I?*; * v ■ / / A Brief and Plain DISCOVERY O F T H E Falfenefs and Unfcripturalnefs o F ANABAPTISM: As the fame is now Praflis'd by thofe of that Perfwafion: Wherein is plainly prov'd, from God's Word, the following Particulars, I. That God's Covenant with Abraham, Gen. 17.7. is the Covenant of Grace, where- by all God's Ele& are Sa- ved. II. That Circumcifion was the Initiatory Seal of that Covenant to Abraham and his Church-Seed , during that Difpenfation. III. That Water.Baptifm is now ( under the Gofpel ) ftcceeded in the room thereof. IV. That the Gentile Belie- vers and their Infant-Seed, have as real a Right to the fame Covenant of Grace, and the Seal thereof, as had Abraham and his In- fant Seed. V. That fprinkling (or pour- ing out) Water, on the Sub- ject of Baptifm, is the (un- doubted) Right way of Ad- miniftering Baptilm under the Golpel, To utfiich are added, Some Remarks on a Namelefs Author 5 and a Poft- fcript, occafion'd by Mr. Stennef* Reply to Kujfen. By $imes Barry. [The Third Edhhn.l LONDON': Printed for the Author ; and fold by -fobn and Jofepb Marjhill at the Bible in Gracechurch-Street, and at the Bible in Newgate- ftreeu MDCCXV. Price 1 s. T 0 . T H E impartial and tlnprtjudicl -READER^ Who defircs to be Riphdv In- form'd in the Nature and "Defign of Cod's Covenant wkh Abraham, (his Friend) in the behalf of Him- ielf and air his Ecclefiaftical Or Church ) Seed, both among Jews and Gentiles . to the End of the World.' Courteous Reader, IF the Sprit of Grace reigns in thy Heart ■ .^00 p# ( I doubt not) readily believe me\ M serially when I mofl folemnly ' prof eft, as \pf I were (immediately ) to be caffd to the t Bar ofthk Great Judge) that no Prejudice \ - ( or Hatred) againft the Perfons of the Peo- ;i fie, who ( without any Warrant from God's ■Herd ) Style themfelva Baptifis, and Bap. I tr^d Churches of Christ, hath ftirr'd me up i /o appear in print, in oppofwg thofe permci- ! m Principles., which the Men of that Per- mafwn do ( with Jo much Violmct and un- A . 2 fcriptural To the Reader. fcripttral Zeal J Teach and Maintain. I finccr ely blcjs Cod, that his good Spirit hath taught me to diftinguifi between Perfons, and the Errors which they hold and maintain. Their Perfcns I love, and am really gritv'd t'jat I love them no more than I do. And I hope neither they nor any others will be angry with me. for fo doing : But their Errors { in Religion ) I do from my Heart abominate and loath , becaufe hateful to God, and all good Men, who know and under ft and them Jo to be, -dnd for thus doing, I ntither fear a Frown from God,nor ytt Blame from any Man, [tru- ly wije ) who is able to dijimguijh Truth from Error. That J pall be cenfwSd and ( uncharitably ) reflected on, for what I have done, in print- ing this fmall Trail:, J am not infenftble : I am very f ure 'none will thru do, but fitch at ei- ther know not, or care not what they fay. Thefe kind of Blows I am taught to ward off with a Religion* Scorn and a Holy Con- tempt ', refolving ( in Chrifts Strength ) to ■purfue and hold fkjt the Truth of God, let who will bark and cavil againsl it. It was the Saying of Valerius Maximus, iEquo Am- ino ferenda funt, hnperitorum Convitia, & ad Honefta vadenti, Contemnendus eft, ifte Contemplus. The Reproaches ( faith he ) of the Ignorant and Unskilful are to be born with an even (or patient J Mind ■': And To the Reader. And he that intends to advance towards Good and Honeil things, -mult contemn their Contempt.' That fomewhat will come out in ahfwer hereto, I qtteftion not, ( if the Men of that Principle have not loft their old Wont ) hut (my Comfort and Confidence being built on the Rock of Ages ) I -never fay a Confuta- tion from my, nay all, of that Perjwafton, who breath on the Earth, until the) procure {from Heaven ) another Gofpef which is (JDi~ armtrically ) oppofite to the G off el delivered by the Son of God, which I am fire will nevir he.. I have made no Deviation from the good old way chalkt out by Abraham5* GW, ( wherein the* Prophets and Apoftlei, with ail the Pri- mitive Churches, who are gone to Heaven, walkt in) thm-l hiowof t If I have, 1 do faithfully promife, that ( upon the dijeovery of my- Error, ) I will own my f elf therein nuf taken, - ■ I have been (for fever al Tears paft ) impor- tuned by many ferioiti and godly Chriftians, to print what now I expeli to be blani 7d for, but never found my jelj ( thereto I indm'd, till of late : not- that 1 queftion any part of wl at 1 have printed, being Gocfs Truth ; but v, - need, the variety of Try ah and fitarp AffMi- ons^ which have (incejfantly ) followed n,e, fince caii'-d to the Sacred Office, both in my Native City '(Dublin) and alfo z>z England, A 3 . ? - have To the Reader. oavi kept me wacr \ together ny, in draw tig Profibytu aftir them, I have ( in Conference of my 1) a - t)\ both to God and Men ) improved my poor 'Talent, in explaining and opening up the Jxature and ^efign of tne Covenant of Grace, tea'd® with Abraham in Gen. 17, 7. in hopes, that Cod irill tiefs the Plainmfs and Brevity therein its'd, to inform poor ignorant (and unthinking ) Souls, how wretchedly they ate imfGtfed upon by Preachers of that Perfwafi- on^ who have ( them/elves ) as great need to be inflruHcd and taught, what the deep My* Jt erics of the Covenant of Grace be, as the poor (Tongue-ty d , Babes, whom they (in ■vain') labour to exclude and fat out from tie Bene- fits and Seal oj thatt Covenant, in the Vifiblz Churches of Christ, /is their denying Abra- ham^ Covenant, to be the Covenant of Grace, adminiftcrs jaft ground of ' fufptliirg, whether they have any other than dark and confused Notions about the Bollrim of God^s Free Grace, (fo much fpoken of in Pulpit and Print.) To die Reader, SotheirVnm&rcifulnefs and Hard hearted- nefs to the Infants of believing Parent *f ik not allowing fuch to be accounted of the nnm her of God's Elect i mierly became of. the In , capacity of fuck, to male an open Profejfwn of Faith and Repentance themselves, adminijhrs PiF$ ground of fufpecring M>lth^jhjxhlMlr thqdoxjn the Doctrine ' ofEMbion. -J am very, fare the State of Infancy can neither null or make void the Electing Decree of Gody nor yet render the EleB Infant anyway uncap able of that Grace of God's Covenant to which he is E letted, or of the Seal of that Covenant of Grace in the Church VifMe-, for any id hold or fay it doth, is to reflcft on th* mo ft HI ok God, and to make him a mutable Agent, Uke to a Fickle Man, contrary to Mat 3* 6. Rom. 11. 2P. and {unavoidably ) to fend all Eletl Infants to Hell, {who die Infants ) contrary roMar. 10. 14. jo. 6. 39. Rom. 11. 7. All that I fn all farther fay, is only to be? and pray thee, for the Lord's fake, for thy%wn Soils fake, and for that Love and Tcndemefs, which the. Law of Nature Qefpecmlly that of Grace) obliges thee- to have for poor Infants, ( if thou be a Parent) con fider well, and weigh jud.'ci- oufy ( in the BalUnce of God: s Santfuary) the Arguments laid down in this f mall Trail, to prove what I have {therein ) undertaken. ?- If God blefs the ~ Reading thereof, to the keeping thee back from Ffpoujing the Errors herein A: 4 decrfd; To the Reader. decry* d-, or if it foodd prove the occafion of thy Vomiting up {by found Repentance and hearty Reformation ) the love and likln? thou Lift had to thof Principles of DarfaejT, give I the Glory of his ever* Grace, and jaffhr ■thy felf no longer to be impos'd on by juch Preachers, who Are not only Intruders into i tie Sacred Office, hut alfo Heterodox and Vn- mtnd, in what they teach concerning God*s Covenant with Abraham, being a Covenant if Works • concerning Infant L+$&pifntv being tftft a Pepifo Invention, and a piece of Will" fVorjftip • and what they Teach and confi- dently yjjfrm of dipping, being the only right Mode of Baptising commanded by Chrift, and prdWfed by John aitd all the fir ft $apf iters \ By which Principles they raj c the very Foun- dation of Salvation to grown Believers^ as wc!> as to their Infants : f.nd difown, that thrift hath any right Gofpel Churches but thimfehes : From which Principles I finill e-> w fay, and heartily pray, Good Lord De- liver me, and all the Families of thy Faith- ful People. T H E INTRODUCTION. An occasional Difcourfe between a Minifrer and a Church Member, concerning In- fant Baptifm ; wherein funclry material QuefKons are put by, the Church Mem- ber ^ and plainly and particularly An- fwered by the Minirter,- for the Infor- mation of the Ignorant, and the Satisfa- ction of flich as are daggering in their Judgments, about the Lawfulnefs of In- iaiits-Baptifm, Minifler. Brother Edward,. By what I have heard from feme of my Neighbours^ at aifi by the Difcourfe which pafi between yon #nd> me when tali together ^ I fufpeff ihdi \ fome have been tampering with yo#, to draw you away to Anabaptifm \ is it jo- or no ? deal plain ly, to the end I micht addrefs my ft If to my Bnigi in giving yon fatis faction i-lsi ?<->/, from God's Y/ord. Church Member. I malt m geriioudy ac- knowledge, Sir, that I am not without \fa* vering, and doubtful Thoughts in my Mind about Infant - Baptifm, occ aliened partly^ by difcourfmg with fome of that Way and. PerfWapoii- partly by reading fome Books ' which were put into my handy which to The 'Introduction. me feemsfullof Clearnefs, that Infant-Bap- tifnl is no way warrantable or juftifiable by theGofpel of Chrift. Mini It. Ifind th&n that lam not mifiaken in my Jlpprehenfion of you in this Matter : but for your Encouragement, I muff tell yon, that xoh arc but tryed herein by a Temptation -r for rirfoici I think never the worfe of your Sojds State , neither are my HQpes and Confidence of your Integrity towards God, a Jot ar Whit lef- 'hied by "the Inclination in your Mind to fa- vour that Opinion i for I have known fame ve- ry Holy and upright -Hearted Chrifiians, who in the Simplicity of their Hearts, have ftrongly inclined to favour and efpoufe that Caufe and Principle, as the rnosi plaufiblc, and likely to a- (nee with the Gofpel, there king no Mention % all of Infant- Baptifm in the Gofpel, nei- ther in Precept, nor yet iri Example^ to recom- mend it • yea, I my felf have ( in my fi, si fet- t{r'(t out in the ways of Chrifiianity ) met with Temptations to draw me to that Opinion \> and that by the very fame means which hath occa- {■on cd \ our ft agger i'ng kcni>n. ^nd the main .'fwijicb Indue at me to hanker aft it that fripciplc) were, ( 1. ) The high and chanta- hit 0 pm. on I had of fome of that Party, being Akn o; hiah yhtainmuits in Grace and Uofptl HoU'cfs.* in doing two things^ in order to recover yoa The Introduction. you. The fir & is to reprove you for going out' of the way of Duty, in expofing your Con- fcience to thofe Soul deluding Entanglement sy which have occafionedyonr prefient Difturbance^ and Vnfiettlednefis in your Principles, by de- luding Entanglements ; / mean your going out of the way of your Calling, to ft are and gaze ( out of Curiofity ) at the Plunging of Perfons under the Water ', which ( albeit) jou and others- may think may be done without either Offence toyour Brethren, or any kind of Danger to your felf ^ hath in it an infiatuating, charming Energie, to allure and draw into a liking of it. Tour frequent difcourfng with Men of that Principle, who ( you very well know } glory not a little in Profclyting People to that way ; jlnd your fo much delighting to Read their Books, being not able to grapple with fuch fiubtlle Enemies -, the Deceit of whofe Argu- ments lyes covered under a falfe Vizard. By thefe your Pratlifes you have filled the Eyes of your Confidence Jo full of that Duft and Smoak, which is always raifed by- doubtful Deputations ; that f on want of your Monitor ^ i^your Confidence J mean } you are now at an apparent ft and in thofie wajts of Truth wherein you ought to run fiwifitly -, and well it were ifi jou had been at a ft and before you had fio fiar advanced in thtfie unficriptural Tsnents : Bat however , (feeing you are not a fc ended fo high ( in thefe Errors ) as to be fieated in the Scorn- crs ' The Introdud'iorr. ers-Chalr, to laugh at and deride Baby-fprink- Urn, as a piece of Will-Worfnp and rrteer Po- pery j as the Anabaptifts are well known to term and account Infant- Baptifm : ( not for want of Ignorance and Prejudice, the Lord knows. J Ijliall now in the fecond place endea- vour to help you out of this Quagmire, into which your- own- incauteloufnefs and finful Cu- rlofity hath ( by the Art of a fubtile Adverfa- ry ) involved you : In order then to a fpeedy helping you herein , / defire you will reduce thofe things wherein you defire' to be fatisfied ( about Infant Baptifm ) to as few Heads , ( and in as plain a Adethod) as y cut poffibly can, and then Ijliall endeavour to anfwer your Objecti- ons^ wherein ( I faithfully promife you ) Ijliall mosl freely refer my Jeff to the Word of God, and to the Writings of thofe Divines now in Glory : At whofe Writings the WifeH of Ana- haptifis are glad to tight their Candle^ though in the point of Baptifm they are accounted neither able nor worthy to teach them. And when you and I are come to Cone luf on, you in objecting, and I in anfwering, it will then ap- pear whether Infant- Baptifm be. any part of WtH-Worjliip or meer Popery,. as it is repre- JentedbyitsAdverfar'es* Church- Afemk Sir, Mike your Propofal very well, and in compliance with your reasonable Requeft, as alio in order to my own Satisfaction, I (hall reduce thofe parti- culars The Introduction. cularswrere:n I deftre to be fatisfied, to 3 Genera] Heads, under each of which I hope you will give me Liberty to propofe, by way of Obje&ioa, what I think convenient and fit to ilart. MinifL / like very well to hear you name but 3 General Heads * / hope you will ohferve Or- der and Method in what you intend to. Objctl under thofc $ Heads. Church- -Me mb. I will obferve Order and Method as well as I can ; and fliall ( I hope) with becoming Candor, weigh in the Bal- lanceof an impai tial and uupi cjudicate Con- fideration and Judgment, what Strength ap- pears to be in fofct An Twer 5 and in cafe f find my Conscience fatisfied by the Strength of your Anfwer, 1 (hall readily own it, and give Glory to God. iMinifl. J difire you to name the 3 General Heads^ for fear we (l:ould forget them when we come to be earmfi in our Vifpute. Church Memb. The 3 General Heads which I propofe to be fatisfied in, are as fol- low : 1. The Covenant which God made, with Abraham, mentioned in Gen. 1.7. 7. 2, The Seal of that Covenant. And 3. The Subjefts who have a vifible Right to that Covenant and the Seal thereof Under thefe 3 Heads, I fuppofe, may be brought in all that I need to fay. • MinifL The Intfociucricn. Minifh Jls touching your fir ft General Head, viz. The Covenant which God made with Abraham, What would you be at, a- bout it. Church Memb. I would pray you to clear it up from the Word of God, that that Covenant is a Covenant of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works j for the Apprehenfi- on I always had, till of late, that that Co- venant was the Covenant of Grace, was the Foundation whereon my former Principle, yi&i Infant-Baptifm was founded •, but be- ing informed and taught otherwife, both by Mens Preaching, and alfo by their Books 5 I am much in doubt as touching the lawful- nefs of Infant-Baptifm. Minifh / perceive then yon apprehend that Infant Baptifm is like to ft and or fall, as the Covenant of God with Abraham, is proved to be either a Covenant of Grace or otherwife ; What if it be made good from the Word of God, a that the Covenant of God with Abraham is Covenant of mcer Grace ! Church Memb Truly, to be plain and ingenious, I cannot fee how Infant-Baptifm can Hand, if that Covenant be a Covenant of Works:, as I ara^fenfible the Baptifts hold and teach it is V. and which I am incli- ned, under' my prefect light, to judge it miul be as they fa v. But in cafe it beprb- -ved otherwife, I plainly fee the Anabap- tifts The Introduction. tiffs are like to fuffer a miferableShipwrack v fo r their hold ing aad _. teaching that G odY Cpve^a nt with Abraham is a Covenant of Works, is the jpnncipai Pillar, on which7 ajmolf all their Arguments agai nit Infant- Bagifj-R lean. If that Pillar then be fha- ken and overthrown by Scriptural Argu- ments, the whole ftru&ure will tumble of courfe. .Mi n iff. I am very glad that Ton and I do ( in any meafure) agree in our Sentiment* about this matter \ to let you fee then, how fandy a Foundation the Anabaptifts build on^ I fiat! begin to lay down fome Scriptural Arguments r to prove them moft heterodox and un found in this point of Abraham's Covenant , wherein they do moft evidently raft the very Foundation of Life and Salvation to Abraham himfelf and all his Seed: CHAP. C i ) C H A P. I. Of God's Covenant with Abraham, wherein is fiairdy proved, that that Covenant , in Geo. iji J. k i the Covenant of Grace. THAT God's Covenant with Jbraham, 1 in Gen. 1-7. 7. was, and ilill is, the Covenant of Grace, difpenfed in a Church way : None of the Orthodox ever did: ( or do) deny, that I can find. That the ta- king that Covenant in this Senfe, is- the Foundation Principle, on which all found Proteftants do maintain and juftifie the Right of Believers Infants to Baptifm> is beyond Contradiction. When the Mcft High and Sovereign Lord God fa w fit to make known his Will and Pleafure, to be; that his Covenant of Grace, ( agreed on, between himfelf, and his Son Chrilt in Eternity ) Pnould be. Dif- penfed in an Ecclefiaftical (or Church) way, he (Ingles out (above all other Men ) Abra- ham his Friend \ on whom he confers the Honourable Tide, of the Father, of the Faithful^ Rom. 4. 11.. Not that Abraham did v or could ( poffibly ) beget a Believer fas fuch) or could convey into thQ Chil- dren he begat (according to Fleihly Gene- ration ) CO ration i that noble Grace of Faith, where- with God's Free Gift had Blelled himfelf. But God opens arid propounds his ever- lafting Covenant of Grace and Salvation to him, as a Puhllck Perfon, who was to Perfonate all true Believers •/ who (in after Ages ) were to be Members of his Viiible Churches, to the fecond coming of Chrift. The Sum and Snbltance of that 'Cove- nant, is briefly comprehended in the Words of Gen. 17. 7. / will efiabtifi my Covenant between me and thee, and thy Seed after thee, in their Generations, for an Ever- lafiing Covenant-, to be a God to thee, and to thy Seed after thee, This Covenant hath Two EfTential Parts, as all Right Covenants have, ( i. ) God's part, held forth in the- Words, / will be a. $ God to thee,kc. The meaning whereof ( according to the Analogie of Faith, ) mufl be thus u 1- derftood. Tho' thou Abraham, whom I now call, to become my Friend and Favo. rite, and a Publick Head ( or Reprcfenta-. tive ) of all believing Church Members, to the end of the World \ be'it an undone and guilty Sinner, polluted in thy Nature, and ; born under Adam% Covenant of Works \ liable and obnoxious to its Curfe, and to the Wrath to come \ unable to recover or help thy felf out of that deplorable Con- dition, ( 3 5 diton, into which thy natural Birth fas Adam's Child) hath put thee. And albe- it, thou be no way worthy of any Favour, yet I think fit to let thee know , what Thoughts and Purpofes of Mercy and Kind- nefs, I have in ftore for thee. Abraham : And for .the reft of mine El eel:, whom I have chofen to my felf in Chrift, (the Promifed Meffiah, ) of whom, that Son which I have promifed thee, is to be a Type : And in whofe Perfon , all mine Elecl, are to be Allegorical! y ( or Typi- cally ) Reprefented j and that as thy Son is to be a Type of mine, in whom I have elected and chofen them. I frankly and freely pardon and for- give thee, all thofe Tranfgreffions and Sins, wherewith, (as Adamh Child) thou flandeft chargeable, for breaking that Co- venant of Works I made with Adam, thy ( and all Mankinds) Natural and Federal Head. I account thee -perfectly Juil and Righ- teous in my Sight , not by, eg: foi~, that Principal ot Inherent Holinefs, which the Spirit of Grace ( in effectual Calling ) hath wrought in thee, ( which Inherent Holi- nefs is (ever) the- Fruit and Effect of a juftified State -, but never the procuring (or meriting) Caufe. But I account and e- fteem thee, as Juft and Righteous, as if thou (4) thou hadft (in thy own Perfon) exa&lfr performed that legal Righteoufnefs, which the Law Moral requires ^ on the alone ac - count of my Son*s Righteoufnefs, which ( as the Mediator and Surety of this my Co- venant of Grace } he is to perform in the behalf of thee, and all mine Elect) I moft freely impute to thee. . I fan&ifie and renew thy vitiated and polluted Nature, by my fanctifying Spirit, that thou mayeft be capable of Communion and Fellowfliip with me, both here, in my Church Militant •, and hereafter, in my Church Triumphant. I adopt thee to be my Son, by Grace ^ and by virtue hereof, thou art reftored to all the Blefllngs, Rights and Privilege's, which Adam (thy Natural and Federal Head ) loft and forfeited, by his Apoftacy and Defection : Hereby thou art admitted Q as a free Denizon ) into the Family and Houfhold of God : From whence thou waft call out ( in Adam ) when he was ejected and call out for his Rebellion, witnefs his Expulfion out of Earthly Paradice, a lively Type of the Heavenly. I promife to efta- blifh thee in Grace, fo as thou flaalt never more be in danger of lofing thy felf, or forfeiting my Love and Favour any more : For ever I will be a Sun, and a Shield, to furnilh and fupply thee with all neoeilary Acconi- ( o Accommodations for Life in tl^is World ^ I will protect and defend thee from all ad- verfe Powers, Spiritually and Bodily, which fhall contrive and feek thy Ruine. And* finally, I will receive thee into Heaven, when, by Death, thou goeft hence ; where thou ftialt Live and Reign, with me, Eter- nally. And the very fame Mercy and Favour which I have now exprefled, and fhewn to thee, I do oblige my felf, by the Promife of this my Covenant, that 1 will do to ail mine Elect, who are to fpring from thy Loyns. As alfo, to all mine Elect, who are to come of the Gentile Race, to the end of the World. .