and (halt be my people. So thac the Scripture fpeaks more magnificently of the Churcb of Chtilt for the extent of it, then yW,.T. doth. Though fomca-cfoboldastoaflirm, that to hive Chrifts Covenant, his {atisfaftion, his Church, his fcaling to extend to any more then the very Elcd and faved is no honour toChrift, but a difgracc J many fuch defpcratc expreflions I find In late writing of a femous learned man, or two, very difhonourablc to Chrilt and Scripturi. Mt.Hudfon faith better then they (^Pag.z2o.)Tht Covenant of Grace and faivatlon by Chrift,and the firit Evangelical promife that ever vfas made in the world,was to Ad.tm and Eve rc- prefenclng all ma.ikind,and therefore confequenily the whole Church of God.
I defire Mr T. therefore when he is anfweringthat Argument of mine, chap. 20. to deal with thcfe ftrong fupports of it in Mr. Hudfons book, and not to turn It over with a wet finger (as he ufeth; being backed with fo ftrong defence of Scripture and Rea- fon, as he (hall there find. When he hath foundly proved the taking down of the uni- verfal vifiblc Church (whereof all [nfants were Membersjwho were ever Members of any particular ChurchJ or yet the calling oflf all Infants out of this Univerfal vifiblc Church, then he will have done fomething proportionable to his undertakings. But then he muft do it with more Scripture andlleafonjthen he hath yet produced to prove the Repeal of their Church- memberfhipi or the Moral overthrow (demure) of the Ef- fential frame of the Church of the Jews, as well as the cutting off the Accidentals and of the unbelieving Members. The vifiblc Univerfal Church as well as the Invifible' (though for the fake of this latter^ is called Chrifts Body. And the Body Is but one* and therefore not altered in aay of its Effence. '
Arg,
InfAnts Chnrch'tnemberfhip and Baptifm, |4 i
Arguments to prove that Baptifm is a ftanding Ordinance for entering of all Church- Members (ordinarily,) and not only for the fi4:ft Difciphng of a Nation.
vvi
'Hen I had fent this Book to the Prefy, and a great part was printed, a Neigh- bour Minilter, nnd very loving friend told me, that there are feme rifen up in a Neighbour Countrey to us, who do confute the Re-baptizers ; but it was on ihis ground, as denying the continuance of Haptifm as a ftanding Ordinance in the Church} and therefore hedefired me to adde fomewhat by way of an Appendix a- gainftthts Opinions which (feeing mens error makes it ncceffary) 1 ihall do i but very biitfly.
* liuc 1 will firft premife tkefetwo AlTertions : i. In my judgement this Errour of the old and new S'<jf.«,\?«.v,ih6ugh bad, is nothing fo bad as Mr.T'sjltd thofe others that de- ny the Church mcmbeilhipof Infants.
My rcafon is, bccaufe they deny only the fignand Seal to Infants, (which is incom- pirtbly the lefs.) but not the l^riviledge and benefit fealed (which is the greater.) But iMy.f. denyeththem both the fign and the I'riviledge of Church- mcmbeilhip , and confcquently all the Privilcdgcs that are due to vifible Church members o'"'y. And though he yield the ufeof the figntothem when they come to age, yet it is to be but an empty (ign, ai being quite belide Chrifts Inftitution, and void of the true end of Baptifm i for it cannot then be the initiating fign to thofe that have been long in the Chu.ch before.
2. 1 Intend thefe Arguments only to thofe that acknowledge the Divine Authority of Scripture •, for nature telleth us nothing of meer pofitives, therefore to thofe of the Seekers that deny both Baptifm and Scripture , it is in vain; it being irapofliblc to convince them of the duty of Baptizing, till they firft are convinced of the Authority of the word of God, whichenjoyneth it.
But to others, I prove it thus ; i.Y-xom M^tih. '2-^. 19. CoandDifciple me aU liat'i- ons, bapt'ir^rg thcw, &c. Whence I argue thus : What Chrift hath conjoyned, man murtnot feparaie : But Ciirift hath conjoyned Difciplingand Baptizing as a ftanding couifc to the end of the world (as the next verfe fpcak« j) therefore we muft not fepa- ratethtm. Though the wo; d [for tver] do fometimefignifie a limited time in theold Ttftam^nt, w-^. till the New World under Chrift 5 yet in the Gofpcl [till the End of the World] can have no other then the proper fignificaiion without plain impudent violence.
X X 2 Argnm,
;^ Flain Scripture ^reef of
Argnm , ^. From i Cor. 12. i^.Byattc Spirit we arc all bspti^sd inio one body, li B.ip- til'm be Godsappcinctd'oidinary way of engrafting All into the Body of Chrift , then it is a ftanding O: dinancf^ as being of a Handing ufc -. But Baptlfm is Gods appointed ovdinaiy way of tQij,rafti:i5 A.l into the body of Chrift : Therefore, &c. The Antece- dent w:il appear } lain in the Tcxt^ if youconfider, I. That it is'rcall Baptifm that h he:e menti.ned, the Spit it being fpckcn of as a concurrent caufe. 2. That it was All that were ihuj Bsptlztd into the Body.
A)gum. 3. Is from the expn Is phcc, Eihcf. 5. ^6. where it is faid that Chrift fan- ftifieth and cleanfcth his Church with the waihing cf water by the Word i that he might prcfenttttohimfclfagiorious Church^&c If the whole Church of ^ hi ill muft in au- tv be waflitd w".h waier, then ic is a ftanding Ordinance for the life ct the whole Church; But the Antecedent is plain in the Ttxr: 1 herefoie,5ie.
A gum. 4. From R)W.6.7, If the ufc of Baptifm be to Bapriac men Intojcfus Chrift, and into his death then It is a ftanding Ordinance to the Church,as being of a ftanding ufe; But the former is in the Text: Therefore.&c.
Aigim. 5' l$ixomAils 1.58.&22.16, If Baptifm be inftituted for the Rcmiffion of fin, oi'the wafliingaway of Iin ^whether by fignifyingjfealingor exhibiting) then it is a ftanding Ordinance to the Church ; (as being to a ftanding ufe and end, one 3g« cf the Church having no Icfs need of it then another:) But the Antecedent is in the Tcxrj lhereforc,&c.
Aigum»(>.l-sitomCo\z,\z. If the end of Baptifm beour burial and Refurredlon with Chrift, then it is of Handing ufe, and confcquently a ftanding Ordinance. But the Antecedent is in the Text: Thcrefore^&c.
Argiim. 7. Is from i Per. 3. 21. If the end and ufe of Baptifm be the Churches falva* tion, then it is of continual ufe (and fo a ftanding Ordinance J But the Antecedent is in the Text. Thercfore,&c.
Argum. 8. Is from %ltb. 6.2. It is there reckoned among the foundations or princi- ples which are of ftanding ufe, and therefore it is fo it fclf. So G<;/.3.27. It is the ordinary way of Initiation into Chrift, or putting on Chrift. Aigum. 9. If we have no warrant by word or example in all the New Teftamen: ( iince the (olemn Jnftituticn of Baptifm, M.itth.i^.) to admit any Member into the Church without baptifm ^ but both Prtcipt and conltant Example of admitting thcna by it : then we muft not admit any withou: it (ordinarily.) But the Antecedent is evi- dent, joh^.i.Afis 2.38,41. eJ;- 8. 12,13 16,36,38, eir 9 ige^- 10.47,48. dM^.i 5, ll.&.i^.S.& 19. ^^4:$.Rm.^.S-&c- i he confcquent is undoubted to thofe that take the Word for their rule.
Aii^iim lo.lf Lhiifthimftlfhave Inftitutcd the Ordinance of Baptifm in the Word, and not again repealed it J then ic is a iLinding Ordinance to the Church j (and no man muft dare to repeal his Laws;) BucChrifthath Lnftitiited it ; andlctany man fhew where he hath repealed ic ihat can j and till then it muft be acknowledged to be fliil in force.
Many more Arguments might be brought from other Scriptures, as T'//.?.^ . Hcb i.o. zz. Juhii 3-^. (if that do fpeak of Baptifm J Ephcf.^.^. As the whole Church is one bo- dy.and hath one Lord, and one Faith, fo it hath one common baptifm.
But 1 will addc no morCjlecaufe it is bu: on the by, as to my main intended bufinefs, and be caufe this is fufficient to thofe that can judge of Scripiurc-Evi<iencc when they hear it, and will be ruled by it nb;n they know it] and for oiherSj it is not many words ihat can cure their difeafc.
I under*
Infaists Church-memberjhip and Baptifm. 343
IUnJerftand alfo th-it fome kw Anabaptifts there are that Fcbaptize upon other grounds then common : Who believe that Infants arc Church-members, and mull be entrcd by Baptifm ; But bccaufe they then Covenant by their Parents, and muft ne- cefl'arily after Covenant by themfelvcs i therefore they take it for a double Covenant, and To muft be an Iterated Seal.
And foiiie becaufe they cannot be refolved whether Baptifm in Infancy or at Age be better, think itthcfafeft way to do both, that fo they may bcfure to hit on the right.
1 am paft doubt, that both thefe foits do go on far lefs erroneous and dangerous grounds, then Mf. T. and the reft who deny all Infants the benefits of vlfible Church- inembcrniip, which is far more, then to iterate the Ad of Baptizing. Yet doubtlefs they are both in an Errour. For it is but one Covenant which we enter in Infancy by our Parents and at age by our felves. The latter is but a renewal and Recognition of the Covenant which before we entred : ^though abfolutely neceffary to the falvation of thofe that come to the ufe of Reafon) And each renewing the Covenant muft noc have a Repeating of the Seal.
Chr
firft J, . . ., ---
ples,nor twice entred into his body (i Cor.iz. i^.&c.) 2. The Apoftle$(to whom the full clearing of thefe dotabts, and difcovery of Chrifts will was committed) did never Baptize any into the NameofChriftj but once. And we arc to be Followers of them as they were of Chrift j and to cake the Scripture for a perfcd Rtile and Law; And therefore not to go beyond it. More I have not time to adde.
The
544
The Conclufion of this Treatifc.
ISril^fcTcn^^K' r"^'"g°f^»'"took,«to expearopleafethem whom I
fagc .n my mouth, by his Grace, I will fpeak it : 1 had rath'. r Ln were ar^r wir^^l:
lervant. .ure 1 am that I fpeak not for my felf, nor the advancing ci any Hclhlv imc II •• ^^f^ ^s well as others, which is both the pleafing and the rifing w y and choupi through the great mercy of ray Lord, thedaily cxpedations of my hang?' do'h weak.
SdotSrfl7fi:ft "^'"S tny felf to that wo,k and manner of performLgT
r« n.r t,? iT r ' ^^' "°"' '° '^" ^^''^ rrocurech 3ie friends But I have learned, that the T.f.;y/.,^.// «,,«,, ,yr^^^^^., ^^^^^^^^^
tcred in us above the Intercfi of the Flc[h. If I hate any language of Sh'ncfs or mi^ eHIv / "'/ ^' r°^ P?^^^'^^ ^ '^^^'^ "°' '^"^ ^° ^^^ter it on Th. Spir t,bu uS c^Ii'^:T^^''a?°^r^ '"^^ ^^'^^^'"'"S °"'y 'hat they would noc judge of Gods' Zltl 'a ^""'•''y ^-"/^ thcmfelves more then me.) Butldarerotfvoid S Sofe? ?rfr °^^°'J'"8 ''^^^"^f^'. I know the pride of men (that^f ?. .dolizmgfio) hath brought them generally to be impatient of thar i.nPHiae.Vhli
Ru!L"":^ht do'a; n? h"r •'i''r?r'^'j'" ^^^°"^ ' '^^"^^ .•micate>.vas\.k^ed by the r.ol' °^5 , $ "'; '''^'"'' [I fpke openly to the world, I evertauoht in the $y- \^Tl^f ^t Temple,whither the Jews a'l wayes relbrt , and in fecret h'ave l^id no- .h,ng. VVhyaskeftthoume? askthem that heard me what I have faid unto them they know what I fatd, /.te.iS.^cxi .] There was no ev.l in rhis anfwer which hTcou d bearw.tnefs o , and yet Chrift isfmittcn ^ and if he had now givcnfuch an ani^er our times would hare cenfured him for arrogant, unmanneriy/faucy and rail de- fh. An L' ^Tr" 'I "^^'l^''^^'" 'l?^" Chrilf. If I be thought ro be in the w ong,ai d thcAnabaptlftsmthe nghc, if this book will not convince (as it is unlikely whefe the r ce.ver .s not capable we muft ftay till the grear judge determine it by h / final de! c.ncn, and then u rt^ail be known. J f any will Reply; I ag,,n will give them thi cn^ couragement.th.n they are likely to have the honour of having the laft word -for wac J able, 1 yet purpofc never more to deal on fo low a Tbcam
Toflfcript.
345
Tojlfcript.
HAving not long fince publifhed a fmall book, Entituled Aphorifms of JuUificacion and the Covenants,! quickly found too many over- valuing ic,and fomc over- vilifying ic(contrary to vny ov^n mean SfiintA' tion and Sxpeclation. ) The former, with the Stationer (the Impreflion being foldjdo importune me inceflfantly for a fecond Edition;! am not only diftrafted between mens contrary judgements and defines ; but far more,between a fear of wronging theChurch bymiftakes,and Of wrong- ing it by my fiicnce , and Chrift by hiding my Talenr, and his precious Truths, which after hard ftudy and earneft fupplication, he revealed to me on thefe terms, that I (Tiould reveal them to others. My foul trem* bles at the thoughts both of being a depraver of the Truth. and of being a man-plcafing betrayer of it^ A»I daily importune God to diredtrac in thefe ftraits, fo have I beyond modefty importuned all my learned friends (from whom I had ground to expeft that favour J whomldif- carncd to diffent.and were likely to afford any help to the change of my judgement, that they would be pleafcd fpeedliy to impart to me th ic thoughts ; Bud couidneveryet prevail with any togratifie me herein ; (fare one ingenuous friend that voluntarily attempted fomcwhat at the firftjand another Dear and Learned Brother with whom I prevailed fot a few brief lines and words,conjoyned with a profeffion not to difpute the Cafe J Some accufc that Book of obfcure brevity, fome of inconve- nient phrafes,fome of particular Errours ; and moft, ofereflinganew frame of Divinty.My prefent purpofc is(ifGod afliftjto clear in the nexc what fcems obfcure, to confirm what feems to be but nakedly averted, tomanifeft thcconfent olthe learned to moft that feemcth novel and fingular, to adde much where I find it defedllve, to reduce the whole to a better Method, and contrail and annex what I had prepared of Uni- verfal redemption(becaufe I will not provoke the angry world with any more contentious Volumns,if I can chufe)and to retract what my friends ftiall difcover to be erroneous. To which end I earneftly intreat them, that if there be any who think it worth their labour fo far to endeavor the prevention of my doing injury to Real or fuppofed Truth, or that have already prepared any Notes to that end, that they would be pleafed fpeedily to vouchfafe me the benefit of rhem. Or if the V Vifdom from aboveC which isfirfl Pure,then Peaceable,Gentle,ea(ie CO be entreated,^
fh«il
34^ posrsc Ri rr.
(hall direfl them rather to publiOi their Ammadverfions-^\\\zy w«)uld be pleafed fpcedily to give me notice,that I may delay my Ed tion, till I fee what litth againft my Doflrine. I p elumcnotco expcft this for my own fake, and meerly upon the fcore of ChrilUm love, f though this werenounreaforiablcexpcdtationj<i»>.5.ip,20.jbucforthefakcofthe Church and truth of God, which I had rathtr die then be guilty of ab'i^ fing. And this Encouragement I give to any thir fhall attempt thischa- ritablework; I do foiemnly promifc in the prdenceof God '^by the help of his Grace) to try all with my ucmoft impartiality and diiirence, and to beg daily ot God to reveal to me his truth ; And do profefs, ihacjif my heart be not wholly unknown to me herein, my love to fi uth is fo ftrong f and 1 fear exccflive j that I had far rather Reifaf*,were it to my great difgrace (miich more when it would ttrnd to recover* the love of my dear Brethren) then proceed on \\\^ leaft jcaloafie or doubt oferring.Thismucb my Conscience forced mc?io pubUfh, that at leaft I might be free from the Guile of rafhnefs.and ofinconfidLrate wronj^ing of the Church and Truth. Let my Brethren an{ wer it as thcLord ftiall di- rect them.
Novcmb.i2.i<55o. Rich,BaxUr^
J I ■ »
F I nis.
A Friendly
ACCOMODATION
In the fore-debated Controverfie Between
M'. Bedford,
And the
AVTHOR:
WBnRElN
Is manifefted that the Differences,
arc few and fmall ^ and thofe continued mih. mutual rcfpct^ and Love*
London^ Vmit^t Anno Dom. iS^il
Readett
IT veAS my defre U have rtvlfedthis Appendix ^ and have corrreSiedai hdrfhtr offertjive pa f ages, and blotted out whatfoever Mr» B. difoivnetb er hAthfince recalled -which u here mentioned m hn "^ords ; But feeing I ctnnot pojfthlj in thlsfireight havefo muchleifurej muft defire you fo far to right both him and me, oi to view over thefefollorring Pap en, and what* fo ever you find in the former that U here recalled^ or contradicted, take it 4U non diftuni or obliterated*
R. B.
347
X
Ctp/$ Kj g/j5)]V)/.
Rtve/CHd sir,
Have read over ycur book In which you have tnaintaincd the Tiuth agiinft the Argamencsof Mr Tow/^j, In the qaeftion of Pcdobaptifm. I confefs my fclf fo much taken with the Clccr- ncfs of the Judgement, and the f olldity of the Arguoients pro- duced b> you for It ; That when I came to that other part of your bock which concerns mv felfjl began toqueftion mineownTencfj which I found cppof, d by him^ whom I could not but reverence, whofe labours and 1 al for rhe caufe of God T could not bucad- mire and emulate. Add this alfo, 1 found many things In your book interlaced and (?i^;rf;touched,which did not a little Confirm me In what rcfolution I had fixed on^ as touching the peftilfnt Do^rine ',f thr Antinomians ; touching the Non-coherency of that DodrinCjthac jultificatton is an inftantancoui Ad, ftmul^ /cwf/tranfaded in. our firft unltlon to Chrift ; touching the Combination and Co-a«lunatlon of renewed reptntance, of thecareandconfcienccof Holy ducieSj the combination ofthofelfay with Faith ?n the perpetuation and continuation of 'he juttlfied perfon in thJt eftatc of JuftificJtion, in which Upon his Faiih he was fi. ft ftated : That Faiih ^w^o/^i is net fo much 3 'caufe as the C'jnditian qinlifying the party for juftification : That the Co- venant of Grace fo far as icholdeth forth Chrift upon ihc condition of Faithand Re- pentance, is not rtftrained to the eleft onely .• Jiowfoevcr , by a fpecial pi eventing Giace of God, thoy only are enabled to come up to the full performance of that con- dition which is r.q.iircd j Others fo far carried on in the way ai they do follow the condud of G ; act, but then jurtlylefr, when they grow weary and give off the care of Godlii.efs ; i hefcaiid fome other particulars which I found here and thcic hinted in youi bjokl did nctalittlcrejoyce to hnd J Fcr who is there that doth not congvatu* late the ccnfiimation of his own Conceptions by anothers ? cfpecially,fo able an hand." And hereupon iit fuprafcrtpcum ef}, vshen Xcame to what concerned my felf In yeur bockl began to ftagger In wha: I had written j Till upon more ma:ure deliberation^ examining what 1 had vvri;ren,and what you anfwcred, I did plainly perceive, that in what ycu hjd not miftaken my meaning^ a favourable conftruftion might eafily recon- cile us j And the appearing differences would be found but Myoyyiy'ntit not worth the while to contcft a!;ouc them j Whereupon I rcfolvtd rather in this way to give you
Yv z an
348
an aaount of thofcmlfiakesj and verbal differences, tken to mak? ? j ubUkc bufincfs of h, and to give way to that bitrcrrcfs cf Spirit whirh commoily fcli:weih the Reci- procation of the Law.in matters ofqutftion and controverfie j $ubfc:ib;ng wholly to that In your book page 184. that conrroverfies occafion difcontenti and heart-burn*- ings, tend to difcoropofc our own Spirits, and much unfit us for life or death, &c.
Now then to the matter in your book againft me ; I obferve thefe fiv; particulars, in which licth the greatcft part of your rppofirlon. i. That my Tenet touching the efficacy of Infant- Baptlfm is not Orthodcxal. z. That it Is not confonant to what thofc two great Divines Bi(hop Davcnant ^znd Dodor ;;'4/^have delivered, g. That in the ul'e of thofc terms Moral and Metaphyfical there is grofs ignorance. 4. That in the Tenet of Church- traditions there is too much loofnefs, and too much affinity with the Romanifts. 5. That there is too much bittcrnefs in ccnfuring thcfc for Jchirmatlcks which mlflikc the Ceremonies of the Church, whither Catholickor National. Thofc are the principal.
As touching this !aft (to begin there ^ I may juftly reply; Your Animadverfion cometh in too late : fc after the fault is mended ; That part of my bock which dealt wiih the Anabaptifts Arguments I have fincethat time, revicwedj and (upon occafion of the growth of that error) printed agiin under this title, A moderate anfwer to thofe two queflions : wc^.whethcr Parents may bring their children to baptifm i i.Wheiher •i: be linfuU to receive the Sacrament in a mixt Aff.mbiy ; This was printed A/mo, 1645. And howfocver I conceived no ftrengtn in that confcqucnce, T.B, faith, this is the tflumphing Argument of all Schifmaticks j c>go T.B. accounts them all Schif- matiks that upon that ground do miflike the Ceremonies of the C hu-'ch ; Yet to avoid offence, I left out that palTige wholly. In the fame Edition I did alio bring again to the hammer and Anvil, that Tenet touching Traditions 5 And I hope, freed it from all juft exceptions. Which I doubt not may eafily be done^ in as much as all our Di- vines who difpute that Queftion wiih the Pontificians do flill return to this diflinfii- cn J Tome Traditions are cic DoClritia & cultti ; and thcfe we difclaim. Others arc it ritibui & Agcndit Ecclcfuey Thefc are not all of them difclaimed ; I reftr you to youc own Doftor, (for the high cfteem of Bilhop Davenant, at whofc feet I fometime fate, I cannot but love yo\i)de JtidiceXh^}^ ^. & lLqticntibut)2r\d lo yo^x onn book/*. 151. God forbidthat I fliould in any the Icaft particular fet up Tiaditionto the prejudice of the Scripture J Or account them all Schifmaticks which niifl.ke the Cerejnonies of the Church, whether more univerfal, fuch as Cruci- (ignition, Eafter, Lent, &c. or National as the Vcfiurcs, and Geftures that our late Canons prtfcribed. Car. z J. 27. Add this, That in that fiift bock of mineprinted i6;;y. there was both caftration, and interpolations ufcd by an hand not mine ; ( which you may eafily perceive in /"/rg. 5 9. • f my Sermon.) Particuhrly that Miroinal note, JmniicWy & Jus in re, a^iinii which yoa takt exceptions, was none ot mine, though I fee not but it may have a good conflruaion •. Since ali mtn knew there is a diftercnce betwixt Right and poffefiionj 5«if/c^r/,hjth light to Salvation, yet is he not in Pofleflion ; And hid your books come to the Prsf* when mine did, thty would have fufiered ai mine did ; And how to Itlp Ir, when the books is i^inted, I could not devifc. When it cometh to a fecond Edition, which I Ihill hafton as much as I can, peradventuie it may be done. But to
S recced. Touching that third point, vi\. That iniheufe of thofe terms Moral and IctaphyCcil there. Jigrofs lgnorance,yea in this a contradiQion betwixt Df.wWand jttc > I fay no mote but this, I am not much catefoll to wiili away the imputation of ^noranccj fave in thofe things that arc of grime Nccc0tty ^ I4o not arrogate to my
fclf
54P
felf any grcirmeafurc of humane learning; Had I thou^hc that definition of c»u[* moralls to befufficient vrhlch you fee down , I might well have refted in it : For you may eafily perceive tiiat I aimed ar no more but this, to fhew , that in the Sacrament God doth not only offer Grace to the eye, bat alfo to the hand of the Soul ; Not only reprefent it, but indeed prefent it to, yea and confer it upon the Receiver ; God I fay j For you will not find me to attribtt'c any of this efficacy to the Sacrament, but only in a Mctonymical predicationi The which is iwrmwwyaffdrted in my latin Trad./).74.. And what if I had called the Sacrament, Inflnmentum Metonymcitm ? What if I had explicated my term MetaphyGcaU to be talk caufa, qji<e vcrequidemnon efficit, fed tamen talis efi, ut ei impute tur cffcHu ? This you fay is Mnyalis caufa ; Had I fct that down, as my meaning of Metaphyfical j What great error had been committed ? Un« kfsanywililo bind us to the School- terms and their explications, that we may not laium ungucm dijcedcre. lut in this we will not differ. Let it be m(lmmentiimmotaU^ or whatelfc you will j So that yon deny ic not to be /'what Reverend Pcrl^ins afferteth it \%) an Inftrument to convey to us Chrift and all his Benefits. A mean by which wc receive tke Grace that is fignifics.
I come now to the fecond exception, vlr^. That my Tenet is not confonant to what thofe two great Divines, efpecially, not to what Bifliop Davcnant doth deliver' Here you beftow fome pains in tranflating much of that which is in his Epiftle \ I wifh you had tranflited ic all ; I (hould have given you thanks. But truly, I am much miftaken if in this yoa do not miftake ; And (ince you do highly efteem of him, in which I am ' loth to be behind you ; Let me briefly reply j That I Hull not unwillingly reca!!, whatfocvcr (hall upon juft examination be found contrary to his AlTettions, I fay of him, as Cyprian of TertuHian, Da Magijlrum. Let me here acquaint you with how wary fiepsi walked inthis buGncfs j I was in my younger dayes carried away with that: conceit of the Sacraments^That the fpeclal end and ufe of them was to be but as vcrbum vifhUe^l mean, that what the word prefented to the eatjthat did the Sacrament prefenc ' to the eyc;Nor did I take notice of any further efficacy in themj Afterward when I be- (an to look into the efficacy of them, and did well conlider what diredions the Church gave us to defiie fome fpiriiual benefit for the Infant, (which I obferved to be done by thofe Divines who yet in their Preaching would fpeak againft the efficacy of the S-Kramcnt j and withal! did coolider that ftill Gods way in dealing with man* Is thix, officiumpioptcr bcnrfdum; fc. not to require a duty, but inthe wayof rendring MS capable of a mercy j 1 did begin to refolve, chat fince God did require the ufe of the Sai ranent, he did hold forth fome benefit in it for man to exped by it. But then I waspuizled inthis, Ihac the ufe ofthe Sacrament is the duty of all that live under the means i And yet 1 coul d not fee what bencfic any could have by if, fave only the Eleft. Nor they hardly till they came to be regenerate by the word. Though on the other fide it feemed bard , that all fhould be bound to duty, and yet onely fome few be capable of benefit. I met with the book of Dr. Bargefs, Of baptifmal Regenerati- on i This di'd convince me of the efficacy of that Sacrament to the Eled ; And noc- withftanding thofe paiTages in the liturgy of Baptifm, which contain the DoiSrine of our Church touching that particular J yet durfl I not extend that efficacy of Daptifm further then to the Eleft, for fear of that Rock, whereof I perceive you bare alfo taken noucCfpagc j)i. of your b-ook; Your words are, Nofcriptore againft them that fay all Infants of Believers fo dying are cerrainly favcd j Nor Argument but only this, thac then the djildren of the Faithtull that prove wicked may fall from Grace. At this rock I flu-nblcd J Till at laft meeting with Saffragmm Theohg. Magn* Britannia, Artic^ $. Crfpi.Aod with this EpLftlcof Bijhop Davotanf :oX>i lyard} I perceived that there
ftai
3iO
was no ncceflity to rtArain the efficacy of Bapcifm in confcrenda fratli to the Elcdithat a man may haYC temporancam irrdinattoncm >:d falutcntj who yet is not pyiedcflitintui ad fa litem , and that the inftanc of Infants falling from Baptifmal Regeneration is not tothe purpofcto prove the Apcftilic of Saints > Hereupon I refolved upon this Tenet, which 1 have publilhed. "Vou urge, that there 's nuich difference betwixt him and me, vi^: That the primagraiia conferred in Raptifm. is ( faiih Bilhop D.ivcnant) Kcm-jjio feccati Otgi-naUs : buc (Taith T.B.) it is our Union with Chrift ; i hen followeth our Regencrationby feminal Gracci and then '• cmiflion of Sin j You add, that it the two firft, i/iq;^. Union^ and Regeneration be left out, then you and I lliall be nccrer to an Agreement.
