^)^Hf ■-^•'^■■•'^-/ mm. .^ 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*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 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: 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'rledge , 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^, 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- 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 , 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 Www 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 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 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 \ 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'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&)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 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 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.3lgrew 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 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 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 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/) 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 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 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. ^& 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; 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, 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 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 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 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-«/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 //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/ 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 //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 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/? 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. (' 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.*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? 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" 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.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 : Aut 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. 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 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, '^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'. 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'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 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?/ 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 — ■ ■ — 111 1 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 ( (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 thmcmbcrs 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'-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 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 fiple, 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^?'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 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'amdM 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' 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 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 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 "|*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,qu7. 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-.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 16. 17,18. Ihefccth you Brcthrcnym-irk^hctn which caufe dlvifions and offences contrary 1 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) 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 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 ^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 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 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- 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> 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»^tfe/?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 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 yfr.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 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 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 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?}. 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 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,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 '^' '". 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/;/ 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; 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;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 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:• %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. 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- 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 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 ^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 !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;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 mhoit. 5 ^.end Hnm. 47. And rhe moft ancient of the Fathers infift much on the purity, innocenry, mcckncfs, 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 ./>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 prdc 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 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 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 roc 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/ 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 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> 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* 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