- (2-) Man's part : As for thee, Ahraham^ this thou muft do, ( on thy part ) thou muft walk Humbly and Uprightly before me •, thou mull make the Moral Law (en- graven by the Finger of my Spirit, on the Heart of Mam, thy Natural and Federal Head) the (landing Rule of thy Obedi- ence, both negatively and pofitively. In all the parts of thy_ Obedience, thou muft look exactly to three things: 1. To the Subject Matter of thy Obedience, let it be what I -command and require, not what Creatures devife or enjoin. 2. To the manner. See that thou do it In Faith, keeping thine Eye on Chrift (my Son) for for Acceptance, and acting all by ftrength derived from him. 3. To the End. See that my Glory be that thou aimed at, 3nd defigneft , in all thou goeft about. Thou (halt not do my Work and Service in a Mercenary way, as a Servant that Works for Wages •, but thou mud obey my Com- mand as a Son, with Freedom of Spirit, and from a Principle of Love and Grati- tude , knowing and coniidering, that my Grace and Love hath made Proviiion of all that is needful, to make thee (every way eternally happy, both here and here- after. The dreadful Curfe, and eternal Death, to which ( by Sin ) thou hecameft obnoxious : My Son Chrift ( Typ'd out by the Ram) haih let thee for ever free from it. And that by his being made a Curfe, and undergoing Death for thee , ( as being thy Sponfor or Surety J at his Hands 1 have received , the full of that Debt, whereto thou becameft liable, by breaking my Law, there remains not the lean: Mite for thee to pay *, fo that ( now) thou haft no Caufe to fear my Vindicative Juftice-, the many and (harp Affii&ions, wherewith thou malt meet, in thy way to Glory, (hail be but the gentle Chaftife- ments, of thy (dearly ) loving, and recon- ciled Father ? who ( by them ) will purge out the remains of thy indwelling Cor- rnp- (7-) ruption: and fweetly wean thee trom the enticing Obje^s of the vain and be- "witching World thou lived; in. That Perfect, and Spotiefs Righteoufnefs, which mutt Recommend thee to k%% and prefent thee Blamelefs, before, the Throne of my Glorious Holinefs, in the Third Heaven, is ( Subjectively J Inherent in the Perfou of God-Man, thy Mediator and Surety j to this Mediatorial Righteoufnefs of his, thou (halt add nothing, neither thy own Perfo- nal Qualifications; nor yet, the Holinefs of Saints or Angels y ( as if thereby ) thou could eft be made more acceptable, than that Righteoufnefs of his. doth make thee. Thou ihalt keep my Covenant, both thou and all thy Eccleiiaftical (or Church ) Seed, throughout your Generations, till my Son comes to Judge the World at thelaft Day. • Thou v and air thy Church Seed, (which Springs from thee by Fleihly Generation, ) fhall obferve to have all your Males mark'd with Circumciiion, the viiible Token and Seal of this my Gracious Covenant, which I have ( now ) entred into, with thee; for thy felf ( a (Updating Father, ") and for all thy Children ^ who are to be the^Mem- bers of my Son's Mediatorial Kingdom 0 or Vifible Church on the Earth. And when Cfrrift my Son fhall come in the Fieih,3nd fhall enter upon his Mediate- B nal (8 ) rial Kingdom, whatever vifible Token or Seal he (hail appoint to fucceed in the room of Circumciiion", thy Gentile Church Seed (as well as Jews, ) who are to believe in him, (hall ( carefully ) obferveto be Sealed therewith, both they and their Infants : And that by Virtue of this my Covenant, 1 now make with thee, for thy felf and them. And to the end, that neither thou, nor thy Children (in fucceeding Ages) may be ignorant of what my Will and Pkafure is, concerning the Non-Elect, who are to come and fpringfrom Believing and Holy Parents, in my vifible Church or Churches, I notifie to thee, and thy Church Seed after thee, ( throughout their Generations ) that my Sovereign Will and Pleafure is, that all the Infants of my Believing, Profefling Church Members, fhall be markt with the viiible Token or Seal, of this my Covenant in theChurch,whereofthe Profefling Parent ( or Parents) are Members, and that without any Regard had to the Elect, or Non-Elect. For, feeing that the Secrets of my Decrees and Councils are known to my felf alone, I will that thou, and thy Church Seed after thee, ( to the end of the World ) do, in the Judgment of (rational) Charity, judge all the Seed, and Infant Posterity of my jojoidling People, who have laid hold on toy. Covenant, ( by an eternal, viiible Pro- fcflion ) (9) feffion ) to belong to the Election, and to own them for fuch, until they ( by open Apoftacy, and final Impenitency ) do ma- nifeft the contrary. For albeit my Viflble Churches do confiil of Elec% and Non~Elec\ and the one as well as the other do partake of the Seal of my Covenant, and are Par- takers of all Church Privilege s , yet none mall ever partake ( internally and favingly) of the inward Grace and Mercy -figiiified, and fealed by the Token and Seal of my Covenant, (\n the Church Viflble, ^ but the Eleft only, whofe Names are ( particu- larly ) Regiftred in the Lamb's Book of Life. And altho' the Non-Eled m my Church, do fall fhort of the faving Benefits of my Covenant of Grace ; yet (hall they find that I am no way behind with them; fory altho5 1 ( the abfolute Sovereign of the World ) be no way obliged to the Creature (efpecially fallen Bxbels,) yet, feeing it is my Pleafure to employ the Non-Ekd in the Service of my Church, ( while it is in a Militant State) that thofe common Gifts (of my Spiritj wherewith they are to be endowed, might be laid out and improved, for the good and welfare of my Eled and Chofen ^ I will give them a Place in my Church, that they fhall be called by my Name, and fhall have an -equal Right (with mine Eleft) to the Seal of my Covenant^ B 2 and C 10 ) and all outward Helps and means of Salva- tion, in the Church Viiibtej whereby it fhall plainly appear, fin the Day of Judg- ment J that their miffing Heaven, and fall- ing (hort of eternal Life, was of their own Procurement. Notwithstanding, as is the Service wherein they are employed in my Church, 1 will give them a plentiful Recompence, ( viz.. ) a Temporal Reward, in Lien of a Temporal Service :, Such as Bodily Health, Worldly Wealth, Plea- fures and Honours, &c. which areY every way) more fuitable to their Spirit, and are more fought and delighted in ( by them) than are the things laid up for my Chofen : Plain Inflances ( hereof) I have feen fit to leave ow Record, in the Perfons of IJlimael and Ifaac, both born of Abraham, ( according to the Mem ) the one a Re- probate, the other Elect j both muft be of the Church - viilble, and Sealed with the vifible Token and Seal of God's Covenant 'with Jhr*ham. Of the fame Nature is that of Efau and Jacob, both born of Jfaac ( according to Flelhly Generation ) yet the one a Reprobate, and the other ElecV, both mult be of the viiible Church, and Sealed with the Seal of the Covenant, and pafs (currant) for Church Members, ( before Men) until they (themfelves) make the contrary to appear ; As did Ift>* r/uui, Efahi &c. ' And C xi ) And thus, having as plainly and as' briefly as I- could, (for the Information of rhofe who are yet ignorant of \Abrahams- Covenant) explained and (hewn the Sub- fiance and Tenure of God's Covenant with i&tfakam, for himfelf and all his Ecclefi- aftical, er Church Seed ; both Jews and Gtntiks, to the end of the World. I ceme now to laxdown_l^je^crijptu_ral Arguments,' to jrovex that God's Cove - riant with Abraham, ( as now explained ) is the .Covenant,. of Grace , which God propounded to Abraham^ in Gen. 1/7. 7. And -not a Covenant of \Vorkis, as the Anabaftifls teach it is. That it is the Covenant of Grace, and no other,will evidently appear to any,who look notafquint on the Arguments following. Arg. 1 , The frrfb Argument is this. If < .God never yet made a Covenant of Works,! with any ( meet. ) Man, but that which hej made with finlefs Adam ( the Natural and! Federal.' Head of all Mankind ) in the State! oflnnocency, before the Fall : Then God 's-i Covenant with Ahrahmn is the Covenant! of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works.! But God never ( yet ) made a Covenant! of Works, with any meet Man, but that! which he made with ilnlefs Adam^ f the! natural and Federal" Head of all. Mankinds i ill the State of Innocency, before the:: B 1 Fall1 Fall : Therefore, God's Covenant with Abraham^ in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of Grace, and no other. Plain it is, and aone (without Lying againflGod) can deny it, that God made a Covenant of Works with Adam, and in him with all Mankind. The Condition whereof was, do and live ; fin and die. And as plain it is, that Adam fell, by tranfgreOIng that Co- venant *, by which Fall -he loft the BleiTed Image of God to himfelf, and all his Poft€- r.ly, whereby he and his Pofterlty became utterly vmcapable of Life and Salvation by that Covenant. Ndw, Abraham being (by natural Birth ) a Son of the fir ft Adam,, and ( as fuch ) born under the Curfe of Adam\ Covenant, and Partaker of a fulfill and polluted Nature • which rendrcd him as uncapable of per- forming any Work, which ( as a Conditi- on.) can anfwer the Laws Demand ^ as a Man naturally dead, is uncapable of railing or quickening himfelf-, or as a Sparrow is uncapable to remove, or carry on its Back, the greateft Mountain in the World. To what end fbould the only wife God make z Covenant of Works, with fuch a fallen Sinner ? Arg. 2. If to hold and teach, that God's Covenant with Abraham^ ( in Gen. 17. 7. ) is is a Covenant of Works, and not a Cove- nant of Grace, be a high Reflection on God, and alfo deftru&ive . to the Souls of Men \ then is God's Covenant with Abraham ( in Cm. 17. 7. ) the Covenant of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works. But to hold and teach, that God's Covenant with Abraham, (in Gen. 17. 7. ) is a Co- venant of Works, and not a Covenant of Grace, is a high Reflection on God, and deftru&ive to the Souls of Men. Therefore, Gods Covenant with J>- braham, (c?e« 17. 7. ) is the Covenant of Grace, and not a Covenant of Works. For rendring this Argument unan- fwerable, Two things want Confirmation. ■■■ Ffyfiy That to holdWl teach, that GodV Covenant with Jkr-dham% a Covenant of Works, is a high R - ment of an ignGrant,raih^nd-prefumptiK}^3- Splat.: frora- which Charge., let fuel* Meri fee kow they can acquit and" free them- felves. and not by Works \ then the Covenant vvhiclrGod madejvkJiJiuTi, is the Co venant OrGracc7and iiotj)f_Works, But Abra- ham was jollified by Faith, and not by Woi ks :y Therefore the Covenant which £?od made with him , is the Covenant o£ Grace, and not the Covenant of Works. That Abraham was juftified by Faith, and mi by Works, the Scripture is exprefs and: dear, Rom. 4, 2,3, 4. Gal 2. 5, 6, 7. Arg. 5. If God hath made no other Covenant of Grace with Abraham, di- Sinft from that in Gen. 1.7. 7. then, that Covenant in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of Grace:, but God made no Covenant of Grace, with Abraham, diftinft from that in Gen. 17. 7. Therefore that Covenant in Gen. 17. 7. is the Covenant of Grace, and not the Covenant of Works. That which will determine the Point in Gbritroveriie, is this, let thofe who (herein^ oppofe me, lay down a Scriptural Definition of the Covenant of Grace ; and that in fuch Terms, as bell pleafe themfelves 5 and in. Cafe, their own Definition, do not agree (at leair for SubHancej with Gen,, 17: 7. if it be according- to God's Word, then am I freely rcjjiliag XX ovva my. fdf ( hereia J miftaken : C*7 ' ) If they fefu'fe to' comply with fo fair a Pro-' pofal, let the judicious and impartial Reader judge, who is at the Lofs (herein) they or I ? I conclude this Chapter with this Drlem- - ma, ( viz. ) Abraham, ( the Father of the • Faithful ) he is either fav'd, or eife he is - damn'd • one of thefe two the Ad verfa- ries ( I now oppofe ) mull grant ; for there t is no middle State for the Souls departed. "If they fay he is damn'd, then, there is : no Ground left us to hope^ that any of A~~- dam\ Poflerity ever were or.fhall be fav'd ; ; for we have no other Covenant whereby to- -expedt 'Salvation,, but that of Abraham : ■■ .And if he Perifhed . under that Covenant,-. fo mud we. if they grant, that Graham is in a State " of Salvation, (as they mud, if they ipeakr by the Spirit of Ch rift ) then Abraham was' - juftified and laved by a Covenant of Grace, and if by a Covenant, of Grace, thenahan - Covenant, mention'd in Gen, 17. 7. xnuit " needs be the Covenant of Grace ^ for be— fides that Covenant tBefc Scriptures know ••? no other. ' Againfl what T have Said^ ('and all Or- • thodox Protefbants conflantly hold and at- - firm ) concerning Abrakamh Covenant be-- isig a Covenant of pure and abfolrte-Gra.ee \ \ this is .objeftcd by. the Mverfaries, ■- C is ) Object. The Land of Canaan wot a Tem- poral Bleffing • therefore fk~ch was the Cove- v ant , of ir hie h Circmncijlon wai a Tempera- ry Seal, I anfwer in two Particulars. Firit, The Promife of the Land of Canaan is no Ellen- tial part of the Covenant oi Abraham. Let the "Words in the fth Verfe be Read with- out Prejudice. The lail Claufe of the Verfe doth fully comprehend the Sum and Sub- ihnce of the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham. The Promife of the Land of Vandrn is only by way of Addition or O- vcrplus No Eflential part of the Cove- nant it felt. The Covenant is briefly com- prehended in thefe Words, 1 will be a God to thee ^ and to thy Seed after thee : For in thefe Words God engages himfelf ( by free and abiblute Promife ) to Abraham and to ffis Eiecl Church-Seed, that he will be a God to him and them, to do all things for -them -which are needful to compleat eir Happinefs, both here and hereafter. Secondly^ The Land of Canaan was pro- ofed not as it was any EfTentisl part of Covenant of Grace :, or, as if real Blef- vednefs cod lifted in the actual Enjoyment thereof: But as the fame was a Tempora- ry pe oi Heaven. And for wrant of Un- ilcrftandihg and coniidering this very thijo^ many, who have thought thcmlelvts in ife* C 19) wifer (ha the Myfteries of the Gofpel ) than their Neighbours, have prov'd themfelves ftiort of true Wifdoiii \ in this Particular atleaft. To convince of this Miftake, let that of our Saviour(in/I^tf. 6. 33. Bntfeelyefirft the Kingdom of God^ and the Righteoufnefs thereof^ and all thefc things Jhall be added to yon ) be weighed in the Ballance of an unprejudiced Confideration, and to an impartial Eye that looks not afquint at thefe two places of ho- ly Scripture, Gen. 17. 7. and Mat. 6. 33. it will moil plainly" appear, that Temporal Bleffings are held forth in one, as well as in "die other. And if it muft needs be granted, that becaufe God made the Promife of the Land of Canaan to Abrahamy &c. that therefore God's Covenant with him and hisv was a Covenant of Works : It will as neceflarily follow, that Believers, to whom Chrift direcls his Speech in Mat. 6, 35. are now under a Covenant of Works as well as Abraham was. And fb, neither Abraham (the Father of the Faithful) nor any of his Seed, (the Eleft I mean ) either of the jewijli or Gentile Race^ are like to be laved or enjoy God for their Portion. And by this way of arguing, it will evi- dently appear to any feeing Man, (who fhuts not his Eyes for fear of being con- vinced ) that while theAdverfaries (I now oppofe ( io ) oppofe in this Controverfle) were employ- | ed in deviling this Shift to prove God's | Covenant ( with Abraham ) to be a Cove- ; nant of Works j and that (on purpofe ) 1*0 exclude poor Infants from that Cove- nant, and from Baptimr (the now Seal thereof,) they have ("in fenfibly) Ihurboth Abraham and thenijelyesioo out from be- ing fayed : and what Advantage will (here- by )accrew to their Caufe,let it be improved to the utmoih Objeft. 2. It is again Ob jetted, If the Co- venant in Gen. 1 7. 7. 7 be a Covenant of pure Grace, and not a Covenant of ~ Works , and that all Abraham's Children be alike interefted therein, then doth Grace come by natural Gene- - ration ^.contrary both to Scripture and Reafon. Anjw. The ground of the Ohje&or's Mi- - ftake lies iii> two things: Firft^ his not diftinguifning or confidering, that the Chil- dren of Believing Abraham, are fa id to be m Covenant two Ways, or in. a twofold ! Refped : Firs!, Internally, by Virtue of God's Ele&ion : And thus none are (ore- ver fhall be ) in Covenant, but Abraham's Seed, (i'k.. ) The Elect, who are in Scrip- ture (by way of Diftin&ion) ftyled, the Children of Promife, Typ'd out in the Per- fon of ' Ifaac,GaL 4. 28. Thefe ( and they alone ) partake in. the^ faving Benefits of the Covenant \ and have . C 11 J alfo a Right to the vifible Sign or Seal of the Covenant hi the Vifible Churches of Chrift, under the Gofpel Difpenfation. * Secondly, Externally, by Virtue of the External Profeflion made in the Church .• £nd thus the Non-Ele&fas well as the E- led) are faid to: be in Covenant with God, in his Churches Vifible, ( here on Earth. ) Thefe albeit, they never partake in, the faving Bleffings of the Covenant ^ yet by Virtue of the External Profeflion made,they and their Infant Seed, (though not Eled, ) have an External Right (in the Church Vi- fible ) to the Token (or Seal J of Abraham's Covenant ; and to-all other Privileges and Ordinances in the Church, whereof they are capable, according to the Revealed Will of God: By Virtue hereof it is, that God calls fuch his People- and he will have his Church to call and own them for fuch too, until they manifeft themfelves to be otherwife •, and that by a voluntary Defe- ction, and final Apoftacy. Plain Inftances hereof are ( Graphically} fet down in God's Word, in the Perfons of Ijhmael and Efaur ( in w:hofe Perfons the Reprobate Seed of Abraham were ( AHegoricalJy) typ'd out as the Ek&Seed } were Megorically and Ty- pically represented in the Perfons of Jfaac and Jacob '<\- The. former of thefe fprang fronUhe V&faQl Abrab$mr_z% well as the latter ; C ^^) - latter : And on this Account they had a place in the Vitlble Church, and were mark- ed with the Seal of God's Covenant, as well as the latter. They -were efleemed and reckoned as God's Children, and true Members of the Church,, .until ( by Defecti- on and Apoilacy, ) they difcovered them' felves to be otherwife. If this Diftinttion be not allowed, I cannot fee how God can be ( orderly > Worfhipt by any Vilible- Church on Earth. This is the Sum and Subftance-of God's Covenant, made with Abraham in Gen. 17. 7. and with his Elecl Seed, err. And by Virtue of this Promife, sJbrahamznd ( with him ) all his Elect Seed would have been moil Happy and eternally BLeft, had no Promife been made of the Land of Canaan. So ( in like manner,) (hall all true Believers, with their Ele& Seed, be eternally Happy and Bleft, being made Partakers of the Righteoufnefs of Chrift, (intended in Mat. 6. 33.) Albeit fuch Believers (and their E- lecl: Seed) mould ( with Ltzartis ) Die on a Dunghil, for want of thofe Temporal Blef* fmgs held forth by Chrift, in the above- mentioned Promife, which plainly demon- ftrates,.. that the Promife which God made to Abraham, of giving to him and to his Seed, the Land of Canaan, was no more an Eilential part of the Covenant in. with C *j ) with him and his Seed, than the Promife held forth by Chrift, In the place (above- named ) proves, that Believers and their Eled Seed are ( now ) under a Covenant of Works. All the Difference which I can find between thefe two places, isv that the Promife in Gen. 17. 7. was Typical of the Kingdom of Heavea. The other is not fb. Were this Covenant of God made with A- hraham ( the Father of the Faithful ) as^he was a Stipulating and a Covenanting Re- prefentative ( in a Church. Vifible, ) but -rightly understood, and -heliev'd with Ap- plication to Mens own Souls, I am per- fwaded there would be neither Anahajtifis. nor Armlmans in the World. The Church of Rome holds and teaches, that Ignorance is the Mother of Devotion .* Iain, not afhamed to fay, it is the Mother of all Errors in Religion. Neither am I afraid to affirm it to.be both the Mother and Nurfe of Anabaftijm and Arminia- nijm. CHAP. II. Troving that Circumcifion was a Seal of God's Covenant of Grace, made with Abraham, and- his Seed. Arg. i.TpIther Circumcifion was the ex- V j ternal Token (or Seal; of Abra- ham's Cm) ham's Covenant (of Grace)mentioned, G. 1 7. 7. Or elfe that Covenant had no Seal at all. The Ad verfary cannot avoid here, He nraft either grant or deny 5 if he? grant thaJLCircunxcilloiiwas utheSeal of Abraham's Covenant, Ihaye what I vvas to prove-, if i he deny iuobe the Seal of that Covenant, ) then it lieiat_his Door to demonftrate what -j was the Seal of that Covenant : If he fay that that Covenant hadTnoTeal at all, He will (thereby; not only gainfay the Word of God, but alfo fpeak againfl: Reafon \ for all Men know it is an_eflential Propertyj>f a_ .Cpyenant_tq_have a S_eal, to confirm the Matter contained in the Covenant. Arg. 2. If Circumcifion is by (God himfeif ) called the Seal of the Covenant, then is it ( beyond all Controverfie ) the Seal of the Covenant. But Circumcifion is (by Gcd himfeif) called the Seal of the Covenant. Therefore Circumcifion is (beyond all Controverfie) the Seal of the Covenant. For Proof of the Argument, compare Atts 7. 