But I beleech you Cdeer Brocter.) Ts this any whit more then a ftrife about words ? Doth not Bifhop D venant^ynhtn heharh fct down the Ptmxi'iumfff.flum baptifnti to be Rimiffio peccau O.iginaUs^ doth he not add, 1 hat out ot this do refult their Regcnera- tion^ Juftlfication, Adoption, and Sandific.nion ?. The which, though they be not Vnivece eadcm with that Regeneration, and Adopt on, which is afterward by Faith •, Yet is ic fuch as doth confer Upon them u ftatt of Ivation p/o condiiione parvutorum. Now thcnjl looking uponthefe bcnefirs allto^eiher,and fe(.king to c.ft them into the OrdcrofNatureasi conceived, placed this firft. v:\. Our Urion with Chriit, Our incorporation into him, which I called the pfiw/jjjz/Wf^iJ.'tfw Bupft(mh and which I taketobethe/(3/WM/ij?'«/oof our Adoptioni and then did I in ihis f^'cjuaw inmaffa wrap up the other whichi call//7/(3«iB<i)>rir«»'j^'i'^ Regeneration ,& : emiiliun You wil fay, That that Regeneration whereof Bilhop Vavenanc fpeaketh, is onely relative, but mine is real j His flandeth in traKflaUoi.e p^yvuli e vcCen projapia in vovam-hw mine in the collation of fcminal Grace ) But withall you will find, (bat his regenera- tion doth confer on them ( whether Eled or Reprobate ) Sutum falutis iro condnione parvulo/umi Nor do 1 feek for any thing (urder i He feems to fubfcribc tothacot Cerfon and other SchooI«men, cited by D.'. H'ari Tra£l. r. pa-, i r 7 , That what is not infufed by Bsptifm into the Soul of the Infant, vi\ Habitus fide fpei & cbaritatiSf is infufed la momenta feparatienis ammte , if ihechilde d)e after liaptifm j For which tenet, what Scripture have they ? withowt regeneration, without Hoi intfs none ihall fee Godj/s/i.g.J. iit^.12 14. This 1$ thtirgrc;Und } How much more confonant is it to the text of scripture, t/iefaltcmfud'ct, to fettle the coUaticn of It in Gods Qrdi- nance? Since that text of j^o/;.j. 5 7";/. 5. 5 give us fuchconfilfcd ground for it. H- fpecially fince their is no neccflicy to multiply the wayts of regeneration , for Infants dying, and for others futviving j A ad lincejihu Keck de ^Ipoft.ijij fan^orum ii ^tc- yented lU fupra.
And fo I corac to the firft Pofition, in which I can make it apparent, That I have not deviated from the text of i>cripruie and the tin h of God 5 I may be excufed, though none of thofe great Nimes mentioned in my i radate do hear witnil's with aje. i might here alltdge, That what I have fet down, if taken in my meaning is con- fonant CO the Doftrinc of the Primitive C.iurch, and the Ancient Fathers } that it Is in mmmls the Dodrine of the Church of Ens^hnd. Uhat is the intent of my EKglifh Treatile, buc to fet down the Dodrine of the Church of £,v^ff««</ touching that Argu- ment, which is fufficiently acknoffledged, in that hewho li^enfed it to b; printed was but over- curious in this point, though no: more turiciU then thole times icquircd. fiiUt I fhall wave this ; And deal by Argument, Yt.yr h ft and miin Argument aeaintl ifle,is this i That Baptifm was not inftitutedto be a 'j>ci[ of the Abfohuc pron;irc,Z'/'^. tl^t in Jcr.l-. Dabo cor «i7i;//w,wkich is that that works a real change in man J Reafonj :8ecaufc, tcfote the fulfilling of that pjiomi(e, iji- before men have a new heart they arc
uncapablc
3^1
uncapable of e«gaf,lng thcmfclvcs ro God, as being till then altogctlier Aliens.- But BaptiAnistonKireu by metibLamutual engaging Seal. -Hence you argue : It not Fnftuuted to be rhs Seal of this promKc, Then not to be an inftrument to convey that Grace. To this I reply.
I. \ idmu,ihn Vebo cor novum doth indeed make the firft real change: that dc- pendeihnotupcnihe wtll-ufingof Natural abilities, but is meetly the etfed of a preventing G race : that rhofc previous works virhich you grant arc wrought in feme in the way of preparing them for ir, are fome fruit, tff As or fluxcs of that fitft Grace as the daw ning of the day is from the Sim rifing that followeth : So Chrift hath a work upon the heart) before he take it into Union with himfelf. All this 1 do admit.
1. I idd. What doth hinder, but that this Dabo cor ;rrti'«»j,though it be abfolutCjand a preventing Grace to the Infant; yet may be the eft'ed and fruit of a conditional prcmife to the Parent, ^'/^. What he by his Faith hath laid hold on for himklf and his Infant. 1$ not arcutrctdam cor tuum &• feminis tui, an explication of Era Vein tuu^ & fcmmstui'i At Icaft, it isanexpreflion of one main benefit comprehended in that promife. Doth not God by that promife ingage himfelf to do for them , vvhatfocvcr may be for the wellfare both of Body and ioal ? As for them > fo for their children according to iheir capacity ! Is there any exception to this, but that only , Mods non fonant obicem i And is not this promife, Eyo Dcus tuus & feminit, fealed to the Pa- rent, in that Sacrament ? Particulary, that brxnch Dcus fefninis tui, is fealed to the Parent in the Baptizing of his Infant} As e fO»r>i the Parent by prcfenting his Infant to the Sacrament doth engai;e his Infant to the fervlce of God ; Thus it is eafily fccn, How baptifm is a mutual engageing Seal; Not that the Infant doth or can engage himlelfj But that his Parent doth engage for him ; So then, the Faith of the Parent acceptcth of that promife for his In^ant,tendereth his infant to the Sacrament, that in it God may accept him and reengage him to be his God .-The Parent pnts forth the Fray- er of Faith , and clofeth with that promife. that his Infant may be received Into Co- venant with God. and receive fuch benefits of the Covenant as he is capable of.- In the number of which I doubt not but cor novum, fo denominated from that Principle of G;aceof which [ fpeak, that this^ fay is one, I doubt not. And is not this th fame that Mr.Ph^(«j faith in that paffage cited byyoupJij. 536 ? The faith of the Parent dpth bring the child to have a title or interefl to the Covenant of Grace, and to all the Benefits of Chrift. If to all, then fay I, to this for one. And ^ my D.B?-. /> weigh well Ibefeechyou the force of this reafon which I confefs hath prevailed much with me : That according to this, we may fee the abundant goodnefs of God in providing for the comfort of the Parent, who by the eye of faith looks upon his Infant in the guile of that firft fin, and in the pollution of Nature : Yea he looks upon himfelf as an in- Hiumental caufe in both ; And what (hall he do to help the poor Infant '• Saith (jod. Bring him to me, I will cure his Malady^ by incorporating him into Chrift.— Believe, and he fliall be cured ; Now then by faith doth the :'arent lee a ground of comfort : If I bring him to Chrift, I fliall procure a blefling : the blefling of remiftion to take a. way that guilt. The blefling of regeneration to cure the pollution of Nature by little and little : So that in tfFid, the faith of the Parent doth fet his Infant as one that is Re^iii in curia : And if he do afterward perilh, he (hall not lay ad the blame upon his Parent. 1 his, to your firft Argument ■, The rtft i pau by, as not doubting but that. If you do rightly apprehend me in this, your own candouL- and ingenuity wilVfa>iific your lelf in all the reft. Efpeciiliy Inthat^ I: is not thefeal ot he firft Grace, tothe Aged jfjgo Not to Infants, unlefs we fay, that it fealcth one Covcna-nt to the Parent and another tothe infant. No, (ay I ; Not a difierenc Covenant doth it Seal ; But a
dilTcrent
35»
diicicm benefit ofche fame Covenant may ic Teal to them This Co) n«c;um, and pre* venting Grace cannot be fcalcd to the Parent upon bis faith } Hii f.iith is an (ffld of It i But to his faith may ic be fcaled for his iiifan.3 will nor this cvidrncly appear in the inrtancc of Abraham^ Not he prcventnl by hisClicumcilion •, Alicady he n juftificdj But well may hii fon Jfaac in his Circumcifion receive upini ihc faith of Abrubam chal- lenging the promifc, he may I fay receive preventing Grace.
'i hus have I endevoured in the fpirit of mcekntU to give you an account of your miflakings 1 The refulc I hope nil! be, that in the main, i (hall be found t. hive de- livered nothing which is not confonant 10 the text ')^ Scripture, the DoftJneof out Church, the determination of thcfe Divines^ and your own ccnrluG'ns. 1 (hall not add mut-h more j This onely I (hall dciirc you to take into Ccnlide. a^ ion.
How cantheDodrineof Baptifmal i^cgentratlon, be an occafir.n ^'f Aiiabapfifm i This you alledgcas arcafon why you did meddle with my f r^datCj bicaufc youc^n. ceivcd it to be dangerous as wei! as erioneocs ; At lik Jy a means to mskc mm Ana^ haptifts as moft you know ; Now fay I, Wow can this be ? V\ h^n as this ik the com- mon faying of the vulgar, What is the infant the better foi thii water fpnrJtling? And why do the Minifiers cry down the Anabaptifls for denying Infant- baptifmj when they can ihew us no good that Cometh by it ! Doth It not h.r.ce appear that it ii judged rather a National way to prevent the prevailing of Anabaptifm>w^.To mike ic good* that there is fome good gained by It, which ordinarily is not gained with^uc It Some real good, fome fpcclal Cirace that Is truly tendered by God in ihc i>acramcnt,and ti uly received by the Infants of believers, for the conveying and receiving of which ( fo far as It can be tranfadcd by a Corporeal fign^was the Sacrament inftituctd to be a means thereof. And truly (me thinks) this (houid be a proper Argument to overthrow the Anti'-pedobaptifts. Mr. raw/^idochobjed to Mr. ^./ /^i/, that he doth alledgethe Ancients for rhep'oof of b;>ptifm, but not upon their grounds > Hail he and others taken up that Arpument, I verily bcUeve they had long lince if no: filenccd him, yet provided for the ftaying of many ftom being led afidc with the ertour of thofe wicked ones. So much the rather I do believe this, bccaufe fo long as that Argument, I mean ' the efficacy of the Sacrament was acknowledged, vic^ A Regeneration wrought la -B iptifm, the praftife of Anti-pcdobaptifls was i\pt received. Your fclf rbferve that Anabaptifm rofc not up till Luthers time. Mr. Tombs inflance of the AWig-nfa and w'<?/^f»/tJyoHhave very well and worthily confuted j They took occafion ftom that poiition of his, Nofaith, No Baptifm. Co-etanecus withhimwas2»/;7g/»«jand others, who to overthrow the real prtfence infifled much upon it that Sacraments wcne but figns for Kcprefentation J And when that Dofti Ine was once broached. It foon Icund ihcm that could make bad ufe of it f Any thing that tends to de-dlgnific Gods Ordinances is foon reccivcd.^1 he Anabaptiffs could cafilymake their advantage of It. If no benefit come to the infant by baprifm.becaufe he wants Faith Then to what pur* pofe fljould he be bap- izcd before he hath FaithJHis Church- mcmber-fliip is (I grant) a benefit not to be contemned, even as ic is.an outward Piivtledge ; Yet if you make it not a ftace of Salvation to the infant, They will not much regard thsr other. So then $ I fee not how this Dod; ine of mine Ihouldoccafion the error of Anabaptifm. You urge fome tnftances upon your own knowledge, and which is more to the point, your own Tentation j You make my book one part of chat Tentation j I believe it was the haft pare, I may not enter into the heart to fetk what was the other. It is well,thac you did over mafter that Tencatio^ti ; We all h<ive caufe to blefs God for your labours ; And Ihall h-we more, ifyouftudy out well this point, touching the efficacy of the Sa- crament; that io Cods Ordinance may receive the ^onor that isdvie to it. Ihe
Papiils
355
take from iut »«»-.-.*. ^..1., - — o V" ' " """ ■"*•*■ ■ ^"^ «ijiii
fufFered thefe Scftaries to rife upj by whom.in a juft revenge of our partiality ,he threat, ens to caft cft'the Mihlftry. The Uofpcl is J\^x,j.ii .^i «? <yu]\\ei^.v. But Is it not fo, in refpcft of the f acramcnts, as well as the Praaching of the word ? Thus have I learn, ed- Thus do I teach i I ffiall trouble you no further at this prefent ; but only to rc- queft your candid imcrprctationof what I havoYrictcn and wi'.hall, your prayers for mc that wherein I err, I may readilv upon admonition reform it, and wherein I am rieht.I in*y proceed couraglouny,no. * hftanding all oppofuion and difcouragcment. Farewell, (my D. B/-.)Gow ..Imight) j^uide you, guard you, and blefs pou In your way and work foi- the Glory of his n^mc^and the Good of his Church. Softlll praycth for you and all faithful! Labourers in Gods Harveft,
Lond. March 8. Your brother in the Faith of ChrifV,
1650. • and in the work of the Miniftry
7ho. Bedford^
He^or Ecclefu Londinenfis efua, vulgo dicitttr Martin Outwich.
Tojlfcript. '
For a further confimation of my conjetkire touching the mofl ^rev Ailing Argument againfi the Anabaptijis^ Ihavefent you thii letter of Mr» Cnnfotd tome writtenVcith hijo'^n hand. fVhofe Epi file prefixed to mj hokj had you advifedlj readityyou rvofild have found to be more then a bare Imprimatur. Now^if bj all this yoHreceivefathfuBion, I hope you mil take it into your thoughts how to ^upe off that blot, that yon have caft npott me. Farewell,
Zz
354
Xt \ 5 /
Brother,
YOh know my minde, that I conceive the ground of Aft^haptifrntv huve been the erroneous Do^rine de nudis fignis, m is dear in the Ec- clefiafiicalfioriesofoldf andmofl argutngsofonr An<tyupt':jis. I Am mart confirmed in this opinion h Vi^^hat I had oncereturned me in dnfiwer to An Argument drawn from Hph.5./row the ejjicacj of Bnptifm to inforce the hap:izing of Infant s^bj y^/r.Tombs at A/r Roberts his houfe in London; viz. if that tenent could l>e clearly prtvedy he would no longer eppofe that 'Fra6life* J Jhall fpeakjtvith jou further about this bn^tnefsj andrefi.
March 5. 1650. /(j^r/, Ja.Cranford.
MY
355
My Reverend and moft honoured Brother,
Unfelgnediy confefs my felf unworthy of fo mach efteem and refpefl as thefe your lines import, and of fo tender and friendly dealing as they containe. I rejoyce in your confent in the owning the Truths mentioned by you :
_^^ And alfo to find by this your Epiftle, that wearefo
much n^erer in judgement about the point of Baptifm then I thought we had been ; and are fo fairly accommodated, that you doubt not to fay that [in what I have not miftaken you meaning,you plainly perceive^ a favourable conftru6lion might cafily reconcile us: and the appearing differences would be found to be but, Logomachies, not worthy the while to conceft about.] And fhould I deny that favou- able conftrufti- on, to one that fo favourably conftrues me, it being the only neceflary and fufficient means of Reconciliation, I lliould jul^ly incurre the cen- fure of that unfeaceabUnefs, which 1 fo much abhorre.
I. As to the firft and fecond points you fpeak of, (being the lift of the five you number, jl am heartily forry that I have done you fo much wrong, as to lay that to your charge which you have already revoked or cocre<fled, yea and that in y our books, which vvas none of your own. Wherein l muft both cxcLife and accufe my felf. i. This much in excufe I may truly fay ; that I could not poflibly know of that Caftration and Inrei polation of your books ; Nor well fufpefi it in that point which I faw again in your Latinc Tradate : and that I never ( to my remem- hrance j fawor heard of your book which you mentioned, wherein th jic things are cevcrfed j nor yec have I feen it : ( living fo obfcurely
i^z 2 and
35«
>Dd ermote from thit chief garden where ftchfl^i^^lT^^rrTV,, muft I accufe my fc If.That before I adventured to m^nri^f "
had not erq.ircd,whether you had nor ?etTut leo" hXr^K'"''' thofe point, might be reverfed.For I KknowIed« to v„ ' >;. '7''""'' to have that hid to your chirce which vr.nh.f,°l?Vy"'''"'°'"- I take it to be fo when the cffe' irmine own wf^^ '''i^ f'^"^""^'
Anin,adverfions on n,y Aph„,f„, ^h^rthe" S/h ^^^^^^^^^^^^ againft, was a word in my book of Reft • T rnM m J, .u ^^ ffcepced
th\t faying to be true L the fenlthicU tan.Teftcd' .^f h!d''J^'' it out purpofely m the fecond Edition.of my book which », ^' before hejent me hi, exceptions ; Yet dot'L he long ,fe;"if;!" . CHrf«-pM>(h me to be erroneous becaufe of that faying. anTdireft«h his reader to find it in my firft Edition, which he knew was corr/,^M • the fecond. I thought this not ingenuous • Your ivrnl^l! ..''1'.°
feemsj though I be not fo suiltf Fo } did ?r i7- ^ " " '"i"'' ( " rectffirated ; ) but he in wiffullne'fs " '2"°""" ( ">»%
To the third point(about the diftinflion of Moral andM^f.ni, r i w fay, I . It was far from my mind to accufe fo learned am S^f"'"" nnce ^further then as we'are faid truly, coknoX fn p™) f„?or paiifonof whomlamfoignorantmyfelfj But indeed /',."" perceive by my words. ) mv diaroeft foeV rh.; ;Ti- ^ '' >^°'' "V
Thofe thatLk^thisth^/tlaft'refuStSrnofV mentality in uftifying.l faying • It is not a Phufi.,? t A" ''' * '"'*™- Moral, butaMetaphyfical^ ofwyp r^W^t afhT'"'' ""'1 .hem whatphrafe f J be too «.™"n'er}yadifown?a'n°d'ask°r o."r- don for, and confefs my fell to be too oft faulty in that kinH^ ' R '^r the thing it elf, I am glad to find that we are of Ztd^ZLtl!°' Yet you could not well blame me, i( when you termedStaohX^i caufe, I did not underftand that you meant c^ur^Ji^,^^l" though Iwouldnotfotye you to Sc'hooTterms t'"o„^r;;^r' IV. when you are pleafed to ufe them and tye vourfelf to th^n^ ^ a' S' underftand them in the School fenfe • till Z> ,, r ' ""'* "^'^'
otherwife,and thenlamfat^fiel Andl';?ryl"4Kd?ltd called It hjlr»min,«m OU»vn;mic«m .'1 I fav vou m,,?..!! l'"'
you pleafe ; but I muft fobear fuch phraies my &f! tilll^e " 1?"
mie
357
mie you mean,whether CaufAjEffeSH^SubjeBi or Adjm£li-^l l^now not, nor yet fully how it (hould be any of thefe.
As to the fpecch of Perkjnsj it muft needs be limited to thofe Be- nefits of Chrift which the conditional Covenant makes over to Belie- vers and their feed, and cannot extend to[]all]]unlimitedly, or to thofe of the Abfolute Covenant. Is not the Grace of perfeverance, a benefit of the death of Chrift ? And if all believers Infants have that, then acccording to you they are all certainly faved. To be bred up under the means of Grace, is a benefit of Chrift, which they all receive not ; To be the Children of believers, and thereupon to be within the Covenant, is a benefit of Chrift,which Baptifm convey eth not ; for it goeth before baptifm.When Mr. Ball in his Catech. asketh [How wc are made parta- kers of Chrift with all his benefits? ]& anfwerethCBy faith alone]hc muft not be interpreted either to think that our firft faith Cand all the means to work it) is none of Chrifts benefits, nor yet that we are made parta- kers of that Faith by that faith itfelf. But the word [benefits] is evidently limited to thofe particular benefits which are contained in that Cove- nant, whofe condition Faith is.
4. To the next, which you call [^the fecond Exception] whether you go not further then T)t.DavenaHt and Dt.fVard f I think I have made it manifeftthatyoudoi and though you now think I miftake, yttafter- Vffards in your anfwer to the Objedion, you feem to me to confefs it. Bucl gladly accept of your double conceffion or regrefs. i. Where you fay, that you (liall not unwillingly recall whatfoever ftiall upon juft examination be found contrary to Dr. Davenants affertions. You can- not deny but that you muft then recall the affertion of real Regenerati- on, Sanftificacion, or habits of Grace is given to Infants by baptifm • or that baptifm was inftituted to that end. 2, Where you fay (^His Re- generation doth confer on them whether ele6l or reprobate,y?4/«;»y^. lutii pro conditioHepar'vulorum ] Nordo I feek for any thing further.] I think then we ftand at no great diftance, But then remember that it is not all that the Church hath right to admit to baptifm ( that is, the In- fants of Hypocrites; but only all chat have true Right before God to the benefits or the Covenant and baptifm Cchatis,cothe Infants of true believers only ; ) And in this I think you will alfo agree with me. Now then all the qucftion is, whether the habits or leed of real Regenerating, Sanctifying Grace, be abfolurely nectfl'aty ad Jlatum jalmi^pro condi' tlonepAtvHlorum ? If you affirm it, you muft prove it; which till you have done, I have no more to do.
But
358
But here you niuft undeiftind that D.iVin/int ir\d 1, do no: mean btr iStatum falHtif"] that ftate wherein one is immediately capable of en« joying God m Gioryi but that Rate wherein we have right to both that enjoyment, and the immcdiite capacity thereto. For i. EKe no man living can be faid to be in a ftate of Salvation ( which is contrary to our fcnfe, and common fpecch ) For no man is in an immediate capacity to enjoy God in Glory, till he be pcrfcdly fardified and freed from each degree of fin ; But no man is foperfef! till after Death, Cin order of nature « leaft.^ Indeed that petfedlion wherem this immediate ca* pacify doth confift is our very Happinefs ?nd Glory fubjedively, as God isObjcdively.
Here therefore have you, I think, ajuftanfwer toyour Queftion, viz [[what Scripture have they (Daveuant^ Ward^ Gerfon and other Schoolmen j for their opinion, that habits of Faith, Hope and Charity^ which are not infufed by Baptifm into the (oul of the.Intant,are infufed tnmomento feparationU anima, if the child die after baptifm? How much more confonant is it to the Text of Scripture (fay youjmefaltem juMre, to fettle the collation of it in Gods Ordinance ?] To which I lay. They can prove from Scripture that an Infant cannot adually enjoy God in Glory without real Sanftifying Grace, and therefore it muft be given them at Death. Thisisall paltdifpucc. But you cannot prove chat an Infant cannot be in StatH/a/utu, that is, in Gods favour, and have right to Salvation, without real Habuual Grace. Nor wili you prove, that the Text doth fettle the collation of it on bap.ifm. I chink you will as foon piove, that the perfeflion of fan^ification in the /*.dulc is not after Death, but by uaptifm, as that the beginning of rta) landiH- cation in Infants muft be by bapcifm. For I think, that thefirll Grace together with the perfeflion, is given to infants dying or dead, to the fame ends, as the pcrfediion is given to the Adult dying, oi dead. I con. fefs to you, my opinion is, that Habits of thr loul, and Ads aienecrer kin, and do lefs d.ftet then moft judge, fpecially if S cot m's opinion (hould prove true, that immanent Ads (Inttliedion and Volition) are not in the predicament of Adion,buc of quality, z^**. the lame fpecies of Habit. ( Though he, fay, that tu^ fouls hdl^^onatpu or fell detcuni. nation to underlhnd and will, is in the predicament of Adion.) And if I muft take any thing in this part of Philolophy on truli, I confefs J'ct^r^^hiscredit willgo asfar withme, as any man that ever writ, not guided by an unerring infallible Spiri:. At leait Habits aie io properly forthclakejof ihtaa., orconncxcd wth ihtoi, that you will hardly
prove
359
" . ur .inrp npceflitv of Habits, where the afts arc neither necef- ?'"'' 'r nfffib Ic " A?d th« this is mre»a.„ fenfc, you may fee ful-
•^ ""^1 ';«/««^;"s.»r« /-«#d,Lr»««i»». .ll.^^M-'f^lx"'
^""7C,dX<./'i'if'« J,}f.»i«.«r. But what need I f»y mote 't ,r,h„d "utth .nd fifth ptopof ?.?> 4. 5.15. 7. S,?.'"- »"<'.«'• "e fo fu 1 whceTn the common jud^m^e^of fathers .nd our D.vmes ateloiui^ W.K And the ike hath Dr.wW.
" """Ifd I wo^Id n"e t you 0 confider well of this Argument That ^\ fs the who e ondition on mans part of his Juftihcation and Sal- whichisthewnoivconui r of Juftification and
r'St ;;1Sr I '"^ hcfaitiof the Parent tiiat is thelnfants Right to Salvation. ■^fgj(,-j-(,jMj,ot
"'l"rp;or fire e" were no\rue and full condition. (Still needs no ptoot . /^»' ^^ ; , ^,,„ „ot thj Mumqmi dekt«r, but temembtingthatby t'"tt'<;'"'J .?L, Minor I think you will not deny ;
the u,.n, f /^'"XbtaTGu^L be the inf ms co^ndition , that he For you take not Habitua^^^^^^^^^^^ t^„^P^ „f ,b,Co.
may h"e Gods Co cnan: b.nehts D the condition. And
X"d ? ypl niS-^ '">"" ■helnf.ntsRightisforthe inaeeaitis vtiy j^» '^ , 4ic;nhm and not his own. Ana
[tel^herr^i^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^T' Y' ''t
ffi7htRrg?:reou{;thech,.drenofb^^^^^^^^^^
the whole of their conduion IS '^ t^h « P«™»^,^;^^^^^^^^
td'tler°efo";"on1l'K
And therefore iconuuu luftification, and right toSalva-
*l''?»^ro^rtt:.lltfS^^
^•ThSVT*M.T'^" M^Ve^ notbing for you, as I have
" Whhout Holyncfs none (hall fee God, ^^ V^^}^^^^^:^ And yet as the Adult bave tigUt to fee God, ( and ■<> ;° f f f'^" '' iZ) befotc they a;e perfca ; So Infants may have right to fee G.d^
5<5o
( and lo to real Holmcfs ) bcfoie thev qr^^ r,nA^T"f TTT-
Grace. This expound. M 3 5. l^«c»Jm!lt ' """' JinT7 ' "^"'.'a "";,'''" '" "" "'"'= >''»"' -'0'i> r« Vcu think » change a, Bapnfm.I/ then you and I 'c p~°U^^^^^^
=rdi^j'-----=-Hi'r
As toyour wary proceeding in this point, I conceive fh.,,.t hid attained to much of the trtth by Degrees when uL«i„ ^" '"!; Z).z,f«.«,youleftitbehindyou,SoLrdisino7toLror :'*'''""'*
Rock, J know ; bur, methinks they eK^redTleave „^n Z '?"* ''""
J. Laftl^, astothequeftion, whether uour fpnpn^ k* n,,i. j
Whereyoufay[ftisconfonanttot:,/Doareo Kmi^v rK°^^ ^d Ancent Fathers, J I think not fo ; Nor do yo„ proTit Nor did Davenant think fo, when he wrore rhsr fifrl, «. Jt^ ' '^ ^'"
Jtfl
Reiener^tiodicendaejit nonnifi cHmadatatemrationiicafacem^vent' ri»t, in lis product docent. Sec the proofs.
But the main matter lieth in your Anfwct to my Arguments where you fay f after fome conceflions J [ What doth bonder but that this Ddbt cor novum, though it be abfoluce, and a preventing Grace to the Infant, yet may be the eflfeft and fruit of a conditional promifc to the Parent, t^/c.what he by his faith hach laid hold on for himrelf,and his Infant ? Is not CircumcidAm cor mum & feminis tui,zn explication oieroDetn tum (^ femiftUtui ? Atleaftitisan expreflion of one main benefit com- prehended in that promife.Doth not God by that promife engage him- felf to do for them whatfoever may beforthe wellfareof bodyand foul ? as for them, fo for their children according to their capacity,&c. To this and that which followeth I Anfwer. Thefe following Argu- ments perfwade me that you erre. I. No fuch promife (that giveth cer- \y cor novumy or the firft effedual Grace to all the rightly baptized, or to all the children of believers ) can be Qiewed in the Scripture j OV- cumcidamcor tuum &f€mi»u /«i,feems to me to be none fuch,i.Becaufe elfe it fhould not be the fame Circumcifion that ispromifed to the Pa- rent and the child : but there is no intimation of two CircumciHons in the Text : One to the father, being only an increafc or aiSuating of Grace ; and the other to the child, being the giving of the firU Renew- ing Grace. 2. The Text Teems plainly to fpeak of [their feed] not in their Infant Ihte, but in their Adult. "Deut.io, ?oti.ver.2, the con- dition of the promife is exprcfly required, not only of the Parent, but of the children themfelves by name. 2. And that condition is the pet- fonal performance of the fame A(Ss which are required of the Parents, viz.. To return to the Lord and obey his voice with all their heart and Soul. 3. The circumcifion of heart promifed, is fo annexed to the A^J, that it appcareth to be meant only of thofe that were capableof the Ad, verfe6 The Lord thy God will Circumcife thine heart, and the heart of thy feed to love the Lord thy God. So that it is not meant of thofe that are uncapable of fo loving. The following Arguments prove this further.
And for that wh'ch you urge \_£roDeui tui & feminii] 1 doubt you will n»t prove that it rcacheth fo far as you fpeak. It fufficech that God will be to them a God of mercy ,ar!d do for them all that is nece(fary to put them in fiatumfalutis pro co)iditior,e parvulorum. But you have not proved that this cor novum is requifite to that Race. The following Ar- guments will (erve to this purpole.
e/f 4 2, If
2. If this Do<5^rine of yours ftand, (that this be thepromifetoall the faithfull for iheir feed, to give them comovttm ) then all the feed of the faithfull arc certainly favcd : ("whether they dye in Infancy or not. j But that is cercaPnly untrue. The confequence i< proved, i. In that fcrwoTz/^w is given to the eleft only, and is ever tft'c<Sual to pro- duce its Afts in time, and doth perfevere. i. If God do ( as you fay ) engige himfelf to do for them whatfotver may beforthe welJfareof body and foul, then there is no doubt of their Salvation. Unlefs you will fay, It is not for the wcllfare of their fouls to be faved, and to believe when thcv come to age, and to perfevere. If you deny theconfequerce of the Mijor propofition of this Argument ( as I know you will ) then you will fall on the following inconveniences.
3. Hy this Doftrinc you feign Cor »(7v«w not to be proper to the Ekft ; which is contrary to all Antiarminians that I know of.
4. You will maintain that the moft proper Renewing Grace may be loft, and fo dafh on the Rock de ApoftafiAfanSlorum, which you fay you avoid. For when tbe fame promife, JjAhocomovum, is made good co the Adult, you will acknowledge that they are Sa-.nrs, and have fpecial Grace ; therefore fohave Infants if it be made good to them. If they lofe cor «ot/»w?,they !6fe that which 'Bertim faith the Adult lofe. For to lofe the Afl of Grace is not fo much.
5.Y0U feign a cor novum which will not bring forth the good fruits of cor »ot/«m,when occafion is offered ; whereas C hnft faith, A good tree will bring forth good fruits ; by their fruits ye fhall know them. What is the ufe of Habits but to produce the Ads.^ And why then do not thefe habits bring forth a6luallHoline(s, when they come to Age .? Do they lofe them before ? Oirwhatisjt? And what a vain ufelefs thing do you make of Gods fpecial Grace? But this Argument 1 have driven home before.
6. If you flye this, and fay that this Grace doth ad, then you affert the lofs of Adual Grace, as well as Habitual.
7. And then you will make it a harddifpute, whether fuch can ever be faved. For total Apoftates cannot be renewed byRepentance.
8. As it is Pclagianifm to fay that the firft Grace is given [cctindum merhum. (though all acknowledge Relative Grace as J uftification A- doption, &c. to be given on a condition, which the Fathers called meri- thm,) So you feem to be plainly guilty of it; For it isgivcn Caccord- ingtoyouj on ihe condition of the I'arents faith. p. According to your opinion, the abfolure ^tomk^Daiio cor mvttm,
(hould
3<5J
fliould never be made good to the child of any believer ; ( except you will fay, it may be made good to him for a fecond Regeneration, after the lofs of the Hrft by Apoftafie. ) For if the new heart be given to them all by the conditional promife made to the Parent for himfelf andhis feed , then it cannot be again given by the abfolure promife. And (o that promife fhould belong to none of all the Generations of true Chriftians, but only to the fiift Chriftian progenitor.
ic, Nay^except you make the fruits of that promife lofeable) it was never made good to any fmce Noahs flood, f that is,bcforc it was made.) irotaponNoiihs believmg, his Poftcrity Qiould have all New Hearts ^ and fo their pofterity, and fo to this day.
1 1 . And lo there fhould be never an unregenerate man in the world, either now, or fincc Noah.
1 2. The fame promife that giveth the new hcart.glveth other mercies that are proper to the faved ; as the writing of Gods Law in the heart, remembring no more their fins and iniquities, &c. And the like pro- mife gives perfeverance,[I will put my fear in their hcarts,that they (hall not depart from me.] And it promifeth aflual Grace [they fhall all know me from the leaft to the greateft.] It feems to me therefore than you may as well fay all thefc muft be given to the children of believers as one; and may as well make allot them as one, to be common and Jofeable Grace. But fome are not frch, therefore none. I th\nk cor novum is no common Grace (as it is in this promife meant. )
] 3. You make the Parents faith to do more for the Infants, then ever it did or could do for himfelf who is the principal; that is, To procure the Infant cor novum, or the firft effefluall Renewing Grace.
14 Ithink you will never prove that Baptifmha^h fuch different ends to the Adult and to Infants, as that it fliould convey that to one, which IS the very condition ptcrequifitc in the other. ( But of this I fpoke to you already. )
1 5. God harh not engaged himfelf to any certain time before death, for the bellowing of any Grace which i« not neceffary adftAtumfalutis. ( He giveth fuch ut Dominpts abfolutm ; As the degrees of Grace and comfort to his people .- he may give them when and in what degree he yn\\\\)'^wx. cor novum is not tolnfants necefrary4iy?4r«w5'«</«r«; ('though it be ai ipjAin fAlutcm.) He that faith it is, let him prove ir. Therefore God is not engaged to givec<;r»(7Z'«wto Infant sin b apt ifm,
Thefe Arguments perfwade me that you yet miftake in this matter.' And now I exped that you recall all this according to your promife, it
Aaa 2 b(iing
3<'4
being agsinft the enprefs words of Diven jnt, w? , S " 7.,„,,r , r-Z «»« W h,ch I urge, bccaufc you yet profefs fand ite.ate I) that vl
For ^U.Terkif^s fpeech, I anfvvercd before
As to ycurReafon drawn from the comfort of Parents,! fav i We mufV
give no more comfort then God hath Pi'ven 2 icirnlr 'i^ ^
fortthatGoddothpardon,hdrOrfefi„:;„VS:^;K.^
/«/«/«, and vv.ll g,ve them the me.nsof Grace, andhis ownhdpwhen
J,'Ty°«'^'i/°"''^"°"''"S '" *"" ' "^^ heart, mVr..3X* and «;,11 .ffeflually work ,c ,n his elea in the fitccft feafon ^ , Dorh no! xper,erce evince drfaBo when they come to age or any ufe ofR afon that all fuch children have not ccrnnum > but Orisinal fin i ftilllr^ dominant? The faith of the P«entr,«W.W/STdo"h m te InfantJ,S««,» c,r.i He/anvi : hot you do not think fure.hTt all O- r.g.nal fin IS taken away m Baptifm , as the PapiHs doe! No dovou prove that it is mortifyed.or overcome. ^
Tothefccond Argument, you give the fame Anfwer asrf.rl,pfi,« and I return the fame Reply. And where lou f,„ rK,/,!,' ii , "'"' appear in the inftanceof^X.ilt^rf ^ Se that Z^ 17^'''"''^ .»» by virtue of that general Covenan'c'to Ae fti h ,|{"d theirTeeT and not from Elefton and fpeci.l Grace i.If that be foVh.n^r u J anewheartastrulyas J^ and^„^, wh/chTfee nX S '^f
I am glad that among the reft.you feem to recall that over afSn» r„ baptifm and derogating from thepromife .- ( which D. ^^wt^o ° exprcdy faulty ,n then you; and now feem to yield that t iTorincTn,
To your Queftion. How the DoSrine of baptifmal Regeneration can make men Anabaptifts. 1 gave you before , full anfwer. U have know^ many thant hath a mod made Anabaptifts, that were fober peopTe
1. A difcoveryofoneerrorinanadverfarv is a mofl nnr^nr „; '^ make us fufpeftall his Doflrine , and polTefs'us wkhte e ' Lft .tiEfpecially about the fame matter. When men hear that he «ond of our baptizing Infant., ,s i. That they may all be Regenerafe^rean. and have new hearts; ..And that by the prober Inftrumfntale&ienc; of baptifm ; And when they fee by Scrip«»? and Reafon^tlh c"/.
36J
not be, and by experience thst de faBo'xz isnoc, bat that divers fuch baptized ones never dtTcovetcd any new heart; what likelier way to make them Anabaptifts ? They think that to overthrow our grounds, is to overthrow the lawfulnefs of that pradlicc which is built on thcm^ Even as it hardneth Papifts to read in many of our greateft Divines,thac Chrifts Aftive Righteoufncfs as fuch is oms formaliter^ and not only meritorioufly .' that we are juftified by faith properly asby thelnftru- mentof ourjuftification : and that juftifying faith is AfTurance, (Tay fome ) or pcrfwafion that wc are pardoned ( fay others .- ) and that in thefe things are the main differences between us and iJ^w^. Would not any inconfiderate Novice turn I'apill:, when he hath found chat we erre in all thefe, and yet make thefe the main difference? So in the prefentcafe. If fas youfpeak, ^ we could fhrw men no oiher good that comes by baptifm, but this; then it were time to make good this, or give it over : But I think there are other benefits, which we can bet- ter provc;when the afferting of one which we cannot prove,wi[l ihake all with the common fort. Your Argument [chat Anabaptiftry arofc not while the efficacy of the Sacrament was acknowledged, ] is a «<?« Caufapro Caufa. I deny not the unfoundnefs of Lmhers Poficion, No faith, no baptifm J Nor do I deny but Z«;»^/«w gave too little to baptifm in termf, though I am ready to think he meant rightly. The avoiding of the extreams herein, is that which I endeavor.
As for Mr.Cranfords letter affixr,it fpeaks not againft me. I own not the Doflrine cie nptdis fignU ; I acknowledge an efficacy to theufes which they are appointed to j that is, As Moral Inftrumcnts to convey relations and rights, though not as Phyfical Inftrumcnts to make real mutations; But this conveyance I take to be but by obsignation, and (olemnization,and complement of that which was before conveyed by the Covenant effectually. I cannot blame Mr. Temhs to fay what Mr. Cr. exprelTeth. He might fay alfo to a Papift, If you can prove that the Sacram mt of baptifm doth f A' c/jjT^tJ^fr^i^o take away all Originalfin, I will baptize Infants : And good realon ; Muft we therefore think that ground neceflfary or good ?
My Reverend and dear brother, how far I am fatisfied with yours, and how far not, thefe few lines fibew. I fee we are neerct much then at fitft 1 judged by your books. The d fference is fmall ; and indeed fcarce any, when you have recalled what you here promife to recall. I acknow- ledge your condcfcenfion, and the Spirit of meeknefs in your lines; I crave pardon for the defefti of it, which appear in mine, intreacing
S66
you to remit all acrimonious and unmannerly expreflions. And then that we pubhquelycontrad.a each other, I think, is no dirparac-emcnt or wrong J Nor do I know why the dccrcft brethren in the woild may not publifh their diflFerent Judgements andrealons, without the 'lead diminution of lore; that fo by comparing them, the woild may have a further help to rhe difcovery of the tru.h , yea. mcthinks, for that end, men Qiouid purpofely agree to do fo. V\ ho knows not that wc ail Oiall m fomc thmgs diflFer, while we knew but in mn - and what hurt ts It if they know Wherein wc differ Mf men took ic for no wrong or difparagemenc-to be contradicted, (and there's little rrafon the? fiiould; then would our debates bepfacidly and lovingly managed without any ftnfc, exafperations or d;v.fiuns ; and fo the Chun h mtht have the benefit, and we efcape the hurt. For my parr, I do bur as I would be done by. I never feh that any mans writings agamft me, d d make me fmart. And I can truly fay, that my fmall difference with'you IS accompanied with unfeigned love to you , and honouring of your worth, and prayer that God would prefcrve you, and blefs your iabours to the fervice of his Church.
Kederminfler fun. 2?. Your unworthy
^ ^ J ^* fcllow-fervanc,
kh, ^Baxter.
3^1
To the Booksellers,
jWr.Underhill and M.Tyton.
Icy^m dejtredto ledve out the appendix in the next Edition of my hok^ of Biiptifm. I ant loth to -wrong the Ch»rch or my Reverend brother by being (juarrelfome \ and jet loth to withdra\>(> it if it be of ufe toVPard^ thedifcovery of Truth. It feems to me that the mofl (iffeSlionate Brethren may well fublijh their differing thoughts anddebates, without the lea/l in- jury J alienation, or mutual d.fparagement, thatfo others may have the help of finding out the right. J dare not be judge in this particular^ nor have I thofe neer me atprefent^ that are (it to be conful^ed. I do therefore intreat jou both to confult ^ith the mofi judicioi-u ar.d Cjodly Divines whom you can procure to give their judgement in Jucha bufmcfs ; and if they tell you that it ^ilt be more ufefull to the Church to have that Appendix left out, I require you whoHy to leave it out : If they judge otherrvife^ then print it, 4nd after it put thefe Papers,
TcurSf R. Baxter.
A Ccordingly we have performed our "^triift.
ThowM Vnderhillj Francis Tjtofi.
JPrnfeJlinanm Moraton
OR,
Mr. Tombs
His VR^CVRSOR,
Staid and Examined, and Proved
not to be from Heaven,
but of Man.
Yet G O D by Mr. T. fcndcth this Truth to the hearts of allrvhomit mA'jC9ncern, Pr^curf. pag.82,85.
[JPajiors and Teachers , or Presbyters to Teach Am Govern the Church of God, I am affttred are a Divint Inflitfitiony and a very merciftill gift of Chrift , Eph 4.11,12,13. iCor.12 28. A(^.i4. 23. I Tim. 3. 1, rit.2.5. towhom People Jhonld yield obedience, Heb. 1 3.7.17. and yield maintenance liberally, i Cor.J?.l4.Gal, 6.6. iTira.5. 17,18.
If any go about to extirpate them, let him be accurled as an Enemy to Chrift and his Church.]
Or if Snciniuhtoi more Authority with them, let them receive the fame Truth from their Cracovian C^izc\i. df Ecdcf. cap.i.
London^ Printed in the year, 1652,
^:\:lv ■i?^^;^^.
('.or
■^ f'^pfi J[)0[Hfni^x3 ^
r.^^:.'-ir3
.r?in"rb?nr*i-r .
37Ir
»'>ui
1 he L>. o N T E^N T s. -^^^^4
OV the Antiquity of Infant- B apt ifm Sc<S. 3
0/ W7 afleg.itio/t of Hy^irus inftittition of GoJJips. ibid.
whether all Difciples Jhottld he htptized. St<^.6
UMr. T. untruly ch.trgeth me with preaching againfi Annyaptiflshciufe I^roie agaiptfl them. S(.6i 7
I truly mentioned hU plurality of places. Sed.S
Air. T. h^i UMtvorthy dealing ^ith me about my VoUrine of the Nature of
Faith. Se^.9
whether he excufe not fmners from the guilt of breaking their Baptif-
mal Covenant. Se^.lO
whether he accufe not his otvn children as no Chrifliam. ibid.
whether men are in Covenant eo nomine becattfe eltUed. ibid.
The Relation of afervant may be, where there is not fervice. ibid.
U\tj meaning fully opened, of the term [Vifible] m to the Church or
Members. Se<3. 1 1
Whether I had not reafcn to think that LMr. T. judgeth it befi for Infants
not to be Chrifiians. ibid,
A fuller explication of my meaning of Infant- Holinefsf I Cor. 7.14.
ibid»
The ^onfequences of the zy^nabaptijfical principle of notu^ommunicating
Vriththe (fuppofed) unbaptized. Sedl.iz
Gods admirable Provi.'encein keeping the Orthodox frorH the n'oforioJii
guilt of this Age, and leaving tejhmonies to vindicate them from the
calumnies of all enemies. Sc<S. I J
Cods emifient appearance by providence againfi the iyfnabaptifls and other
SeEls of this age. ibid.
Afr.'X. hi-sreufons for private mens admlniflring Sacraments confuted',
andthofe againjl it dt fended. Seft. 1 9
tiisyeafons againfi Alagi/i rates tenure from the Redeemer confuted, ibid.
A 2 Ancients
37a THE CONTENTS.
Ancients dndCMsdern, Orthodox Divines, took^ not Infant BMptifm as Wit hoHf Scripture proof. Sed.ao
Hojv far Mr. T goei towards the overthrow of the Minijiry. Seft. 2 1
Teople are not to govern bj Vote, The Elders have more to do then the people in Excommunication : Excommunication a part of Government.
ibid.
Mj mifiake of the fenfe o/Mat.7.15,16. acknowledged and cm-reded.
ibid.
Mr. T. doth dangeroHflj extenuate ^ and jpeak^dipjonoHrahlj of Ckriftj Kingdom. Sed.ia
Letters between Mr* T, and me about Writing and Difputing.
My
313
Y Reverend and unfeincdly beloved Brother (for fo I will call you whether you will or no ;) I lately overtook your P/xcrirfor and finding him in a publike and('tooj common Road (theugh out of his way^ I prefently enquired after and pcrufed hit in- tcIJigcnce. (News pleafethhumsne Nature; efpccially when itconccrnethus.) 1 confcfsl had nohrghcxpcdatlonof fatis* _^^^^ faSion J but yec I locked for fomething new, after fo great '^^-^ ^ pvovocations and promifes ; But I fcund the old mattcr>the old flile, with the funpkment of fourteen ihcctj of Paper, which had they been bare, had been worth three pence, and would have fcrved me for Come better ufe. A new Ti:!«
alfo I confcfs I fcund : And its like no mock-Title fas you judged mine) —
¥c(l'in!>nscttcos parlt It makes more hafte then good fpeed, fo nimble footed
as to overrun the Truth. Ttie Proverb faith, The l.itc Mcffcngcrbr'wgs iJh trucfifinvs. And a wifcr concludes, He il>.u u fiftin his own cnujc, fccinctb jufi 5 but his ne'igh- bo.tr conicth aid fcarchcih him- Prov.18.17. Jghn may out run FeUVj and go laft into the Sepulcher.
I have declared my intentions never to meddle with you more , while you continue Enndcifi c.Viioc Cmultnam j but I durft not tyc my felf, as having found God crofling nsy purpofes by his providential Call. Two things now prevail with me to do what Is here done, i . That your Frttcurfnr fet forth at that very feafon when my Book is in the Prefs for a third tdition; a. The advice of fome friends to take tiiis feafon, who othervvife would have had mc to hive confuted you with filence. Becaufe men muft an- fwcr for every idle word and work, and every loft hour •" I will fay nothinp to :lie re- peated or frivilous paffjges in your papers ('which is mcft) but in C3ch Scai^n touch on that which is moft material. or new. i he Lord guide my Spirit and PcDi that I may do it in his fear, and light 5 and may not vent my own fancies or paflions, nor let fall a word to the injury of his Truth .
You divulge the great humility of rhe fix Gentlemen, who will fo patiently permit you to affix their names to fuch a paper. I know none of them but Major Gen. Har^. yifoHy whom I love fo well ih.it I wilh he may p.uioniz: a better caufe. I findc the old querulous ftrain in your Epiftle,as if you were much defirous to be noted for aSuffercr. You fiift complain of [a new ftorm bythc violence ofmcn bent to bear down diffen- tCfS from the determinations of the Affembiyj&c.] This ilorm did bear you down f:om London to Bctvdely^Rofs, Sec I wilhyou Ids fufFering or more patiencf. Y our next fufferlng was, that you found not the fettk.iicnt which you hoped for in the
B b b 3 Ccumrey.
374
Ccuntrcy. I doobt thofe hopes are the roor of your unfetledncfs. Two caufes of this, youaffign. i. The States Told ycur Lands, cut of which your maintenance there arofc. Are notfhcGcntlemcnyoufpeak to, part of the State whcm ycu^qci^fe? But if it were your Lands, the favilt wis the Icfs : fome faid, it was rfie Churches,and fomc faid it was Gods. t. You fay, the alienating of mens fpiiirs from you through the dii^ancebetsrecnyou and the Anyigonift, did inagreat mejfuicfruiirate your hopes, God ufcih to fruftrate hopes ofTetulemenc on earth, I am §lad you can charge the. Ai>r tagonitt with notbing hM liiftanct ("and that only Ui jiuigijiiein., fade in af» fettlon.) "•''''■•, * V >' ^ •'
Your Jccon4 Epiftlc is queuiloiis too, thv-[you findetveitlicr your Antidote, nor your fpeech regarded by many, nor perhaps will this writing take much with them.] You might calily foretell that by the quality oi yx)ur woikj except with thoft cMU drcn that every wind of D;'drine will tofs to and fro. But let's fee what the book it felf will -ifford.tothat difcovery of my injurioufnefsand weaknefs which you lay [will appear in part by reading ic] ' i v."' .(..', -;.:// 'I i ^- .. ^ * ■ ■^■yr^^
To whar end you rccit; my Allegation offufii M^rtyrt'ts paft my reacli to JiWagTl^' Vnleis you would inlinuaie that I confcfs this to be the courfe with all the b.ipii^ecli rvhUb I cxpicfly Jay rvas ibe way of bapti'^rti!, the aged.
§. 1,
To your tirft Sedion I < have no:hing to fay.
§. 1.
To the feccnd but little J for it needs not. The fuppofed contradidion in my words, had been removed had itpleafed you to read or cite them all, in p-ig.p. And is ic a contradidion to fay, [The gutc ii (Irait^tbe rvay narrorv] and yet [/j/j yoi^e U eafie, bn b Hi den light y and h ii comniavds not g(kvouii'\ ' .
§• ?•
The fum of your Anfwcrs to the words of the Ancients, fccms tome to be this 'I will regard nothing that Antiquity faith againft my opinion.] Such is your Anfwer to Ongcn. It is not in one or two places only that he fpcaks for Infant- b3ptirm,and there- fore the lefs likely to be corrupted ./4u^i/J!r/2is lulc you cite by ihc halfs leaving out[and was not iriftituted by Counccis, but hath bctntvcr held.,) Ytur crofs inllaarcs lefm- vain. I. 'Eplfcopacicno doubtis of Apcltolical Ordination ; but ^f you n^an Diocc- fan hpifcopacy, k isfo far from having .4./y?/«iuniverfal Antiquary, that 'Ik firltVVri- rers maniftft they then knew it not. i-. 'I he time of Hfuy as it wai^at fiilt a matter of no great obfervation to Chriftians.& therefore might well be fovgotten,3S was the time of Chi iftb Nativity, fo it ncvir pretended to uiiiverfal couUnt, one part of the Church pleading for one time, and others for another. 3. Ififimt Comnvunifn is net once mentioned til! many ico years after {f/^;-,/?i but though &g?.inft it in the liilt Wrirerr,. 4. TJiq Millenaries opinion, was only alTirmtd M coitie'from ^<//>3 by fooie particular mehij and^t is not matter of Fad, but of DoGrriiie", wherein 7 f,-Wiitioft hath lefs Authority, r.utareanyof therelike to fhc matt:i* of B.^pt zing Ir^K*^ which muft needs be fo notorious, that it is next to Imp'iffibk, '.hz.,0 i^c>i, Cjpyiutj and the Ghurch in their times (liould be ignorant whchcr this had been the former Cbur- cbes praftife. Matters of Faft themfclvcs are very ciiflS'icnr; fome pradifed, but oftce or long before,: cr in 3 corner.' lorhe often everv-through r^U irif.ChurcJies, and ordinarily. This in qucftion iisop the latter fort.- If'indecd )<iu tsifjl; that Auftins Kuie il5Vintcit.^in in iuch ui-uters as theA;-' I dtlite you by tlie next co tell me, how
you ..