8. with Gen. 17. 10. To Which I will only add, Rom. 4. 11. which will put the mat- ter (in Difpute) beyond the reach of all Difpnte. The Words are plain and ex- press, in calling Circumcifion the Seal of the Righteoufnefs of Faith •, which plainly groves two things. Firft, That Circum- .tifion ciflon is a Seal of the Covenant made with Abraham. Secondly, That the Covenant of which Circumcifion was the Seal, was the Covenant of Grace, and no other. CHAP. III. That Water Baptifm, fncceeded, or came in the room of Circtim,cifion, ( under the Gof- pel Difpenfathn ) I prove by three con' vincing Arguments. A*, i. XF there be no other Initiato- J[ ry Seal appointed by Chrift under the Gofpel but Water-Baptifm, then is Water-Baptifm come ( or facceeded ) in the room of Circumcifion, to be the initia- ting Seal under the Gofpel : But there is no other initiatory Seal appointed by Chrifl: under the Gofpel, but Water-Baptifm. Therefore Water-Baptifm is come or fucceeded in the room of Circumcifion, to be the initiatory Seal under the Gofpel. The Truth and Strength of this Argu- ment will the more clearly appear, by duly considering, that Circumciiion was (under the dark Difpenfation of the Law,) the ini- tiating Seal of the Covenant, which will not, cannot be denied, unlefs by Men who underfland (or care ) not what they fay ^ That Water-Baptifm is, ( and mult be) fo now; now \ muft'fof neceffity) be acknowledged by all who own that the Lord VSupper fhc- ceededy or came in. the room of the Baf- fover. I humbly conceive no wife Man will op- pofe me, in faying, that the Churches of the New-Teitament have as great need of an initiating Seal of the Covenant of Grace, as had the Church of the Jews under the Old : And if Baptifm be not that Seal, I know not what is; for that Circumcifion is (now) abro^ted-and abolifhed yjnflef the Gofpel, none can deny • and that fome other viiible Sign mult futceed (or come) in Its r6om, lgult be granted by them who acknowledge that the Lord's Supper jucceeded:(or came ) in the room ofThe Paflbvcr. ■ A$g* 2, If the Adverfaries themfelves do (practically ) own Baptifm to be the ini- tiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant, then Baptifm is the initiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant: But the Adverfaries tbemfelves do ( practically) own Baptifm to be the ini- tiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant. There- fore Baptifm is the - initiating Seal of the Gofpel Covenant. Thofe I (here ) difpute againft, before they can overthrow this Argument, mall abandon their own Practice in making Bap- tifm by Dipping, the Door of Entrance in- to their Churches;, by which Practice they unchurch C *7 ) unchurch all. other Churches who are not of their own Perfvvafion. It is well known in London, and elfewhere, where Aaabay nfm is prac~tifed, that they make Baptifm (by Dipping ) the Form of a right Gofpel Church • on which account it is they refufe Communion { in the Lord's-Supper ) with the moft fan&ified Believers, if they ate not Dipt after their Mode. 'Tis true, that fome of that Perfwaflon would feem more moderate and charitable than others, (of that way J While they make Saintfhip the ( only ) term of Church Com- munion : Thefe feem not to lay fuch flrefs on Baptifm as the reft of that Perfwaflon do , they will admit to the Lord's-Supper ( with them ) thofe of other Perfwafions, though not Baptized in their way • but how fuch will be able to juftifie_their Pra&ice in ; admitting Unbaptized Perfons to the Lord's - Suj^per^ I cannot underltand \ to me it isi plain that there is the fame Parity of Reafbn for keeping hack an unbaptized Perfon from] the Lord's-Table, as there was for keeping back an uncircumcifed Perfon from the Paf- fover of Old. The firfl of thefe ( viz.. ) : Baptifm, is the yifible Badge of our Union \ (with Chriil) in Regeneration, ( as Circum- cifion was to the Believing Jews) The other (i^.)the LordVSupper,is the vifible Badge of our Communion and Fellowihip with Chrift, ' I fliail not here meddle with explaining this, becaufe, I lhall have occaflon to fpeak to it when I come to anfwer the Objecti- ons brought againft Baptifm being come in the room of Circumciflon .- whereto I re- fer my Reader. Againft what hath been faid, concerning Circumcifion being the Seal of the Cove- MSvAGiacCi &c' k is obJ^ thus. Object Circumcifion wa* only a Seal of a Temporal, Carnal Covenant, Sealing only W^m °mion> l anfwer in i. I have already proved, that God's Covenant with Abraham, ( of which Cir- cumcifion was the Seal ) was (and ftill is ) n ,7^^ of Grace> and n<* a Cove- nant of Works, as fome ignorant and in- jud.dous Teachers woukftain have it I .be : and that (meerly) on the Account Zhirl ,flag ,P°°r Infants frora BaP»»V wh.cn they know could never be iuftified (by God's Word) Ihonld they judiciously' acknowledge, that -0™Ws Covenant Is the Covenant of Grace ; and that Cit> cumtifion, was the Seal thereof: and that Water-Baptifm, is ( now ) come in the room thereof. 2. In that fome have reflefted on that Covenant, calling it a carnal Covenant of Works, and the Church which was to ob- ferve and pra&ife Circumcifion ( the Seal thereof) a carnal Church : all I need to fay ( by way of Reply ) is, to bewail the Car- nallity of their llncircumcifed Hearts and Lips ^ who have no better or higher Ap- prehenfions of God's Holy Covenant, ( the Grace whereof mud bring them to Heaven if ever they come thither, ) and of his fo highly honoured Friends, Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacobs with all the reft of the Holy Patriarchs, Prophets, and godly Believers of that Day •, than to call it a carnal Cove- nant, and them a carnal Church. 3. If Abrahams Covenant, was a Co- venant of Works to him and his Chil- dren, then it mull ( needs ) be fo to us Gentile Believers, and to our Children now. And iffo, let the Adverfary demonftrate (if he can) how Abraham, or any of that carnal Church ( as they falfly term it ) can be fr.ppofed, to be ( now ) in a faved State : Or, what Ground of Hope we Gentile Believers' ( and our Children) have, C 3t ) have, that we or any of purs fl-ajl £o tol Heaven when" we die, feeing that we are) fffir under the very fame Covenant witrt( Abraham^ which Covenant, if it be a Co- venant of Work^, and not of Grace, no Salvation can be expected ; and if th^ Be- • lievers (under that dark Difpenfation) were carnal/and not fpiritual,'how comes the unerring Wjfdom of God to propound . them to Believers under the Gofpelr for Ex- amples and Patterns of Faith, Patience, &r. Heb. 1 1.„ Heb. 12. 1 Jam. 5. 10. Xet it be farther ^conlidered, that, albeit, the Sea] of Circumciiion fealed no laving BlefnV ;s 'to the Non-Elect', it doth not hence 'fol- low, that it fealed no other than Terr ral Bleffings to" the Eledr, feeing, that {-ta them) the Heavenly were ( Typically')' ciudedin the Earthly. oAs touching the earthly Bleffings, lib} Circumcjdon fealed to the NomEleci tl -were greater and better than God wa?>a,'i I way) obliged to give them. I am |1 than they( favingly ) improved. > ObjecT - We ■ utterly Aehyj that. Water • Br fifm dfdjucceed and come ifc the room of C . cumcifion. - Aaf-w. For Confirmation of th^Af: > tive, let the three Arguments alread -down under this Head, be feriouil- without Prejudice, ccmildeml", to 4 -••' - & ) I will only add the Explication oiColof i. ii, 12. whereon I have grounded a fourth Argument, to prove that Water- Baptifrri fhcceeded and came in the room of Circum- cifion. In the place above quoted, the Apoftle plainly lets forth to the believing -Cviojfuws, ( and in them to all believing Cm- i fcf,to the World's End ) two things, (ne- ceflary to be known and believed by all true Believers.) Flrfij That they, who, by a true lively Faith, have embraced the Lord Jefus Chrift, ( as held forth in the Gofpel,) evidencing their Faith by the Truth of Gofpel San- £\i location : They, and none elfe, who are Adult, are made a&ual Partakers of the true and faving Circumcifion, effected in the -Soul by the Spirit of Ch rift. And which was (externally) flgnifkd by the outward Circumcifion. Thcfe Believers having ( now ) obtained •the Spiritual Circumcifion, are not at all to be concerned or Troubled, that they are not outwardly Circumeifed with the Circumcifion made with Man's Hands. Forafmuch as that which was ( Externally ) fignified and fealed to the believing Jews, 4)y the outward Circumcifion, is ( now In- ternally and Powerfully) wrought in their Hearts by the Spirit of the Lord Jefuc thrift. Secondly i C r, ) Secondly i The Apoftle fets forth in this place, that Water-Baptifm is inftituted and appointed by Chrift ( under the Gof- pel Difpenfation) to be (to believing Gefc tiles) the fame that Circuracifi on was to the J'ewsj viz... A Vilible Sign and Seal of jibraham\ Covenant to all his Ecckfia- ftical Church-Seed among the Gentiles, viz.. All of that Race, who (on God's calling them ) believe in and obey the Lord Jefus Chrift. To thefe and their In- fant-Seed ( and none elfe among the Gen- tiles ) Baptifm doth ( now under the Gof- peJ ) fignifie and feal the very fame fpiritu- al BleiTings and Church Privileges, which Circumciiion (of old ) did fignifie and feal to the believing Jews and their Infant-Seed^. This I take to be the Senfe and Meaning v of the Apoftle, in that fo much controver- ted place. In this Senfe, I hope, I [hail die fatisfied. And herein, I humbly conceive^ ■none of "the Orthodox will differ from me^ which Senfe being granted, it is beyond the reach of all Scriptural Contradiction, that Water-Baptifm was Inftituted and appointed (by Chrift J on purpofe to mc- ceed in the room of Gircumclfion* C 2 CHAP C m) CHAP. IV. Shewing and f roiling that the Infants of Be- lieving Gentiles (?7ow under, the G off el) have as real a Right to the Covenant of Grace, and to Baptifm7 the ( now ) Vifible Sign and Seal 'thereof: as had the Children of Abraham ( according to the Flefi ) to it7 and to Circumcifion, the then Seal of the Covenant of Grace- ' And, that they are as capable of the Grace and outward Seal of the Covenant, as are the mo ft Adult grown Believers. J fli all lay down Four Arguments^ to evince and make good ( again ft all Oppofition )what J now ajfert. jircr. i.rpH E "iirft Argument* is thus X fram'd : If God (hirnfelf ) did, by abiolute Soveraign Grace, comprehend sibraharrh Church-Seed in the Covenant of Grace he made with believing Abraham , ( their Stipulating and Covenanting Father ) and never fince Repeal'd that .Gracious of tite : Then the Infants of Abraham's Ct \ are (till interefled in the ( venswt of Grace, and have as great Right to and are as capable of the Grate and Seal of -that Covenant as ever., but God (hirnfelf) did by abfolute 5o- Grace, comprehend 'JSh Church- i 35 ) Church-Seed in the Covenant of Grace he made with believing Abr^ham^ \ their Stipulating and Covenanting Father' which* Gracious Act of his was never ilacc Re- pealed. " m Therefore the Infants of 'jffirah •Church-Seed are {till interefred m the Co- venant of Grace, and have as great a Right to, and are as capable of the Grace and Seal. of that Covenant as ever. I cannot fee how this. Argument can poflibly be overthrown., but by pro that God did alter and change that Cove- nant he made with Abraham ( his Friend ) for himfelf and for his Church -See..; ; which, when the Adverfarv dolj ' £ :■ dence of Scripture, ■( not . ' . a : par - verted^) I (hall then yeijd the Cauie5 and bewail , my Mifiake. But two' things caure in; me an unfhaken. Confidence, that d-,s can never be done. Ftrft^ The Immutabi- lity aad Unchangeablenefs of God.^ on which very account he is ft lied a Covenant- keeping Giod, who never yet call oaf any poor "Sinner,, until that Sinner did fir ft adiw ally caft God ofF^ the which, I think, the Adverfarv dares not deny. Secd?idly, The .Impolfib.iiityof poor Infants actually caft- ing~God off,, and. that beeaufe of their Inca- pacity in refpect of Age. C3 Arg ( 30 j&g. i. if Infants be at all faved r they r,re faved by the Grace of God's Covenant made mthJhrSham , which Covenant, and the External Seal thereof, ( in the Vifible rch mart belong to t#em alfo. * But Infants are faved by the Grace of i's Covenant, (made Wixh^braham) and ^ other way. • jreforc the Covenant of God's Grace y Which they are faved) and the Seal thereof, ( in the Vifible Church ) jmifl: be- long to them al fb This Argument hath been conftantly inaiatainecu by the Orthodox ) againlt the Enemies of Infant Baptifm, with iiicb Suc- cefs, that I never yet heard the Man's Kame, who was ^hie to anfwer or over- Throw tho. fams^by found or folicf Argu- ment. To deny Salvation to Infants is a Prin- ciple fo njonilroiiily cruel and uncharita- ble, (expoiiog to the Judgment of God, and to the deferved Frowns of all Tender- hearted Parents) that fome, who account it a point of great Skill and Wifdom, ( in the Myftery of the Gofpel ) to decry and witnefs againfl Infant Baptifm, have de- clared themfelves jlrongly inclin'd to be- lieve, that all Infants are faved, and that vvitnout difringuifhing between ElecT: and probate, or between the Seed of Pro- fefline ( V ) felling Godly Believers, and that of Mako- met an s^ &c. A Principle ( altogether j as fifty and groimdlefs as that of denying the Right "of Believers Infant-Seed to the Co- venant of Grace, and the Vifible Token or Seal thereof in the Church, And at whan Door this ( Heterodox ) Dream fhould en- ter, or from what Root or Principle it fhp.uld fpring, I know riot, unlefs from fehafc Popilh Arminian Principle of general Re- demption and univerfaT Grace. Here, by the Conceffion ; or Grant ) of the very Ad- verfaries, Infants are faved *, but 'how, or in what way ? whether by a Covenant or without a Coveiwnt. Here they are ( pro- roundly j filent, not daring to mention any Co vena n t a t all , fearing a n Ad v a ntage ma y be (thereby ) given to dlfcbver or prove the Right of Infants to the Covenant. It is fufficierit ; fvich Dreamers judge) to leave poor Infants to the -general Mercy and Grace of. God, as thofe' do, who dream and conceit, that the very Damned in Hell mall, atlength, be delivered from the "Torments of that Place, For which Chy- tnerical Wftym, there is as much to be faid (from the Word of God, ) as there is to prove, that God will extend the Grace of his Covenant to ail Infants dy- ing fo. C $ Xht (38) The Adverfary I difpute againft, knows well, that_fhould it be granted ( in '7\r minis) in plain Terms, that Infants are tared by the Grace of , the_jCovg5aiit7Tt id" way be avokled, but tha^InfaDts foiaJf be rn that Covenant, and mull: have an indifpntable R\^hi.( i-r faro Ecclsfu) to the outward Seal thereof. But this mull be denied, and its contra- cted, ;'for the moil glorious Gofpel-. Truth,') vjz.. That Believers only fex- . their Infants) are interefted in the Covenant, and have a Right to the Seal thereof:, and that in the Right of the Pro- on they make before Men. Now, how abfurd and contrary- to the Tenure and Deftgn of God's Covenant vn:h thrift (in the behalf of the Ele&j this Prhicitle of - Anahaytifm is •, I leave to eve- ry unprejudiced Reader (who underitands any thing in Religion ) to Judge. And whether to reft rain the, Promife" of God's Covenant ( which equally extends to all the BlccT ) to. that part of the Elec% which are adult and grown up, to make a ProfeRi> on, and to extend the Grace of God be- yond the Bounds of his own Covenant, be riot equally to rafe the Foundation of Gof- pel-Truth, and to nfurp the Throne of God (or to invade his Prerogative) in the _hj I leave to Wife Men to deter- mine. If ( 39 > ; If thus to do falls not uncler that dread- ful Commination ( or Woe threatned ) i& Rev, 22. 1 3. I am greatly miftaken, Arg. i i If Infants do Hand in, as real need of the Grace of :God's Covenant as the A- dult do, and be (every way) as capable thereof as the Adult are, then mud they of neceffity be allow'd the Seal -thereof in the. Church, Bu t Infants do iland in. as real need.of the Grace of God's Covenant, and are ( every , way) as capable thereof as the Adult are/ Therefore the Seal of God's Covenant in the Church mull of neceffity be. allow'd them. ' That' Infants- are Partakers of Adam\ Guilt/and alfo. of that Pravky and Pollu-. ; tion of Nature, which came by Adam\ Fall,. I am confident will be deny'd by none]; un~ Tefsby downright Dreamers } now to own ' this. And at the Tame time to teach and hold y that Infants are becaufenot grown up to thernfe of .Reafon and adual Faith ) unca- ' pahle of Regeneration, is to deny Salvation to all Infants,' who die; infants : And how. rinclpls accords with all Infarcts •being laved, ( who die Infants) iVjaQt-fii^ :%ujt: to underhand! If this be not Com a-: diftia.w Termini^ viz,.. A Contradict V,ti-. in plain Te ; oow net what a Conn?- fiction mean's/ C i Tie C 4P 1 The Lord Chriff ( who can neither lye nor be deceived in what he faith ) allures 13$, that except 6ne be born again, he cannot ( pojfibly ) fee the Kingdom of God. Joh. 3.3. wherein the abfoluteneed of Regeneration Is difcovered and aiTerted •, and the Subjed of which, this is predicated fin that Text) being indefinitely and univerfally expreft; we are taught that neither Adult nor Infant, ihali ever enter Heaven, till that Work of Regeneration pafs on the guilty polluted Soul : A nd to fay that an Adult ( or grown) Pe-rfon ( by reafon of his Age ) is capable of this great Change, but that an Infant ( be- caufe he wTants the ufe of reafon, &c. ) is incapable of it. What is this but ( inter- pretativelyj to hold and fayvthat the Crea- tures own Will and Reafon muft concur to the producing the New Creature in a Dead And jhow advantageous this Principle is iO tfafifts Arminians, Pelagians and Soci- Sms> tbfc Learned and Orthodox, well iftfiOW,. The Enemies themfelves do (with us) knowledge, that Water-Baptifm is iPaf- frve Ordinance ; and iltange it is^. that zilok ( of thaa. Party ) who are concerned to- deck and adorn the Frontifpiece of their Bocks ( TigainiV Infant Eaptilln ) with ftcfe 0**ete Fiourifhes of Greek, Hebrew, and: Latin; O J Latin Sentences, do not ( in their way of arguing about this matter) give us to under- ftand that they underftand and know the Meaning and proper Signification of the Word Paflive, better than it appears they do; certain it is, and the Learned know it, that the Term Paffive fignifies and im- ports a Non- agency in the SubjeQ:, when a Change is palling on it, or a Work pro- ducing in it; to the effecting of which > Change (or Work) the Subjed recipient neither wills nor^&s any thing towards thej Produdionof fiich a Change. If I underftand any thing of God's Mind > (revealed in the Sacred Scripture ) or was ever (experimentally ) acquainted with the Spirits Method in paflingthat great Change : on a Sinner, in efFe&ual Calling. The Work confifts of two Parts; Firfr, God'i Gracious Afts, in freely pardoning all ih&z Rebel's Sins and Tranfgreflions committed i againfl the Law, imputing to him that Spot- lefs Rigbtepumefs of Ghrifl his Son i thr Sinners Sponfor-or Surety J as truly and > .really.. as if that Spotlefs Righteoufnel^ bad £ been a&ed and4 performed bj the Sinner ; himfeif (perfonallf. ) This is the fir ft part - wherein that great Change lies or agree(in applying the Water of Holy Bap- tifm) they will be at length found to in the right, how many and black Cjerxfures foevcr are heapt on. them by injudicious Spirits : The Spirit of God ( in the Work of Regeneration) applys the Spiritual Bap- tifnrby Sprinkling or Pouring out of his Graces on the Soul. There muft be an A- nalogie kept between the thing ilgnified and the outward Sign. Againit what hath been laid down to prove Infants Right to Baptifm, ( the Seal of God's Covenant ) many things are ob- jected . I will, for Brevity fake, contract the - Objections, with my Anlwers, to as few Particulars as poffibly I can. Object, i.. In the Words of the Gr. Comm ffiott-) there is not one Word concerning Infant s\ Mat. 28. 19. Go ye and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name, 1 This -C 47 ) This feems to weak ( though well mean- ing ) Minds to be unanfwerable : But in the ftrength of him who gave out this Grand ' Com million, I hope to (hew how wretched- ly the* Objector is miftaken herein. In order whereto, let two things bc^ rioutly^C anot warily) considered. • Firfiy That albert Ghrift tne Lord doth not mentioa Infants ( in particular) yet he includes them in the Words of the general Comrriiillon, Go Teach all Nations, Baptizing themy&£. Here the Lord commands ( ex- preily ) that all fuch as' belong to God's Covenant (with Abraham) Gen. 7. 7. fnall be Baptized : namely, all who (hall embrace the Son of (fc>d by Faith, and their Infant- Seed ( if any they have). That this is the true fenle and meaning of Ghrilr, in that place, is clear to any wrro do not r wilfully) fhut their Eyes :y for evident it is, and none can den-y'fthat he (there) commands to Bap- tize all Nations, not excepting againfc or -forbidding the Diiciples to baptize little Infants: He knew that he fpake to Men, who ( after the fending of the Holy Ghbft ) "fiiould know and co n fid er that Jhraham's Covenant ( with Believers and their- Infant- Seed) was to remain and continue the fame to the end of the World. And this, ( to- I gether with the fharp Rebuke he gave to his 1 Apoftles, for. offering to hinder little Ones being; (48 ) being brought to him ; and his laying be- fore them fuch a convincing Reafon where- fore ftich mould not be kept from coming to him, Mark 10. 