^1
J^Uknow-vhcthercheScfipturM which ybq now uH: areth« fimc Books iii vvholdot pari whidi were ettant 'In uh6 Apoftlcs agci and thar there was not morj^and Which ht CanonicaI,&c. Do not you care to fmitc through Chriftlaniy, (o you mny brfng down Infant-BaptlfrtJ ? Sdmafttu and ferae others fpeak as radily and partially .is you. See- Ing you deny nothing In Judin Martyrs words, you muft yitld that it Vv:is known ihrh fo mothers that their Infiints were of Gods Kingdom, and then ccrtain-iy they wefi Church mejiibersarid known DJfcfplei or Chi-iftlans J for hone bu: Ch^nHani are kfiown to bfc of* Gods KIngdbtrf. And ill Chrhtiani are Difcfi^fes, A(l.i\.i:6, mi all DJfclples mttlt bebaprfted, Af.i^i^.i?. "You think fjp/.7w and all thcCovfccl ^and confequenily all their C har^h) might be ignorant whether Infants wei e baptized icci yearsbefore. Andwhy? Bccaufe £it was not at all or very rarely ] A rare Argli* rticnt ? if it were [not a^ all] why might thi^y nor know that ? You fay, 1 hey rrilgtt not know that Infant* were not bappirrd, betaufe th^y ^rre not baptized j that I's^ be* caafe kwerecognofcible. Irmay betheTTimc is your tertfo'n on rhe other fide, They might be ignorant that they were baptized, becaufc they we're. But Why fhould f6% think It rarely done ? (If fo, yet It was done ) Doubrlcfs cither the Apoftles uftd and appointed it ordinarily, or not at all. i. You fay, it is not known of what age thofc o6.Bi(hops were; a perplexing doubt ! You miy be fure All or feme were Seniors j and Itslike if never a oncof them \*v'et;e old, yet they hid old men of their Cfiuj'cht^s'5 unlefs'yoB Ic-fay^ Ir Is poflible that no old men were Chriftians. I arh fure Its not pr6» bable. 5. You fay, Its "not known whofe childt'enrhfey were. Bur as Its niofl probable tha: fome of them were Chi iftians children, fo Its certain that the children of former Chriftians were then Chtiftlans among them, either P.iftors or Members, or both,and that in great numbers. And for what the Epiftle exprtfftth and implyeth of the Hifto- ry, 1 am content it Telf be judge. Sure I am, it makes no qucuion of Infant- bdp* tifm, nor did Fidut whom they anfwer. I thihk ycu were guid.d to tranflite th^ Epifll'd cdthe confutation of your felf. Bur ycur great hoife' is about Hj^ifffr* makirtg Gof- fijs ; where I. yonfcign metotr'lumph In it, that fp you rnight bethought t'dliaVe doi efdmething tnifbnrutitfgir. Bnt I lay fb little ftrefs on it, thatl think it not of fuch nwmcnt as ycu intimate. 2. You fall again to the old way in two Anfwers. i .You fay f the Decrc^-jhthe Epiftle, &c. rrtentloneth not Infant baptifm, though it fpeaks of CeiTips, &c.J?/»i'y 1. It Is utterly tantruc that the Epiftles have one word of theDC' crceor6f JGb flips '• I have not '()p\ndcr 2Z hin^ 5 buc if he dofpeak'fo fa! fly as ycii fay, t wiinefs belleve•himhereafTe^yif he do riot, you arethe lefs tx? be believed.' a-. ' Ynu hlv« fatlsfSedde hereby thit'yb^ rfcvur read'the Eplftles, which yet' you tnight hdvey<«neln fo many AtirTidrs ; ^ by then would' you be fo rafhis to ralfreporr them, Withbut firft confuitfngthcm. Ifcitfier BlondiUiu^Simm, Nicolhms, Cr^b,Birm), Gri'* iiarii ncrranymherthtt ever I'rcad, have anyinbrei'piftles of /Vj;g?/"f^but two'j nef- ther of which have one wbrjd t)f any fuch bafihefs. z You tell me of diviTS Writers that fn dlfpt'iYcthe'EpfflR*, tffat yoo could hsrdly have imsgined ai^y harniifd'lf'rd- tcftant would ever ha\ e thus allcdged fo tlotdrfonny fbrgcd a writing] artd'ybii tell m? [I havereafon to be afliamed of abufing men with this foigeiy after fo much tvidlon of it bj learned men, being more like to a brazen facecj allegation^ &c.]
k^ply'. What man that reads theft ivcf ds wcdld imagine that all this were faife ' aind Itfeerly forged out of yoiir own brain ? Yer fo It is. How could you think to perfwade *iHy knowing Reader that this Is ttue, who hath my Bot5k ro fee Its all your fiftlon. Do I nor know that the Decree of Hyej'na js cot in his EpiftUs at all ' but meriffoned bj thcmfelvts by GYfttM, a? re^^ifed by Hlftorical Tradition ,' a'ntf nfat a< Kll tn the tK^\\ of thbfc Bpiftlc«> Did ! nor exprtfly 'therefore tdl yoo ibat Itpok it on the
confent
37^
confemof Hiftory ? Did I once mention the EpiftUiatall ? Let any judge thax'. reads my Book. Why would you forge all thiii without one word lo occafion you ? Do- you think the deceiving of the limplcls the vrinning.of your Caufc > I am not Igno- rant what your cited Authors Uy againit the Epiftlcs (whether fi.Ju ly againft all m well as fomc, 1 judge not) an.! divers more Celpccially E!o}id://:f*)ihit fay much more then Reynolds. Whether the i rndit ion that I allcdge be currant, Heave men to judaft as they fee caufe : liu: certainly you venture fa: to change me wi h thcfe thmgs conccra'-) Ipg th( EpiftUs. For what you lay about interpretation of Scripture, 1 ealier believe myskiltobcrmiU.thenyourstobcgi-eat : at Icaft where prejudice pervertcth yoae underrtanding- Let your next words ftand as witncfs, where you fo confidently li- mit fo many otncrals j and think your poor rcafons prove that Chrift ther: invites men to him only as a feacher/and confequently only fuch as are weary of other Do-? diine) and not thofe that are weary of fin i 3i)d teacheth them not mecknefsby his example, but only by his Dodrine : And yon thinly by, previni (m^you4iJp,ove tH t^bcYt Mifthcyrvc/eoppofitc. :.',
§.4.
The next ueferves no Reply, being fuch difcernabiy grofs evafions j fpecially that
plain con'raiiidion about /*^. i^.io. For his zeal to promote his opinionj an J his
aduall withdrawing men into other bodies, 1ft his hearers, and all that know hi-, way
judge, None thit know him I think will believe what he laiih o^ tlys/ ho: his fol-
lowers.
§• f.
I havethankedyou for your exceptions againft fomc points inmy /iphorifmy bue you might have alfo acknowledged th.n you r.'ccivcj a Reply j even i ;' (beets to yoiv one leaf andlidc. It fecmi to mc an unworthy ad to publilli all thcfe rcproachfull a<> cufitions againft mnfter Biraflon, who ncycr m.dlcd with you in that way. Would h not fufficientiy cafe your llomatkthat you might have your full ftroak at me ? But whoever ftands in your way muft talle of your fplcen. Will any man think your accufatlon (liould be received, that hath not hoard what he can fay for himfclf ? 1 think it ncedlefs to tell the world what I havehea'd him fay to thcfe Charges of yours ; but this I will fay, that if by [temporizing with the King^ partie] you mean [flaying a^c home] fo didmottof thcgodluft inf!cirr//qr, aiid thanked Ciod they mjgh;^ But if you mean, cither jhat he was fy: thsm, or did not in preaching icpipve ifatm Cwhich yet was then dangerous^ miHer jj'Jh.in H'ipl{i/is ^ now with God, did fer-ioufly -tq me profds the contrary, and vindicate him in both thefe particulars. The Magiftracc alfo muft be cenfured with the reft i yea, and the others that Invited me- ('thtu^^h a$ eminent for parts and piety as any I know thcre^ muft be faidtobe [of fomewhat ^ like ftamp] whereby it appears of what validity are your Accufations, and horv yop will ftar^^all cbac are againft youc Aful;>apiifai.
§. 6.
I am the more obliged to obferve what you fay in this Scdion, becaufe you fay k-i$ to the chief points in my Book : And therefore I may perceive here what way you mean to go in your larger Anfwer ; and perhaps the Reply to this may luflicc to the fum of that.
I. You fay, your confdfiqn that all fhould be admitted Church-members by Bap» tifmj was meant of fuch as by their profcflion are vjfiblcj npt of (uch as are yiCbie ia my way without profcflion. SUpiy,
377
Reply. But how oft did yi u confcfs it of AH in general 5 But I thought how flippcry you were ! And yet for all ihij you dare not fay yet that Chrift hath any Difciple* that (ordinarily) ought not to be admitted by Baptifir.But the bcft is, even that which you yielded was proved, Chrift will have no Difciplcs enter at any other door, ordinarily [C?^, d'faplc mc i'U nMmx, ba(>tn:j»g /ktt-.]
z.Youfjy, As yetyoufindeno Law or Ordinance (f^ Infants Vifiblc Church- membeifhip) favewliat isenjoyned concerning Circumofion]
Rcp'y. What not yet ? And yet dare you boaft fo confidently of your prepared con- futation f Yet can you findc no Law that nude Women Church-tnembers ? nor the uncircumcifed Males in the Wildernefs ! O the power of prejudice !
3. Youfay, you anfwcr my challenge by another challenge j To flicw what one Church had Infants Vilible Church members belldes the Jews.
Reply. 1. The Church in Abrahams hmily, who svereno Jews. 2. My Books anfwers you as to otheis.} An J I anfwer your Challenge with another Challenge, to llicw me what one Vifible Church on earth befides the Hc^/r)V5, we have any fuch Hilloryof, as f,om whence we may cxped any light concerning that Cafe ? when even multitudes of Divines ackncwltdge not the being of any other vifiblc Church ; yet confequen- tial proofs I have given him already. 1 o my fecond demand [What one man denycd Infants Church- menibctfliip till within this two hundred years ?] HeanfwerSjnot by naming any one. But I. he faith, Till Abrahams time nothing is fald about any Church frame. 7{eply. Bu: as God had hij Church till then ) fo I have proved Gods love the fame to his Peoples feed, and that the fecond Commandment as to its promife was Mora!, and that Infants Church membeifhip begun not with Circumcifion. The reft of his Anfwcr I think not worth the taking notice of.
He faith [Infants are excluded from Baptifm by A/.7r.i8.i9. Mai-.i6.i^,i6.2 As if it were excluding part of Difciples, and part of Nations, for Chrift to commind them Ito dijcip 'e .ill nations baptii^jng ihcin^^ ^^ returns a qutftion [What great com- fort follows thiSjthat our Infants are by Nature tht- children of wrath r]
Rayly. 1. 1 1 is a point beyond controverfie, in plain difcovery. Is this fo ? z. Take heed of equalling your own opinions to ')ods clear Truths. ?. It is a point of great neceffity to be known, and tends to this confolation j that [clfe Infants could not be faved by Chrift] whith now they are, Next he falls on another paffage of mine, that [Tobc vifib'y inoroutof the Church, is all oneas vifibly ('or to our judgment) to belong or not belong to Ch ift and Heav.n.] This he denycs, and doubts not to Ihew that this mtft-ike hath much mifl.ad mc i and faith, he can prove thit Chrift will five his Eleft though no Chrift ians in appearance, nor Difciples by piofelJion, nor rifible SubjeOs of his Kingdom.
Reply. 1. But whatsthat to the queftion ? Becaufe he will fave an andifcernable Be- liever, that dyeth before he Cin make proftQion of his Faith ; doth it therefore follovy that he that is fo laved was vifibly a Church member ? or that to be vlfibly in or out cf the Church, is not to be vifibly or probably in or out of Chrifts true Kingdom ? Can you have any knowledge who they be whom Chrift will fave, that are not vifibly Chuich.mcnabers ? z. I advife y;.u ts :skehced of afferdng the Salvation of any meer- ly as Lleft. They muft be in Covenant or under the promiie, as well as Ele(5i j or elfc youkno.v nothlngof their falvi:ion. A'ld who arc under fuch a promife^befides Chri- ft ans or Church members ? The reft of this Scdion I'weet and four, ihall pafs as Ic is for me.
Cc c §.7.
?7'
S. 7-
To all this Seftion 1 will Tay little • only Mr. T. dcnyetfi not the Truth of my Napi ration in any material point. Only where I faid, I never fptke agiinft his opinion ; he fiith, My memory retains not all I printed , &c. and cites a wotd C/'j^.j:;4 of my Book of Reft.) Bu: M '.T. untruly intimates that thofc words wci e preached j for they never were; nor twenty and twenty leaves in that bcok befides. liuc I ftill fee weak 'gfounds Will fervehis turn. I fee alfo he is too tender of hii creciit when he pofeffeth to have done what he did this way on Gen.17. that he might ftand right in one mans thoughts. I advlfc him to preach to better ends, or elfe no wonder if he preach no bet- ter doftrinc. It is hard preaching Chrifl and your feU together, 1 am forty the In- dependents Caufe is folow with you, that you have yet no way to excufe them f'om bemg Hereticks, bu: [citrt i:s unknown to you that they make a pany tor their hrror.] Your charity is greater or your knowledge lefs then they feem; then no wonder If you know no: harder matters. I doubt its known at Aowc and Conflantimp/c, which yet you cannot kno^-' here. You do not know that you make a pa; ty yourfelf^ neither its likcl Well : I wihthefcmen to conflder where you leave ihcm, and look out for a better defence then.this : Laftly, you did confirm what I did fuJmife ; for you de» ny notburthityour delignin deliringmy Animadvirfions was to put them with the reft into your review ; And fo now I perceive what would come on it, if I had yield- ed to y^ur dcfircs.
§. 8.
You complain of the charge of Printing j for which I confefs I am not much forry, and do lefs compaflionare you then for any other of your calamities. But I muft tell you iris long of yourfelf. When you put forihfuch Books as this, would you be fo uncharitable as to vvidi poor men to part with the ir money to buy them and time to readthcm? If the weekly Pamphlets did fing nothing but the fimefong, who would buy them? But I finde by the Lift Weeks News book {oi Augtift jij that you hjVv' found out a cheaper way of writing : And I confefs I app-'aud it , and think ic had been better that your T><cf/r-/o>' hid gone P' ll by the (3 me- w.iy . Only (though by your oft mentioning me fo pubiickly, I perceive that I h ive a mom in your thoughts) i was forry thereto hnde, i. ThstI was any occaHonof the Ox/";'/Chillengp. 1. And that you ventured topafs your judgement h far on iucl. me-n and lo many as to con- clude that you [_favp Hit'e of Cods Spirit in their intcnions and rvaysl But the angting paflage was about your Revenues : where ycu fay , I would have the world believe it was de firablc for my ftlf. True or falfe , you venture to fay fo. Is reproving your Pluralities a fi^n of defiring them ? Let me but tell you that if I had defired more, I could have had ic ; yea, was cflcred 500 per avniim without Plurality. I pray you be not jealous of my defiring your Revenues-, for I do not think ever a neighbour you have will tell ycu that you need to fear me. I am loth to talk of thefe matters. Where you fay, I was unplundcrcd, I fay, Cantahil vaciau., I had nothing to lofe, but Books and a Horfe, which were loft, but that part of my books were preferved ; and I never fought or received reparations, but feived the State much of my tsoae for nothing. And where you tell me of a good et'ate in Land that I am heir to , I rnuft tell yoii^ [ am never the richer lt)r that, nor defirc ever to be. In- deed ^it;my ioo.\, per an/ium is much more (for all my very chargeable weaknef$)then I know what to do with for roy felf. And had I not better ways to expend fome of it,
i;
ST9^
Ifliould defire to rid my hands of k well .• but you fay [It is falfe and exceeding in- jurious to you] that I fay, [you had four Market Towns on your ihouldery,] and yet complain, Sec. Is this falfe? i. You fay, [There are no words that have a fhew of complaint, but thofc in the clofe of your Examcn and Ape!o;y.1
Reply. I. Two is enough, i. Let the impartial Readtr perufetheEpiftlc to your Antidote, and judge whether this be true. 3. Even this book muft yet fpeak the lan- guage of the reft, and in the Dedication complain of a fturni from the violen-;e of n^en bent to bear down Diffentcrs from the determinations of the Affembly &c the fiu- ftration of your hopes by the States felling your lands, &c. But what need I look fur- ther when even here where you deny it, you fay [I cannot but be fenfible of the great wrong [ receive in my name , and perhaps in my eftate by Mr. S. his calumnies.] I am Corry you cannot but be fenfible, even when its but a [perhaps : ] And fuch a [perhaps] as could be conceived by nothing but diftcmpcred jcaloufie : and jealcufie comes from too much love. Never fear it, Sir, I promifeycU, I will not diminifh your eftjte a farthing, if I can help it . This Terrene Melancholy makes you too fen- fible. I do not think all your neighbours you have, canconjcdure which way I may wrong you in your eftate 5 except only in the fale of your Books : and [ hope you mean not that. This is my firft untruth ; whats the fecond ? I cannot gather it out of all your Narration, except that be it in the firft words [that I had four Market Towns on my ihouldcrs ; which every one will interpret to be four beneficial Places under my cliarge together.]
Reply I. And can mens interpretations make my true words falfe .' a. Did not I tell you to your face, that it was the Plurality that I excepted againft, more then the bene- fit ? j.Lct measkyou thefetwo or threequeftions. i. Were you not at once, even when I wrote thofe words, Preacher Refident at BctvdUy, Vicar of Lcmpflcr , Parfon of R()/i. Mafter of the Hofpital at Lfi/o«y)' ? You will not fure deny it ? 2. Had you not three of thefe long before that? 3. Could I foreknow then how foon you would f wil ling or unwilling) leave Tvo/j or Bfu^a^/O' '' 4- Were not all thefe Market Towns?
5. Is there any doubt whether they were all beneficial to you, except Lcmpflcr i And
6. did you not long hold the title of that, to the keeping out of any other ? And was it not all the Ecclefiaftical means you had heretofore ? (though I believe you received not much from the deftitutc people.) And did I not tell you that a reverend Minifter told me that they offered you ^o.I. to quit your title, that they might put in nnothtr, and you would not ? and you did not deny ic ? 7. Ought ycu to take publique main- tenance for nothing)' Or were you fufficient for all thok places ? I dire fay confident- ly that you have as much tado at Lc/»p(lcr as you and fuch another is able to do. 8. Doth not the Hofpital at Lcd'ou,y bind you to about four moneihs rcfidencc yearly ? Aiid can you be four moneths confcionabiyabfent from your charge ? But I doubt your opi- nion will falve this, and you will take none but the Kcb.^prized for your proper charge. Where now is the untruth? Andhow feriotifly have I heard you complain againft thatgodly Knight, in the very words hereufcd by ycupag.25.line laft [10 great was the Antipathy of fome men agaif.ft mc, that I could neither get reparations foe my lofll'S, nor allowance for building, nor augmentation &c.] 1 am forced to fpeak thcfc (orhcrwife inconvenient^ paffAgc.c^becaufe you charge mc with untruth. As for the Aff.mblyof Divines whom you mention , I think ycu would not have had them difobty the Parliament that called them to thnc fetvice : nor yet to have forborn to preach ordinarily in London : (if they had, they might well have bccnaccufed ;) Nor yet to give up their Paftoral charges in the Couairy, bccaufe they were detained on a temporary Icivice , no more then Chaplains in the A; my ihould give up ihA:i:s.
C cc z Cut
380
But I muft needs tell ycu, that you go on in midakcs, when ycu fay, that [had you been an Affembly man. ycu might have been ftiled in my Booksa Leirncd, Hojy Ex- perimental, Judicious, Humble, Heart-piercing Preacher.] I hontiir your worth j but had you been an Archbiihop or Cardinal, or had )ou been Prefidcn: ot a Coun- cellj I think I (liouidhavc given you no fuch titles, without knowipg more by you then yet I do. It fcems you think your ftlf as worthy of it, as ihofeto whom 1 gave it ; Bu: 1 cohfefs 1 never To thought. Muft orhcrs prize you as highly as you p ize your fclf 5 For thr prophane piflagcs you mention , I Tay, 1 never fhou^ht Chi ift rp..kc p:o- phancly in faying, Th'-y that l^iU you lhiUtbi>il(th'.\ do Cod fcrvice : Nor to tell the IharHccSj Wo to y.ti HypKr'ncs^ &c. I'oitr fathers l; Ucdthc P^nfihets, and ye bitUd tl)eir Sepidclvfs, &c. Nor for the Prophet to tell men, Tb.ic ihcy fac, i/iccd to ihcir awn nets • Nor for God to fay to the wicked, 7'/'o« ihow^hufi I wai aliegrthc,- fuch .7 one aj thy felL Or for Riia: ro fay, C;y alottd^ for he is a Ged ; 'either he u la\:ng or purfuing, or he U in a journey. Or for Faul to (ijiBcvpar^ of dogs ^ beware of the Cofuifioni no nor £.1- rulis dcfcriptiyn of \ dels.
§. 9-
For what is faid of the bufmcfs of the ir.ildcufcs, I think it not worth the labour to fay any more then is fa id, or to difcover the additional flips of this Paper; ndr yet a- bout his charge againft my Dodrine of Juftlfication,but only this. La the Reader ob* fcrvcM>'. T. his ingcnuoljs dealing. I. He chargcth me with thefe words in my bock of R<fi [Doubtlcfs the Gofpel takes Faith for all Gofpel preccprs] and addeth hJs own Commcnraiy in the fame diftinfi charader. as if they were my words. 2. Thcfe wcrdi he accufid in his Aniraadverfions on my Aphoriims ; to which I replycd in ihefe words [In that /).7^. n. I apprehended my felf fo obvicus to mifccnftiuftion, that 1 have correftcd it inthefecond Edition, which is now Printed : Yet i. I fpeak not of Faith as juftifying, but as the condition of Salvation, which contains mere then that which is the condition of our firfi Juftification. 1 I never termed thofc [Gofptl precepts] whicii arc not in ibme way proper to the Gofpel.] Hereupon Mr. 7. fcnt to mc fur the fccond Edition of my book of Reft, wherein all this was altered ; He never made me any Reply to this. Yet doth he fo long after charge on me thofe fame words which I to!d him I had revoked, and that in the fenfccontra^y to the words themfclves, and my explication to him. Hefpeaks here of fending his exceptions, but nothingof his never returning any ihing to nry Reply. In \\hkh Reply 1 anfwered the four exceptions hcie mentioned pa^. 5 z. Nay whcr>.'as he makiththis my fourth Errour [my makingobedience to all Gofpel precepts an tfll-niial part of Juftifying Faith] Let the Reader note, I. It is utteily untrue ; I never wrote fuch a word; He pu:s In [Obedience] for [Subjcdion to Chrift] and fjufiifying Faith] foi faviiig Faith, z. Yea this fame thing he charged on mc in his Animadvcrfions, and brought many Arguments againfl It ; and I largely (licwcd him his miftakes ; that by [fub- jcftionto ChriiV] [ meant the Covenanting or confcnting to be at fi:fi his fubjiAi j which ftateth the relation and i^ nnr flriftly cbedi^nce to Chrift , but preuquilite; Even ascomradingcr confenting ihat fuch a man be my Sovcraign , my !v.3fier Teacher, &c. goes before adually obeying him : and the form of obedience prefup* pofeth the faid Relation. Yet doth Mr. T. after all this deliberately again charge me with the fame words, which I fhewed i. that I never wrote, 2. nor ever thought j nor amended his fence. Other foul paffagcs here 1 will pals.
§. 10,
38,
§. 10.
A<^aln, you go on a very falfhood in vindicating your Informers j as if I preach- ed thc'words which yoH mcmion inmy bookof Kcft, againft Anabaptiftsj which is untrue. Whether you forced me to diTputc, fliall more appear by your Letters. P^g J 4. Mr. r. faith ic is my fidionthat telleth finners that they never finned againft tiheif Captifm' and Engagement. Reply, i. I deliie the Reader to petufe my words pje.174. ^. Letanyimparciall man judge. Whether that man do not wholly excufe hniiers from' being guilty of violating ihcir baptilmall Engngemcnc,^ ( and fo teach them that they need not repent of ic, nor Icek to Chrift for pardon of it ) who teach- etli them that they never were baptized, or by Bapcifm engaged to (jod ? Can he break a Covenant that was not bound by Covenant i
To p:ove Mr. r. an accufer of his own children, I Hiewed pag.il'). that there is a double accufatim j theory when men are charged with i)\c ; e.u m cu'px : the other when they are charged with the mj^Mfcc/;*, or to be 0^,'^/// adpccnam: Aiid I ihcwed that this is Satans end in charging the former: This is the principall Guile intended by the Accufer j and he therefore provcth us guilty of the fin, that he may prove us obnoxious to the punilhment: and therefore accufct on is not only thcch^ig- ing with a fault, as Mr. T. imagined. Here he hath nothing to fay, but fuch words as I am loth to "ive their due Epithites to. He faith I difcoutfe from the end of the Accufer and the oppofit ion of iullification toaccufation and condemnation,] and
. ppod -
to pel ufc the place. ;. Every word of illuftration in the whole page is not part of the Argument. 3. Do you not know that the end enters the Definition of chefc Relative morall Anions ? Yet you fay, [1 had thought accufation noted the accufers ad, not his end.] [tfeemsthen you are ignorant that it dtnorcth a Clum morale m, quia, fine jppr,-(;nitu,'. both his aft and his end ! I perceive there are fomc obvious and com-
mon tiuths that you yet know not. 4. ■'^n<a couia youininK v^ir 1 naa argued from the end ) that it wi uld follow that accufation is condemnation and execution? Have thefe the fame ncareft end with accufation ? It is the neareft end that fpecifics : the remote ends mnv be the fame j but the next are not. He adds [that Jufiification n oppofed to AccufatioHjand Condemnation Ihews they are diftinguiilied, the one being the charging with a fault, the other yafling fentence. ] Reply. No doubt they are dfw ftlneuifhed. But that accufation is only the charging of the rcJLum culp^, and not of xyitrcatumpceiia, is the thing that you (hould manifelt. And let me now argue from theoppofitionofjnaificationto Accufation, though I did only ufc it for illuftration
before. rr n r
If the rcitut parije charged on us unjuftly, be icmmm a quo of luflrification, then «c may be the matter of acculation : Bu: the antecedent is true; crgo,&c. He addeth [ 1 muft confefs 1 yet underftand not his language of accuflng without charging with a fault, nor do I think any Law-diftionarie doth fo define Accufation.] 7vV;7y, i . But our qucflioniSjWhecher accufation be anything Befidesor Difcina fiom the charg- ing with a fault ? though not without it. 2. The fault here is taken pw canfejfo^ and thetefore needs no charge : Who knows not that all children have originail fin ? (^ex- cept moft Aoabaotifts and fuch like. ) But it is only the dcbitum p(cn<«, that is in
Cc c J (jucftion.
382
qutllion. 5. The Law knows no accufing a man to be ohligatum i^d fce>iam wichout charging with a fault : becaufe it fuppcreth men to be rcafonable j or ar le.ift tke Law to be fo reafonable as to admit no other accufation of that Icrt .• Kut wiut Ihall we then think of them that arc fo unreafonable, as to accufc one as obnoxious to fo great a fuf- fering, without accufing them of fin? 4 The Englilh word [accufation] is ufed for the two Latine words ^acliO & accufatio.'] 5 . Though ufually an:e is ufed in civiis, and jfa//.7i/fl appropriated to criminals^ yet are they alfo promifcuoufly ufed. I need not trouble ^ir. T. with Didionarics. Let him tesid n'cfcnkchiM, Digcfl. Lib.j^^. de Accufar. Tit.z.pag.^^o. where he faith, Acciifarc ctft gc^wra'tlcr (tgnificat al-quun ad Caufam diccndam urgcre,u>ide AccujMionunomme ctiam Civ; 'is AClio ^pcrfccutio ve- nit, ficuii contra aStio p^o eiccufationc ponitur : tamtn oitnmit, &c. And fOreyou know that /^(So/- doth Declare and Plead againft Jui Foff^lfwnuy JuiDsm'inti ufiUt &c. Befides Pt/^/io is in Englilh a true Accufation, though not that publlck one to which ufe hath commonly affixed that name. See alfo the fame Wefcnbcib. in Cod.!, j. Tn.\l.pag.77. Accufatio autcm ab Aflioued'ffcrtj quaKvu in hac matcaa fajjim eir promijcHCi aliai Accuf.itio appcllatury a}ias vera Aiiio, &c. ^jiamvU cti.xm bttc qua. damtcniu cfl Accufatio. &c. Et Imc propria nota ((Iqu.i Afliofics ab Accufitionibus di'^ flmguunLuri qiiedm lUu petitur alitjuidab Agoitcfin hU vero A^or fibi tiilnl pnftidet, fed aut panam fijco api lic.iri nut rco iyfligi petat. And do not you defirc the infliding of this fad exclufion from the vifible Church Covenantj&c ? yet ftiU remember that it is your intending the Poenall Matter only that 1 charged you with^ and not the form of a Pceaalcy.
For his qucflion about Janizaries or other Infidels, baptized in Infancic ; Dql needtotell him again, 1 hit Apoftacesccafe to be Churcli»members ? and that the Infant Title will not ferve thole that difclaim Chrift when they come to Age ? and that the aged mufl have a title on perfonall Covenanting or Faith ?
I'ng.i'i. he affirmethmeto fay [that It is no more thanks to him then to Satan that he keeps not God fiom making promifes to his children, p. 178. ] when there is neither the words nor lcn(£ there. Only when he faith [T did never difpute them nut of the Covenant ] 1 faid, no thanks to him j and 1 faid, after, [ Satao may fay the like. ] Is this to fay, [ Its no more thanks to him, then Satan, that he keeps not God from J &c? ] Yet doihhe exclaim of this as beyond all moderation, when he maketh it himftlf. Doth he think no man will try his accufatlons by revciwing my words?
F.:g. j6. he chargeth me with [a moflfalfe fpeech] as he calls it, wcj^. [Nor ate they in Covenant becaufe eleded ] Kci>ly, Who will not cafily underftand thcfe words, dc Cjufafo, mdi : q. d. co Tiomine^ b.ciufc dcded ? And fo he confiflcth befcre,tlcfti« on is not a Ccvenanr. Nor do 1 believe his interpretation of /(ow.p-S that [ the cliil- dren of prcmilc ] is all one with [thcEled] iihe man kformaOter, and not only matcr^aiur. j^ut if my fpeech be mofl falfe^ ac leaft it will follow li/eiJuiell: ergo ^ faderaiM til, ] He is eled, therefore in Covenant. I'u: that is falfer then my fpeech. Adamtind all the tied were e\e£t from eternity j but were not fo in Covenant. And the Covtnsnt that now belongs to the eleft before Converfion'cr faith (of themfelves or parents ) is not a rnutuall Covenantj nor fuch as we treat of, and Baptifm fealethj But fuch as leaves them yet children of wrath, and hated of God. Anddoth;?ow. 9. fpcak of that ? It is the elcd as Believers, and not as eled, ( and therefore not till Belierers) that are in the proper Covenant which we fpeak of. Then he citeth Rather' fordand Norton, faying foli clc£lifiederati i as If that were all one with Omnes Elcfii ! He tcls me of my confufion about the Covenants ^and when he hath donc^Diftintt- ]y opens it in my wordsias mine. He faith as if the Conditional Covenant is xquall
to
38?
to all till the Condition be performed j tv^o, infants not believing, Sec. Kcply. As Iffieknewnot, that we maintain the Parents Faith, or accepting the Covenant fgr himfelf and his children to be the Infant condition ? How forgetfull is Mr. r?
He faith, my faying in generall terms, that he denycch that God covenanteth with Infants of believers to be their God In Chrift, and to take them to be his peculiar people [isfaidlike a Calumniator, his words being fo plain to the contrary in that
very place. ] Reply, .^lis tcnc.it FyctcKm ? i. [Infants of btlievcts] arc his
words added to mine.lt is Infants of Believers as fijch,and therefore al fuch that we are fpeakingof. z. He laith, [Infants may have an inccrcli in the Covenant of Chrill be- ing dcded i but whether they have or not, he cannot tell.] But i. This is but Tome Infants, even the elcd. i. If he know not whether they have or not, then he th nks ic not revealed in the word i and fo he denies the Dting in (Jovenant to fome, and the knowledge as of all or any ? Did 1 calumniate then in thefe words ?
Butldefire M:.Ts. followers to remember, that he here faith, that hethere per- fwadcdnot parents from cngagcing their children in Covtmnt^and prcmifing in their names; I hope then they will do this much, if they will not baptize them.
P.7g.39. There's a longer infulting over a fuppofed [ monilrous abfurdJtlc, non« fcnfe.gibberillij] then I will tranfcribe, buti will only tell him j i. The relation of a fcrvant in cur cafe,i$ founded in Gods Dominion-Title, and as it is a Oeneficiall Relation, fuppofeth our confent or our parents for us, as th; cojidnio (ine qua non. i. ThtTcrrrnmiiproximush not fervicc, aftuall or intentionalK but Dnmmus the Correlate; fcrvris cfl Domhn fcrvus. j- Ihe more nxnoitTcitnhim of it, is two- fold- I. As it IS a Relation of Duty, Duty isxhuTcmhinSy but it is Duty as en- gigei to, and not as in prefent Aduall exiftcnce ; that aduall duty being yet a more remote term. A wife maybe in that relation long before acluall procreation : you may bind an Infant as a fervant. So do we, promil7ng aduall obedience when he is capable i yet the Covenant. begins the Relation without it. z. As it is a Relation Beneficijli hiving righr to the I'riviledj^es of Gods friTiily and Mafter-lhip, fo this Right is its TciinniHs : And this God is pieafcd to convey prefently .- he being capa- ble ofpcrforming his promU'e, and the Infant capable of thofc benefits ingreat part, before the faid Infant is capable of aSuall obeying. Even as an Infant that hath his life in a Lcafe, and is bound to do homage or aduall fervlce for it, when he is at age, is dated in the relation of a Tenant, and hath prefent tight to the Land, though noc prefently capable of doing fcrvice. It is fufficient that this fervice as Due, hive a Ci- vill Being, and an eJ)}cog>i'Uum, a thing engaged to be done when capable , though it have no prefent exigence, i'ofarihe aduall exigence of fervice is accidental! to the ■ Being of the Relation, that it is feperable from it. Read but what f faid^ and now fay, and review that Infulting pageof Mr. T. and if your obfervation meet not mine, that, [He ufually Is moft confident, wherehc is moft notorioufly weak J then you fee not as 1. If thofc triumphant pafliges (hewnotthislcained manto be ignorant of the nature of Relations, then I cannot interpret them. Is it fo ftrange to make an Infant a fubjeft, and member of a Common wealth, before he can ob( y the Laws ? They are membra tmpeififia fcchwi mpcrfcfle : at laR vcre mcmbm, (i;-non tantum fccundunt quid. Doth he think when one had covenanted for fo much vi'nh A ,iftntlc to teach him, that he was not his Difciplc before he learned of him. He faith, [It is monftrous abfurditic to make a denomination without the form denominating, yeatocountic accidental! to conceive a Relation without the foundation, which is all one as to call one a Father without begetting, a Lord without dominion, a fign without a fignificatl- 00.] and then he comes in with his merry riddle. ;jt'/>/j'. But I would ask hirai. Whe- ther
384
thcr he be fure that the Denomination in a Relation, be taken only and ever from the ftaidation ? 1. Whether he indeed did think when he wrote this, that aduall fcrvice
isthe/a?;i^j??jfW«wof theRelationof a fcivant .- lihediii- , Ifnot .
g. Whether aftuall Tervice have the fame place in the Dthnirion of the Relation of a fervantj ai Begetting in the Rclarion of a t'atht-r, 4 Whether Dominion be the foun- dation of the Relation of a Lord, or raihec the Form ? 5. Dothhc not ccnf-und the form, the Fmid.imentum and Tcimmut, as if they were all one, cr 1 dcnycd alb I tell him th:refore a5ain,that(though he cal tliis .ibjurdoum ab Mrd/fufium^wkich I (licul J be afliamcdof) thataduill fervicc In exillence is feparablu from a fctvim, p:;thipi while he lives ; But I have flayed too long on this, i he reft I pafs.
§. II. This Ti.§. tiath nothing init that I can find, which is net fully anfwcre J already.; If the Readerwill p;rufc my words ?nd Mr.Ty. together,! deljre no more : If he will nor, I will not repeat the fame things. Only I cannot but obrcive that Mr. T. feems p.ig.-^i. tohaTcadefignto make the Reader bdieve that i ufe the word {.ViGble] in fome odde fenfc, yea^ and lay fo greaca ftrefson It, that when he hath ilirwfd the un- firnefs of that ul'c he hath over;hrownall. And whit is it? why [I m flake the terra [Vifible] as if it were a< much as to appear fuch in the judgment ot probability, though not difccrned by fenfe, by which Definition the oppofitc terms Viable and Invifible, may bccanfonndtd, add the term Vifible is ufcd contrary to the common ufe of Wti- tcrSj & .] Rcpl. I muft the rather cpen the myl^erious deceit of thefe words, becaufc it fecms he means to make fome ^reat matter of this in his following bock. i. The word [fuch] is pat ambiguoifl/. I fit relate to [the Vifible Church memberdiip] then it is a feigned abfurditie. 1 hope he v.111 not perfwade men that I fay [A Vifible member is one that feems a Vifible member.] It it relate to the tetm [Church-mem • ber] undiftinguiihcd^ ih;n it is his fiftion liill. For I lay not thus [A Vifible mem- ber is one that fctms to be a member, ] whether he be one or not. But if it rchtc to a Ri:i\\\ member of the myflicall body, then it is my fenfe, which 1 own .• For in the place he mcntionethffc.?/'.!?. I diftinguifli of the word Church, into its Primary and iisborrowed fecondary fenfe. In th:; firft it lignifitch only the body myflicall of Chrift : In thcf^cond it fignifieth All that are engaged by Covenant toh/m j becaufe they feem to befinciire; and of the myflicall body. So that I fay, he that is fo engaged by Covenant, doth more then feem to be a member of the Church, in the ftcond fenfe of the wor.1, v\. as it is called Vil^blc ; Due he doth but feem ((jua tain to us) to be ofthemyftica 1 ChurchjOr of the Church in the firft ftnfc. (For maik that I divide not xhcgcKm into its [pccics Jed xqui-vociim mfua itqwvocata. ) And 1 addc that the reafon of the Appellation given to the Vifible body, is its fecming to be the fame with the myflicall ; or that the name is given fcconda ily, borrowedly, from the myflicall to the vifible. $othat if you ask me, Whether it be cert.iin or enly probable, that Ii.'i fitntsare members of the vifible Church ? I fay, Certain. Ifyoua k me. What Is it ihat Diredly or Immediately confiiiuttth them fuch members ? 1 .mfwer, Their vi- fible or auuible , that is, their external tngagcment by Covenant to Chrifl ; This (performed by the parent for them ^ is it on their part j fuppofing Chrifl s 1 itle to them^ and the oflcr of himfelf in Covenant, /f you aik me further , Why arc metr cxtemall Covenanters called by the name of the Church or Church-members ? / anfwer, Becaufe they do that which makes them appear to us to be Really members of the Church myflical. In thefe words you have my fcnfeas plainly as /can exprciL* it, (And Zbelccve tbis is Mn 7\tlar(h. h meaning in that one qucflioncu Word in his
lace
385
lata excellent^ honcft, folJd Sermon for Uniticj where he deny€t4t-aH except the truly ■gracious to be Members of the Church, but acknowledgeth others fuch as we muft ufe as Members ) z The word [Appear] too is scquivocall. I fpcak not of any [feeming] In General i but of a [feeming] by ihe way thu God hath appointed for manifeftati- on of it, as by external Engagement, by Covenantj or by profeflion of Chriftianity. 5 Where he addeth [iheugh net difcerned by fenfe ; ] If he diftinguiflinot between [difccrncd] and [difcemable,] he fpcakshis own fidions, and not my fenfc. I knew no way to the jiidvlment, for fuch an objeft as a Chuichmcmber, but by theUnfe?. But I do indeed aifirm, that he is 3 vlfiblc Church-member, that perhaps isnot fcen or heard : Fori never thought i\\2i omnc vifibile cfi vlfum : nor that a man ccafeth to be a vifible member every time he is alone, cut of the fight or hearing of others. Ycc I think not that God hath any vifible member in the World, but he hath been aCliLilitcr vifiu to be fuch, at one time or other, by fome perfon other. ^ For he that is the means of Conveiring him, or he that baptizcthiiim, or his parents that cducatehim, or fomc- body muft needs difcern thcfe figns which God hath appointed to difcovtr it. By [y'lfi'flc] therefore I mean not either, [a thing dilcerned by the intelleft without the fcnfe] as Mr. T. fee ms to fuppofc ; nor yet [a thing meerly as vifible to the cy?, or difcernable by other fenfes, without confidei ing it as intelligible or difcernable by the Intelleft : ] for then the Church were vifible to Birds and Beafts. But by [vifibl;] I mean, [that which is difcernable by the Underftanding medlvitc faifu,'] there bting in it a double Trope J i By :i Syf:ccdjchc fpcdcl [vifible] is put for [fenfible j ] the moftncble finfe, for the reft j and its objed for theirs, i And then fcnfible is put for inteWl^ible mcdianic fcnfu^ 4 He calls his ambiguous explication of an Adjrdivc [a Dcfini Ion] and faith,[by this the oppofite terms Vifible and Invifible^may be con- founded. 3
Reply. Ifby [confufion] he means[aconfiftencie] Inconocto in attribution to the famefubjed, I f)y, taking them as I have fully explained my meaning, & ccdcmre- fpcciuy they are not confiftent. Invifible and Vifible are attributions from diftinft reafonf. Ihe Church is invifible or myfticall in its Internall form, and fincere co- venanting with Chrilt : and it is vifible in the matter and in the external Covenant and profeflTion. But In thefe various refpeds I doub: no: but the fame Church and the ume member, is both vifible and myfticall. But if by [confufion] he mean, that vifible and invifib'e, difcernable and undifccrnable (as explained) are terras of the fame fignification,or coincident;! fhall more regard his affirmition when it is well pro- ved. 5. Were it not that I aflcd brevitie^l could by a multitude of Fiftimonies difprove his affirmation, that [I ufe the term Vifible contrary to the commcn ufe of VVriters,]if he mean Proteftant Divines on this fubjed. 6 \\t faith, [he doubts not to fliew that ic is no: true, that [ he that is not of the vifible Church^doth not feem (as I take the word fccm) to be of the Invifible. ] You may fee by this what you muft next cxpeft from Mr.T.i'i'^to prove, that [He that doth not [cem to be of the invifible Church, doth (com to be of the irivifible Church ; ] that he doth, and he doth not. Or that [hefcemeth, (tkat is, is to be eftecmcd in probability upon Gods warrant and diredion^ to be of the Invifible Chuch who neither by Covenant,profeflionnor rny fign of Gods ordi- nation doth make his mcmberfhip feeming or difcernable.] It I can under (land him, this is it that he doubts not to prove. If he doth undertake to prove Heathens or any that arenoChriftianfj'o beiccmingly in my fenfe ('that is, foto be Judged by a fign of GoJs appointment) members of the Church myftical, and fo to be members of Chriftj body, and to be fivcd j he will do a ftrange work ; and I think will eodcm to ■ Hat 11, prove them membeis of the vifible Church.
D d d Oae
?86
One word more. He is To offended at the next paflage, that he faith [he knows not what to conceive of iti but that cither by Gods judicial ad of leaving mc to my fdf," or out of addiaednel's to calumniate &c.]
Reply. And whit arcthefc words.' Read them/'.;g.i8y.[But MrT. will fay, I beiiive that it is better that Infants were no ChriftianSj then that they were. ] Where i I fay not that he did fay fo. ^ Nor that he will (yet he vainly asks, [who can fay but God, that he will fiy fo for time to come, feeing he may repen.] I w ih he may repent. 1 only faid that [I believed this would be his anfwcr J Now whether 1 had rtafon to think fo let the Reader judge. Mr. T. denyeth Infants to be Difciples , and vifible Church-members. 1 argued with him that if their Chuich membcrlhip be repealed, it Is in mercie or judgment J h:faidj In mercy. 1 replycd. If in mercy, then either to pa cnts or children ; and of them, to the elcd or non eled : He anfwercth, Both to parents and children, to the elect and non-cleft - 1 further proved thit Church- mem- bers viliblc and Difciples are all one^and difciples and Ch' iftiaiis all one, in the bn« eua-^e of the Scriptures. Have I not rcafon then to think that he that faid Church- mem. berihip is revoked in mercie, and that it was better for them to be no Lhurch- mem- bers would fay alfo that,[t is becter for them to be no Chriftians? But I am glad M.T. calls this [an I mpious Speech] which I defirc him to remember and to think fo ftill. And then wheress he talks of I'uch memberlhip as the lews had, 1 hope in his next he will tell the world lome R?afon of his opinion, if he think the lews membcrfliJp was woife then none - and he will tell us alio, Whether i- be in mercy or judgment, for the"ood or hurt of Infants, that Chrilt now dcnyeth thtm to be-^ifiblc Church- mem- bers' or fiich as he dilcoveieth to us to be of his vilible Church.
^1.TJ^. confident words about Infant- holinefs in i Corj. 14, fhew me that it will not be unmeet to add a few words of the fuller explication of my meaning, leit in his next book he run on in the daik on miftaking fuppofitions. I dcfcribed the holinefs mentioned in that text thus,/>.7^.8o. [A Ihte of feparation to God, as a peculiar peo pic from the world, as the Church is feparated j wherein the Covenantor 1 romilc of God beine the chief caufe, it is oft called Lfoederall holinefs.] Now it fecms to me that Mr.T- thinks that by this hoiintfs, I mean meet vifible Church -membelliip ; and therLforc concludes that vifibie mrmbcrlhip cannot be conveyed to the child by an hyp crite parent, becaufe 1 fay that holinefs cannot be fo conveyed, and becaufi- [ ycild thatiuch a''^! ""^>°^y I multlet him therefore underttand, i 1 hat I take holinefs there for much more then vifible membcrfliip ; Gods Promife or Covenant, as I laid, is ihe ground of this holinefs : but mans Covenanting or PofcHion is the Ground of thevifibility ofhiimembeilhli\ Thisholinef» is Relative, and conlillcth In being truly Relative to God, as a peculiar people j and truly fo accepted by him i and ha- vine right to his promifcd favours in that Covenant, and the b.othts ihat arife fiom the mutual Relation. Bur a man may (being a grof? dilltmbler that creeps into the Church to I'pic out her liberties ana to pc.fccutt) be a vifible member- 1 conftis I ha.c not fuUycxprcffcd how far this lelarion and Covenant doth Intereft them in Chrifland his benefits; whether it only give them genei all Grounds of Confidcnct in ;hofe words [I will be thy God and thou ray People ] or [ He will have mercic on thoufands, &c. ] or, whcrhfr it be full Relative holinels, which hath the conco- mitant Right to pardon and falvJtion, ('which [I will be thy Goo] fccmcthalfo to contain) I thought it not meet to be too peremptory or exprefs in a Cafe fo much dilputcd among divines ; But 1 muft confefs I rather incline to think that it is ( not Keall holinefs which is the new Nature,, but) that Relative Holinefs. which is proper to thofe in a Reconciled Hates and that all true Believers Infants fo dying arc cer- tainly
38?
»ainly faved^ being relatively in the fame ftate wi:h their parents : and that this Infant" relative holinefs being on the conditionality of anothers faith, may be loft i (without any advantage to the Arminians in the dodrineof Perfeverance of adual or habitual Believers.) I defire D.?»f«/r»/5 Bpiftlc in Mr. Bfrf'Wj book maybe weighed j and alfo Mr. Rcdfnrdi and Dr. Wards Traftate : ^ though yet I continue my diffent in the points which I haveoppofed in them- 1 confefs I am not able to anfwerthe Arguments rfiat are in my own mind , for a certainty of true-bclieveri'infants remiflicn and fal- vation if they dye before their Infant title ceafcth. Cut however it is apparent that holinefs here isfomcwhatof far greater moment then vihble mcmberlhip- i I mult next add, that as the word [Church ] Is taken equivocally, fometime moft properly and In Its primary fenfc, for the true body of Chrift f as in\ ifible orvKible;) and fome5^me in its remote, borrowed, Itfs-proper fcnfe, for the viliblc part, that is but vi- fiblc and not (inccrc j (as a pidure is called a man, oi as a vv )m3n is cilled your wife before themarriige, when it is next to concluding j ) fothc word [Holy] alfo hath the like double fignification : i Primary, as ic figiiificth the (^ elation of cne finceiely dedicated to God and owned by him. i Borrowed, •rtraiifl iced thence: as it is gi- ven (frequently by the Apoftlesj to thofe that fecm tooe holy in the firft fcnfe , be- caufe they fo fecm. 3 I add, that therefore the children of tine [believers have that true relative holinefs, which this text pri.nivily intcnv^s = and therefore the children of Teeming liclitvers, arc feemingly holy in the fi: ii fenk of the word, and truly holy in the latter, borrowed, Icfs-proper (cnfe j even as their partntt arc fecmingiy holy them- felvc$,3nd really in this fenfe. 4 I add that the ground of our baptizing it the cxprel's commindof Chrift, to [Difciple all Nations, Biptizing them,] and fo to baptize all that are Difciples 5 He hath n t bid us baptize only (Inccre Difciples , nor told us that we muft know them to be fincere b?fo e we baptize them. 6 He hatU taught us by his Apoftles conftant example, to baptizv.- thofc as Dikip'cs that by a fc bor Covenant- ing with Chrift, km\ tobefo. 7 He haih authorized them thus to Covenant fur (and fo Difciple) their infants with themfelves. 8 1 doe not therefore conclude the liaptizing of Infants dircv'ily from tfeir holinefs, as if that made the Duty; but from Chrifts precept dircdly i and from their holinefs a what which infallibly 3iTures mc, that they are he due fubjcftt of that Baprifm which C hrift commandethitheir holineis being either infepirably concomitant with DifciplcOiip or eminently containing it j none but Difciples beng fj hoiy. 9 Andfo (though Chrift do Covenant with none but true Difciples } that is, to none other doth this Covenant actually convey right to its benefits J yet) asfceming B.licversot Difciples arc to be baptized, cbeingrruly Difciples only in the b'^rrowed lenfe ) fo I fay of the feemingly holy , being indeed holy in the remote borrowed fenfe, by rcafon of their ffcming to be fo in the firft fenfe. And therefore though true Oifciple.liip and holinefs be the qualification which God looks at in conveying further Right by Baptifmjor fealing It to them cffedually ; Yet it is the viiibility of Difciplifhip and holinefs (in the ftrift fenfe) which is the qualification which men muftlook afnr, (in their external Covenants and profcfllon) and on which wc muft b'piizcthem. And fo I conclude, that thoughtht infants of Hypocrites a-e not Difciples or holy in the ftrift fenfe, yet it is cur duty to baptize them as being vilibly fuch, as It was the A poftles duty to baptize the 7,000. and Stmen M'''g'- , And Ml. f. cannot fay that hvpociites convey not a vifible memberflilp to their Infanrs becaufc they convey not the tiue holinefs or DifciplcHiip. And I delite hU.T when he anfwcrs me, totakc my meaning as here opined to him.
If any one clfe ask me, V\ hat wc (lull fay of thofe that have a common faith which is yet undilTembledthoM'hnotfaving j I anfwer , Alifaichnoc favlng is defedivc either
D d d 1 as
388
as to the objcftive Extenfion, or »s to the a6ive and habitual Intenfion. i .•'ome do feriocfly believe in Chrift, and confent to take him as a Sayour to pardon thtii fins by his blood and iiucrc(fl"ion, and to favc them from hellatlaft, and to command them Co far as will ftand with their flclhly intertft. Thefe men may be ferious in the Aftsof Affentingand Confentlng j but it is not Chrift as Chrift that they receive ; not Chrift as a full Saviour and Soveraign, i'bl'olutcly and unreferTedly to be obeyed, and therefore their faich hath not the objcA ofaChriftian faith : Tfccfc men do not diflembie in faying they believe in Chiift; but they dilfemble in fjying they believe in or receive Chrift fully and Hncercly as he is ofltred them / and thcy dUfcmble or fpeak faifly in faying thcy arc true Chrift ians. For indeed thefe men are but equivocally and in a borrowed fenfc cal ed C hriftians. Who will call a Turk a Chrifti3n,thcugh he • believe in Chrift as a true and excellent Prophct-of God, and though the Alcoran re- vile the Jews for rejefting him ? who will fay that he becomes afobjeft. who is con* tented to receive the Is ing as his equal? 2 And as for thofe that doe pofcfs to receive Chrift intirely and in foveraigntfc, and yet doe indeed preferre fome fltflily intereft before him, they are hypocritical as to the ad it fclf ; So that, though fottje diffemble groffcly and knowingly, and others clofciy, not uifcerning it themftlves : Yet all of them fcem to be what they are not ; and fo all wicked men arc properly Infidels (though not all in one degree,) fome open Infidels, and feme hypocritical ones ; And fo in ftrift fenfe none is a Chiiftian but the true Chtiftian ; and others are only fecming Chriftians j y."t called C hriftians ufu:Jiiy in the forefaiu borrowed fenfe. Indeed there are fome chat God is drawing tovva.ds C hrift , who doe not diflembie: for thcy profefs not yet to be his , (en if they doe, but counterfeit;) but ciiefe are not Chriftians indeed till they come quite over to him.
Thefumme ofthisSefilon, if lundeiftand ir,i$, as ifhefaid [I am rcfolvcd togoe that way which moft fucceffefully may piotnotethcfuppreflGon of infant- baptifm ; If Minifiers will not hinder or crofs me in that, but let me quietly carry it on, as Gods work, my heart is to have communion with them (and it (hall not be fa id unlawfully bu: bccaufe they refift me, I will [eparate from them, and prove that none but the bap- tized Ihould be admitted to communion .' ] fuppofing that they arc unbaptized per. fons. I doe not intend to trouble this with an anfwer. Only I would askM.T. whe* thcr he would not have taken it ha'noufly if one had tcld him, afcerthe w itingof his three fi ft books againftbjptifm that he would come to this now that he is a i^And whe- ther on til? fame grounds ns he will exclude us from Communion ^ he muft not deny us to be Chriftuns vifible ?,and to hive any thing to do with any Church Ordinan- • CIS ? whether he muft net affi m sh-.t wc are no true Miniftcrs? and that cur Churches are no true Churches ? and that Chrift haihhad no true Churches or Minifters en carthjbut thoi'e very few that were baptized at age? and iha: all the Chriftians that have b en converted, confiimrd and favcd by hearing Minifters that were baptized only in Infancie, didfinagainft God in fceuing them, and ought to have refufe d it ^ Yea nr.ift he not on thefc grounds ( if wc are not Chriftians^ deny to love us ^s Chriftians? or to dee any wo k of charity to nry fnch as Chriftians ? 'J hd'e Confcqucnccs p aftlftd are firhaJife as I would not wiih Mr. T, to live. And for ought I feCjthey are as ncccfi'diy conftquents ofhis picm-fTes as his own is ; For if it be a good a-eument [ 1* is msnifefi in So ipturc th.n pcrfons were baptized before they brake brcid tcgcihcr &c. therefore I fee ancccflity of defifting fiom uniting in Communion ihcfe that difttr in Juci£mtnt sbouc Infant CaptiJmjJihen I would know
whether
SSp
whether he can name any in Scripture, that were true Chriftians, true Minifters of the Gufpel, true Churches without baptifm j or that were to be heard, loved, converfcd with, and refpeded as fuch, without b^ptifm ? If he can namefuch, I doubt not but it will be proved that the fame men biake bread together without baptifm. If he can name none fuch, thefe confcqucnccs will follow as much as the other. Or if Mr. T. lay not the ftrefs cf hisargument on this Scripture mcdiuw, but on our oppofition to him .(for in r«ch a conJundion of heterogeneous Mediums, I am not furc that 1 know his mind , J yet I am fure this is the ufuai way of ethers of that party, SoMr. Cox one of their Paftors In Lovdon difputed with mc in writirii; [we may not be heard preach, be- ciufe wc are unbaptizcd.] And I chink Mr. T. hLSril Mr. BroivH lately at H'orctftcf goe the fame way; maintaining his communion with th.fe that accufed the Scriptures of fillhood i and that Pd«/ might pray among the Cir/nuhians, though fomc were drunk at the Lords Supper, and fomc cat things oftued to Idoh and Devils, and fomc denyed the Rel'uciettion &c. but that now they may not pray in our mixt Aflcmblies; becaufe wearcunbaptized. is it not evident that Rebaptizing is become ^c great Idol which men fct up Inftead of Chiilt, or a found faith, or a holy life.? Prove to them that there are in their own Aflemb'.ies, mm that reproach or denie Scriptures^ denicthe immor. tality oi the foul, dtnic Chi ifti Ordinances, (and confequently have not Chrlft with- in them,)yet they may have communion with them btcaufe they arc in the order of the Gofpel (as thty call It) that is Rebaptizcd and fcparated : But with us they may not communicate thouj,hni.verfo godly, becaufe we are unbaptizcd .' Was ever Infants- baptifm Idolized thus.? or abufedtothis heighc> by any that pretend to be knowing reformed Divines?