14. was the principal, ( if not the only Reafon) wherefore his infinite Wifdom favv it not needful to mention In- fants in particular, they being (molt cer- tainly) included in the general "terra, all Na-: tions : All Men fwho know any thing of Learning) underftand that Omne majtu continet in fe minm^ ( every greater includes or contains in ittbelefierj is a fure and Handing Rule both in Logick and Divinity. Agreeing with this Senfe ( I have given off the grand Commiffion ) is that of i&pr^ J&ts 2. 39. For the Promije is to jott and to your Children^ &c which affords an invin- cible Argument to prove that there is (now under the Gofpel ) no Change of Abraham's Covenant, /any other than in the external Ad'miniftration of it ) The Covenant (.in its fubflauce) abides the fame for ever: By. the Grace thereof all God's Elcft ( both of the.Jewifn and Gentile Race ) are to be fa- ved. Rom. 3. 29. What I have faid will yet receive farther Confirmation by what is laid down by Paul in Gal. 3. 14. That the Bleffing of Abraham might come upon the G 'entiles , through Jefus Christ, &c. The Places now quoted out of Jcls 2. 39. and GaL 3. 1 4 prefuppofe a Command to all, ( whether C 49 ) (whether Jew or Gentile ) who (by Faith) receives Jefns Chrift for a Saviour) that they (hall be iigned with the Seal of Abra- ham's- Covenant, according to Gen. 17. 9. For if the Gentiles^ who believe in Abra~ ham's Saviour, do cxpeft that they and their Infants fhould be made adual Partakers of the Bleffings .of Abraham's Covenant ; they muft be fure to obferve and keepGocTsGo* venant with Abraham throughout their Generations. Secondly, feeing that Chrift (himfelf ) words the CommiffionTo in general terms, (which, undoubtedly, includes the parti- cular) not excepting againft Infants : It mu.fi neceffafiry fellow, that if Infants be apart . of thofe Nations which the Apoftles , &c. are commanded to Baptize \ that Chrift commands them to Baptize Infants . as well as any others. Reader , obferve the. Words of tie CommHHdn, Go and Teach all Nation s, &c. Here is no more mention of grown Perfons, Men or Wo- men, than there is of Infants. If then A- nabaptifts cannot deny that Infants are a part of Nations, and that they can no way prove how Abraham's Bleffing can come on the Gcntiles7 through Chrifl Jefus,. any o- ther way than by and through the Cove- nant of Abraham \ It will (unavoidably ) follow ( ail the Wit in Man cannot oppofe it it with Succefs) that Infants as well as-adult Perform are Cas the proper Subjects of Bap- tifnu) intended^ by Chiift) in the Grand Com million. Object. 2. None are the 'proper Subjects of Eaptlfm, but fitch as are firft taitght, Go and Teach, &c. Infants are , not capable of Mans Teachhtg^ therefore they are not the proper Sub f els of Baptifin. Jnfw. This, with the Objection already ipok'en to, feems (to weak and injudicious People) to be unanfwerable, (for excluding Infants from Baptifm) but he. that looks into it with a fpiritual Eye, will find no- thl ng i n it .agai h ft I n fa nts. In order to difcover the Weaknefs and MiA:ake of the Objector, let it be oblqrved ( with Care ) that the Word Teach, is twice- mentioned inane Words of the Commiffion r ■Go^ and "Vtach all Nations^ Baptizing themy &c. And inVer. 20. Teaching them toob- fervg, &C. T tie firft Teach, is (in the Original) Ma- thet fin fate \ and the other is, Didashntes ; which I choofe to fet down ..in the Englfli (rather than in the Greek) Character, to the end the unlearned may Read them -7 and in Reading, obferve the great Diffe- rence which is between the two Words, and that both in the Letters and Sound of the Words * if this be taken Notice, of, it will wil- afford to the Unlearned fwhoV .not be impos'd upon; groiind jto Tii: not only the Skill (In Tongues,) but alio the -Honelty_:ahd Faithful nefs of thbfe Guides, whom they judge come nearer io Infallibi- _llty in what they teach, than do the other eminent Servants of Chrift, .who differ from them'- and at whofe JLabours the a-- bleU Preachers of that Party, are glad to light their. Candles., As thefe two Words differ, in Letters and Sound, as the Unlearned themfeives will find, (if they be but .Faithful to them- selves,)- fo they differ alio in their Senfe and Signification, as the Orthodox and Learned well know. I begin with the firft, vizi pfatbetmfate7 which fignifies ( properly ) to Difciple, or to make Difciples in all Na- tions,* where th^.Goipel ihall be (gladly) received. , How is this to be done I Aafw. Even as God taughtAiraham, when he Inftrii- cted him in the great Myftery of the Cove- nant : The- which , when Abraham em- brac'cl for himfelf and his Infant-Seed, he receiv'd f gladly J the Viilhle Token or Seal [f} that-Cpvenant of Grace, 'vizj. Circum- ^iion, and marks out his infant-Seed, by jutting the fame Seal of the Covenant on Pern, and that ia compliance with God's iCommand. - h ( 51 ) It is but rational to fuppofe and grant, that the firft Subjefts of an Ordinance fhould be Perfons Adult and grown up to the life of Reafon, that they may be capa- ble of afting for not only themfelyes, but for their Off-fpringand Poftenty alfOjWho are not ( while Infants ; capable of acting for themfelves. . , This was God's Way and Method with ■jibraham C his Friend) he propounds his Covenant of Grace to him, and (m him) to his Seed, as their ftlpulating.and cove- nanting Head and Representative. In in- ftrudting Jlbrdxm, God, in Grahams Perfon, infinite his Infants fo as by that Inftruftion his Infant Seed became : Difa- ples, and were ( accordingly ) fign d with the Seal of their ftipulating Father s Co- VCThis undoubtedly, was the Method which the Apoftles went in, .when they were fent forth to make Difciples (to Thrift ) in every Nation. They lnftrufted Adut and Grown Perfonsin the Myftery of God? Grace (by Cbrift; and when fuch laid hold on Chrift ( in the Covenant; by an External Profeffion of Faith inhim) thev wete Baptised with their Infants,^ if any thef had.) Hence we read of the Jay- was Baptized, helnd all that were of him. em- ytk;. His own Perfonal Oif-fpring, fo the ■■Greek Word fignifies. Hence alfo we read Qf whole Families, who were Baptized (.by the Apoitles) on the Faith of fueh as were the Heads of fuch Families. It was no more jieceflary, that Infants fhould be made men- tion of, ( as being in .-fuch Families when Baptized } thaiHt was, that they fhould be Dam'd in the grand Commiffion ; the Spi- rit which gave otit the Grand CommHlIon, was in, and with the Apoftles, when they Baptized} and it is, to me, convincing, that Infants are intended in both, feeing they are excepted agai nil in neither, which the Adverfary rnuft ( needs ) be convinc'd of, nnlefs he be able to prove, that Infants are- neither a part of Nations or of Fami- lies. The other Word teach, in the Commif- fion is, Djdaskomes, which (properly) fig- nifies a Teaching or Intruding ( Do mm mi,fl: 't follow ( u-r j variably ) that all Infants, who die in " S a™- eterMlIy bft: And h0wri H /hisDoanneis.andhowinconSltentwVi 1 D ( 56 ) the Doctrine which teacheth that all In- fants, dying Infants, are laved, all Men may fee. Thirdly, If none but real true Believers have a Right to Baptifm, I would gladly fee how thofe, I difpute againft, can juftifie their own Practices, in admitting fo maty poor ignorant Folk to that Ordinance (in their way ) who (with fome who admit them ) are as ignorant of the Myftcry of Regeneration and of Baptifm, ( the exter- nal Seal thereof) as was Nicodcnms. Can they, without a Divine Revelation, know tbatthof: whom they admit to Baptifm are ( infallibly ) real true Believers ? Object. 4. To af ply Baptifm, ( the Seal of the Covenant ) to an unintelligent SubjcEt, who neither knows what is clone to kiih} nor ycilds con Cent thereto : It is. all one as to pre fern a Vihptre to A blind Man.t which to do> is moll abfurd and rid-adous. ' ' JrSw. To this I fhal! reply in four Par- ticulars. A ad Firft, I fay, w ith a Learned Man, this is, at heft, but a blind Compa rifoa :, and ( which is far worfe ) a high anc fancy Reflection, on the infinite Wiidon and* uncontroulablc Sovereignty of %ht molt high God ; for moil certain it is, tha nothing can bc'ofrercd as an Argument t< keep Infants from ffiptifm, (meerfj) on th account of their t>siag unintelligent Sub tea ( J7) jects, and uncapable of yeildiifg their Con- tent to what is done to them in Baptifm ). But what will be of as great force to keep them back from Circumcifion ? And fo th£ Objector may fee plainly how ( herein ) he arraigns the Wifdom and Sovereignty of God at the Barr of a (hallow and corrupt: Creature's Reafon, which demonlrrates him to be more Brutifh ( I am fure more proud and Wicked J than thofe Non-intelligent; Subjects which the Objection is 'levelled againft. This will appear by cOnfldering God's dealing with Abraham, in that he command- ed him to Mark, or Seal, his Son Ifaac with. the Seal of Circumcifion at Eight Days old. Had Ifaac the ufe of -Reafon at that Age ? Had he actual Faith cr Speech to exprefs his Confent to what was (then ) done to him ? No fure^ what then isffi God be charged with Weaknefs- or Unreafcnable- nefs for applying the Seal of his Covenant; to an unintelligent Subject ? By tfeefe kind of Objectors, God's Act (herein ) Rmds charged with Weaknefs and Folly ; But 1 conclude with Paul, Rom. 3. 4. Tea, tct &M be true, but every Mart a Lyar. God com- mands nothingin vain, and the reafon is be- ~aufe his Ordinance hath no kind of deperi- ience on the Creature, to give it Power, or :o make it effectual to accompli (hwhau he D 2 bath C 58 ) hath appointed it to, but on his own free Spirit, which works molt powerfully, yea, iiTefiitably, where he himfelf hathpurpofed to confer the Spiritual Good, fignified by the outward Ordinance. Object. 5. The Promife of God's Covenant is made to the Elect , and none but they have a Right to the Seal: No Alan can affirm that an Infant brought to Baftifm is Elect. A'ifvo. I anfwer to this in two thirigs. Firft, I grant that none [hall ever reap any iaving Benefit by the Covenant, but the E- Ie bout them, whether: they be m the tkCri- on of God, yea or no. It is ground fbf- ficient for us'to biefs and thank God for his dealing fo graciouily with our Infants, in that they, with us,nre taken .into the fame Covenant,, and Sealed with the Seal there- of j for by God's dealing thus. wjth^Belie^ v^rsinfant^Seed, BeJieyei'i Have; a go&fy Foundation kid^jwhej^n^ibot^ Hope_and Comfort^ ( w.ith Reference to: their Dying or Dereaied-Infants ) and alio { €ojrvej^pn_and,^^ the which the Enemies to Infant-Baptifm, do ' C by denying that Infants belong to the Co- venant, or have any Right to the Promifes thereof, till they themfelves Relieve) de- prive, and (infenfibly) (poll, them [elves' of. .This is moil evidently true, as will appear if it be ferioufly confidered, that all rjgh t_Pxa_yer_i5 a*Heffin the Najrj^aiidjyleritj qf_ .Chrjft his own Son, in and through' whom., the faid Promifes are intaiPd on all. theChildren of Promife : Now if my Infant! be fick or ailing, if he be going on in Sin, &c\ how cap I (by the Anabaptift Prin- ciple) put up a Prayer to God for him, feeing there is no Promife of God's Cove- I nant belongs to him ? Or how can I comfort j my forrowful Spirit ( with reference to my D 3 Deceafed C 60) Deceafed Children ) if I mull look on my dear Babes as Strangers and Enemies to God, ( the which they are by Nature ; and nnii ft remain fo for ever) in cafe they be not Partakers of the Grace of God's Covenant f Secondly, If none but the Elecl; have Right to Baptifm, this Objection will fall like a Mill-ftooe on them who Baptize whole Droves of Men and Women , of whofe Election r to eternal Life ) neither Baptizcr nor Baptized, know any more than they know how many Stars in the Firma- rnent-, To that by thus arguing ag3inft poor Tongne-ty'd Infants, they may fee how they deny Salvation to their own, as well as others, Infants, and render themfelves uncapable of difchargin»g a good Confcience to their poor Children, in putting up ( dai- ly > Petitions to God for them. ; Object. 6. We have an open Profefflon from thoje we Baptize^ and that warrants our Bap- tiding fitch as offer themfelves to join to the Churches. Ton have not the like from Infants. Anfvo. I anfwer hereto in three Parti- culars. Ff>&S It were well for both Bapti- zers and Baptized, if both the one and the other were better. acquainted with the Na- ture of right Converfion than they are, and that they were better grounded in the found (and experimental ) Knowledge of the Co- venant of. Grace j the which, ifthev were, C 6i ) I dare ( boldly ) fay, they would not be fo precipitant and ra(h in condemning and de~ ipidng thofe poor Infants,who are fet forth ( by the Wifdora of God ) as Patterns and Examples, by which grown Perfons are to be moulded and fitted for Heaven : Nei- ther would they be fo forward t;o offer themfelves to Baptifm on fuch flight and evanid Motions, as falls fhort. ( in too ma- ny ) of common Convictions. Secondly, Poor Irrfan^nevexCy et) broke ^ QJJ^r^felgflkdjthe Moral Law, ( Perfonal- % ly ) and that is one great Reafon why an>; actual Confeifion.of 1 aith and Repentance | is_ not required of "thereto qoalifie them for \ Baptilm.; As the Sin of Infants lies in the ^ Imputation of Mam's Difobedience, and the" Pollution of Nature, derived by fleflily Generation ; fo their Help and Remedy lies in the Imputation of Chrift's Spotiefs Righteoufnefs to their Perfons } and his Spirits renewing their inward Faculties in Regenerating them. And this twofold Work of the Spirit in juftifykig and fancti- fyingthe Elect Infant, is (plainly ) iignified and fealed in that Ordinance Gf Baptifm, , to the Infant, as well as to a grown Believer. Thirdly,- Albeit Infants be not able to fpeak for themfelves, and to claim that Right to the Seal of God's Covenant which the Covenant it felf hath'entajrd on them, D 4: - (as X as they are the Church Seed of Believing Parents ) yet there is one who (peaks for them, whole Judgment and Teftimony of them is more Jure and infallible than ano- ther Testimonies of Men and Angels- the lord Jefus, I mean, who ( with his Father, and God the Holy Choir. ) contrived and made the Covenant of Grace, wherein they are comprehended. ' I will lay down in fix Particulars what is the judgment of Chrift concerning Infants, \ as they are concern- ed in the Covenant ) Firfi, he propounds them a* Patterns, by which grown Perfons KMjft be moulded and fitted for Heaven, Mku 18. 3. Secondly, declares their Right to the Kingdom of God, Mar. 1 o. 1 4. For of fitch is the Kingdom of God. Thirdly, re- bukes (moftfevereiy) his Difciples for hin- dering Infants being brought to him, Mark 10. 14. Bat when Jefe faro it, he was much difpleafed, &c. Ill the Greek it is Egarzak- te'.e, which fignifies to have the Bowels (in- wardly J moved, or aftecled with Grief, to be filled with Indignation \ as Bez.a ren- ders. it; Indignatus eft, to be Stomackt at a Perfon, or a thing which is greatly or highly difpleafing : A Word which judici- ous Sydenham obferves, was never ufed by Chrift in any cafe, or on any occasion, be- fides this of poor Infants, to inilrncl: and teach Men: (No doubt) how greatly he was c m was concerned for helplefs Infants, and how difpleafed he was at the Hardnefs of his Difciples Hearts again.ft them : Oh ! that the Coniideration of this might melt the hard Hearts of fuch, into a Chrift-like Tendernefs towardspoor Infants. Fourth- ly> commands Infants to be brought to him± Mark 10. 14. Suffer little Children to corns unto me^ &c. Fifthly , pronounces them holy, Rom. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Sixthly y bleifeth them,. Mark 10. 16. And he took them up in his Arms^ laid his Hands upon them, and Blcffed rhem... Thef^ Six Particulars laid together, and weighed in the Baila nee of God's San&uary, I leave it to any Man of Senfe (in Spiritual Matters) to judge whe- ther is fafer to credit this Infallible Teftir- mony of the Son of Gqd, concerning In- fants, than to rely on the bare Teftimony of a rneer Man, concerning himfelf y wha may, in all he pretends to, be but a Painted Sepulchre. 9 Object, J. If Infants musl meds have I Right to Baptifm^ becaufe it is a Seal of ;h§ ! Covenant $ theny of necefflty., they muB tyave i- a Right tothe Lord' 's Stopper _alfa y for that n : a Seel of the Covenant of Grace as well, as \B.aptifm. The Wine in the Suf per might I well be poured down the Infants Aiouth with I Spoon, as tofprinkle Water on his Face. I Anf?>\ -This- Objection- better ..becomes i Efi S cm a Superannuated Man,, who borders on perfcft Dotage, than one who pretends to be a Teacher of ignorant and mifguided Souls £ and not only fo, but who takes on him to ufurp the Seat of Judgment, in pa& ling Sentence on all the Holy, Learned and Orthodox Divines, and Proteftant Martyrs and Churches, who are gone to glory in the unfhaken Belief that the Infants of Be- lieving Parents have an unqueftionable Right to Baptifra, and that they are as capable of the Seal of Baptifm as they are of the Grace of God's Covenant, fignified thereby. But that the_Lo^dVj>uj)pe^^ feme But to adaU and actual Believers, who are^rj^lej)fj^^ in, a worthy Communicant *r fuch' as Self- examination ( with Reference to his State God-ward:; his Faith in Ghrift, his Progrefs ma. Holy Life,, his difcerning the Lord's Body, his keeping up a lively Communion with. Father, Son and Spirit in that Ordi- nance, and judging ones felf in cafe of fhort ^O'ming in holy Duties. •Th'efe are the Qualifications required to He- in one who comes to the Lord's Supper: 0 which, any ( not in a Dream) may judge. m £hW& cannot be capable, ( while an In- line ) 1 humbly hope fra judicious Chrifti- m w.ilicenfure me, asralh«and uncharitable, ft I judge thole fo.cactets fitter for a Shos- hoav4 r$ ) board than a Pulpit, who are not able or i willing to difcern. or diftinguifh between I Milk and ftrong Meat \ and who will deny ! to Infants the Miik of Holy Baptifm, \ ( whereof they are capable, and whereto ( by God's Covenant ) they have right, .be- , caufe they are uncapable of receiving and |j digefting the ftrong Meat of the Lord's- j Supper. J Object. 8. If Infant-Baptifm were God's j Ordinance, and were accompanied with his 1 Blejfm?^ to the Infant, how comes it to pafs9 j that Jo many Baptised, {in Infancy ) prove fo Carnal and Looje in their Lives an4 Con— j vcrfations ? i jfofip. Hereto" I reply in, three Partial- j lars, wherewith I (hall Ihut up the prefent j Difptite. Firtf, It is with many Believers Infants now ( under the Gofpel ) as it was with A.- braham and his Infants of old. Some are. their Children by flelhly Generation- only3 who ( Ijlmad-like) prove Mockers and: Scoffers at Holinefs, and Haters of God and good Men: Thefe, ( notwithftandiiig. i the Relatioj^-t^ey1tan ble Church for a time) being left to the Parknc& and Eoily lodged m their cor- rupted. Nature^ they, give .. thgffifeJv.es- over C 66 y toallkindof.Loofenefs. Baptifm now) is no more to be faulted on this account, than Circumcifion was formerly. When the Children of believing Gen- tiles do (actually ) violate God's Covenant, and depart from him^ then will God do with them, as he did with Jbrabam's Car- nal Seed, &£. Secondly, As fome of the Children of be- lieving Parents, who were Baptiz'd m In- fant State, prove loofe and vain, fo blef- fed be God, a great many prove holy and upright Walkers with God, manifefting la their Lives and Conventions, thelive- i.y Copy of that Spiritual Circumcifion wrought (by the Spirit) in their Hearts when Converted, which was iignified and fa led by that Baptifm, which they were made Partakers of when Infants. Thirdly and lafily0 If from the vain and ful Practice, of fome (Baptized in Infancy) (ijiaru.-Baptifm mull be difallow'd , (as W- IniHtutioii of God ) how ftrong an ./anient will this prove, to overthrow tilt Baptizing, grown Profeffbrs ? For (if . not ) the Oppofcrs'of Infant- Bap- i i amir, own, ( will they nill they ) that. snn\y of thofe Baptize:' 'in their way)' have ading their mining Profeflibn, ,ns to the Work of bin) fallen, moll;. foully, and And' ( 67 ) And thus I have, according to the Wif* dom given from above, endeavoured, to clear up, ( from God's Word ) that Abra- hams Covenant, Gen ij. 7. is ( moft cer- tainly ) the Covenant of Grace. I have al- io prov'd (from the fame AVo^d) that Cir- cumcifion was. the Seal of that Covenant: And that Baptifm ( under the Gofpel) is now fucceeded ( or come in the room ) thereof. I- have endeavoured to prove, that the Infants of believing Gentiles have as real a Right to Baptifoi as Abrahams Seed had to Circumciilon, vinder that dark Difpeniation. And whether the A nfwers I have given .to the moft material Objecti- ons, I find brought againft Infant- Baptifm,- be pertinent and convincing, I leave to the. judicious and unprejudiced to judge, G H A ?. % Of Tmmsrjion, Proving that Gofpel Bdptifm ii by Sprinkling, not by Dipping. AMong all the RaHi and Prefumptuous' AfTertors of Dipping the whole Body under Water, being.theoniy right-Mode or. • Manner of Baptizing^ none hath made a.