§. xj.
To all the angry paffages here, I fay but this: 1 1 defire not to think Mr. T. means woife then he doth. If I miftook his meaning, I am forry that I fpoke fo ofFenfively , and repent the miftake, and the (harp words that it occafioncd. i But lee the Reader perufe his words, and fee whether he gave me not caufe to inteipret them as I did. When in the midft of a Difpute about the Monfters in f^ctvEvgl.vjd, he faith, [Nay give me leave to tell you, we may rather thmk we cughc to determine, that God may order accidents fo, as to become liumbling blocks that people fhou\d not receive the tiu.h rather then & -.] who would think that he fpoke not here of ihefc monfters ? or that thefe woids doe not charge God with a purpofcd leading men into error by wonders ?
In my tp'ft'e I (hewed my hearers the danger of a perverted judgm^nt^ that it will mike the h.itiioufcft (in feem a vertue, and men think ;hcy do God (crvice In killing his Sain s, &-. which Chriit hath faid himfelf Btfore me : Whit doth Mr. T. but fay, In all likelihood 1 fpeak of thanku ivings for vidories againft tht Scots j and fo dilate on thofe providences? To which I only fay, i I dclire ?\lr. T. to Jeal with my words, and not to pretend tokno.v my thoughts. If 1 had faid this much cf hinj, 1 dcvibt he would have faid, I ftirred up the State againft him, with a pi ifccuing in- tent ("at Icatt ) ifl had faid what he harh piivatelyer faid of me, which I can prove. Some have cbicivtd that the Rtbnp:!zers wnters ufually turn to blood, and their hant's incline much to a crimfon dye; and that they are much bent to the baptizing cfallmcnj their Profeiucs h,t['tif>?jste flummi: \ and the roll bapt'ifmiitc (anzjiinv. I think not that all are cf this minJ. i 1 maft tell Mr.T. ihatldtfpife not ;he ftiangc providences of this age, but obferve them; and acknowledge and admire God in them,
D d d 3 and
390
and dilcernhini teftifying agalnft the fins of the dtftroyed. But I fuppofc the full In. terprctation of them is not fo obvious as in the caie wc were upon; Nor do I find in Scripture that it is Gods afual courfc to choole a holy, humble, meek people to be the executioners of his fcvercli judgments on bis Church. When wc have finned our felves into a nectflfiiy ot fuch calamities, < >od ufuilly choofcih executioners v. hole na- tures fit and difpofe them to the work. Were I to k II a Hare, I would not fend a Lamb to do it •, or to kill a Partridge, I would not fend a Dove. And I here pub. lickly and fearlefly tell the world, that [/ tsl;: it (or one of the remmiinbk and mofthap. pypi-ovidoiccsoftbisagc^ ihittvhcn he bnd j itch (Irangc judgments to execute as rve have feerjy he bath thofcn out fuch infliuments to be his executioners y arid would fiat fuffe/ thofc to h-ive a hand in them, vpho thereby might have brought a [candd ou the 7{c forced Rett' ^'on; and hath fogmiioi/Pj ordered it, that if auyT/i'li, JeWy or Papillfhall dare to fay hereafter) [Tour Reformed Orthodox Chriftiam did thefcth'ngsl their nat or tout 'mpri- ftmmcms andfec'iifwfis tvU vindicate them for evrr^^htn God hath in mcrcie again re- folved on a healing workjhe will then mzke ufe of piudcnt compaffionate, healing in^ ftruments. And for the Common-wealth, Mi. T. may fit in his chair and talk fcf them, with lefs trouble, danger, charge, or p.uii^ then 1 have aftcd for ihem, and yei perhaps with more thanks.
And feeing there is lo much ofF^ncc taken jbout the matrcr of wonderful provi- dences, wji''^ ^ mentioned, 1 add this much more j I cannot but with joy arxl reve- lence look on the hand o.f God , a^ainft the erroneous ways of thefc times. Was knot the all-difpofing Lovi-rof Truth who cbofc rutihefc two leading women in 2^nv-£«g/(i?7rf, the one to bring torch luch a multitude of births at once, and the oth:r a birth with fuch various parts, feme of birds, fomc of beafts, fomeo^ fiihes, and fome of man j hereby to (liew his tcftimonie againft their various abominations ? Ihouch fA.xs. Hutchinfon (ii6, [God did it to harden us, ] I think he did it to confirm his truth. 1 he remembrance whereof makes me hope that the fame God will yet appear in Old £wgtofy,ag3inft the fame Caufe, and (fome (ay) the fame Agents. And in- deed he doth appeatj and hath already done fuch wonders as aftonilh me to obferve them; giving up the minds of fome, and the bodies alfo of others to fuch a powtr of the Devils , that fome have fuch Itnnge (liakings and trances j and fuch a multitude in fo manv parts of the Land, tu:nRjntcrs, Blafphcmers, commonly unclean thit fcemed religious : yea, fome turn down-right Infidels ; (o that not only the /{jfowtj« Catcchif/j, but the moft hellilli book that ever 1 heard of ('called Jht' three Grand It>.- fnftors, thought to be written by Bririaidmui 0:h'iuis ) lab uring to prove Chrili a Deceiver, is trarflated, and printed in Lorid'in And lift menflj.iilJ doubt of the truth ofthefe Dclufions, God permitteth a woman to run naked into the AlTirably, the men to goc about rhefl nets, fayitig they are Chritt, and their wickedntfs to fprcad' far and near j fo that it is Ibmetimes the matter of the Weekly P.imph!ets to proclaim it , btfides others that publifli it for the warning of the godly ; as Juliice Stoai^s in his ifiltjhrre Rant, and other like. Doubtlefs Godlhews himfelfagaiiift them apparently, and hath done very much hereby againft them already. Andlcannct h.-ar of one among a multi ude that comes to this fearful pafs by another way. then firft turning toAnabapjftry and Separation, and then ufuallyto villifie the Miniftry. andfo to Antinomianifra, and then who knows whether? I dare not (hut mine eyes againft luch providences , In an age when fo many call us to the fludy of providence.
391
§. M.
I need to fay but this ; It Is partlculai- men, and not any fappofed focletje which confifteth not of particulars, that are known by their fruits, though not every parti- cular man. That one mans dodrine may be Ihamed by the life of hit companions, though nut by his own) And there are Iigns probable as well as certain.
§. ij.
The anfwer to the i j.$. (hall fervc for this alfo j only adding this : That I fliould more readily ask Mr. T. forgiveni.fs of my (liarp Imguage againft Anabaptifti, if the moft of them in £ffg^;/t</ were as he and his oat tie here • Buc when I look about me on Engl.vid, Scollandy HoUmd, &c. and conhd.r what they have done, and what it is certain they are attempting, and like todoe, (v\eieit but againft the Miniftry o( Chi ills Gofpel) I am afraid of being guilty that I have not dealt yet plainly enoughj having juft cauie to fear that yet £«g/j?;rfhath not taftcd the worft of them, how fairly foever Mr. T. may fmooth the bufinefs. I would I had known the accidents of this year, which he faith {l>^g.6z.) may wipe away the reproach of them, as to the difobey- ing (thatsan eafie word ) of Governours that doe not pleafetheml furehemuftbc a potent Rhetorician that mikes this age believe them fo obedient, whatfoever the next may doe. Bile Mr. 7'. cculd not have faid as now he doth, /)<7g.6o. [Thofe that fit at the Stern, I cannot yet learn, have fuch hard thoughts of them as Mr.B.] Againft which aflertion I confefs my felf unfit to difpute. Unlefs I wcreneercr the Stern, or knew them better^or had fpoke with any that knows who fits there. But if he had faldj [Thofe that did fit at the Stern ] I would have confidered of the reafons that moved them to think better of them, and have enquired whether by this time their judgments be not changed, or like to be ere long ? and whether they will with Mr. T. fubfcribc to their innocencic, obedience, fidelities and give them his acquittance ?
§. i6.
His confidence p<ig.66. is marvellous. I doubt not but he knows that I take the words, [fincc the folemn Inftitution of baptifm, AUt. i8.J indufively. And fo [ anfwer, that this folemn Inftitution is our Warrant, requiring us both to Difciple Na- tions, and baptize Difciples. And we have other Si-ripturcs which plainly prove In- fants to be Difciples. Tothache calls acalumnie, /u^.67, 1 fav, He chcfe thofe which in my judgment were the weakeft Arguments. I hat threatning which he cals a tale- tellers fidionj/'j^.^S. is in his own letters tome : though fince then I could name him men of note far and near, to whom he hath ufcd againft me much more of diac language.
§. 17. I know not one word of Anfwer that this §. needs for him that will perufeany words.
§. 18. Ncr (hall [ lay any thing to this, but trouble the Reader with our Letters in the end.
§. '9' To the firft error, I am glad you Ihew youi meaning to be better then your words,
whether
39i
whether by explication or rccancntlon. Where he faith, [Iprcfume they that fit at the Stern, do find the fo-called Annbaptifts as faithful! to the publick Caufe as their Cppofites, ] I will not deny it, till 1 am fo well skilled in Politicks, as to undcrftand [what thcpublick caufe ] means j and whether [the ilern] fignifics ftrcngth or au- thoritie, and how far violence and faithfulncfs may confift.
To the fccond, about Lay-mens baptiim he faith nothing that I know that needs any anfwcr.
To the third about Lay mens adminlftring the Lords Supper^ he contents himfelf withftrange Anfwers. i He pleads that Ruling Elders, and Deacons have Church Adminiftrations. Bur he might know i That the qiieltion is (in my meaning) of this Adminiilration. i That Llders and Deacons arc Chrifts Officers, and he doth ill te call them [Lay.] Our queftion is of members not in office, i Heasksp^gSi. [how is it proved that Miniltcrs only fiiould leprcfent Chrifts pcrfonin breaking bread, delivcri,:g it to all, bidding, Take, Eat, &c ? Doth the EmbafTageof Chrift, difpenfing of his my lleries, befeeching in his ftead^ confifl in breaking bread, deliver, ing it, bidding Take, Eat ?
Reifly. I Chrift did not perform this aftlon as a common perfon, but as Head ; and therefore they only thi: are commiflioned tofpcak in his name and ftead, muft doit. Let any other fhew their Commiflion. z 1 he Embaflage to the Believers doth confift partly in this, Take, Eat,&c. He argues to the contrary thus, [If It doe, then a non-preaching Minifter who doth thcfe things,m3y yet be an Embaffador of Chrift.] Reply- If by [P. caching] you mean publifliing and teaching to men the doftrlne ofChiift, Iknow no fuch thing as anon preaching Minifter. 2 What if Itbegran- tcd that he that is notfent on the ilmbaffage of publick proclaiming Chrift to the world, be yetfent to bid the Believers of a particular Church Take, and Eat? He adds [then breaking bread is a converting ordinance, as Mr. Prywu held.]
Reply. If you mean, that it w.i) convert} who ever denycd It ? yea or it maybe ufuiU to convert unfound Chriftians tofincerity. But if you mean, that this is the direft end to which it is inftitutcd, to convert men from Infidelity , yea or from Hy- pocrifie,] youmsy cafily f<iy, biu vh^n will you prove that this foilowt h ? Doth Chrift fend Minifters to do nothiK^ bii: convert ? Have they no mcilage peculiar to Eclievers? Doth Ckimicr hy \^'pfo fgnn'] mean ihc v\holeSacran:^ent >
'Bazpag.^z. hs faith [M.B- faith ib, ihat the Sacrament re- ealeth the myftcry of 6od to the eye, but not one text of Scrip ;urc faith fo^ nor is it true ; The myftcry contains not only the thing done by Chi ift ; but the end, ufe, reafon of it : but this is perceivable only by theunderftanding, and the Sacrament abftraftively^rom that word declares it not 3 no not fo much as a pidurc : and therefore the Sacramental AS Ions ofthcmfelves, are not the revelations of themyfterics of Chrift, nor ever fo called in the Scripture.
Reply. 1 If the rccciTingafiions do declare themyfterics of the Gofpel, then the adminiftringadionsdo = But the receiving adlons do, i Cerii.i6. Asoft as ye eat this bread and drifjl( this cup, ye do fhtve the Lords death tiU he come. Are not eating and drinking, aftions ? and is is not Chrifts death and comming part of the Gofpel myfte- ries ? and was it not Chrifts death with its end, (the expiation of fin,^ and his coming with the end, fthe glorifying and fully delivering the Saints) that is here meant ? buc only the meer Death and Ciomming, without the reafon^ ends, orufe? And is not this text Scripture? t Do you think that the Sacrament confiftethonly in aftion , diftinS from words? Are words no aSions > or no part of the facramcntall adion ? Isnotfaying, [Take, Eat, this is &c.] as reall a part as breaking the bread? j Doe
not
S93
no; you therefore dcfcribe a Sacrament which Chrift never inftitutcci, if you fay, If confiftcchofaAlons without words? 4 WedilltBguilh between the words which arc partofthisordinance,[ Take, Eat, this is my body which ib Sec] and the words of a bcrmon, or other doftrine not tflentiall to the Sacrament, i he sacrament mit^h: fig* nifie without one, though not without thcoiher. 5 Did Mr. T. think that £ make the eye an IntelleA tofee Rcafons, Ends andUfesr Or knew he not that I mean, [Ic flieweth by the eye to the liuellcd ? J 6 Doth he indeed think, that the Word revcaU eth truths immediately to the Intelled ? Lee him fpeak to the deaf and try? 7 Can he tell me in what kind of caufality the Word woiks, which the Sacrament doth not al- io work in ? Dothtbe Voice by any natural power of its own, acquaint the underftan* ding with truths ? 1 think it works but per m»dum figni, as a (ign of the fpeakers mind; And that it is not a naturall fign(forthenchildrcn would fpeak without teaching,^ but an inflituted ; when men by agreement do impofe fuch afenfe on fuch a word, and by cuilome ufe it to fignifie fuch a notion^ then it is fit to reveal that notion by the ear to the Intelled : And when they change the cuftome and ufe it to another fcnfe, then it lofeth its aptitude to the former ; So that words are ('under God) in mens own power te fignifie what they pleafe.fAnd I think if all the learned men in the world that ufe one language ('as the Latine^ would inaCouncel by their Delegates, fix a common lenie of moft ufeful and controverted words, it would be a moft excellent work, and thebcft Didionary that ever was made) And may notGod irapofea fenfe uponan adion of the Hand, a; well as on a Voice ? Nay, hath he not done it? Doth Mr. T. think that Dipping, and Walhing have no impofed fignification ? or that they fignifie only to the eye, and not the Intelled? Is it not ufual for the dumb to difcover their mind by figns? In which way feme will readily and ordinarily difcourfe. Nay^I would know, if you will needs look to the Nature of the thing, without Inftitution or Impo- fition, Whether the Sacramentall anions be not more fignificant then the words? Let Mr. r. fpeak of Chrift crucified to an Indian that never heard word of his language, and I think he will make him undetftand more by other figns then by words.
Alfol would know of him what he thinks of Scripture, which is na Voice, butavi* fible fign ; may it nottcach the myfterics of Chriii? And hath not he that made thofc words the fignifycrs of his myfterlcs^madc the Sacramental Elements & adionsfotoo* faying, ^Tha U mybudy which iibio^r,i foryoujothk in remembrance 0 f me ^ Sure Mr.7*. interprecj [T^fcr u my body"] as the Reformed Divines doe, by \^Thii (ignifieth mybodyi] 1 hope he doth. And what if I fay, that Words are the Primary fign (as the written in- ftrument in Law cifes; and the Sacramental adions the fecondary, (as the feal an- nexed,) it would not follow that Sacraments declare not the myfteriej Though indeed as to the matter of fignification they both woik in one kind of caufality '» though God h.tvc inlUtutedone in a kind of (ubferviencie to the other.
And where Mr. T. addes,that [he thinks to be Stewards of the myfteries, is all ontf as to preach the Gofpel,] I would have him be;ter confider two things, i That pare ' of the Gofpel is proper to Believers, z That the very fubftance of the Gofpel is more clofely and exadly comprifed In the Sacraments then any where elfc that I know. The expiatory facrifice is there teprefented, with the facrificing adions. and then follows the fubftance of the Covenant it fclf, [ Take, Eat, this is my,&c.] The Gofpel is the RtvJationand cCrof Chtift and his b^nchts j which is all here done. If that be Gofpel \_Lct him th-it is ihnfly come and drml^ &c.'] then this is. Dnubtlcfs it is not the mecr bread that Ch: ift bids us Take, but Himfelf, with pardon of fin, and right to fal- vation. And P.;/</ talks of the G.i/aihuas. as [before v/ho(ccycs Jcfus Chrift hath b?erj evidently fet forth cruciticd among them] not only to theii ears,bui their eyes. Though
E e c t
394
1 deny not (but as Grotius) worjs may be here chitfly meant, yet I fee not but $Kra-
mcnts and miracles muft be Included. At leaft Mr. T. will not deny but In \ Cor li.iO. [-tatTAr^4A=.7t] is^dcdarativc adion. I conclude therefore that If It bethc aft of an Officer to reprefcmChrift ordinarily in his folemn ftated worllib, Glvlne bimfelf and benefits to his Church, then this in band isfuch; Ifitbenot, there is no ad of office at all, and fo no officer.
HisanfvYcrtomy fecond Argument Is as ftrange as the former. 1 fay, [If there be no command or example in Scripture of any but Minifters adminiftring the Lords Supper,thcn no others may do It ; but &c.] iHetclsmeof iCor.^i.iS. Let a man Kxamrt himfclf, andfo eat,'] Is this a proof;» or fhould Mr. 7". fo importunately expeft that other men ihould be fatisfied with that that fatisfiath him? The Queftion is whe- ther private men may adminifter it ; and he proves they may eat. Eating prefuppofeth Adminiftring, and Taking prefuppofeth Chrifts Giving by his Rcprefenters. When God faith [Wfji-' and your foul [ha U live y"] It doth not allow them to preach, norfup- pofc a hearing without preaching. And whereas Mr.T. [ilihpag.70. his chief ground is 1 Coy.ii.io,zi. that in eating every one took his own fupper before other, and this could not hive happened if they had been wont to receive it from a Minifler that dl- ftributed to all. &c.
I Reply, 1 All (thatlknow of^ are agreed that the 17. t^. fpeaks of their eating at their Lore- fcafls before the Sacrament, where the old communitie begun to be for- gotten, and every one eat and drink of his own, and fo the poor did hunger. Yet the bacrament was abufcd by this, they having fuch a connexionj and there bein" I'uch a divifion at the entrance on it. And it was in regard to this feaft that the Apolfle bids them tarry for one another : that if thy would feaft publickly, they (hould doe it in communitiej if not, do it a: home, z Why tnijbt not thole that came not in toecther receive that which was bleft and delivered to the Church ? We fay not that it was put' into particular mens hands. 3 It Is fo far from being probable (as he conceits) that there wet-e no elders, that its moft probable the number of them was great ; and that thefe Elders were the chief in the divifions i and then each partie might eafily reccire it. (As appears in Ckm.Vioman Epift. to them, where he is fain to advife the V Iders to adminiftcr by turns, becaufe they could not agree.) I here were many Pi ophets c/r. 14. and they were Church guides; And the Apoffles that ordained Elders in every Church, left not this without Chrifts order and ordinances ; Nor do any of the 1 exts that he cites give any probability of it.
fBut I niarvellhow Mr. 7". fliould/)rf£ 91. [think that the Presbyterians and Inde- pendents agree with Papifis about the fufficiencle of R jptifm by Pricfts or Weomen becaufe they do: not qucftion their baptilm nor fc.k aiiy other] when yet he pleads that other may adminifter both ^acramerus,bf lidcs Miniliers ; Why thtn fhould it be a,nullity becaufe done by a P. left or Woman , if his way be right?) Nextheciteth 1 Cdy. 10, 16, i-j^ But he knows that when the wliule Church 1$ mentioned it is ufuall to fay, They do that which the nobler part doth; By [We blefs] is meant the Offi- cers ad, and by [We are partakers] the Peoples and Officers reception. When we fay £ This Commonwealth doth command and maintain their Armic 1 the meanin ' is the Ruling part commands It, buv the whole maintain it. Mr. 7". addes [But forcomniand or example that an ordained Presbyter only Ihould Adminifter the Lords Supper let them thlc fay there is, fhew it.] ' '
^(py. I Th."9u^ftion is of Minifters as oppofed to private men j and therefore you Ihould not thiuft in the te^ms [ordained Preibyrers ] It is a doubt whether Ordi* aaiioo be t.f luch nfccflity to ibe Being of a Minifter, tbac in cafe of nectfTity he
may
395
-;;^r;^^rb7^out it. ^ The fame man h not the fame «hcn he looks another way.t Doubtlefs the Will hatha&reat power over the Underftand.ng .t felf. Iprovetha Mlnlfters did jdminiacr this Saciament j and Mr. r. denycth t not. I put h.m to prove that any otha ever did it i and he cannot. And yet he would have mc moreover Sove that only Mimaers did it 5 that is, Prove the nega- .re m the matter of fad-, vi^, that others did not ; or prove the pofnive excluHon in matter of warrant i^^fU'^^^l on\v that others can (hew no commiffion, but that they are forbidden. But Sir, why n"l youl Chen ad^^ ,he like reafoning in point of InfantBaptifn.?Do ycu (hew com- mand or cxlmple that the ajcd only fliould be baptized > And doe not then prefs us ftilUo Lw cXan" or ex' mple that Infants (hould be baptized. But for my pace, 1 ("hiUveild to Drove my affcrtion in both, and have done. ,,,<-. t
T v« adde this : If Circumcifion were a fign and feal of the nghtcoufnefs of faith, then it Co far declared the my ftery of Faith ; and if it may declare it,Y»hy may not Gof. eel Sacraments much more> . ,
^ M 7*. next words pleafe mc more then all the angry words that ever I had from him f "to mv fclf) in l^refs or Pulpit difpleafe me. I will write them m full Charaders, 5u^ n^^ea all thofe in Parliament, Army. City or Country, that may be concerned in the matter, to lay them to heart , and prevent this gu.lt and curfe : and hofe thaTv lue Mr. T. judgment, to regard it here. iPaftors andTc^chcn ox Presbyter^ Tteach and govern tbcChJb of G.d. lam .(fur ed arc a Divine ln(luuUm and a very mcUJofchnfl, Eph.4.u...,M. I Cor.>z.a8. Aa.i4.iJ..i T.m. i.Tit. rTtoiL^eopUouldycddobedmcc, Heb.15.17. andycild m.menanceUbcraUy, I Cor 9 14 Gil.6.6. iTim.j.i7.»8. if any goe about to extirpate them, let him be ac- curfeda. anenemyto ClrnjlandbnChunh.yi^^^^A^^c^?^ they repent; however lee hi detgnbebUftedandaccurfed;] Ohletthe Churches Guardian ^^ZZ^'f WM Gods providence that even when the Pharifees ask their M.fllonaries [ Do any of r/K/Xr .rP/;^'/AoW/rr./«fe/W] there rticuld be a 2^/c<,rfr^^« at the.r elbow to confr d a hen. by taking his part. And if it be now asked, [ Doe any called Ana- bap fts freak for the Miniftry, their Government and maintenance :] here .s Mr. T. pronouncing them accuvfed as Chrifts enemies that goeaboijt to cxcirpace them. ^ Sue let me fay to him, that I fear m«ch Uft the Dcfign laid by h.mM-J?. «>ay doe mofe o this curfed wor^, then this curfc will hinder it .^x- His P^«^"dmg [a necef- fitythat pcrfons not ordained yet Preacher, of the Gofpel, dobapuze] CThou£h^he words are a molt compleatxquivocation, as ever was !^«ered at Dr//.fc.. ; You njay Take it [not ordained yet to be Preachers, or [not ordamed, but yet Preache.s. ] but i rathet ak it in the laft fenfe. ; If once thofe that are no Mlnifters, muft of necefllty be prcacLe,, and baptizers, and may adminitter Sacramems, and the Juna.cal Go- V rnmem ^ "/denycd Mi«ifters j and all the ^' "'ft-^,^*^^^^^. ^^
Sptizlne judged to caufe this neceffity ; how (liort a ftep .s .t, .f nottothe direft rxtiSfoQ of the office, yet at lealt of all thofe perfons ? and then where will Mr. T- Z\ Ln enough, oFtolJ^^^ parts tofupply thei? places ? fome think Mr. T.. dehgn here^s now on the wheel for execution. Minilters medlmg w.th State matters I am a'akftasUas Mr.T.fobeit he will give me leave to meddle with C hurch m«- Irs. andChriPs matters, and fin •• and lo he do not as I have known fome. x;^^^ when the Aa for fequeftring all that kept not the appointed dayes of Humiliation Tnd Thankfoiv ng was out. aSd Minilkrs'du.lt not keep them becaufe they underftood notstatem>fteri«^ the Scottifli wars they were blazedtobe med-
lerl with S^ie matters, when they were quoad legem, fequcftred for not mdl«lg vrir* St" rmatters,Tnd thai before they underftood them, and lhi»c « an c^raordmary du- ty to uod. .- ^
396
I think the minifterlal Government, is not propeily called Juridicall. And I doe not much diflent from what Is here faid about the preaching of thofctbat arc not In Office} though I ihould havefuHycr explained it.
The 4. and y Errors which Mr.T. purs by^ I had rather have dealt with him aboati then any of the reft : But feeing he wares them now, I muft follow him,
To(he<''. Error [that Magiftratcs arc not under Chrift as Mediator] I intrcatthe Reader to fee how well he anlwcreth what 1 have faid : and whether he doth net repeat his words which i have already anfwered, without taking notice of thfir anfwer. i I fticwed him whercMagiflratcs have a commiflion from Chrift.iVVhen he falth[[hen no Infidel isalawful Magiftratcthat denyesChtift] Hcknew I anfwcred thisjbutthrufts his repetitions on lefs careful Rcadcrf. He may as well argue t then no magiflrate is f om the true God, who denyes the true God.] 3 He faith ^ihen a Magiftrate doing of right to an Infidel againft a Believer, or to one Believer agalnii another, as putting him to death, is an aft for Chrlft as Mediator.]
Reply 1 had hoped no fober Chrlft ian had denycd iv, I fear this dodrinc makes fo little done for Chrift .• But if men once ceafe to acknowledg their tenure from, and dependance on Chrift, and think it their duty to ftand Newtcrs, between him and Mahomet or Infidels, let them look to thtir ftanding, and wonder not if he be as little forthem, yea if he manifeft his authority by judging and confuming them: For if
his wrath be kindled, yea, buta little . 4 Hcaddes; [then a fathers power
over his child ; but fure that is by Nature.]
Reply. Did not I already anfwer this .? Nature it felf is now committed to Chrift for all things arc in his hands. The pillars of the earth arc born by him. He faith, He thinks I have not anfwcred thefe. And 1 fay thats a IhortRcply. 5. Headdes [then if Chrift had not been Mediator, there had been no lawfull Magiftrate.] And why fc? May they not be lawfull under God Creator under the fiift Covenant, though they be all under God Redeemer fince the Law of Grace ? 6 He addcs [ then Domi- niiim fnndatur In Gratia.'}
Reft): Moft cerrain : But in Gratia Redemptionn & univcrfali : noa in Gratia fpcciali jan&ificationii vd adaptionu : except you fpeakof the peculiar right of Siints above others. 7 He yet addes [ May not Believers entitle themfclves to all Power and all mens cftates ? J
Reply. Believers have no power but derived from Chrift, as they are heirs: but de- rivatively, and not as Chrift. And therefore how can they hare that power or eftate which Chrift never gave them propriety in j yeajhath given to othcrs^and forbid them to ufurp ? fo much of that.
§. 20.
The Ancients tock Infant- baptifm, asyou fay, for an Apoftolical Tradition, but rot unwritten. The warrant they fuppofed written; but nottheHiftury de faHo- You might have fpared all the 86. png. where you prove that Papifts take it for an un- written Tradition- We know they aredefirous of any pretence to fet Tradition above Scripture. Yet you know Bellarminc and others commonly prove it by Scripture. The words of B£'fd»«j ('not §. 24. as you fay, but §. 11 J yccid, the text rightly in. tcrpreted to prove Infant-baptifm, and thats all that I defire. I had thought that Cha- tfjiers anfwer to this might hare fatitfied you .' If you have forgot it, peiufc it again, TotJi- 7>lil^-9- f^^P- 10. §-40- &c. & Tom. 4, /. j. c. 9- §.'31- ^''■• Roz^ers hath made you know hc.is of anoihsr Judgment. Mr. Bcdfordtilh mchc bath corrcaed his words
in
Z91
In a later Edition. How could you alledge Dr. FifW without confidcring how you wronged your felf ? Is nothing written in Scripture but expre fly ? Yea , is not that Scripture proof and plainproof J which (hcwes plainly from i'cripture the Ground?, Reafons,and Caufes of the Neccflitie of the pradicc ? Dr. ^ridcanx thought Epif- copacie proveable from Scripture ; and therefore if he thought that Infant- baptifm muft be proved the fame way, he is fure againft you. For Dr. Tafor^ if ycu have rtad all his Bocits, I hope you will no more reckon him among Protelbnts^having fo much of the Hody of Popery in them. Mr. 7*o/<>75J words ('if they be his ) areagiinft ycu in the thing you cite them for- There are tcftimo^ia mwih apcm : and there are tc(limoma apcrta pro fund^tmcnln & prtemi(fi^, quxfunt t»i?ius apcrta dircilc pro cor.clufwm. My audacioufnffs in afferting plaine Scripture proof muft be better re- prcflcd then thus, if you will fatisfie men of reafon and confcience.
§. II.
I fliallpafs over all the words that require no anfwer.He faith /•jj.pi. [for the tenet of the Peoples govetning by vote, 1 know no Reafon why they Ihould be called a 5ed rather then their oppofites,]
Reply. But doe they not errcmore then their oppofites? Did not you even now prove from Scripture thit Minifters muft govern the Cffsrch , and the people obey them? Can that ftand with the I'eoplcs Governing ■> Is it fo fmall a matter to arro- gate the Minifterial Office? and conft quently dcftroy it ? You pronounced them even now accurfed as enemies toChrilt that goe about to extirpate the Miniftry. The Lord keep you from drawing any of thncurfe on your felf. But lay altogethet: and fee what ufe you leave for a Miniftry. [i Others may baptize : yea , there is a neceflity (becaufetheMiniftcr will not rebaptize, &c.) that fome not ordained , ycc preachers, do it. i Others may adminifter the Sacrament of the Supper. 3 Others may preach publickly. 4 And if the people may and ought to govern, what is a Mini- ilry to be upheld for? Or at lcaft,how fair a way is here to their extirpation i He adds [The excommunication which the Scripture fpeaks of, fo far as I difcern, is no where made a part of Government, or of the Elders office any more then the peoples.]
Reply- The term Excommunication, is not in the Scripture ; but that which is aequipoUent is ; when a man is obftinate in a hainous fin, after private admonition and publick , Ihould not the Minifter charge the people in Chrifts name to avoid fa- miliar communion with them? and is this no more a part of the Elders office then the peoples? muft not the Minifter do it as an authoritative ad of an Officer of Chrift, Yihich clave iWfiery ante the people are doubly bound to obey ? not only raUoncm<f terne, f'as they muft from another ) bur alfo by virtue of the J. Commandement, and that of Chrift. [He that defpifeth you defpifcth me ? ] We allow the people judicium d'lfcretionu whether the Minifter fpeak according to Scripture: and we allow them ailuakm cxccutioncm, by an obedient avoiding the communion of the partic : Buc have they alfo the authoritative judgment of dlfcretion, gui-dance. Commanding non- communion ex offi.io in Chrifls name ? or have Minifttrs none fuch > Do you think Minifters have any more power then others in preaching? If they have , thtn why not about thisfubjeft as well as others ? to apply thecommand [with fuch no no: to eat] to particular perfons, and charge the people to obey ? what is that govern • log which even now you gave to Minifters .= If it lienor in authoritative guidance, and charging on men the duties prefcribed by Chrift, T know not what it is ; And how falls it out that it extendeth-not to the duty of avoiding communion with fuch perfons, as well as to other duties? Alfo, flaould not Minifters decide to wicked
Bcc 3^ men
39?
men ihclr mlfcric and Gods writh by a particular application ? And is not this part of it ? Mijr I not pronounce an obftin;ite (inner to be a child of the DcvU as Pattl did Elmos ? or to be in the gall of bitterncU,3nd bond ot iniquitic, and have no part or fcllowlTiip, &c. a Pete, did Siino'i} or one that is inan onjuUified ftjtc? at leaft, one that with whom the Church lliould have no fjmiliir Communion ? And doth this belong no more to the Elders then the people ? arc the keyes of the K ingdomc of Heaven given as much to private Chriliians as to Officers? or do no: the keys reach to this? When F-j/// charged the Coi intbiaus toakoui (^exectiirue) that wicked perfon. did he no more then belonged to the people? But you fay [ In antlq«.i:y its appa- rent ou: oi Cyprim, that the people had a great hand in Elettions, Excommunicatl. onS; Abfoiutions. ]
Reply. 1 As to EleAions ; the oeoplci consent is coKdi tie pne (J i*anon to the etccU" tion fuccefsfuUy of the miniftcrial office : and this ?/4//o\j/i^(/'j -and not dlieftly per tn(lhutioncm. For who can rule a Peoples Willi againll thtir wills i* Confent is the fuccefsof peifwaiion : and therefore the peoples confent muft be the like condition of the plenary title of an tldcr over a particular Church, liut whats this to authority cfgovetmaent P to confent to foveraigntie is not to be a Soveraign- 2 When the Church had no Chiiftian Wagiiirates, how could any man be guide to a l-cople but by their confent i" or calt out, or take in fuccefifully wi hout it? 3 Didyoue\er rfad in Cyfr'tnn, or any man worth the reading in all Antiquity, that the people had any more in excommunicating and abfolving, then io judge per judiciim difc/ctionui and to confent to the Officers-authoritative cenfure, and obediently to execute it by hold- ing communion, oravoiding it ? 4 Doe you not find it fequently in Cyprian that there ii an Excommunication and Absolution tvhich are parts of governmcnc,and be* long more to the Officers then the I'eoplc ? Yea, and fuch rigid cenfures ( keeping men lo long before they would abfolvc them after a fall, though they begged it in geat foenitence; and iharply taking up the very Confeifors thatprcfamedto intercede tor their readmiflion ) that vrere they now ufcd, what Tyrants, and Pupes and Anti- chriih (liculd wc be called ? who would have thcu^htthat i>\x.T that hath faid fo much to the contrary, (hould fay fo much for Popular Church-government ? He adds [Nor is a peifon a Stparatiil for that i enet, but for dividing pridifts.] 1 1 had thought he had been a Sepiratift in judgment , that doth not praftifc his judgmenr. 1 Is it not a dividing pradJce to piaftife popular Voting Goveinmen'.?N3y worfe then aftual ^paratfon, as I'ubverting the very cifence of *- hiifts Offices^ if not Churches. I confefs I doubt whether that can be a true particular political Church of Chrift where the Government h in the peoples Vote. For every fuch Church ellcntially conlitteth (asaCommon»vvcdlch doth^ of a P. if' DiiigeHS& N/O'ciativc irnperans, & Parsdi- •iMz & impcr.na. And in Chi ilis Church the foimev arc his Officers.
Yet Ictraeadd , that we give the people the fame things (in \hcir judicium difcreii' i»»M, and in execution ) which fcber congregational men ddire. Only wc are ready to prr/e, i: is net Government ftrid'y fo called.
As tothcncxt pilfage about i^/d/. 7 »6. Ycu" anfwcr is more and moieftrange. When 1 prove clearly a [faife I eacher] and [ one that tcacheth falfly] to be the fame; ycu will difpovc it by faying that i^a f^tlfc Teacher] and [hearing falfe dofttine] are not the fame. As if it would prove the objefts to be divers , becatafe the objett and i'ci':fe or manner of Reception be divers 1 or as if ic had been Ch.iftsendto tell by what fenfc they might come to know falfe Teachers, -i^i^ by Hearing ; and not by what ligM I When the quefi ion was whether the coldnefs of the water , or whitcnefs of the wall were a tign by which you difccin it to be cold , white ? or the form Co de-
nomioatirg
399
nomlnatbg it? You talk of [feeling] thecoldnefs, and [feeing] thewhitcneftj as if that were any thing to the queltion, which was not dc Rcctptioney but de objeSlo.
Bu: (though I dare not be fuddenly confident, yet^ mc thinks, I now (with giad- ncfs) fee my raiftake about this Text. And it did lie in the mlfunderftanding the word \_PfciiHO'pt(>phetJ, falfc prophet] i I took [Prophet] to be f.tmc with [ Teacher] and z I took [falfe] to be fpoken of him ab opcrc, from his doSiin: , and not a Hcfc- ^u formd & author itatc, with a pretence of the contriry. I inconfideratly judged as Varxium lee. that P^ophHa eft Dolior ycritatis. Plcudo-prnphcta Donor mcnd.uii^ and as Pifcalor, that thefe falfe Prophets were fa/fi DoHo-res qui Ecclcfir proponum dngm.na cx'u'ialia. So alfo Calvin, Bic But 1 now think i that the word [Prophet] is not taken for a Teacher as fuch ; but in the ftrid and ufuil fenfe, for [one fent of GoJ ex - traordinarily to lead men out of Errour, or bring men to fome focciall Reformation, as receiving his DoftrinCj or his Commiffion, or both, byafi immediate InfpJraticn orRevtlation from Heaven.] z That they are called [falfe] as we call the Papilla [Pfeudo CiUhticof\ or others [Pfeud:'ch'ifiia!ios il that is, they are counterfeit l^ro- phets ; they pretend faifl/ to be fent or infpired by God j and fo to be PropHetf, when they arc no Prophets. As If a man come to a City in the Kings name, and f.iy, He is a Herald, Embiffadourj or fpecial Melfenger ; and another fay, Take heed of him) he Is a counterfeit Meffcnger : the King fent him nor. Now in this ki\k it is plain thac [his Dof^rine] miybeoneofthe frnits we may know him by, and it Is not idem per idem, as I faid, and as in the former .fenfe it muft be. And 1 the rather now incline to this Interpretation alfo^ becaufe I rtfolve thac Aufluis rule muft be followed , of in- terpreting Scripture in the moft comprehenfive fenfe, where there is no fpecial reafon for a reftiidion or liiuication ; And therefore I rtiall take the [fruits] in Generall, as applvable cither to Dodrine orLife,wirhout reftraining it to either ,as Dcodalc doth,and the New Aunotitions(and not as moft interpreting i: of dodrine alonejnor as fome,of pradice alor>e.)Yct 1 am ftil perfwadcd that the Text inrendeth praftlce as much if mc much more then Doftrine j And for the DoSrine «hich I delivered hence, ic is fully manifeft in feveral other Scilptures.P(;/c/'and///^<? give us the defcription of the Decei- vers of thofe times>as men of enertnous lives. And P.i/W prophefies that they ihall hold the fame courfe in the laft times. iTim.^. i. totheio. Ir was they that having a form of ^odlinefs without rhe power do creep into houfes, and lead caprive fiily women laden with fins, and led away with divers lults, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truih, &:• who were the fclf-iovers, covetous, boiiierSj proud, blafpheiTierSj difobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural aff:ftion, truce, breakers falfe-accufers, incontinent, fierce, difpifers of the good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pkafuies above God. Thefe are the fruits they (hall be known by And it is ufuall for God togive up the Rejedors of truth to vile affi-ftlon* and wicked lives {RoM.i.io, to the end, &paffim) I will add Grotius words on this Text, [ A 713 r /c 2 f 777.7;' AU7Z0. ] cx opcribui miquitalu ut infra dicitiir. c.j.-jzi, Alqui d.cat aliquUJim d'SluffiCii pietjtcm abiflu vcl ff}3xi?f;e fimuUri : fane, fed vsrtim e(i iUud Mimi ^ Citoadnaturamfi£liYcciderHnL[uam. Ly&is:b.i)j>vyyo:'ovJ)jjJiu'j' aym 'ir^.d" czL^nx r Tyorru" 7» *07W. Intcrdtim mora, aliqud , intcrdiim atUcntiom fda, opm eft. Sccerni, inq/nt Ciceio, h'andus amicus n vero,& internofct uvi poteft adhibit a dilgcmid, qiikm omnia fue.ua & fimuUta afmceris & veris, Non diu proficient inquit Paulus, ?;.<« infijiicnttaiUo'urnmamfcfta fitt. &c. Fru£lus coram hieffefolcnt^ quod pcrpeffiones dc-i fugiunt^ allcUant cos qui in ■vuiis h/trent . p/Afertim opttlextiores, queflionci movent nihil ficientci ad profc^iwn pkutiSi Uhcntcr obtrcCla/it aliis, prtcfcctlm m dl^Haupofiui , ui -
400
CO. libcrtatii fpcciefe afitA pooulum jnClciit^ & ad ifias res dogrnata fua accommodant ^ ut v.dcrc ejl in utraque ad Tim. in ]ui. Epifl. d;- Pet- a. aique ita eficndunt (e tales tjje qiialcs ; tvna fnnt, faftitefoft edii& isvidctttix p.'cnjs, mj^cdcos, avaros.mque tAmali'^ enoi avoluptatibus quamcxi^tmarizolunt, hi iifdcm locis vidcrc c(l. ^l^me ftquit dili* gcnter confant cum lis q^t* de Co/.ntbo, deque N^colw^ aut fi, &c.'] If yoa would have 'more proof of it, Mr. T- when a little came to himfclf, told you pug. 8 j . that it is [the courfeot many Souldieis andcthers, who againft the denyal of able Teachers,to whom the teaching of the Goipel is committed, love to get into the Pulpits of the ableft men. to vent their peculiar conceits, and oft-times thcii pernicious errours; not regar- ding to preach to the ignorant the dear truths of faith and a ho'y life in places where they h3V2 no preacher, but to new Conrerts to pervert them, and draw rhem from their able Teachers ^and todifquiet them and their Congregations, by tiivolouicTceptions.] l\inowvcry many of thefe men j but not one of many which are not Anabaptiftj.- And the moft of them fhow ignorant foever^ arc bo^flers of themfelves, and delpifers of their Brethren ; fpeaking in that languigeas Mr. T. doth, when he lb viiifiethall the Miniftcrs that were at the dtfpuce (as that they weigh little with them that know them &c. ) when I think there were fome as learned , and many as godly as himfelf; aad give 35 good teftimony of it by doft.'ine and life.
Mr. 7". will never prove, that by L(heep>s cloathing] is not meant the fairnefs of their pretenceyjbut their good lives.
5"ure he hath not read Hnbfons Book, or elfe he duift not defend or fo excufe it. And doth he not know how the Prefs do h fpawn this kind ofvermine fo thick, that they are among ut as the fross and locufts in Egypt, overfpreading the Land?
For hisoftcnce at my forboding (as he calls it,) let him i caft his eye upon poor H'd'a, and rcmembtr the cu: fc he paft even now. z Review M:. B.iylyflnd fee whether he railed or prophciied.
§. iz.
The fpecch which Mr. T. is here blamed for, wis uttered more then once in Pulpit andprivn.te fpecch. It was not dc fa£lo praterito only, [ihat no one Country were difciplec] nor of ihe manner only [th Jt it was not done altogether] or [by the Mngi- ftratc.] but it was in anfwer tocu: argument from iW.7M8. 19. which fpeaks ^c Df/j/ZSjof . tS: .Minilierial Duty of Difciplin^NationSjand to what we fay from the Prdphefies that God will defiitii'O Difciple Nations:as if i It were not Minifteis duty to endcivor the Difcipling of any whole Nati'-n ^forihen he mult endeavour to Difciple Infants) nor a part of the worl' ofthit Ccmmiffion. 2 Or that Chrift would never accomplilh it in this worldj (wh.n hi haih promifcd it fo oft 5 ftemy Adcition,- p/*^ 3^9340.^ As for what he faith lA McfcsznA /Wagiflratcs , if you pcrufc what I have faid to that already, I think it will appear that he is no where more vertiginous then in this. He concludes with a [flcightingofmy curfe, /?.^^. 217 ] where I only defire the cure of his under- fianding.or if he p-cceed topubilh errour^that it may not fucceed ; and this he calls [% cuile.] It is bu: futh a curfe as I defire to my fdf, that the Lord would not fufFer me to bean inlhument of wronging his Church and Truth by mymiftakesj orif£ have done it ignorantly in this or any other writing, that he would forgive it , and (hew me my error, and let me live to right the Church and Truth fo wronged. This is mv dayly prayer to God, efpecially as to th'fe points where I find my diflcrt to my brethren focfFcnlivc And the like fogivmefsl defire ofiM^-.T.if / have any where un- advisedly or ignocjintly wronged him : which I know myfraU foul is fo'prafle to that
its
its moft likely I have , though I fhould not fee wherein j for I know my cor- rupt nature will fhewitfelf in all that I do. ) And I promifc him if God fliew me any weighty particulars of wrong, particularly to confefs them. In the meantime I profefs that the roughnefs which appears in my writings on this Subjedi was provoked from theconfiderationof theCaufe.andefpeciallyof the deep wound given to the Gof. pel by the Anabaptifts of this age, and the attempts in hand j 3nd tl.c fearful danger that the Miniftry and Churchcsof Chrilt are now inby rcafon of them ; ButwhenI think of my truly beloved Brother Mr.T. !c not only grieves me that he is fo deep in this Caufe, but aUo that I am forced to fpeak fo hai Ihly to him, ( which 1 knew would difpLafe him) for his Caufcs fake. It hath ccft mc dearer to endeavour the Churches deliverancCj and therefcuing of an endangered Miniilrv.md Gofpcl, then it hath done Mr. T. And therefoic let him not blame me, if I let not all go lb patiently as fome cxpeft.U I lb oft ventured my lifeagainft ihem thatthreatned ihcfc herctc fore- Ice me be fuffcrtd to fpeak a lliarp word cr two againfl thofe that have brought them into as apparent hazzaid j (except I be a ftranger to , or utterly miitaktn in the com- plexionsof thcpieicnt Agents and nff-.iiSj ) 1 am ccftain, have brought our facrcd i?rofcfl[ion under greater obloqiy and contempt. And lee meaddc f though I can- not m4:e Mr, T. believe that 1 call him not a Hcrctick, ) that I am lb far from the violcrice and unpcaceablencfs that Mr.T. doth charge me with, thacl am wholly of. M . 5\/7>j7;('j jiidgment fin his late Sermon for Uniry^ that men for Infant baptifm,'^ j(nd againll it, Ihould quietly and lovingly live togeiher in the fame Church And 1 fliou'd t'.nderly love fuch as differ f om me in thif, and have communion with them,, if ! hey were of my charge ; fo belt when they have modtlily given a reafon of their judgment., (if called thereto^ they would defift from further foil (citing others to their way •, ( as [ would do my fclf on the contrary fide, if I were called to be a private Member of a Rebaptizcd Church, and Mr.7". were my Teacher. ) But if they think they are bound to take all feafons and advantages, by fecret follicitatlons and publique diftuvbing contradidions, to propagate their opinions, and bring all others to them, as if Gods Glory lay upon their fo doing, I know no way of having peace with fuch men, were the differenccfmal'er then this of Infant bapcifm ; but I think all good Chiiftians Ihould avoid their Communion, as the fire-brands ot the Church and enemies of its Peace, Unity,and Profperity.
It fecms to me God ordered Mr. T. to tranflue Cyprinns Epiftle to the difgrace of his Caufe with ihe Vulgar themfelves. For none can be fo blind as not to fee in it the Antiquity of I nfant-baptifm, which is all that we urge it for. Only obferve for the right underftanding of ir, that the objedlon that the Councel argues againft, is In- fants incapicitie or uncleannefs before the 8. day ; and therefore the Arguments are only to the confutation of this, and not to give you the Grounds that warrant bapti- zing Infants } for thofe are fuppofedf the thing being unqacftloned. Here was none that raifed any doubc whether Infants Ihould be l>ap:ized } but only whether before the eighth day.
F f f LETTERS
LET T E R S
That paiTed betv^eeii M'. BAXTER
AND
W' T 0 M'B E S Concerning the Difpute.
404
IT goes agalnft my mind to trouble the ^,ider with thefe followiug Letters between A/r.T. and me, (But his ^= lations ha^ve made it necejjary ^that it may appear ^Whe- ther all 7ny endeaa)0ur was not to keep ojf^ if popibly 1 could, from appearing againji him in this Qdufe in ivriting . nor didle<ver dejtre the Di/pute butmeerlyto jhiftoffwri- ting^ when his followers dr(xve me on to it : and had far rather hani)e been quiet from both : but it wa^ beyond my power to attain it without the betraying the truth. For I difcerned a jlrongprobabdity of his Vefign was to harvegot Jomething from me ^ and then haa:e publijhed his anjwer to it (which he now dcnyes not^ as /uperficially as he did by others j or elfe hanje forced me to df claim the coiitefl , that fo it might he carry ed abroad either that I was confu- ted^ or that I durjl mt difpute it. After his Followers had earneftly prejfed mc to write my Argumejits , arid I to put it hy^ had told them J thought njerbal dijputing more con* *venie?it^ if they mufl needs ha^ve one^ this following I re- ceived from Mr, 1 ombes .
for
405
For my Reverend and much Honoured Brother M'. Richard Baxter ^l kidcterminjier t thefe.
I R:i
TcYce'ivc byfomfpccch vniib Philip MutinCyihjtyou prnpeundadif- fut'ing the point in diffccncc betvixai m and you About Infanl- baftiim in feme of en way of fpcuh, and to have me declare ff>y a/' inmcnts again fl it. Open difpute by words for a g/cat number of veafons I aff'cd not : my affairs, and thejlate ef your body andbu- finejs are lificly to ma\e it uncertain, and to protrafi the time : try Argtmcms arc to be fccn in my Writings. This it in cffift rny plea again [I it ^ that it is niU-wsrfhipybccaufc not appointed by God, Tlx mop expedite and furejl way I conceive to bring the contr ever fie to an ifjuc^u for vou in a S)llcg>fm or two written by you to produce what Medium you have to prove a Divine inftitutienofPcdo'baplifm^whichbcingwiittcnmay the better be examined, verbal con- fercnce h Ir/^. deliberate, and more unfatis factory, if you ca7inot your felf write, if you (hew inaprlni'ed Author the beft Argument you know for it^lt may perhaps fetve the turn as well. Ilcave it toyourfclftodoas youfeegoodyandrefi
Bewdlcy, .9c/;M. 1649.
Ycur loving Brother and Fellow fervant in Chrift John Tembcs.
To my Reverend and much valued friend Alf. Tombcf, Prencbcr of theGofpelat Bewdley.
Sir, T^Hou^h your people my neighbours have much room in my affcdJons, and I heartily
dcHre their unity and ftetlfaftrKfs; yet do not think that I have a rr-ind to rake upon me to be their Teacher and ;o play the Bidiop In your Diocefsmuch lefs to be fo lude as to challenge ycu to a DiTpute. But fome of ycur people having been feverall times folliciting me to do fomething towards the determining of this conti overlie, I Ull tcld them that I thought a difpute the fitteft way ; but they told mc that yc u rcfufed it. The mcflcngcr that came on Saiurday, came on the like errand, and before I uudetftood that he came wHh your confent and privity, I told him I vrould do nothing without a
Fff 3 call
4o6
call from more of your people, snd wirhou: your confen:. The offer I mide to hlin I now mike agiln to you : that if to you or your people a debate fecm neccffary and defireable, (for I or my people do noc defire I: much^ b-u: affeft quletnefs ) I (hall (if Godenablc ms ) fpenda dayor two In publick conference wich you fas far as my ftrength will bear. ) t Or if you fo abfolutcly refufetfaar, that there is no hopes of it, I offir, that if you will preach two Sermons againli it, and I two for it, and fo let fall the debare,and lea^e it to the peoples judgment, I ihall agree to it. g If you abfolutc- ly rcfufe both thefe (which feem to me the only means) if you can contrive how to make a (hort difpitchj and give me fufficient affurance of it upon equall terms before webegin^ Khali confentto wiite. But to write wichout fuch affurance I cannot for thefe reafons. i 1 have ground enough to be confident that it will never be coded while you and I both live, except either be cofiVinced, which I difcern to be unlikely Though for my own part , I refolvc to yeeld to the moft difgraced truth and to fearch as impartially as I can i yet I am fomewhat confident that you arc in an errcur , and you are more confident that you are not, and fo we are likely to remain, z If I llnuld wifte fo much time on fofmalla thing ( compara* tivelv.) it would wound my confciencc. j Effiecially being ignorant In fo many far greater, which I am bound to ftndy in the firft place. 4 I am engaged in more work already then I am able to goe through j having one Treatife in the Prefs, whereof part ij unfinilhed, and another or two at leaft under hand: befides publique preaching which takes up all my time, fave one day in a week at bcft j which one day I beftow in the aforefiid writings : .and befides the pradicc of phyfick for the poor which their neceffi:y compels me to, and which taketh up very much time, j The weaknefs of my body is fuch, that I am able to ftudy but 1 or 3 hours in a day, befides my fick dayes when I can do nothing. 6 I have tweeter and more pleafing work for my thoughts- 1 would not fteepthemin fo bitter a fubjed as this unpleafingcontroverfie, and fo lofethe reft of the comforts of my life for a world. 7 If you and I fhould write many tedious volumSj the people would be no more able to difcern the truth, then they are from what is already written. 8 I am afraid of giving my people fo ill a.orcfident as toftrain at aGnatand fwallow a Camel ; to wafte their precious time and thoughts and ipeeches on fuch a queftion, while a ioo,each of incomparable greater moment arc
unfiudyedand unknown. Now to your Letter. Whereas you think either
writing, or referring you to fome printed book , will be the moft expedite and fure way, I wonder how you canforce your felf to think fo 1 It is many years Cncc you begun your fclf to write with l>l\ MTr(l};lly i'Ar.h Ji^&c. aid you have not yet expedited the bufinefs : no manyeildech, nor doe you fee me any nearer an end then when you bcgui, except wearinefs caufe any partie t^givcwver. 9 Befides your body is healtht'uller j I difcern you can better fit at your Itudy 8 hours, then I cin one. 10 And I perceive you content your felf mote cafily then yout Reader : you marvel* that your iooks fitishe not, and I maivel you (liould chi.ik them fitisfaftory. 1 1 Ma- ny people will think that when they cin fay (you have -infwered it) that an argument is overthrown : the vulgar Chriftians in fo great a difficulty being little able to difcern the infufficiencie or fallacies, i z And bft.y, I am like to live on earth but a while and therefore as I have more need of other thoughts, fo youaielike tohavethclaft word, which with moft will give you the conqu^ft.