- greater Noife. ( or a fairer (hew ) of being, ^Herein ) infallible* than om William Ru$d^ who.. C 68 ) who flryles himfelf Mcdlcim Doftor Acca- demidt Camabrigienfis. This Author, with a more than ordina- ry Confidence, hath boldly aflerted, that Dipping, &c. is the only right Mode of Baptising, commanded by Chrift in the New-Teftamenr, and pra&ifed by John the Baptift, and all the Apoitlesand Primitive Christians. This crude ( or raw ) Aflertion of his, he labours to fupport and make good by a fourfold Medium : Firft, The Etymologie of the Greek Word the Holy Ghoft ufeth to exprefs Dipping by. Secondly, Thofe Metaphors tifed in Ho- ly Scriptures, to reprefent it to our Under- ftanding. Thirdly, The Pra&ice of the firft Bap- tizers. Fourthly, The Words of the Grand Commiflion given by our Saviour in Mat. 28. 19. To demonftrate the Falfenefs of his Af- fertion, and to difcover to Weak and In- judicious People, the great Miftakes where- on he bottoms his Aflertion, is the Deiign of my prefent Undertaking. But before I attack this GoHah, in examining what he can get from the four Particulars ( above mentioned,) which may caufe fimple and empty Brains to think and conceit this Aceade- ( 69 ) Accademical Doctor, invincible and unan- swerable in what he hath ( fo peremptori- ly ) aflerted for the Truth of God. I will lay down two things, ( by way of Premife) whereof I defire the Reader ( who is unwil- ling to be deceiv'dj to takeNotice,. The fkft is, That not fo nrcch the Bare Letter of 'Scripture ? as the Senfe and Meaning of the Spirit, ( therein ) is the Word of God ^ by which Truth and Er- ror are to be try'd' and judg'd. I have often faid, ( and I am very bold in affirming that ) that Senfe or Interpretation, which, any Man or Men give of any Text of God\ Wordj which thwarts and contradi&s the An»alogie of Faith, that Senfe or Interpre- tation is from the Spirit of Satan, not from God, be the fame never fo plaufible and pleadng to the Sons of Men • and be the Authors never fo highly efteem'd of, for both their Piety and Learning, There is a fweet and an harmonious Concord and Agreement between all the parts of God's Revealed Religion, though but few ( com- paratively ) can fee it to be fo. The Do- ftrine and Institutions of God in all the par- ticulars of his inftituted Worfhip, are plain, eafie, and obvious to the Eye,wh&iv the Spirit of Chri-ft hath anointed, i But to fuch Men and WomenT who are Defli- tute. of the Spirit, of Qiri.% nothing in Religion ( ?o J Religion appears to them^ bat Nonfenfe and feeming Contradictions, which is the Reafon why fo many thoufands in Eng- land &c. ftagger and reel ( with a Spiri- tual Vertigo ) in the Principles of the Pro- teftant Religion, wherein both they and- their Anceftors were Initiated ( by Water- Baptifm O and in maintaining- of which, they feemed (for many years) very Zea- lous. The fecond thing I (hall premife , is this, ( viz.. ) That Heterodox and Corrupt Underminers of the Gofpel are then to be molt of all lookt after and watcht againft^ when they lay about them, to advance the Fame and Credit of the Devil's Minilters, by Eclipfmg and Darkening the Credit and deferved Fame of Chrift's Worthys, whom Chrift hath honoured with, being the chief Combatants in the Lord's Battels againfi the Powers of Darknefs in this World. My Deflgn in this, is to difcover to the unwary Reader, this Doctor's Deiign of blackening that Renowned and Incompa- rable Servant of Chrift, Mr. John Cahln, than whom,. I verily believe, the World hath not ( fince the Apoftles left the Earth.) feen a greater Divine.. A Man, whoy for his high and excellent Endowments in all manner- of Learning, efpecially his Eagter eyedusfs:,) C 71 ) eyednefs, in penetrating into the Senfe. of i Scriptures ) was more like a Prophet, or an , Apoflle, than an ordinary Preacher^ This Do&or, that he might put a Lu- I fire on Michael Servcttv his Name, draws i tliePencil, of horrid and black Reproach a- | crofs the Name and Reputation of Holy >■' and (as I (aid ) incomparable Calvin. The i Devi! ( in his "Mini'fters ) being deeply fen- j fible how the famous and elaborate Works i of that one Man {land in the way, to pre* | vent and hinder the Devil growing Ram- pant, in advancing his Kingdom of Dark- en efs among the Sons of Men. Calvin is (by theDf ■■ ) reprefented as an j ambitions, .Self feeking Man • and (which | is far worfe) a bloody Perfecutor, whlle-his- \ Servaus h deckt and adorned with the ; Robes of a glorious Martyrdom. The Drs. Words will mew whether I be miHaken in what I fay of him, fee Page 4 oftheDrs. Epiftle,- where he faith, (.with a Spirit of Virulency ) and at laft I concluded it mnft certainly proceed from the very Spirit and Principle of the firft founder jpf your Seclr, Cleaning the Presbyterians) Matter John Cdvin, who burnt the Books of Servetm%, a Learned Baptift, and afterwards perfwa- ded tfte^ Magiflrates of Geneva tcrbnrn him alive j which Sentence was executed upon him, ( as Cafieliia teflifies , who was a con? contemporary with him ) In thefe Words Michael Servetui was burnt alive for his O- pinion at Geneva , 15 C3, upon the 27th Day of 08ober. Beiides this, the Dr. tells his Reader, (with an ungodly Deilgn, to leflen and blacken the Famous Calvin, and to extol his Servetus, ) that one well obferves, that Mr. Calvin did acknowledge of Servers, that lie was. a Learned Charitable Man -, notwkhftanding which, lie wrote a Book to iultifie Servetus being put to Death. When I fee and read thefe things, from a better and more impartial Tefti- mony than Cafiellio was, 1 (hall then fay fomewhat to it. But (indeed) Imullin- genioufly aflure the Dr. that I fhall neither believe him, nor his Cafhllh, in the Re- ports they fpread abroad of Calvin, and others (of Chrift's Worthys ) who detect and decry their Heretical Doftrines. ^ Not him, becaufe fad Experience teaches, that thofe of his Judgment are pretty well skilled in Mifreprefenting and Be- lying the moft Holy, Orthodox, and moft Learned of Divines ; on purpofe to gain Ground among the lefs intelligent, whom they know to be flrangers to Au- thors •, and who will be eafily drawn to credit thofe Reports, which they are not able to contradift : efpecially when repre- fented C 73 ) fented to them, by the Mouth and Pen of fuch as they take to be good Men. Not his Cafiellio0 becaufe I look on him every way as unfit to ber a Witnefs againft fo Orthoddx and great a Propugnator of Gofpel Verities, as Calvin is known to be ; And that, on the Account cf the Teftimo- nies given of Caftellio\ by good and learned Men, who better knew what CajZsllio was than Dr. JRujJii doth. The Great and Learned Scaliger charges iCaftelllo with holding many corrupt Opi- nions of the Aaahaftifts. And the Learned Hoffman accufed him for being one of the firft Sowers of the | Seed of Arminiamfm. , Tar, .' F*ker, another Great and- Learned : Author, charged him with faying that the* Song of Solomon was a Wicked Book. And -.he held that Paul taught a more. Myfterious Divinity to fome perfect Difci- pies, than he, left in Writing, this is to be feen in his Book, on the Firft Epiftle to the Corinthians. Now, if the impartial Reader ferioufly | weighs the Account given of Calvin -and \Caflellioj by the Orthodox and Learned, ihe will foon conclude with me, That had jthe Parts and Learning of Servetm and Cafidlio both concenter'd in one Head, Calvin's Orthodoxy in the Faith, and his Excellency (74) Excellency in all manner of Learning, had never been in Danger of Suffering an Eclipfe : Nor yet his Books of receiving a folid Anfwer ( much lefs a Confutation ) by fuch Men as Servetm and Cajkllio^ what- ever Dr. Riifell and his bigotted Profelytes think or believe to the contrary. That Eagle-eyed Calvin foared too high ( in penetrating into the Arc ma. Imperii of Heaven ) for fuch Glow- Worms to reach his Senfe, or to underftand the Spirit iy which he fpeaks and Writes. Wifdom is jttftified of none but her own Legitimate Ojf- fpring, Mat. i i . 19. And here I- defire the wary Reader to take notice of the fraudulent Defign of Dn Rujfcl, which is, toimpofe on his Reader, a believing that Servetm ( who dy'd at Ge- neva for his Opinion ) did die for being an Anabaptift : which indeed is a notorious Piece of Falfnood, as, the Learned and Godly ( who look into Antiquity ) well kaow, who give that Account of Se'rvetw^ that he was Executed at Geneva for his Blafphemy againft: the Holy Trinity, he denying the God-Head of Chrift, and the Personality of the HolyGhoft. This the Dr. well knew would have fpoil- ed his Defign, had he ( honeftly ) told his Reader/ what an Heterodox and'Blafphe- mous Wretch , his Servem, that Learned Baptift C ?S D Baptifl: ( who died ^t^C^eva for his Opi- nion) was. j And truly, (to be plain ) had Servant ;dy?d for being an Anabaptift ( which I ut- terly deny he did, J yet, I am far from •thinking the better of Anabaptifm there- fore: Or judging ■Servetmi Cor any others ! who on that Account lofe their Lives ) to i be true Martyrs of jefus. ( That Saying of Cjtpriw will ever be true, I that Caufa, non Mors , fack Martirem: 'The Caufe, not Death, makes a Martyr. (As the Bleffed Jefus hath his Witnefles | who Seal the Word of his Patience, with ; their deareft Blood, j So the ©evil hath his Witnefies, ( yea 'many more than Chrift hath ) who Seal | their Infernal Herelies, and Damnable | Doftrines, with their Hearts Blood -yet T am far from believing that fuch Martyrs will ever be owned by Chrift, at their ?oing off the Stage: Or that fuch Sufferings will make better the horrid Lies and Blaf- phemies Men fuffer for, be their Con- ftancy, feeming Zeal, and Courage what fit will. ; Having premifed thefe things, I now •proceed to examine the Four Particulars twhereon his.Fabrick of Anabaptifm feems jto be Founded. I Tte c ?o The Dr. and (with him all Anabaptifts) hold, and ( with great Confidence ) aflert : that Dipping and Plunging the whole Body under Water, is the only right manner of Baptifm, which all Believers are to pra&ife under the Gofpel. : This he labours, (though in vain) to ■make good-by the Etymologie of the Word, which the Spirit ufes to exprefs Baptifm by. The Word ( in the Greek ( is b«it7i>, which, faith the Dr. is derived from ***- *.to Dip or Plunge a thing under Water. This Signification of the Primitive Word b*w« he confirms by Humane Teftimo- ny • he begins with Learned Mr. Leigh, to whofe Critica Sacra he refers his Read- er in quoting whom, he deals with his Reader as he did in quoting Scrvem\ he faith that Servctus dy'd at Geneva for his Opinion, but hides from his Reader the horrid Blafphemies for which he died : So here the Doftor ( defignedly ; curtails the Obfervations of Mr Leigh on the Word *»*'>, telling his Reader fo much out of Mr. Leigh as he thinks makes tor bis Caufe, but leaving out what or Mr. Leigh he knows makes full agamft him - which (I muft needs fay) is the Trick of a Deceiver: And by theie kind oi Shifts he, and the moll Crafty of his Party, do endeavour to .underprop their finking ( 77 )■ Cau.fe, bearing poor flmple Folk in hand that the Eminently Learned and godly ! Men ( whom they Quote ) were of the I Anabaptiits Periwafion. I Now to let his Unfairnefs appear herein ' I here fet down what of Leigh he quotes' j and what of him he omits. * j The Word ferlt^ faith Mr. Lekh, is (derived' from the Word U^Ttmo to j Dip or Plunge into the Water- and fieni- j fieth ( primarily ; fuch a kind of Warning as !:J3 ufed in Bucks, where Linnen is plunged land dipt. Thus far the Dr. quotes Le%h% and who would not think by reading fo jmuch of Leigh, and looking no further if as the Dr. no doubt would have his Read- jer) but that Leigh in his Critic* W was lot the Drs. Judgment herein. j Now follows the Learned 2^/Qbfer- vations on the Signification of the Word \Miip yet, faith he, it is taken more largely ( meaning Ay*/** ) for any kind of walking, nnCn&..or- deanfing, even where there is no Dipping at all; for which he quotes Mat 3. ,,. / indtU Ea izx with Water, . &c. Mat, 20. Zz. Are F able fobe Baptized with, &c. -Mark 7 .4 .. - And When thejfomefrvm the Market, except thoy w*jh they *fe#^. Luke 3. 16. Acts 1. / Jv, 'i* -1* md l Cor- lo *■ -In all :$ftich Scripture Mr, Leigh doth acknow- ' ' leoVe^ ( 78 ) ledge that b**V{« ( the Derivative ) is of a larger Signification then b**™ its Prima- tive, and intends fuch a warning as is done without Dipping ^ and why fhould this be concealed from the Reader? As for Zeppeon*, Alftedim^ Plutarch and Nazianz^en, (on whom the Dr. lays no fmall ftrefs ) I hope he will allow us the fame Liberty he takes to himfelf, ( viz,.) to quote fuch Teftimonies as make for us, The Learned Dr. Featly ( quoted by Mr. Leigh ) tells us, that Chrifl: no where requi- reth Dipping, but only Baptizing *, which Word ( faith he ) Hefychim^ Stcphanus, Sca- pula and Buchm, the great Mailers of the Greek Tongue ) make good by very many Iiaftances and Allegations out of Claflick Writers, that the Word importeth no more than Ablution or Wafting f>**-V£* /fay they) in their Lexicons and Commentaries) LavoyZtrff,"* Lav at io, Ablution, which may be done without Dipping. As touching the Greek Lexicon^ Pnblijljt and Recommended byt Jofeph Caryl, > Matthew Barker, George Cokayne, ( I William Adderly, Ralph Venning, ? j Matthew Mead, William Dell, ) ( Henry Jefley. All C 79 All that I ftfcil ( oft need to ) fay, h thk t>lt. that albeit I own my felf bound 'to Reverence and Honour the hoary Head, when found in the Way of Truth and Rigbteonfnefs, yet it rmiit ftill be with tht Refervation of the Honour and Refpecr. 'which I owe to God, ( that Ancient of days) their Father and mine, who' alone and not 'the Learning and WifdomofMen (though the greateit and holiejl j is the Father of their Faith and mine. I am not inferable [that fome Learned and igood Men have granted, that the WordB*^, dodi indil- 'terentiy fjgnifie, any kind of Warning by ipoumig out or fprinkling Water upon! or " .?y dipping or plunging into the Water- ed this they have grounded on the native Ipmhcatjon of the Primitive Word u*w. Mt with becoming Modefty and due Vene- •ation to their Reverend Names, I mult rave leave in- telling the World, that for a ipjdl cannot be oftheir Opinion (here. n; until I receive greater and clearer light rom the Spirit and Word of God, concern- ig this Matter- and that for. the Reafons * ererollowing. Firft, the apparent di/Te- nce I find between the two Words, B*V™ ' x?r*7lh ln Letters and Syllables, let & Words beobfervedm b*vt; r theft? |itive; I can find but 2 Syllables, s.v£ ^but in the Derivative, w^ 1 fi^ E three, C 80 ) three, B*T--n-(>, Baftizo \ and as in the Active, (To alia in the PafllveJ Voice ,-B*ttw- ^a/, Bap-to-mai hath three Syllables, where- as B^-Ti-cVu^ which is the PafTive of B*x- / 7i(«, hath four Syllables, B^-rz-iV^ Bap- ti-w-mai. Now that the 2 Words fhould both in A&ivc and Paflive Voice fo appa- rently differ in Letters, Syllables, and found of the Words \ and yet that both the Words Ihould fignifie and import the very fame thing, is to me fuch a Riddle, that indeed I cannot fee how the fame can be unfolded, unlefs by the elucidating Art and Skill of Dr. Rujfd. The Learned know (very well J that in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues, the Chanee of a Letter or a Syllable doth great- ly alter the Senfc and Import of Words ; and why it Ihould not be fo here, I cannot fee anv folid Reafon to the contrary, only it is the Will and Pleafure of our Dr. ( and his Adherents in this Caufe ) that it mufr and (hall be fo, right or wrong; as appears by his Arminian Confidence almoft in even Page where he mentions the Word Bap tize- where he (peremptorily; begs th Queition, taking for granted, that whicl will never be granted by any, ( unleis b Brainlefs Heads or wilful Undermincrs c the Gofpel, fw'O that the Derivativ B**rf^ doth always ( in the Gofpel ) fignif and import the very fame thing with Baft V4 C8i ) viz.. to Dip or Plunge the whole Body un- der Water. But that which will farther clear the mat- j ter, and put the Truth ( I here contend for) 1 out of the reach of all Scriptural Contracft. , ction, is the Pradice of the Holy Ghofr : who is a better Etymologiit than our Dr' I and then all the Arminian (and other Here- tical) Criticks, who ( in pretence ofgivin? j the Native and Genuine Senfe of Words m | the Scripture » hare forc't a wrong Senfe . trora the Original, on purpofe to lava jfirm Foundation, on which they may build jtheir Heterodox, and Soul deluding Do- ctrines. 6 ■ I find that when the HoJyjShfl&wogld iflgreKtheAaof Dipping or PhSSjE". &* v^ tJ5 eSliMiveB,^, that I can had: For Proof whereof, let thole Serin- aires quoted by the Dr. himfelf in Paee n- j be without prejudice lookt into, and eponflf weighed, Rev. ,9. 13 He hid hi efiure a,pt ,„ Blood. Mat. 16. 2 1 . He that uppetb hum„4 with me in the Dijh. Luke [ ^ 24. k hat he may dip the tip of his Firmer I* w"": And in ?ch„ 1 3. 2%. It is ( faith )he Dr.) twice ufedlB^ Dipped^. j*4*», md when he hxd Dtp fed : Here in m Dip or Plunge mto by the Primitive ( 8* } 't^ivrw, but never by K*™Z»^Baptizjo> the "Derivative. Secondly, again on the contrary) when the Holy Ghoit expreifeth Baptifm by warning, he doth it by the Derivative £**- 77'^, but never by the Primitive ft-ht^ Bap- to. For Proof hereof, let the places of Scripture already quoted (out of Leigh's Crir/ca Sacra) be confulted, in all which places the Spirit fpeaks of Baptifm, but not a VV ord of Dipping i and that by the Deii- vative Word (^vfa, Bxm^o \ never by the Primitive Bapto. Seeing then it hath pleafed the Holy GhohY'to exprefs Dipping or Plunging into by the Word b*vi0) but never by the Word ii*riihi*i Bufti^o • and that he hath exprciled Baptilm by the Word **-^3 but ncvei by the* Word b*™. I think none but Fools or mm Men will blame me for refolving tc believe the Holy Ghoft fin this matter) be- fore 1 believe Dr. Rnjfd^ and all the humane Tefiimonies he hath quoted to make gooc his Caufe : though he were able to quote ; Million ofAuthors as witty and learned a hisfo much admired ScrvetmzvA Cafieliio. 1* he Premifes confidered, I hope th Dr. will not be difpleafcd for making th fair and generous OtFer to him, and all wh cfp; ufe his Unfcripturai Caufe, ( vif. ) th; it be. or thev, can Ihew fuch a folid an cor ( 83 ) convincing Renfon' (as doth not contradict the Analogie of Faith J why ( or wherefore) the Holy Ghoit fhould nor in any cf thofe Scriptures ( where he expreffcth Dipping .) exprefs Dipping by b*t7«'(* the Derivative} but only by b*V7» the Primitive }- and why- he fhonld notexprefs Bap'tifm in any of the places of Scripture above quoted, by the Primitive b*j#<*, Bapto> but always by Bap- tizo^ in cafe both s is the only true and right Baptifro. Now to ctifcover their Miitake and Error herein, I (hall offer but two things to Con- iid era lion. The firli is, to (hew the "Scope one! De- sign of the ApolHe m thofe places, which is not ; as they fondly and iisjudicicttfly ima- gine ) to Ihevv that Chrift was baptized by dipping, or that believers are to be fo bap- tized- , But the Scope and Defign of the Apoflle In thofe places, is to fet forth and prove that Suretyship Union, which is between Chrift ( the Mediatorial Head ) and all the Members of his Kody Myflical^ there be- ing no ohe Act of Obedience, either Active or Pa(Kve3 which Chiiir, ( the Mediator ) 'performed m the aiTmrie'ch Nature, but all his Members are laid to do and perform the feme, and all the Effects and faving Benefits thereof do undoubtedly redound to all the Eleft : and all this is fignified and fealed in Baptifm to every el eoted Sinner, whether Infant or Adult. And I cannot but reckon it a ftrange Infatuation on thofe who lay fuchitrefs on the Dutch Tranilators, ia the point of John the Dobpif, ( wherein ijlly and weak People do not a little glory and brag that they fhouid put fucrr Sleights and Contempt on the Dutch Annotacors, thofe there great Lights of 'th^ World, in matter ©f Infants Right to Baptifm, of 'Abraham's Covenant being a Covenant of ' abiblute* Grace, of Circumoiiionv being the .Initial t Seal thereof, and Baptifnvfucceeding in the.: Irdbrri thereof--, with fnndry other material' ■points in .Gofpel Religion*, .wherein ■.-t.hejr are found and orthodox : Yet, in .nothing 1 mufi our Dr. and his Adherents make ale. of \ \ the Dutch ^ only 'John the Doopery John-^i^: \Dooftr: And in this Com nnfiion,. de Snh&: I Dopcnde, Dipping them. And. what ground hath our- :Dr. to* qon— | elude, that had our - .Englifo Tranjlatar* > I turned the Words (about; Baptifm J int<*> Dipping, as the Dutch tTranJlators have - ; done ? ( If it be as- he faith ) that therefore.:- Jit mull: (neceilarily ) be fo in the Original^, ; or how will, he prove the Dutch Tra?jJUt&rf-< | nearer to Infallibility than our Tvglijlj 'iVar^ ^fiators were? or that our Eiigu^ Trarij tors would have been more infallible than- they were, in cafe they had Tranilatecii John the %anifi^ Johamcsd^Doafsr^ and ir\ i the QommitTion: Baptizing ^hem9 d&jralvs-Dcf- fcnder Dipping them. « Secondly,; If to imitate .'anctefet;^ foi0\ €hrift;s: Burial, be the ©eiigis ofeth^Ai^ |fe then mufi it ( neceilarily ;.