^ Bat why you (hould wifli rne to refer you to a printed argument, I know not, they being all extant in your hands already, and you pretending to anfwer to the fubftance of almoft all. That youflionld deny an open verball difputc, I cannot but much-won. dit your affilrs will lure give you more Icafure for z or j hours difputc, then many
months
407
months writing, and fo I am fure will the ftatc of my body. Truly Sir the difadran"
fed in this Conttovetfie, and have all at your fingers ends, and fo confidcn: in ycur
are
aufe, that you make light ofall that may befaid againftycu by all the Divinci that ,- I fl ihould refufc a conference en ivch advantages, I (liculd thir.k it
wcrcalmofttoycildmy Caufe naught. S\x, cf'my fit ft three cfFcrs, if you plcafeto ycild, 1 find the people like bcft of preaching, which I leave to your choice, and reft
An unfeigned lover of the Trtith c7id Tou,
Richard Baxter.
To the Reverend Mr. Richard Baxter Preacher at Kidderminfierf thefe prefent.
Sir, COwc of my Neighbours comcivcd It vpould be their beflwjy to refolve their doubts about
baptijm^toknow what arguments you could brifigfor Jnfm-baptifffi, and agalnft deir being bapti^edj?ioimth[}cnei/?ig thepyeiendtd baptijm they had in Infancie. H hcreulon mtb my pri-vnie eame one to you ^ upon whole relation of your anjtver to him, I rrrctc toyou^ and upon receit of your Utter tome 1 think good to let you undcrfland that If aid Kot 1 utterly refufed open dtffute, but tbit I of eicd it not, it beivgfitfor fchools and not for con.mn Auditories, entered into ufuaUy with amwofnies and er^gcrnefs to obtamafupfofedviCloiy, mcn.igcd with heat and n.Hltitudc of words with Anjwcrs crd 7{cplie}, not (o deliberate as were requifite tofettle any ones judgment, and ufualy mifapynhcndedby Audiicrs ^ who ecmmonty tckc him to have the better whofpeal^s moft, ending ufuaUy m feme wrangling or fomethivglilie it, fcUowedwith mifrepurts,aeeempanycdwith dijcrdcrly throngmgs, con' fufcd noife, avd mayiy other incchvcnieneics i in Jo muh that except in cafe of betraying truth by declining it, I can hardly bring my f elf toyeild to it. Md whatever you ecncetve of my advantages, you may if you will, and perhaps doe («0JV thatyeu hmefuch advantage inyeur ready wit'cndfpeech. and the favour and gcr.eroU aceluwatm to any thing that u faidfor the fuperflition cf Infant- baptifm, as to bring tirngs fo about that tie event [hall be crying down trutb,and difg, ace ofn.y pcrjcn. Nor have your difparagmg ffeeehcs of my mi- tings without animadvcrfwns en ihimccmvfunicatedto me, or your carnage /it, er not long after the receiving of my Lei fer, encouraged mc to hope for c U candor f ovi you m thu matter. Tor prcaehirg, fth it belongs to you to maintain the d.vine Inflitution of Infant- bapufmy J fhaUbe willing to examine what you fay, when you have [aid what you thnf; good for Infant baptifm, if 1 may obtain n copy of your Sermon^ which you wiU own, and if it fatupe we ifhatt ccnfefs Hi if not, in a Sermon m the fame place, or elfe where, ijhaligivea di- flmil andpliiin anjwer to it.
For Writing (ivhieb I lil(C bcfl) 1 dcftrc net to put you to any tedious or voluminous way, hut that in the mjl cnn,pend:ou> wjy of SyUogtfms , yca,ifit maybe in one Medium sou put the flrengtb of all ih.it yoH can fay, Ferfrnt dtfpatcb you may bang Difputant vr J r J £> i ■> Opponent
4o8
opponent, ajfurc your ftif my anfiver-tvilibc oj fbort m your ariumcnt will pomt^ mui the more ■^oucontyrili^ecping toihc point, the more fatafallory it wiUbe.
ifyoH conceive this point of leffc moment _, others conceive otbeiwifc : Though Tufli. f cation, Redemption, &t. b: of greener moment, yt not all ynu difceurfe about them, Jfitrvcrcyet tha being of frequent praClice needs pc<hafi rcjo.'ution before other points ib.ll come not into fofrcquintufe. You Jay inyour /}phori[ms, pag.149, the neg^'cfl of Sacraments it a b<each ofib.Jtcond Commindmcnt- If fo^hnv cm a godly man fafely live in ncgUcl of B iptifm ? The cniuirie after it is ill judged a framing at a Gnat and fwal- ioivr/ig^ a C.itacl as our Sivinnr meant ^ M l.t^ 14.
lna-Ahr,d^ oiy d.dniin^^opcndifpiitition duth not m^ me thinli f^^y Caufe naughty but ynur p*!innu!g to give ta your arguments in writing, whereby we might better judge of them then upon a vet b.' II conference, mal^rs me imagine your Cnufe U not good cfpccially confdcrlng your ufe of ind.rccl Arguments to create prejudice, and your not dcnycd prejudice^ which how it can fult with an impartiall examination of truth J do not fee.
Other things, inyour Letter to me ^ I let pafs^and a ft
Bewdlcy, Sept. 10 ■ Yours as is meet
1649-
John Tombcs,
Sir,
1 Rcceivrti you-«, and ihercwifh from five of your neighbours their dcfircs of en- gaging me in this cowtroverfie; you mention many iiicoovcnienci.s of veiball difputCj mod of which I acknowledge piobablc : but the inconveniencits of writing fargreater^ asf exp tflVd toyou. Ific were among the rude Vulgar, much of that you faymight fallout: butlhaveno fuchdellreto bcptiblique^ but that if you like ic better, bi.t'crc acompttcnt number of the intelligent , 1 am content. If you think that I dtfi e the difi^r iceof yourperfon, yotj are lefs free f:om finful cenforioufnefs then i took you to be ; My difparaging fptechcs of your writings being notpaiticu* larly expreffcd, I am uncapable of underftanding what you mean. I know not ihat ever I faid more 3;^ainlt ihem but thnt they were in man)»thing$ tome unfatis- fafiory, , and my reafcns I was ready to piocluce; And I pray you how could I choofc bn: yield to you^ and be of your judgment, if I thought your writings found in the main ? fo that you li cm offended thnt I i^o not believe as you, which I cannot yet help) my judgment being not wholly in the power of my will. I hat you fti'iuld fo «xpfS from mc animadverfions on your writings, fccmethto me exceeding ftrange ; I have given you my reafons why 1 am loth by writings to engage in this controverfie at all: much more tobeginlnaway of Animadveifions. What my carriage was that cCnded you, as you cxprcfs not, fo 1 knownot, and thercfeye your reproof muft needs be vain: I asked your meffcnger, who anfwercd that he {aw no mifcajriage,
except
405?
excep: ir were my revealing your Letter to three that were p.efent, whlcbhecon- fefftih fo be his own fault; whenever toM me cf any dcfiics of lecrfclc; nrihndl reafcn to think.ofany, it bting about fopublick a bufincfs : and ifthat dodifcou- rage ycui cxpedations of candor, your ch2ri':y is not n.uch ftionger then others, whatevt: your jwd^raent may be. Formy p.^rt, that no finifttr ends (Jiould make mc diftlr from yc u , ycu may conjefture by thife rtafoiis , i I am nearer of of your judgment In moft other Centre vtrliesi that I have fpoke with you about , then to molt mens I know, and therefore naturally fliculd be more inclined to value you.smthis. i I have volunt-nily been mere prodigal of my reputation inputting out that Pamphlet of Juftification , whic4i / well knew was like to bk^ft my reputa* tion with moll Divines, as containing that which they judge a more dangtious errourthen Aim'-pxdo-baptifm, andthe iflue hath an- fvvcred my expcdarion : lam new To *hiffedat by chem , that 1 feci temptation enough to fchifm in my diTcontents. j 1 am f as it were ) a dying man , and if I Ihould rcfufe truth to prelcrve my reputation, I were utterly unexcufable. For the prejudice you mention, I muft confcffe I Have (omc, not againU this only, but againtt every thing 1 judge to be an .errour. Nor doe 1 know how any man can debate any point without fome prejudice, except where his judgment doth wholly lufpcnd, or hangs in <tqniiibiio. I perceive you yeild not to that way of preaching, as I propounded 3 nor do you offer mc any aflurance of a fiiortconclufion in writing / but only that your anfwer fliall be as ihort as my arguments will permit j as if the Quefiion were al- ready ftated betwixt us, and as if there were but one Qucftion to be debated, and I had nothing to obJed againft your way , as well as you againft this , and you were relolved in all to doe nothing but anfwer. And why is not the bufinefs yet ended be- tween you and your Antagonifis, fo many years fince begun? In a word Sir, no way pleafethmefo well as writing, if ycu wiUfind outa way of quick difpatch, and give me affurance of it before we begin. Which if ycu fend not in writing, if you pleafe toappoint a time when lean, 1 will come to you, that we may both agree of the way, and ftate the Qutftion.
5/Vj 1 am an unfeigned lover gf Truth j PeacCt and Yoitt l^ddcrm, Sept. 1 1 . (for j Ifjiovf it is fa meet )
* Thii rvas when my /jpho. ■lifms came out firfl, when many angry men ivi.re face againd them. But I cdnfcfs fince that j have found as brotherly lOzing dealing about them as I could dcfire y and more then 1 did ex fed j and that from the moft Divinci that ibaveto doe with.
Rich. Baxter.
g S
To
410
To my Reverend and very much valued Friend and Brother,
Mf.Richara Baxter, Preacher at Kidierminjiery
thefe prefcnc.
Sir, 'TO prevent if/mccefjaij altercatiom, 1 return only this to your la/l Letter. There rvere [omeof my Neighbours and Auditors that doubting ivk the/ by their Infatn- baptifm they did the duty of being bapti-:i;rd into the nnmcofCbnfl, cunc to me for refolution • gftd breaufe of your l^n/nvn iuflifymg pttdo^b^ptifm, your parts, and integrity, they judged it meet before they ivere bapti-Kedito linow your groundi .for Pado-baptijm, Icfi ihcy (Ihiu'd be judged iijfh; rchtreupan being Informed by ne that f?!y exception flgainft Pado-baptipn is, thaiititinll-yvoflMp for voaKt of divine iu(iiUition . the only w^y to fatUfe them was f) prove n diVitie luilitution of ?<tdO'baptifm , rehich might be be (I done by a few Sylio* ^ifms in VDriimg j vohieh if you pleafe togfatife them in, they tviU examine it lljanlifuUyi if not, they rviU tal^c it as if it rv ere granted that yon can fay no more then others have dene in print for Pxdab^ptifmy vphlch -anUbe ta\:n to be fufficicmtyanftvcrcd till it be. fhevped vheveinthe anftvers to them are defcElive. And this is propounded for the (l)ortefjiway reccan devife to come to refolution. I am very forry that you art fo vexed with mens frotvtrdnefs upon your rvri ting: it wot wy folly ilxil in my awn cifc I laid their oppofition to t^te fo much to heart : Ifl may do any thing to a (Tift you for your eafe in what we agree, I (hall bereadyasmy time and i)ujincfs will permit. Inlhemeantime leavingyou and your wjyes to the Ahnighties guida'cce^ 1 remain « Ecwd'ey^ Sif!.i'\. 'lour reall Friend and Fellow.rervant
1649. In the Lord,
fehrt Tombes,
Sir., T oftcrtd you in n\y hft (for the avoidance of the inconvenicncics which you feared -Iby a publick difpucc ) todifpatchit before fome fcled company j orelfe In 2 or j Sermons j or (if you would yield to none of this) to write, lb be it you would fiiit aifurerae ofa quick difpatch ; ( bccaufe you have not yet ended with thofeihac you have been debiting the Caufe with thefe many years, ) and alfo if we might meet and jftate the quell ion by confenr. To which end I offered to come over when you were at leafure, and your Neighbours agreed to fend me word when was the fitteft time, bccaufe you were much from home. But contrary to my expedaclon, as if all thefe mo- rions wereunreafonable, youftlU infiflupon my doing the work which you cut out •Jot me, andthatdir^dly in the way that you prefcribe : yea, and you conclude that 3£ I do not chis, i your people will take ic for granted, that I can fay no more for
Paedobaptlfm
4M
Pae 'lobaptifm then others have dqne in print, z And that they will take rhat to be fufficiemly anfwered, till it be Ihewcd whireinyour anfwcrs aredefeaivp. And can you Doffibly think thatthey hive ground fudicient for either of thefc conclufion-i. If they are men that will be fo eafily deceived, and will take things for granted fo eafily and groundK {iy, 1 think it vain for any man to atcempt their inform tion, except by teschin<' tliemfiift how to ar^ue mjPire rationally : prejudice and inns interell in them itlccms are cheir guides. Butter you that area Logician, to encourage thctn to fuch conclufions, who lliouid teach chcm only the tru:h, and the right way of dif- covering the truth, feems to me a thing to be admired at. I hope they will not judge of all your teaching by this. Vor the tirft concluficn, 1 gave you fuch a multitude of
thence "conclwde, that 1 can fay no more then is faid in print already .? z And 'how is i: pofllble that they can judicioufly and hontftiy take it for granted that all that is in print is fuflicientty'anfwercd ? i When you have not in print anfwered , or medled niuchwiih half the books that have been written for Paidobaptlfm? Be(ides the many inLatine Mr. Coii/W and many other in Englifli are unanfwered ; Yea, Mr. MarfhaE that you p'rofefs to deal with chitfly> is not yet anfwered in print. And if you have done all thislatisfaftorily in M. S. whether fo many of your people have perufed it, and perufed it fo long, and ferioufly, as to be able upon comparing them to pafs a fo- lid jud^raenr, that Mr. Cobbct, Mr. Drciv,Ur. Bhkc, &c. are all fufficiently anfwered by you'' you bcft know. Nay, whether the men that were with me are able to try the writings on both fides, fo as to pafs fuch a judgment > I ferioufly profefs.^ir, I did petufe the ihects which you vouchfafed me the view of, as judicfoufly as I was able.and
ther you had fuificiently confuted them or no. And when I demanded how then they could cxpefl any fatifait'^on between your writing a»d mine ; they anfwered that thev hoped I would hy Jown fome arguments more briefly. Wherefore Sir it is noc only my der^re thatw.- (houlJbe affured of brevitie before ws begin: but it was t6 m ' rhe uelire of your people, who confcfs thr. in fuch large difcourfes they are unable toiuda- 1 further propound to you (becaufe you can find out n j Ihorter way) lam fj-alh-ttrwav then whacyou infiil on : that is, i Either to difpute it in private, before a d.zen of each fide, i Or if cheie benoother way but writing will l.e ac- ceoted that you wi I give me the meeting , and let u? write while we are together. Which motions 1 n^ake not for any advantage againft you, but only to avoid the inconvenkncics of voluminous writing, bhould we w>i:clo large, your people wil? be as unable to make ufe of it, as they are of what is already written.
Sh-j I am pur iO?fdg'!cd Faend, and
mwovthy FelloW'Jabaurerj
Richt Baxter. G gg 1 Aftci.
412
After this the bufinefs flept long, and I hid hoped was quite ovcrj till Mr. T- urg« Ing it on the Confciences of his Hearers, one of them unhappily asked hinj in pub- lique, Why he would not difputc with me, but fo prtfs it on them that c^uld not anfwer him - Whereupon he told iliem he would difpute it with me or any trfan (aj they tell mCj^ which protnifc the people laid hold on, and proftcutcd, ^ bhc'iUe fichryifi*. i •
For Mr. Baxter ^\. Kidderminjier^ thefc.
Sir, \^ r Mcffnge was thiSi [uh I intend the ?iext Lords day td profccute what i have begun in cxaimihigthe Hypoihcfes upon which the .i,gumem from Circumciftonfor Infant- hapt'ifm (jPfhich li the Piedobaptifis Achilles^ isbiiiU -^ 1 was mllifig to invite you to be a hearer, and if you judged U mcet^ to uppofervhat you (hou!d thinly good in a Lozjch wny without Rhetoricl^. Tbjtyouf judgment P)ould be againfl difputing on the Lords day fecms PrangCirvho^as I have b:en toli)wou!d if invited, come to preach about that Contr over fie , •which I talic toieall one with Difputinti. That which concerns your u'cal^nc(fci u fuffi:icnt to hinder youlconfcfs , yet he tbwl^s if you tnjflht do it on Munday, you miqhtdo it almod ■wilb the li^efafetie on the Lords d.iy at Evening, I l^aow not how fie it wiU be to gather a Cotig'Cgation to hear M on a wccl( day in publicli, whereby poor people will be di awn from their rvorli', and the hnyliffbcing now vay ficli, I doubt it will be very di [orderly. Tue/day being a H'jfulay as they count it^ perhaps there will be more of thfi ruder fort and dtfordcY- ly,knditmaycnrry afhewofcelcbratingit. Thurfday I intend for Hercforddu.e .<ipd not to return tiU. Saturday cowefortwght. Tct if you choofe to come over either Alundav orTuefdJy, I pjall bercady tojuflifiemy do6lrine openly or privatcly^by word or writing as it (hall be judged convenient.
Bewdley, Dfffw.17. Sirjam
I 6 4 c>. Yours, but much more the Truths ,
JohnTombes.
I have no Copy of mine next before this or next after it ; nor is it matcrfall, But prefcntly upon this was the Difpace 3 and after it I received from him this Letter following.
For
4^3
For Mr. Richard Baxter Preacher at Kidderminfter , thefe.
S I Rj
"COrafmuch fli you (aid tbat'if thcPap'i(ls had as good arguments for their do^lrim as tbofc rvcrc rvhichyou brought on Tuc^hfifor Infant kipti/m, you would be a Papifti J e^yftcflly rcqucfl ytu to do'rnc fo much ngl't or l^ifid/ufs as cirtjy to write for mc out your fclfynur argnments which you csnccive fojhougfor lufvu-kiitif/r,, or procure them writ- l^jffor r/}C at rr,y chA. gcs, th.it I m.;y examine them, and that you will let me t^unrv what sou w'lU do in aufwcr to this motioriy and within what, compafs oftim.
Bewdly, /dv.^ I 6 4 9.^ I am
Yours in Chrift,
John Tomheu
S 1 R
I Perceive you are a man fo cxtreamly fHbjea to milukcs.thatl h.ive fmal! cncou. raeement to deal with ycu. I only faid (before witncfs enough; t!ia: if the I'.ipifls hada.plaincxprefsScripturefor their Rtligion, as that Dr«/ zp. was tor^ioof that all did enter the Covenant there mentioned, I wcud gladly turn Pap.ftf and you moft unworthily feign me to fay f if the I apifts had as good arguments as thofe were which I b'ouaht forlnfant-b^ptifm; in gcncrall. ; For the thing you defire, i you heard whu I faid i You have not anfwaed my tealons againft voluminous dilpu-mg- X lamp.rnvadedbyfome topubliih our Difputej but truly lam loth fo far to dif- pracevcu Kut if I do ycuwill fee my a'guments. 4 Seeing you have melt unwor- ihilv and unbrothetly traduced me four times in publick, ^^ hereof three in pu pit, I defire vou to difpute thefe four points fii ft. i Whether any truth miift be fufp ended for pence /whi hN'r.D.Ji'VJ faith you bid him tell me was an untruth.) 1 Whether the Mac-iftnte be under Clirift the Mediator, ^yea as Mediator) which ycu faid was of d.mlerous confcquence (aslhear.) 3 Whether the Covenant be made to any bur the clea ("for which ycu brought my book dean contrary to my whole fccpe.) 4 Whe- ther I dealt unbrothcrly and unchriftianly in not animadverting on your papers. Sir I ne'verknew fob.rMinifter ufe fuch kind of preaching to traduce his brethren, and ftufF^ermons with mens names without once fpeaking or fending to them firft about i nriva elv I have a great defire to difpute the fo efaid Points with you if you pleafe in writing f:cfc;;;i)^.t. together, and (hall take your yielding thereto as a great favour, and yet vour Eit duty, having firft accufed me.
^ ' Shi lutn
Ja:ui. 164?. rourmi-mUer,
Richard Baxter*. G S g 3 ^or
414
For the Rtverend M\ Richard Baxter Vtcichct^z Kiddermiafler , thefe.
Sir.)
XAri/iiJl-ik^ofyourfpecch being commuwcateiiityonr felft might be as rvcU excufed a* your fmfrcctiifig in your papers the fame fpeelh in my pjpcr written before you. Inyour f:yh:g tb.1t I have mo(l iintvorthily and unbiothcrly\t, aduccd you four times in puhiicl{% tvhcnof three in Pu'pi^, is no truth. After fo many told me of your by-fl:ngi at me, 1 was rvilliiig Mr. Divispculd. tcUyouno truth is fe to be fufpcnded as to be loll for peace, n'hat I [aid about your tenet concerning Magil/r.ilcs in your Aphoi iftn pag.i? 3 • « no traducing you y if it is a truth. And I (hjH fo tal^e it till you have anfrvered Mr. Gillefpy Aarons Rod blofl*. I'ook i. ch.7. iJ'h.n lfa:d about your pnftion^ tvas but the reciting ofyour own woids inyour Appendix p.4 5. It [_the Covenant'] U m:M to the £k£lonly. tl'hcn it w.ts given out jo^t. w.nU come and reverie all I faid, 1 fpalfc to tbk ejf (7. ifyou could fay md' e then others, you dealt nut fo brotherly with me as I hoped , having de fired from you anwmdvcrfions on fame of my papers y and you were cameflly prtffedto mai^c linownyour arguments before I began 10 picach of the argument, which I thought in charitie you w.vildh.ws done to prevent my being mi ft:d, and m.'[Ijad'ng ethers. Perh'ps itwas true which w-^sfaid, that you would hide your weapon till you were to life it. But in this lafeitwisnogood rule vir-tuj an dolus? The clu(lyonhive-M.ifedy J mihing doubt will be wiped axvay. What fpiyit yo:i woe carryed wtb, appears by the carrying of things ^ better ih:^ byword/. My way of i reaching, howevh- you judge^ befitted a fober man. In band- ling the (jncjiion' as 1 w:isto do/nwas meet j [hould alledge mens words and quote the places, their bocl(S bring in print. It had bcenfcarce the part of a fobcr man to trouble bim* (elf to fend privat:ly to evay perfon before I named than. In a word, I acl^no^kdge I have heard many precious truihs from you,rndreccivcdfund.iy l{ii!d/ie^es for which 1 thrr.kyou. t pray you t.7{c it as an o^:e of love f om me to tell you, my fears arc ihr.tynu go in a fl ippery path, if you do as your friends jrna'^iae, oppofe the prctent govcinmenf, and diilciuing brethren, likely outcf miftaken zeal, and othe;s provocation who will abufcyou for their own ends, la^n/i'j fu-ther wiling to word it with you about tbcfc pcrfonall ex* ceptionsiifl may have your (.rguimnii fro hyour fe'f, wcfj ill both be the freer from mi- Ihlics ii id iruibwiU the f tuner sppear, which lithe {adcavQur of
Ecwdley, 7^??. g. ' ' Your Friend and Brother in Chrift,
1649.
John Ton-bes.
This Letter T did ncr, r.or durft notanfw^r^partly bccaufe it had in it fo many un- . t uthSjthat 1 knew the very naming, them would rend :o di(r.ntion;And partly becauie his fecret friendly threa:aln^ in thv^ end could no: bi arfwcrcd without many inccn- vcnicncies : Efpeciaiiy I felt my fpi;it rooprcnc to hnvc exprcfltda contcmpc of his threatnin''^';, tJuc I ihou.ht i: my djty to repief^ it. It ftemed a flrange Divcrlion to me to torn honi a difpure of Iniant-bjptil-Ti To luidtnly to State matters •, Ajid to im/maiemyofpoiingthe prefens Goveinmvnt, bccaufe my fi lends imagine it j and
fo
415
vaovcrnmeiic ; ana uo ecu me or my gumg m a iiippci y patRj as u tnrcaming muit oe " the Aigumenr to cake me off when others failed '. Peihaps he will fay, he meant in re- gard of danger from God immediately; but I do not think any impartial Reader will fo interpret hie words, as to the imaginary oppofing the prefent Government.
After this, when all was calmed, and I remcmbicd the weatncfsof hisanfwerSi I hid ftron^j hopes of winning him by a private Conference; Whereupon I wrote to him this following : But all proved vain,
S I R,
1 Acknowledge it a hard thing todenyfelffo much as to yield to convincing argu- ments after fo deep ingagcmcnt for crrour as yours. And I perceive in publick your credit ftands in the wiy. lintreatyou therefore to condifcend to a fecret conference between you and me alone, where wc may take frecdome of I'pecch. Which motion I therefore make, that if there be any hopCjth.ic you may be recovered to that which I am now more confident then ever, is the truth , and to do the Church as mucl» fcrvice as you do hurt, that your name may nor be found hereafter among the defperate ene- mies of the rruih and peace j how happy wc:e I if I might fee you fo recovered ; Sir I pray deny not this motion (which I thought fit to propound before I reply to your laft Letters ) and which proceedcch only from a longing defirc after your own and the Churches Welfare in
Tours in inifeigfied Chrijlian love,
Rich. Baxter.
For Mr. Richard Baxter Preacher at Kidderm'mfler, thefe.
I
Mr. Baxter.
F I may obtain no more ffow you,yct let mc rcqiteliyou to ^C^ivc me under ymr etvfi hmd the Reafons you gave why the Expofitton given by me of i Cor. 7. 14- cannot be right. I remain
Yours in the Lord^
John Tombes.
FINIS.
\