> follow, tha£i ■it is- Mens Duty to* -imitate it irrailtheC $ftgi&fif«Sf€f4 Burial, as w.all as ij^|ff§s $:%.. mmi C 88 ) Chf ift when he was buried, he was whol- ly Pafliye} he did not go into the Grave himfelf,but was laid in by others; fo muft. Perfons be in Baptifm, they muft be wholly Paffive, they mult not go into the Water themfelves, but muft be laid tinder the Wa- ter by the Adminiftration of Baptifm : Chrift when buried was left in the Grave, fo mult the Perfon in Baptifm *, he muft be left un- der the Water as long as Chrift continued in the Grave, which was three Days and three Nights. If any ihali lay it is abfurdand ridiculotfs to think or fay, that thefe Circumitances fhould be attended or imitated by Believers in Water Baptifm, I fay fo too •, and do farther fay acd affirm, that it is ( altoge- ther) as ab-furd and ridiculous for any to affirm and teach, that for Believers to fet forth and imitate Chrift's Burial is the Apo- ftiesDefign in the above-mentioned Scrip* tures ? If Anabaptifts will be peremptory in averting and teaching that to fet forth *ad imitate Chrift's Burial ia thofe places^ is the Scope and Deiign of the Apoftte, they jHiufi give me leave to be as peremptory as they in affirming, that unlefs they imitate Chrift's Burial in the Circumitances now* mentioned, their Baptifm ( about which fa great and confeted a Noife is made in the Wbrldy is but a meer ludicrous (or mock) Baptifm* (m ) B^tifm, for that they do not imitate Chrift in their Baptifm in thafe Circumitances which are fo ellentially neceiFary to let forth and repreient his Deathand Burial, in cafe it be as they hold it is* ... To which I add, that our Baptizjngby ' pouring out or fprinkling,_Wa£er-Oir^the Subject, doth (every way;)- nwre^exa&ly . reprefent and fet forth a Burial, than that of digging and plunging, the-- whole Body .' under Water. The Truth of this will appear, if the Par-. ticnlars following be feriouily and without Prejudice confidered. Watcry the Patty teptized is A&hrg? ife • going himfelf into the. Water, which (rh*~ * deed) ought not ta be the Ordinance of - Water.. Baptifro, being (in all refpeclcs j a ^ Pajjve^ Ordinance, wherein, the Subject isj to be wholly Paffive t as the Soul is in the.. Work. ojOkgeneratibn. The Work or Converlion or Regenera- m tion is the Inward and Spiritual Baptifm ..*, Adminiftred. by Chrift. In. this wonderful.; Work,, the Dead Sinner hath no hand m , I effe&ing or producing the fame, it is wftot- ] <:Iydoneby Chrift, the Ad mini Orator there- ] I of. So m the outward Ordinance of Wa- i ter-Baptifrrfc, (which is m more: than, She I \ autvwrd Sign, or Seal of the Inward") the ; Maiftgr »' ( <*> ) MiniCer oc the Gofpel ia Admim[ln Baptifm ) mull only be Active, the Subject mull puc forth no Act at all. The Party going himfelf into the Water, doth not reprefent and let forth a Dead Man : la pouring out or fprinkling Water on the Subject, the Party is "wholly pTUve, as is a Dead Man when buried. Again, in_Dip- pi Bg jand Phjnging, the Parly bapiizid is appTyedjq J _b e YVater , no t t h e W a ter jp the Fa rtx, which is contrary to the man- ner of Burials, which ail Men} now is to jay the Corps on its 8 ck in the Grave, and to pour out or fprinkie the E nth on it. Jn baptizing by fprinkling or pouring out Water, the Party is laid on his back, and the Water poured out or fprinlyled on him. The Party Dead is never thruft into the Earth, but the Earth or Mould is poured out .on him. . Now, whether of thefe tw:o ways of bap- tizing by dipping and plunging, or that of Pouring out or Sprinkling Water up * on, do more lively and exaftly fct forth and reprefent a Burial, -let any (who have not loft their Senfes ) judge. As to the Second Metaphor^ ( viz.. ) A, Refiiirrection, I humbly conceive, that what here follows may fuffice to mew, th;t as A.nabaptifts do not ( at all ) hold forth or xeprelent rM Death and Burial of. Chrift ia their ( »i 3 tbeir going into the Water, hi their way ) fo needier do they fee torch and reprefent his ReturrecYton, as they fancy they do. Firsts It is molt certain, that when the time . determined by God's Decree i for ChriU's remaiui.ng. ifi a State of Death was accompli Git, , ( according to the Holy Scrip- tures ; he rakred up himfelf fom the Grave. No hand of Men; or Angels-helpc to raiie him. . So that plain it is, if the Scriptures' they all edge for this, be to be t.^ken in a literal Senfe, then mull it needs follow, that as he that Adminiilers Bap* tifm , by Dipping, or ."Burying the whole Body under Water, ) doth Adminifrer Bap* tifm in that way of Burying under the Wa- ter, to the end the Party, fo. Baptized might lively fet forth the Death and Burial of "Chrift v & he muff, leave the Party Buri- ed in the Water, to raife up himfelf, that fo he might rep relent Chrilt'in his railing up himfelf from the Grave.. If this were pra&ifed, it would not be hard to guefs, how many Profelytes they would get to join with them in! this their Fantaflical new Mode of Baptizing. And truly, for my part, I cannot fee how they can be excufed from doing the. one as well- as the other, feeing that the' Metaphor muft be profe- cuted in all its pariv as weQ as in fome. And 'thus they may fee, wfcat they are life • ' to \ yz j to get, by building their Confidence on mifunderitood and wrefted Metaphors. I come now to the Do&or's Third Medi- um, whereby he labours to prove, that the right way of Baptising under theGofpel, is{ and muft be ) by Dipping and Plunging the whole Body under Water, ( vlt* ) The Practice of the firft Baptizers. In this ha is as full of Confidence as he was in the o- ther two, I have now difmift \ and I hope, in the Good nefs of God it will plainly be. demonftrated, that ( in this alia) he and his Adherents do pervert the Scriptures,, which gives us the Account of the • firft Rap- tizers, as they (moft certainly ) do the o- ther Scriptures, which they bring to jtJiti- fie and make good their Soul deluding. Dreams* He begins with John the Baptis%Vage ic where he tells his Reader, that it doth ap* pear that Dipping is the right way of Bap- tizing from the firft Baptizers } The firft mention ( faith he ) of this Ordinance of Ho- ly Baptifm, we have in Mat. %g-u where John the Dipper is mentioned^ and lb he- goes on in a ftrarige kind of Rapfcdyr warbling out his fo much affefted Note,, Dipping and Plunging. I Avail not be con- cerned to follow the Dr. ( Pedctentim > ftefr by ftep in his Pedantkk way,, leaft I fhoulS be found guilty of the lame empty Tauto- &£jes> C 91 ) logics wherewith his fo much admired E- piltle abounds. The ground of his Miftake herein, is the wrong Etymology he gives of the Word b*ttiV«, which he and his mistaken Tefti- rnoriies take to lignifie and mean Dipping and Plunging the whole Body under Wa- ter. This Etymologie of his I have over- thrown, as the Reader may fee7 if he look back to the fir ft Head of the Diipute, viz, the Etymologie of the Word saTT,£». I (halt not repeat but go on to confirm the Truth, of theEtymologie I have given' of the Word **%"^ from the Word of God, and the belt Greek Authors, by fuch Arguments as ( I hope in Chrift ) will prove irrefragable. The firft (hall' be grounded on the necef- fity of John Baptifi, his harmonizing with the Pen-Men of the Old TeftammmzYL the parts of his Miniftry, if the Dr. will grant ( as he muft ) if he fpeak Truth that his John the Dooper was a true and faithful Pro- phet of God, he muft of necefllty grant thai: 'John did run parallel with Mofis and the o» ther Prophets. This the Dr. muft either grant or deny,. if he grant that fohn did run exactly paral- lel with Mofis and the other Prophets* then it is beyond all Contradiction that John adminiltred Baptifm'-by pouring out or ( n -) or iprinkling Water on the Perfons' he baptized ^ for mod certain it isr that Moles ,( under the Ceremonial Difpeniation ) did apply all the LegalWafhingsand r'urifica- tions by Water, { which all had a Typical relation to Chrkt to come, as Johns Cap- tion alfo had by pouring out or iprinkling the Water: The Prophets aifo (witnefs thofe two great Prophets Ifa. and Ez.ek. ) they foretold of the manner how God would apply to his People the two great Benefits accrewing by his Sons Mediatorial Sacrifice, '{yi^S) jalliiication and Sanctiiication, which was to be by iprinkling, as will evidently appear by Jfa. 52. 1 j. Then fljall he fyrinkk wavy Nations, &c. and Ezek. 36. 25. Then will I fprinkle clean Wzter upon yqu7 &c. In thefe places the Spirit of Chrilt ( in his Prophets) had an Eye to the Baptifmal Warnings of the NewTeframent Diipenfa- tion. Now if John Baptift did ( in all the parts of his Miniftry ) harmonize with Mojfis and the other Prophets, he did ( un- doubtedly J baptize by pouring out or iprinkling Water on thofe he baptized \ for molt certain it is, (as hath been already obferved ) pouring out or fpriakling was the Mode or Way. of Application of a 13 the Ceremonial Warnings which were ufed before John\ Baptifm. If the Dn and his Adherents- deny, that John (95 ) Joh# did run ( exactly) parallel with Mo\ts arc.d the other Pen -men of Holy Scriptures, then is John the Docftr ( by them) made a falfe Prophet- and ail who ( from >ofof.) take up and praetife the Mode of Dipping the whole Body under Water, ( as the only right Baptifai ) are felf-condemned in that they do ( herein ) follow one who contra- dicted the Spirit of God in the: other Pro- phets. And fo ( hereby ) it appears how- much John the Baptift is obliged to the Dippers of our Age, who (rather than they will lofe their filly Opinion > will have the Spi- rit of Truth to fpeak Nonfenfe, ( yea, con- | tradicl: himfelf ) and John the greater! of all the other Prophets ( becsuil- the immedi- | ate fore-runner of Chrifl ) to be a falfe Pro- Iphet. This Stain they will never be able to Iwafh off their Name, any other way .than ;by hoiiefriy acknowledging, that John did f m all the parts of his^Minifrry ) harmo- nize with M)firai$x?az other Prophets; the which if they once grant, (as they tnnft if they fpesk by the Holy Ghoft ) then is their Caufe FoiT, and John np more to be Stiled Jolm- the Boopcr7 but Joi»tfi5 Bap- pizer, I f From 77 hat hath been Paid;, I argue thus, B J&m Bkp0 did (in all the parts of his il . Mini- (9<5 ) Miniftry ) harmonize and agree with Mo- fes and the other Prophets, then did he Adminifter Baptifm by pouring out or fprinkling Water upon thofe he baptized : But John Baprift did ( in all the parts ©f his Miniftry ) harmonize and agree with Mo* fes and the other Prophets. Therefore Jchn Baptift did Adminifter Baptifm by pouring out or fprinkling Wa- ter on thofe he baptized. A fecond Argument (hall be grounded on Impoffibility, thus: That way of baptizing which is impoffible to be praetifed ( without a miraculous Strength of Body ) was never commanded by Chrift , nor pra&ifed by John v but to baptize the many Multitudes which came to John's Baptifm, by Dipping the whole Body under Water, was a thing altogether impoffible, feeing John had na miraculous Strength of Body to render him capable of fuch an arduous and difficult Ad- miniftration. Therefore that way of Baptizing, by Dipping the whole Body under Water, was never commanded by Chrift, nor practifed by John. The major Proportion will not be deny- ed,the A ilumption will readily b^fubfcrir bed, (as an unqueftionable Truth ) if Men who plead for that way of Dipping will be but ingenious in doing two things, Firfl, in C 97 ) in lifting up in their Arms ( cleverly from the Earth) the many Corpulent Bodies which offer ihemfelves to Baptifm, lay them under the Water, and there hold them until the Adminiftrator pronounce the Words of Inflitution, / Baptize thee in the Name of the Fat her , efthe Son, and of the Holy GhoSh Secondly, in fincerely ac- knowledging what Experience teaches them concerning this Practice ; thefe two Particulars comply'd in, will ( 1 doubt not) put the matter now in Debate out of aB j Queftion, that to baptize in that way of | taking up in the Arms, and laying under I Water the moil Corpulent Bodies who of- fer to Baptifm, and to hold them under ! the Water till the Words of Initiation be pronounced*, is a thing altogether impof- i fible, not only in refpeel of the Admini- ftrator, whofe bodily Strength mull (in i an ordinary way) (Ink and fail in lifting and | holding up ( fo long ) fuch maffy, ponde- rous Weights : And alfo in refpeft of the Subject, who mull (undoubtedly ) be ia great Fear and in apparent Danger of be- ing let fall, if not of being fuffocated or fmothered in the Water. And ftrange it is to me, that Arniinians | who plead fo much for the univerfal Love land Mercy of God to Mankind ( in gene- pi, ) fnouid not fee. how full of Reflection ''! : on C 98 ) on God, this Principle of theirs is, which makes the God of Love and Mercy, the Au- thor of fuch a Mbde or Way of baptizing, which is not pofTible to be pradtifed, with- out apparent Danger, both to Health -and Life, of both the Subject and the Admini- ftrator too. i conclude this Argument with the Say- ing of judicious Sydenham, viz. That if haptifm be to be Admini fired in that way of Dipping only, happy are thofe who live in hot Climates, or who have Bodies of Bra fs. h Third Argument may be grounded on Scandal, thus •, That Mode or Way of Bap- tizing, which is both immodeft, and tends to excite luftful Motions and carnal De- flees in Men -and Women* cannot be com- manded by Chrift •, neither was the fame ever pra&i fed by John. But that way of baptizing by dipping the whole. Body un- der Water, is both immodeft, and tends to excite luflfr.i Motions and carnal Deilres in Men and Women. Therefore that Mode of baptizing by dipping the whole Body under Water, was never commanded by Chrift, neither was the fame ever practrfed by lohm Ke who commands all Matters ( relating to Divine Worlhip ) to be done decently, and in order, 1 Cor. 14. 40. and who com- mands Believers- to abftain from all Ap^; 93 1 'ttrf ! °I5wJt - ,/7j<-' v "• car> never be the Autnor ol fueh diibrderly Praftifes as thwart and contradid his own general Hules Now, whether it be not an Im- -tnodelt and nnfeemiy Sight, to fee a mixt Company of Men and Women Hand in Gar- 1 ments, ( to ufe Mr. Sy^Ws Expreffion ) ; nexttoNakednefskfclf: Let any(not H reavdof common Mcdefty J judge • ArH ; Whether the Admin iftrator can . r poffiblv? handle the Female Sex, as he doth ( when i anally dipping them, ) and not feel the j Rifings and Motions of Concupifcence in I his Nature- I leave to thinking Perfon" ; to determine and judge. i Again, in the Fourth place, (to add no !«ore) letthe laft Argument'be bounded on the Analogic, which is (and mult be ) .between Uie Baptifm of J«hn and that of I it A -IK Argimentis thus framed. If Chnlt's Way and Manner of Admini- fe! th^yard-Spiritnal Baptifm(whe?e- ! o| that of John was but the Outward Vifi- lbleSignj.be by- fpr inkling or pouring ont i upon : then john did ( certainly ) b prize by fpnnkling or pouring out the Water, on thofe he baotized : nilrinST5 Wa7cand- Manner of Admi. rv"& w* niwaia spiritual 13a ipnjiKlijig or pouring out upon." There- :' C *co ) Therefore ]ohn did ( certainly ) baptize by fprinkling or pouring out Water on thofe he baptized. If there was a Necefllty that ]ohn fhould harmonize with Mofis , the Ceremonial Law, and the Prophets, I cannot fee any Reafon why he mould not be as greatly con- cern'd to harmonize with Chrift himfelf : And feeing that the manner of Chrift's Adminiftring the Inward and Spiritual Baptifm, is by Pouring out and Sprink- ling the Graces of the Spirit upon the Souls of the Eleft in the Work of Regene- ration, why ]ohn (the fore -runner of Chrift) mould Adnuniller his Baptifm ( which was I but an External Sign of Chrift's ) t>y Dip- ping or Plunging the whole Body into the Water, can never be demonftrated by all the Wit and conceited Skill in our Do- dor, though he were as well verft in all the Roots and^Heemantiqne Nouns of the He- brew Tongue, as his fo much admired Ro- bcrtfon was : And if the Doctor will not be offended, I am very defirous to know it his fo highly commended and admired Ro- hcrtfon was ( by his fo great Excellency in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues ) more In- fallibly acquainted with the Mind of the Holy.Ghoft then other Men •, and that Mr. Robertfon did certainly believe, that the f Etyme- C ror ) Etymology, which he gave of the Word Bap- t:zx>, was infallible as he fa id. How came it to pafs, that the Learned Robert fa did not renounce that Baptifin, which" he re- ceived in Infancy and by Sprinkling > I think I knew Matter William Robert fa as well as Dr. Ruff.I^ and during the time or my Acquaintance with him, I am fure he was far enough from Anabaptifm. All t.ie Skill he had in the Toneues, with his Acquaintance in the Arts, did not convince him, that the Baptifm he received in In- thfk ind ^fpriflkling, was a Nullity, as the Dodtor holds it is. But to return to John the JDooper , I think fit to allure the Dorter, that I own myielt bound to believe John himfelf, ra- ther than Doftor Rujfel, or any oi thofe learned men he fo greatly brags of. The Woras oHofeare fo plain, that I can fee no need of a Commentator to explain their Senfe • he tells us in Mar. i. 8. and in Mat. 3- ii. that he did baptize with Water- but that Chrift mould baptize with the ynolt : a, .-.r *ti and <* «Wj*w« *y„, ^o both intend and fignifie the very fame way and ' manner of Adminittration: All the difie- jrence between John and Chrift, in both Jtlieir Baptifms, is in the fubjefc Matter JflWfe-In the outward Water and the inward urace: John he did Adminiiler Water, the ( ioi ). the outward Sign ; but'Chrifl: he did A'dmi- nifter the Spiritual Grace : but as touching the manner, it was ( moft certainly ) the very fame In both. Now, if the Doctor grant, fas he muft if he fpeak- Truth J "that Chriftdoth Admi- nifter" the Inward and Spiritual Baptifm by Pouring out or Sprinkling the Graces of the Holy Ghoft, he will find it "(altoge- ther) incongruous, and no' way agreeing with the Analogic of Faith, to hold or af- fert, that ]ohn did Admi nifter the out- ward Sign in fuch a manner as was dire&ly contrary to Chrift. There mult be ( nccef- farily ) an harmonious Agreement between the Sign and the Thing fignified thereby, which can never be, in cafe Chrift Baptizes by or with, Pouring out or Sprinkling • and )ohn fhould Baptize by Dipping 01 Plunging into. % i As Chr ill applies the Graces of the Spirit | to the Soul in Converfion, not the Soul to •the Spirit*, fo in the outward Baptifn ] Urn he apply -d the Water ( the outwavc : Sign ) to the Perfon, not the Perfon to th ,J Water. . For making the Thing or Point ( now u Debate ) obvious and plain to the meaner! Capacity, let it be ferionfly coniidered bow plain and exprefs the Scriptures are ii affirming, that Chrift's Way or Manner h Adm- (-I03 ) Admimftnng the Spiritual Baptifin," is bj Pouring out and Sprinkling the Holy Spi- rit on the Serais, which he regenerates- but never by applying the Souls to the Ho- ly Spirit, read ( without Prejudice ) Tit. 3. ifc 6. Not by Works of Righteoujnefs, which we have done, but according to his Mercy, he hath javed m by the rvafiwg of Regeneration and the renewing of the. Holy Ghost, which hi fced on w abundantly, through Jefus Chrifi our Saviour. ?t&0 h'*f**t, hath powered on us, the srery lame Word is made ufe of in Alls 2. \q And it fha/lcome to faff in the laft Days, path God ) / will pour Cut my Spirit on all Both which places are the fulfilling of thofe -iracious^ Promifes in Ifa. 44. 3. and JW t. 28. wnere the Lord promi'fed, that he p pour Water on him that is thirfty re. and his Spirit on the Churches Seed! the Hebrew Word In Ifa. is, 'On< >nn m^Ritchh aHdinJof/theWorduied toex- reis toe fame thing by is, »np HK Tiatoj* ■ moch Etb Ruchi: in neither of which laces will our Doftor's care* )^!^ fc '*OtW : And Dip ye them, befc-id. jhe PoftoT, the better to help his timfc ig Profelytes over the Style of Herel | Error, tells his Reader that the Evan- jPt -A^/^jp wrote his Gofpel in the .4- ( io4 ) brew Tongue; for Proof whereof, he fet< down his own Opinion, that lb it is :, ark "this Opinion of his he confirms (as infalli ble) by the Teftimony of jerom, and ( h< thinks ) the Opinion of the rooft Learnet Men: But the Dr. was lb wary in th'i point, that he refolved the Reader fhouk not ( eaiily) find him out in his Quota tions, the which the Doctor knew woulc eafily be done, had he (fairly ) dire&fe his Reader to the Book and Page in ]erom where his Judgment concerning this matte is expreft, and by naniingthe Learnec Men, who were one with him and ]ero> in this Opinion : His Negkd herein force me to charge him with Untairncfs, ( to fa noworfe) if that be a true Rule in Logics Dolus latet in Vnh'crjaUbt-u, that Deceit Ik hid in Univerfals .-, I am fure the Do&o ( as well as the reft of his Fraternity, wh frequently walk in this Path) mnft fell in der this Laih •, the Drs. Lothncfs to nan the Learned Men who were of his Opir on in this, caufes me to fufpcd that means fuch as his Learned Baptift Strum . and his famous Ciftcflio, with thole oth Armlnlan and Pofiflt Authors, whofe Nam are in his Book. It were worth while for the Readei obferve what fhifts the poor Man is put to prove and make good (from God's Wo C *°s ) ,j Ins new, C though falfly pretended ancient) ' Mode of baptizing, by Dipping and Plun- ging the whole Body into the Water. He tells his Reader that Matthew wrote ; his Gofpei in Hebrew • the Drs. Dellen , .being ( no doubt ) to make way for his H-. 'brew Words, Dms T>3Wl W ^ „ i ftm The root, faith he, is TaM. whi^ is the third Perfon Singular of the Preter- jer feci Ten fe, and fignifies he Dipped- He ■: Pittances in Naaman the Syrian, z Kit,£t r 1 14. Then went he down and Dipped kiWelf \fevtn times in Jordan, whm he '&£%£* "entup ftraightway out of the Water. ** '■1 /erD^talCS SrSranted> that becaufe *U fignifies he Dipped, and that becaufe famon Cm- the place above quoted) Dip- * h.mfelf in J.r^. that therefore fn J«fe* it muft needs be Feubeh, ola* \d Dye them; and that John did dip all ^Baptized, over Head and Ears in >! Am ( io6 ) Am I bound to believe that Matthew did write bis Gofpel in Hebrew, becaufe the Dr is of the Opinion he did? Or, muft I therefore grant it becaufe Jcrom is of his Opinion ? though neither Jerom nor he gives any folid Reafons for that their Opinion. ' Two things convince me that both jerom the Dr. and "his pretended Learned Men were all miftaken in this their Opinion. Firth, I find ( by Reading ) that the Gof pel which Matthew isfuppofed to have writ ten in Hebrew was never yet feen by an Author, and therefore I muft mind him c the Maxim, as true and applicable in th prefent cafe, De mn apfaretitibui, & non ex iftentibus eadem eft Ratio, of things not ap pearing, and ot things not exiftrog, thei is the fame Reafon to be given. ; Secondly, If Matthew had written h Gorpel in Hebrew, he would not ha\< translated into Greek the Word Emmamu in Mat. i. 23. andthofe whole Sentence Eli, Eli, Lamma Sabatthani, in Mat. Z 46But fuppofe I (hould (for Argument Jake want, which I utterly deny, and cnallem the Dr. to make good that Matthew 1* Written his Gofpel in the Hebrew Ton& doth it therefore follow ( neceflanly ) th the Holy Ghoft, (who is fo exact and pr ( ro; ) cife in choodng the moil apt and fit Words ' whereby to exprefs his Mind ) fhould ufe the Hebrew Word ^2& Tabal, which ligni- £es to Dip, and not theWord ^n"| Rachatz., which fignlfies to Walh, or D3D Kibbem^ "which fignifies the fame: I have^ already ■ -demonftrated from the Word of God, that in all the places of the New-Teftament where the Holy Ghoft makes mention of Baptifm, he doth it by the Derivative ?***>- 1% which fignifies to Warn, by Pouring out or Sprinkling Water .upon, but never by the Primitive **«««», Bapo% which fignifies ; to Dip or Plunge into : And when the Holy iGnofb exprefleth the Ad of Dipping or ; Plunging into, he doth it by the Primitive BiVt*, which fignifies to Dip into, but ne- ver by the Derivative w<>, which fignifies Wb Warn with • by which it plainly appears ;( to me at lead; that rather than the Do- ctor will lofe his Credit, and fufferhis rot- ;ten Caufe to be loft, he will rather open door to the old Babel Confufion of Tongues refolvmg f Jefuit like) to fet the Pen-Men of Holy Scripture together by the Ears, and impofe on his credulous Reader a real Belief, that what the Holy Ghoft hath laid down ( and plainly expreft ) m Greek, he hath gainfaid and contradicted in Hebrew •, (which Contradiction, can never befal the pen-Men of the Holy Scripture, nor ( with- F 3 out C &>$. ) Biafpbemy ) be charged on that Hoi; Spirit, by which they were Acted and in failibly Infpired. The Reafon which Jerom gives whj Matthew wrrit his Gofpel in Hebrew, vrz for the Sake of thofe }ews which believed is no Reafon at all •, for had it been the Wi: of God it mould be fo, I know no Reafor why Peter, J ame s and Paid, ( who all thre< wrote to the Jews which believed J fhoulc write in Greek, not in Hebrew ^ witnef the two Epifcles of Peter, the Epiftle o James, and that of Paul to the Hebrews. The Dr. pleafeth himfelf in telling hi' Reader , that in Mr. William Robert fan" Hebrew New Teflament , he finds thef Words between the 1 8 f A? and i$th Vzvte (of Mat. a 8. he means) And as my Fa the hath f en t me, even [o alfo J fend you. Goy therefore, &c. Thefe Words he fets down in the Hcbrer Character, telling his Reader that he find' them not in any Greek Copy. An Argument thinks he) that Mattbcr wrote his Gofpel in Hebrew j#a meer Non\ feqnitnr\ What though thofe Words be nc in Matthew, 1 hope he vviil not deny tira they are in Jo. 20. 21. there the Spiri of God hath recorded them ; and why th Dr. mould look to find them in Matthew ! know no Reafon, or wherefore his Learnec Frien ( too ) Friend- Mr. Robert Con fhould take on him to place, the Words recorded by Jo/w, be- tween the t%th and \gth of Mat. z8. I can- not conceive. But whatever moved Robert- fon to fo prefumptuous an Ad, in taking on him to alter things of this Nature, (as if by his Skill ( in the Hebrew Tongue ) he thought himfelf -able to re&ifie the Order 'in which the Holy Ghoft hath fet down his own Mind in Writing ) I doubt not but the Dr, was well pleafed with To palpable an Aberration •, and all for the Loveand Liking ]he hath to his ^§*3 Tabal^ he Dipped, and ^"TChl Velammadit, Dilciple ye. By what I have faid, it is eafie to judge, that could the Dr. but have his Will in two things. firft, that the Word b^i^«> Baptizo, doth alway fignifie the very fame thing with its Primitive b^t*. • And Secondly^ that Matthew did write his Goipel in~the Hebrew Tongue, and that the: Words DrNK ftSBl Vetabelu \jtham7 and Dip ye them, were the very Words' of Matthew. All the Arc in Men and Angels could never hinder but that Dipping the whole Body under the Water muft needs be the only right way of admi- niltring the outward Bapiifm. But both thefe (on* which he erects Sis tottering Structure of Anabaptifm ) I jftttrly disny^anddo fairly offer, and -fin- F *f cerety . C no ) cerely promife him, that if he can confute fby God's Word) the Arguments laid dowr to prove him miftaken in both, I will forth- with Renounce my Baptifm received in In fancy and by Sprinkling, as a meer Nullity and not. only To, but I will in Pulpit ant Print too, Declare ( to the World ) that 3 am fully convinced that Dipping the whol* Body (under Water ) is the only right wa\ of adminiftring Water-Baptifm under the New Teftament tDifpenfation. And this, ( I hope with the Offer mad* him, in clearing up the Etymology of the Word kapt&jo ) will prove as generous ai Offer as he made to Matter ]ames. As touching what is ( ufually ) obje&ec from Mat. 3. 1 6. concerning ChrihVs co wing up out of the Water. And fron Ails 8. $8t 39. concerning Philip and th< Eunuch going down into, and coming U] again out of the Water *, I need fay bu two things.. Fir ft ^ For any to affirm ( politively what the Word of God affirms not, is (t( me) a fure Argument of an Ignorant, Raf! and' Prefumptuous Spirit. Reader , marl the Words : And^efvu, when he was Bap tized, went up ftraightway out of ( Gree1 ^ not ik, from not out of) the Wate> The Text doth not fay, ( in downrigh Terms ) that Chrift was. Dipt under th WTater Cm ) Water ; neither doth it appear from j4EIs 1 6. 38, 39. that the Eunuch was Dipt, on- ly the Doctor ( and his Adherents ) will have it to be fo, right or wrong. Secondly^ There is nothing more certaia than that a Perfon may be faid ( properly enough) to go down into the Water though he go not in above Shooe ( or An~ cle ) deep, which (I doubt not) waspra- difed by both John and by Philip in the places abovenrentioned - and that for -the -better convenieacy of catching hold of the Water with their Hands, in order to. fprin? -"Me or pour out the fame on ■ thofe. they Baptized. And tliat which may convince any Many T not prepofleft with Prejudice againft the: Truth I here contend for ) that this was the j Pra&ice of ]ohn, and all the firffc Baptizers, !(fo much brag'd of by the Dr. ) is the Ira- ipoffibility of the Spirit's- being the Author of any (though the leaft ) Coatradi&ioB.: jinany part of God's Worlhip. Hence I argue. That which can no way be prov'd or made good by exprefi Tefti* mony of God's Word, or deduced there-, from byTound (and neceflary) Confeq«encev is an Invention in God's Worfhip, whicfc" IjGod' will reject and abominate as not ap«- tinted by him. E-5 • M- ( tit ) But Dipping the whole Body under Wa- ter in Baptifm, can no way be prov'd o: made good by exprefs Teftimony of God'; Word, nor yet by found ( or neceflary Confequence deduced therefrom. Therefore Dipping tfye whole Body un- der Water ( in Baptifm ) is an Invention ir God's W or fhip, which God will reject anc abominate, becaufe not appointed by him. The major Propofition will not be de nied. That which fecuresthe minor, anc proves the Con clu (ion to be the Truth ( which all the Wit of the Adverfary wil never be able to prevail a gain ft ) is tfa Scriptures Silence, in that it no where give; en exprefs Witnefs ( or Teftimony^ hereto And the impofiibility of that being provx a found Confequence i from God's Word,; which makes God the Author of Self-Con - tradiclion. The Word of God no where commands Dipping in. Baptifm, neither doth it fay ( in exprefs terms ) that either John or any of the A potties did Baptize by Dipping under the Water. Reader, keep the Ad- verfary clofe to this, where doth the Word hip appear, either in the Command oJ Chrift ( when fpeaking of Baptizing ) 01 in any Inftahce of Perfons Baptized by }ohn or the Apoliles ? If thou keep clofe to this. c Enemy will retreat and fly to Confe quence . m ) quence:, the whicbj if he doth, (as no doubt ; he will) do thou pin foe him with a Holy Courage, bs not afraid of his daring Brags. How do you prove that to be a found and Scriptural Confequence, which makes the Holy Spirit of God the Author of Self— [Contradiction ? That thus it isv( will evidently ) appear, 'the A'dvcrfary can no way avoid it.. If itfaou urge, ( -with an Holy Zeal for Truth ) what is '( Graphically , fer down- in God's ;Own Word, concerning the manner of Ap- plication of the Blood of the Sacrifices, and ; (the Waters of Purifications, both which jhkd a Typical Relation to the Spiritual iBaptifm/adrniniilred by the Spirit of ChriH.' |Thefe were applied under the Ceremonial Adminiftraticn, by Sprinkling, not by Dip- ping, ( as has been before obferved. ) The. iprophets, who foretold of Chriil, and the great Benefits which Ihonld come by him to ^Believers under the Gofpel. They fet it. forth by Sprinkling, witnefs Ifa.. 52. 15. ind Eiek. 36. 25. And in the Gofpel we .: ire allured, that the Spirit of Chrift doth ap~ . )ly the Inward Spiritual Baptifrrr, by Sprink- ing or Pouring out the Graces of his Spirit ; jjx the Soul in the Work of Regeneration i.ee Tit. 3. 6*. Now to affirm, that Chrilr; either com- - j$aj*ds Dipping, or that he .■.(Simfelf) was.' ; Dipped C *f:4 ) Dipped in Baptifm, what is itbirt to affirm., that Chrift's Spirit doth contradict him- felff What is pretended (for Dipping) from John 3* 23, hath, nothing in it to help their Caufe,, but what empty Conceit and unferipturai Confidence fupply. John ( faith the AdverfaryJ was Qaftizang m i&non, becanfe there was much Water there : Therefore he Baptized by Dipping the whole Body under the Water. The Strefs (or Weight) of the Argu- ment is laid on a fond Conceit, that much Water (there; fignifies and imports the Great&efs and Depth of Water., which ( plainly ) appears to be otherwife, witnefs the Greek^ KW.iim^ many. Waters, de- moting ratheMhe many Rivulets or Springs ©f Water, wherewith that place abounded^ than tjiat the Waters of that place were deep. And it was ( I doubt not ) for Con- leniency fake, that )ohn left Zethabarnh, ( a place of deeper Water ) becaufe ^£non mas ( every way ) more convenient and commodious for the Multitudes of People^ which came daily to his Baptifm. Fifcators .Note upon the place,. may not ( here ) be either improper or impertinent tea-. the Pur-ppfe if) hand., Vjdentwr fignificarl fares Rivij non autem iinum magnum Flttmen. Mw$ Rivulets-, not one. great Flood or Water > (e.ems\hcre.) to fefirafted^hith thatLearnr ed C m ) ed Author y with whom agrees the befir Geographers who give the Defcription of that place. I conclude my Treatife ( againft Dipping in Baptifm) with that Saying of Godly and judicious Sydenham: If ( faith he ) there Ire any ab joint e need of Dipping, it. is to cool the Heat of rhofe Mens Spirits, who deny Baptifm to be. true ( or right ) Baptifm, becaufe not Ad- minijxred by Blunging or Dipping. Pveader : Obferye, that as In the Sacra^ irient of the Lord's-Supper, it is not fo much the Quantity of the Wine drunk in that Ordinance, (by a Believer J as the Quality,; which fignifies and reprefents the Blood of Chrift. Chrill doth not tye a Believer up to fuch or- fuch a Quantity of Wine to be drunk in Remembranceof his Blood fhed, but (only) commands Wine1 to be drunk,, leaving to the Difcretion of. the Believer, what Quan- tity to drink. So in Water- Baptifm it is not the Depth or Quantity of Water which is neceffary to right Baptifm, but real Water •. it matters -not how- fmall the Quantity be, fo there be, but a Sprinkling (or Pouring vat) of Water on the Subjed, to.reprefent the Sprinkling ( or Pouring out ) of the Graces of God's Spirit on the EledSaul in Effectual. Calling. The. ro ) The Traoukd Antlquhy of Dip- ping ( hi Baptipn ) ovcrthroivny hy the moft Ancient Antiquity. s nee I appeared in Print, in vindicating the Right of Believers Infant-Seed to- /Baptifm, the (Seal of God's Covenant) I- met with a Nsmelefs Author, who, by his Book, fcems willing to be accounted, not only an incomparable Antiquary, but a matchlefs Linguiir. This Author, by'the flonrifhes he makes, hopes to drive all before him ^ fa as the An- tagonists he fights againlr. fhall, i^j vain, ex- pect any Relief from either the Original Tongues or Antiquity, in Favour of Infant Baptifm, or Sprinkling in that Ordinance. He perceiving what a Lofs the Men of that Perfwafion are at, in making good r their Do&rine of Immeruon, in baptizing, enters the Stage, brandifhing the Sword of his affected florid Style ^ backt with a ( Riiffcl like ) Confidence, that neither Ma- iler Malleus, his Anonimous Author, nor any of the London Mifliftcrs, are able to ftud fiajnd before him in oppodng what he offers ( from Antiquity ) to prove, viz.. Immerfion (or Dipping ) to be the only right way of baptizing. This Namelefs Author, when compu- ting the Numbers of Divines ( both An- cient and Modern) which* he brags, were for Immerfion, and againfl Sprinkling : Ail which, he affirms, nnderilood the Word Bami^o/m his Senfe > He forgot that Max- im'( known to every School-Boy who hath. learned his Grammar ) Hnmamim eft err are. It is the Property of Humane Nature to err, and go aftray. A Maxim never yet deny'd by any of thofe Divines (either Ancient or Modern) of whom, he fo greatly boafls, that I know of. Agreeing with this Maxim, is thatofFanl. Tea let God he true, but every Man a Lyar^ Rom. 3.4. From this it appears . ~( uncontroulably ) fure, and ( infallibly ) certain ^ that (fince jtidamh Fall ) no ( raeer ) Man can pretend to Infallibility. This belongs to him ( alone ) who moft juftly ftyles himfelf, the Ancient of Days, Dan. 7. 9. The unerring Spirit of this an- cient of Days, ( whofe revealed Will is the' tme Antiqnity ) ajfnra w^ ( by Elihu ) that ( n8 ) great Men are not always wifer neither do tin aged under -ft an d judgment, Job 32. 9. ~ On this very Account, viz,, the Fallibi- lity of the wifeft and beft of Men, All Be- lievers are by Chrift ( the Wifdom of God) dehorted from calling any Man their Father or their Mafter, Mat. 13. 9. On the fame Account likewife is it, that Pad (hun'd to Preach Ghrift in the florid Style and enticing Words of Man's Wifdom (a Vanity too much affecled by our Namelefs Author, and too many Preachers of this Age, who ftudy. more to advance their own-Fame and Party than they do to Preach Chrift into the Hearts of Sinners) that the Faith of true Believers might not Hand in the Wifdom of Men,. -but in the Power of God. 1 Cur. I am not. more confident of any thing ( m^erly humane; than lam of this, viz.. that were th'ofe very Ancient and Modern Divines (our Namelefs Author fo greatly brags of) now living, they would not only acknowledge that God's revealed Will was before their Learning and Wifdom } but they would (alfo ) acknowledge themfelves rmiftaken and overfeen, about the Senfe of the Words now in Dirpute. If the facred Scripture then be the true and infallible Antiquity, whereon we are to ground our Faith, in all Matters Divine. .It (n9) It (mod confpicuoully ) appears, how frau- dulently our Namelefs Author lays about him with the meretricious Paint of his or- nate and polite Style • and his tingle Parts and Learning r wherein ( poUibly ) both himfelf and his Party may conceit him a None-fuch, to ammfe and divert his credu^- Ious and unwary Readers, from the plain ■ Word of God, which he cannot but fee (if not wilfully blind ) is full againft him, in. theprefent Gontroverfie ) that in Pretence of Antiquity, and the Judgment of Modern Divines •, being all of his Opinion, in the Point of Immerfion. He may ( craftily ) draw Men into a felf-plealing Negleft, of looking into,, or not minding the apparent difference between the Primitive b*Vt*5 and Bct^r^ Bafto and Baptizo^ its Derivative •, a I thing fo plain, that any Man, but ordinarily I skilled in the Greek, may readily perceive^ :that this Difcovery, hath given the Do- j&rine of Immerfion ( or - Dipping ) fuch a j Wound, as nothing can help, or cure, but a. new Gofpel from Heaven, which Is (diredl:- ly) ■ oppolite to that Gofpel which the Son of God deliver'd from his Father, the which, when our Namelefs- Author procures, I fhail* then, never before, be of his Perfwaflon (therein) albeit he fpake with'the;Tongue of Men, and Angels/ Yea TertuUlan him- ftlf, of whom our Namelefs Author feems to C "O ) to be very fond in this Point of Immerfion, Will tell him, that Antiquity fine Feritate, nihil aliud e/?, nifi veluftas Err or is. That Antiquity without Truth, is but the very mould of Error. And in another place, treating of the Holy Scriptures, he hath this Saying, Surge Veritas, & fcrutare Scriptures tuas. Arife Truth, and fearch thy own Scriptures Inti- mating (thereby ) that whatever ( in Re- ligion) that is not grounded on God's Word is corrupt, and, as fuch, to be re- jected, how ancient foever the fame may be. According hereto, the fame TertulUa??, when he had to do with the Heretkh of bis time: who (to maintain their Here fie s in Oppofition to the true Religion ) plead- ed Antiquity, crying out, Jgupd Antiquum, id verum. That which is sfneient, is true. Whereto he ( feafonably ) reply'd. Quod Antiquis fimum, id vcrijnmum. That which is moft Ancient, is most true. Thefe Sayings of TertvMUn, I prefnme our Namelefs Author either over-lookt (when fearching Antiquity; or, at lea ft, thought it not for his Purpoie.'t© take! no- tice of them*, they being not fcr his turn. That Bcctto ( the Primitive ) is always ns'd, in the New-Tcframent, to exprefs Dipping by: but never 'B«rV*?o its Derivative. And ; - that C lii ) chat, B&£wiJ«? its derivative, is always iis'd ;ro exprefs Wafhing ^ by Pouring out Water on'the Subject, but never B*Vtw, hath been made good by Mailer Malleus his Anoni- rnous, and remains frill unconfuted, and is like fo to be, untill ( as hath been already Lii a ted ) a New Gofpel be procured from ;Heaven, . #r. And why our Namelefs Author fhould think it ftrange, as well as unlikely, that 'fuch Wife and Learned Men, as the Anci- :nt and Modern Divines, on whom the (frrefs of his Argument depends, fhould be ;iH raiilakerr about the Senfe and Significa- tion of the Words, now in Difpute, I can- not tell, unlefs for want of ( duly ) confi- liering, that thefe Ancients had ( incaute- ouily ) imbib'd ( or drunk in ) forne of that pmoak of Error which poyfoned and cor- rupted thofe Primitive and Pnrefl Churches planted by the Ministry of the Apoflles. And that the Modern Divines, who-fuc- jreeded them, had f from an over-weaning ponceit of thofe Ancients ) been more ac- quainted with the Truth of the Gofpel, then |:hem (elves : hecaufe of their bordering "fa dear on the time of the Apoflles, they^ tfere the apter to acquiefs in the Senfe of" :hofe Words : as the fame was handed down ;o ^hemby. thofe- Ancients, without looking my 'further, - - As 0 rzt ) As many ( yet living ) have ingenuoufi acknowledged, that they themfelves hav done : having taken thefe very Word- rather upon truft, thantryal: according t< the unerring Standard of God's Holy Word Gods with-holding many Secrets ( re& ting to the Myileries of the Gofpel ) m tk< vifible Churches here on Earth, from ih( moll fagacions and quick-lighted Saints, i\ not at all to be wondered at. Becaufe in a! his (Providential \ Difpenfations, toward: his Children ( while in a Hate of Imperfe- ction ) he ads in a way of uncontroulabh Sovereignty. To fome of his Servants he gives an Ex- cellency in one Gift, and to others he give- to excel in another Gift. To one, he be Hows one Meafure, both of Gifts and Grace and to another, he bellows a quite contra ry Meafure. In all which Diver flty of Difpenfation, he is moll free and unlimited. Neithe nlay any of the Sons- of Men fay ( or en quire) Why doth he fo ? ]ob. 33. i?j F.fkv.ii/£phef. 4.-7. The great Diver iity of Gifts wherein tfic Servants of Chrifl excelled one the other (m every Age of the Church) is a con vincing Argument, to -evince what I. hav now aliened* • Nay, C "1 ) Nay, the very Perfonal Experience of every true Believer, will confirm the fame.' Nemo Mortaliumomnibm Horis fapit. No Mortal is wife at all hours. I may add, nor in all Matters. That Proverbial Saying (Hill in ufe a- [along the Learned ) B&nardm non videt om« yia. Bernard jaw not all things, may ( with- out any Reflection} be properly enough ap- plied to the molt Learned and Wife, of 'ill thofe Ancient - and Modern Divines made ufe of, irrthe Bulinefs of Immerflon. I queltion not but God ( the^great So- vereign of the World) hath referved many things to be made known to the Churches in the latter Days,which have been hid from j:he Ancient and Modern Divines now ooafted of. j And in cafe the Dkcovery made of the Difference between B*v-r» and &£&$%£ | which doth {o manifestly nonplus and 'tagger the greateft Champions for Immer- ijon) bc_one of thofe many things, what lath any to object again'ft God for his letting b many of his -eminent and dearly beloved laints go out of the World ignorant of mat he -is now pieafed- to ■ difcover, 'anoV ■pake; known ? And what though iuch a pifcovery be made by themeanelt aid moil lefpifed of thofe called to labour in his :to5s Vineyard ;. that his Sovereign Grace > ' might might honour thofeof his defpifed Ambaf iadors, who ( on the account of the final Figure they make in this World) are (light- ed and neglected by the Rich and moil Fam'd, among their Brethren, in facred Office j is not the Difcovery worth Accep tance ? I do not doubt, but were fuch a Difco- very made, by one of the Minifters in high Efteem, among the Men of this Age, theii Fame would be celebrated throughout both City and Country. But woe, and alas! the poor Man is forgotten by his Neighbours, and his Words are not heard. And Chat becaufe he is poor Ecclef. 9. 15, 16. Mailer Immerfer ( -fo I ftyie him from the Title given to his Book ) he conceals his Name, for what Reafon, I no more know, than I know the Reafon why Matter Mallei concealed my Name ( ftyling me ( in his Book ) Anonimous ) notwithstand- ing my Name is to be feen in the Title- Page of my Book: out of which Matter Immerfer fufpecYs he ftole that Obfervation about the Difference between the 2 Words B*V™ andB**-T^? (which with the Argument grounded thereupon ) hath left the Patrons and greateft Champions for Immerfion, in a Labyrinth, not knowing how (polfibly; to work themfelvcs and their bleeding Caufe out of the fame. When C *M ) 'When Mailer Immerfer fhouki,' like a ^candid and fair Antagonist, whofeekstlie Honour "of God, and the Information of Ignorant^ Souls < not his own Fame) have come Point blank to fhew the particular Chapter and Verfe (in the New Tefcament) Iwhere the Word Immerfe ( or Plunge 5 is jexprefr. by the Derivative b*™'£« or tne Word (or Term W-afn in baptizing, is jexpreft by the Primitive b*Vt». He falls \on a vain glorious Difpiay, of his Rheto- rical Eloquence, which he endeavours to ifupportby the Auxiliaries fetcht out of the ; Armory of miftaken Antiquity, concluding itbat now he hath hit it. In this he feemsas confident of Vidory :|as his Brother :j\tfenge is of his Mathemati- -cal Demonftrationr By which he would jfain prove, that the Partial Plunging, pra- ;ctifed by thofe of his Perfwaiion, "is the true lead for Anabaptifts : m this plain cafe. jiad this very point been feriouily ( and^ Seliberately ) weigh'd, and confidered by he great contenders for Iramerfion : I am !pt to believe, tSey would' Bot:have been k forward in their boafting, that the Anci- nts,and the Modern. Divines, being all on heir fide. ! I mall not now infill on any arguments/ > prove Go'fp'el . Baptifm, to be by pour- C trs ) ing ont Water on the fubjeft, that being al ready done, 1 hope, to the full fatisfaclion o aii,who have read my Book without prejudice I only requcft of mailer Immerfer (oi any of his Coadjutors in this their linking Caufe ) that when ( if ever ) He appear oi; the Stage again, to prove the practice o: Immerfion : that he will prove that Pan was Baptifed by Immerfion. Atts 9. 18 And likewife that the Jay lor was fo baptiz'd sitts 16. 33. with many others, of whon the word of God makes no mention (ex prefly ) either of their going down intoi or their coming up out of the Water. His filling up whole Pages with plaufibL Storys and Quotations, but of Ancient an* Modern Divines, will never down with m> or any other, who make the unerring wTorc of God the Ground of their Faith, nnlef He effectually, prove, thofe Divines to b infallible in what they fay in their writing; the winch when he doth, I hope the argu meat grounded on their infallibility ( if li proves them fo to be ) will be altogether a pertinent, to convince Anabaptills/of th lawfulnefs of Infant Baptifm, as it will b to convince me, and others, of the lawful neifs of Immerfion in Baptifing. Befides the queftion already put, 1 fha prefume to propofe, the Fifteen Querk Kere following to be Refolved, the whic if the Men 1 now difpute againlt,can anfwe fair! ( i*9 ) rairly and folidly from God's Word, I will lie down, at their Foot, and immedi- ately become their Profelyte. If they either cannot or will not, I hope they have no Reafon to think, or fay, that I ad againft the light of my Gonfcience, if I continue to ^maintain the Divine Right of Infant-Bip- ;tifm, and that the Mode of Baptizing, which the Gofpel in joins Believers to pra&ife, is by Sprinkling (or Pouring oat) "the Water on the Subject. ^uerry i. How prove they, that the In- Ifant Seed of encovenanted Parents ( who [were, by God's Acl: of fovereign Grace, taken into the very fame Covenant with their Stipulating Parents) were ever caffc lout of that Covenant ? That they were taken into their profeP ling Parents Covenant, 1 have" effectually proved. If they, who oppofe Infant-Baptifm, .be unable to mew to which of the Prophets ( under the Old Teftament ) or to which of the ApofHes/ under the New) God gave -a Command to call Infants out ^f their Co- venant Relation to the Church of which .their Parent ( or Parents ) is a profeffing Member. If they cannot demonftrate, what the Sin ( or Provocation ) of Infants is, whereby they have merited their .being cut off from the Covenant •, then muft. it ( ne- G % ccflarily) ■J ( tjo ) peflkrily ^ follow ( all the Wit and Learn- ing of Men and Angels can-not help the Ad- verfary here ) that the Infants- of. believing Parents are Hill in Covenant, and ^as fuch; have a Covenant Right to Water Baptiftn. Quer. 2. How can Anabaptifts prove that Abraham's Blefling is come on the Gentile- Seed of Abraham under the Gofpel ( thro" Chrift ) feeing the Infants of Believing Gen- tiles are by them denied , to belong to the Covenant? the term, Seed of Abraham, ex- tends to the Infants of Gentile Believers un- der the Gofpel, as truly as it did to the Children begotten of Abraham's Body. This is beyond all Contradiction, as appears from Gal. 3. 29. compared with Gal. 3. 14. Quer. 3. How prove they, that any In- fants f dying in Infant State ) are faved, feeing, that ( according to Anabaptifm j In- fants neither belong to the Covenant, nei- ther are they capable of Regeneration ? Quer. 4. How can they juftifie their ex- tending the Grace of God, beyond the Bounds of God's ownCovenant }in that they hold and affirm, that all Infants, without Diftindion, are faved who die in Infancy ? One while they deny, that any Infants, while Infants,belong to God's Covenant, or are capable of Regeneration. Another while they hold and teach, that all Infants pre faved, who die in Infant State. Now whether C »« ) whether thus to hold and teach, do not 'evidently prove them guilty of Self Con- tradiction, and in both their Opinions, 'concerning Infants, whether they be not .contrary to God's Word : 'tis left to all ;Men' who can but read Emfifaj to judge, J Jitter, f. How can they juftifie their Pra- ctice, in "diitinguifhing themfelvesfrorn thc-ir godly Neighbours, by ftyling themfeivcs JsSaptifts and Baptized Churches of jefus 'thrift < by which Practice, it is evident, ■they unchurch all the other Churches c#v 'jChrift ( on Earth J which are not of their iPerfwafion. If I miftake not, Dr. ''Rnjfl, that ralh and 'confident Aifertor of Immerilon, and Op- iptignor of Infant-Baptifm ;.he 'owns, in \m Book, that the Title of Baptifb- was iirlt .given to John ( via Emimntia ) by way of : jEminency. Denoting the high Office, af- ;fign'd him by God, as he was to be the Fore- runner of Chart his Son, to prepare the :jway before him. Where do they read, that any (in all the New Teftament ) were ft y led Baptlils, even among the many who were Baptized by John and the Apoftles of Chrift ? If then | •they can give no Inftance, from God's jiWord, of. any that were ftykd Baptifts, jamong the many that were Baptized, And that it be unqiieftionably true ^ that Bap- Gj tilt ( if* ) tift denotes the Office to which John was called by God. Doth it not convincingly appear, bow vainly they afTume to them- selves the Title of Baptifts > and that with- out any Precept or Example j to warrant' their Practice herein. Baptift C if t miftake not the Term ) de- notes and intends Baptifer. Are all who glory in being fryled Baptifts, Baptifers ? Confcience awaken, and fpeak to this Point; «J§W. 6. How juftifie they their Bapti- sing Women, feeing that Women are not intended in the Words of the grand Com- nnfiioii ( as Dr. Ruffd ailerts) they bein£ not of the Mafculine Gender -7for ( accord-; \*\% to him ) none are the proper Subjects of Baptifm, but fuch as are of the Mafcu- line Gender5 or Male-kind. By Dr. Ettffils Argument, it is plain., that as he excludes Infants from Baptifm, becaufe of their Infant State-^.fo he exclude* Women, from having a Right to that Or- dinance, becanfe they are not of the Male- kind. By which it plainly appears, that the Charity of Dr. Rnjftl ( and ail who arc one with him herein ) for poor Infants and their Mothers, is of equal Extent. Cito'. 7. How prove they that fuch as renounce their Infant Baptifm, and fubmit to their Pra&ice of Dipping are ( herein ;■ aded, by aa infallible Spirit ? Qttcr. 8 Que?. 8. How prove they that God's iCovenant of Graft (under the Gofpel) hath any initiating Seal, which fucceeds vCircumciiion, in cafe they grant not that Water Baptifra did? Here they rauft either grant ordeny. If' they grant that Water-Baptlfm did fucceed in the room of Circumcifion, then are they obliged to (hew a convincing Reaion, why they deny Baptifm to the Infant-Seed of encovenanted Parents, feeing they were I never yet call out of Covenant. j If they deny that Water-Baptifm did I fucceed in the room, of Circumcifion, then J are they oblig'd to lay down convincing 1 Reafons, wherefore they make Water- Bap- rtifm the Door of Entrance into their Churches. •Quer. 9. Whether their bearing People in hand, that Obedience to Chriftin Mat. id. 18. and imitating his Example (laid down in Mat. 3. 16. ) is the Ground of their Dipping in Baptifm, be not ameer empty Pretenllon ? feeing how unconcerned they are, either to obey the Command of Chrirf, or to follow his Example, in the cafe of poor Infants, who are not able to fpeak3 w: act for themfelves. Moll certain it is (it cannot be denied ) thatChrift commanded Infants to be brought . to him, Mat. \p* 14. . And as certain it is, 0fc&4 . . that \ *M ) iVht emr^raced them in his Arms, and bterTed them, Mar. io.' \6. Why donor Aiiabaptjjb make Confcience of obeying rift-s Command, and following his Ex- p'.e snd Practice herein ? ■r s no need of flying to firained Me- phors and Confequences, where Matter of Fstt fo plainly appears. Let the Ad- ': get over this if he can, Jfyer. io. How can they prove, by God's Word, their Frafticein laying iiich a ftrefs on Water-Baptifm ( efpecially en the Mode Baptizing J as tends to uphold and pro- .au: t! at Rotnijk Principle, which teaches at Water Baptiirn is (abfolutelyj ne- ceOary to Salvation? A Principle, no way agreeing with the Word of God, or the Judgment and Confefilons of any of the Proteftant Churches, either at home or a- brcad. And not only fo, but which tends to difturb the Peace of all the Churches, and to fet the Members of Chriilian Socie- ties at varience among themfelves. This Practice cannot be jnftihed by the Gofpel, which exhorts all the Followers of the Lamb to Peace and Order, Epbef. 4: 3. Plain it (gfctas to me, that thofe Perions who prefs with fo great Violence and intemperate Zeal, the Neceiftty of Baptizing by Dipping, are as real and as great Difturbers of the Churhces Peace> as they were, who, in the Apoftles C '--130 Apoftlcs times, prelTed the Necefllty cl Circumcifion, AlU 1 5. 24. (?*/. 6. 12, 1 3. As the former did Idolize the Ordinance of Circumcifion, 1 leave it to every indif- ferent and impartial Reader to determine, I whether thefe do not Idolize Water-Bap- (tifm, adminiftred by Dipping? To whom '! I fay ( as Paul to the Profeflbrs of his time, ! concerning Circumcifion ) For in pfys Chriff neither Circumcifion avaikth tiny thing, nor ] Vncircumcifion, but Faith which norketh by Love, Gal 5. 6. -That Water - Baptifrn j (whether by Sprinkling or Dipping J a- I vaileth as much to Salvation ^ (where the i Heart remains unchanged ) asCircumcikon 1 did avail thofe who trufted to 'Aiofes his j Law for Juflifkation and Life. Quer. H-. How will they prove that Chrift, who came in the Flefh to break down ] that Partition -Wall, which Separated be- ; tween Jews and Gentiles.:- to the "end",, both j may become one Body, did erect i or fet ; up) a Wall of -Separation between believ- ing Parents, and their dear and tender Babes, who ( next to themfeives ' are the greateft Comfort a Believer deiires and prays for i n this Wot Id ? I believe no Man, who is taught of God, dares to think or fay, that I am miiiaken, when 1 affirm,that thus to hold, .or -ftach, is t high andrfawcy Reflection on the God ol G i :, L(M Love, who hatfr planted ' in Parents that Principle of natural Affedtion to their dear Off-fpring. That God hath implanted the Principle of natural Affection in Parents, to their In- fants ^ and that He commands Parents to love and delight in them, as they are his j>rornifed BlefTmg, none- can deny. Now, for Men to hold (, or teach) that God hath cut oft' ( or call out) the Believers Seed, froitfr {hating in the Mercy and Blefiing of their believing Parents Covenant \ what is it but, interpretatively, to fay, and teach, that God hath rafed the Foundation of that Natural Affection, planted in Nature, by tfts own Spirit. For, 1 would gladly be informed, what Delight. a true Believer can take in thofe Children, whom God hath caft off, or re- lied ? Qhct. t & How can Anabaptifb' deny, withor.t Refilling God's Truth, that the [/lasting in of theGentiles into Chrifr,muft bear an exs& proportion, with God's call- ing off the Jews for their Unbelief? When Gxi call out (or cut off > the Unbelieving jews, their Children- were caft out with their Unbelieving Parents. When God ingrafted ( or planted ) the Gentiles into their room, He took in their Infant Seed along with thsiv believing^Parents. Rom. fl'i; 19/20. As-was the Calling out otr j Jews, fuch, of neceffiry, 'until' be the Ingraft- ing (or planting} in ®f%he0ehtites. Jhter. 13. How am our Englifi Anabap- • tills reconcile their practice of Dipping in j ' Baptifm, with thepraeYiceof their Brethren j in Holland? who baptize by fpr inkling 'or j pouring out) the Water on the Subject ; 1 As all Orthodox Proteflants are known to ] do. \ Strange it is to me, that Or Rujfzll, and I thofe of his Ferfwafion, who make fuch * I brags that the Dutch Tranilators had traflf- I lated the words John the Baptift^ Johannes | de Dooper, John the Differ : And the words ' Baptizing them, - Salve dopende, Dipping j them, that they mould be ignorant how ; their Brethren in Holland do adminifler j Baptifm. And as flrange it is, that if the ' Anabaptifts in Holland had look'd on the ! Dutch Tranflators to be nearer the Senfe of { ! the Holy Ghoft, then were other Tranna- ; tors of the Bible, that they mould not flick to the i>^c/;Tran(!ators, in pracliilng the Mode of Dipping, in B-iptillng, rather than as they now pra&ifr. The apparent difference then 'between the Englifli and Dutch Anabaptifis, about the mode ( or manner ) ofBaptifing, is to me -an Argument* that thdfe -"in Holland are far -more oouftdera&e and wary,, in ftmnnir^ and and avoiding the ill confequences which follow preffing; and praftifing the mode of Dipping, rather than Sprinkling or pour- ing out the Water 5 than are our Eth&jh- Anabaptifts. They in Holland, I anTapt to believe, know (and coniider) that the jennD/r?, is never intended intheGofn \ but in a bad (or evil) fenfe. Whereas the term S?rMk ( or wafh ) with Water, is always taken in a good fenfe; the which the EngUjh Anabaptifts either cannot, or I .eliearcrefolv'd they will not mind ortake notice of • icafl their fo doing fliould throw down their Dagon to the Ground To Rich 1 on-ty SWi <%' volmit dccipi, derifiantur. They who are willing and defirous to be deceived, kt them be deceived $uen 14. How can Anabaptifts who Hold and teach, that Chrift hath no true Churijieson Earth, bntthofe of their own Perfwaliion, juftifie their Pra&ice, in fitting down in Feilowihip with thofe whom they own not. for true Churches ? Let fuch anfwer the following Dilemma ff they can. The Congregations of their godly Neigh - bourse to which (but too) many of them joyn themfelves, either they are true Churches of Chrift, or they are not fo j one of theft two tfaey ruuft Hand to. If they v them to be true Churches of Chrifi:, why C 139 ) why do fo many of them join with them in Church Communion. If they be true Churches of Chrift, how dare they to difturb and difquiet the Peace of fuch Churches, in preffing. the Neceffity of renouncing the Baptifm received in In- fancy, and by fprinkling^ labouring all they can to draw Church-Members to be re-bap- tized, and that by Immeruon. Let Men pretend what they can, for fuch a notch potch Communion in Churches-. I ftedfaftly believe the Event and Iflue of fuch Practices, will, fooner or later, con- vince all Gain-fay ers, that it neither plea- feth Chrirt, nor is it any way promotive of true Peace or Gofpel Holinefs in the Churches of God's People. L heartily with this may beleriouily and feafonably weight, and, without Prejudice, considered by thole Pallors, &c. whofe Duty it is to watch over .the. Flocks committed_ to their Charge, by the great Shepherd of the Sheep. And that by keeping the Churches Doors fhut againft fuch - Perfons being admitted into Church - Fellowibip, whofe very Principles have a na- tural Tendency, not only to fubvert the Church's Peace, but, which is far worfe^ to deftroy the very being of the Churches themfelves. Were the Churches of Chriil in England but throughly a waken'd^out of that Security which C 140 ) which hath ( a long time ) feiz'd them, they would foon become fenfible of what is now complained of and witnefled againft, and would be forced to acknowledge me to be a faithful Friend and a hearty Well-wifher to all the Churches of the Saints. But under their prefent Frames, I expecl; fmall Thanks foV the prefent Faithfulnefs and Plainnefs here ( and elfewhere ) manifefted for God's Glory, and the general Good of his Peo- ple. ^ Plain it is to me, that the mixt Commu- nion in Churches, of which many ( who confidernot the thing aright as they fhonld) are too fond, is the very Source from which fprings that vifible Confumption in rnoft of the Congregational Churches now in England. I fhall never be reconciled to that Cha- rity which (in Pretence of Peace and Mode- ration) opens the Churches Door to Church deftroying Principles. There is nothing more evident to feeing and confiderate Minds, than that the ground which the Congregational Churches have loft of late Years, the Anabaptiils have gained it. And the Congregational Churches - rhay thank their niixt Communions fori:. The Anabaptiils feem \ to outward Ap- pearance at ieafb; to hug and embrace the Congregational Churches, as fome do the C M* ) Queen* But how near both come to the 1 Iv/s embracing the Body of the Oak, I leave unprejudiced Men to determine. I hope I fhall die in the fame Judgment of a great Divine, who faid, that in Ecclefia Evangelic a reBe Conftitnta , Anabapifmu* minime eft toller andus. In a GofpelChurch right- fy conftitnted Q fa id he) Jinab apufm is by no means- tob e toller at ed> How applicable to the -pr^nt Purpofe^ that Ceremonial Prohibition . recorded in Dent. 22.9. is, I humbly leave to the fe- rious Confideration of the London Minhters, I would not be miftaken, as if I were out of Charity with thofe of - the Anabaptift Perfwafion, though it hath (providentially; fallen to/ my Lot to attack their unfcriptu- ral Tenents, on a publick Stage, A Pra- ctice, to which I have been often provok'd both in Ireland and England. Their Teach- ers frequently inculcating into their Follow- ers, that thofe who are for Sprinkling In- fants, have nothing to offer in defence of fuch a Pra&ice, either from Scripture or from Antiquity. This taking with weak and injudicious People every where, I have been by Men and Women of that Per&va^ Hon, publickly let upon, to force a Difpute about Baptifm. If what God hath enabled me to difcover, concerning Baptifm, prove uneafie and unanfwerableD they are to blame thexnfelves3 thcmfelves, who ftirr'd me up to ftudy the Point. §>uer. 15. How can Anabaptifts clear themfelves from being charged with being a&ed by a Lying Spirit ? in that they tell the World, that Infant-Baptifm was not known in the World till Three Hundred Years after Ch rift's Time. Whereas, it is evident to any, who look into Antiquity, that Infant-Baptifm was not queftioned till about Three Hundred Years after Chrift. As by the particulars here following will plainly appear. " I begin with the Account given by "Matter Philfot ( a faithful Martyr of Jefus " Chrift ) whofe Words ( concerning the u Antiquity of Infant - Baptifm ) are. on MC Conciliis lnftitutum, fed fencer re- ^ tentum eft. Non mfi slxthcritate j4poftolic* ;. tmditum veriffime creditur. That, faith he, ^wheats had by the univerfal Churchy and - was mt inftitutcd by any Councils, but was alvrays hc!d,we are 10 believe, that it came, or was delivered, by no other then by JlpoRo- " lical Authority. J f™ I might fill a Volume with Authors Names, if need were, to demon (irate to the World how falfe thefe Pretenders to An- tiqmtyagainil Infant Baptifa are, as in 0- ther thing?, wherein Infant-Baptifm is con- cerned, fo alio in this of Antiquity, where- by they frill labour what they csn to ilag^ ger fimple and credulous People. I will bring up the Rear with that molt' excellent and incomparable Calvin, whom I think fit here to mention, as beino; a Man of that Orthodoxy and Clearnefs° in the Gofpel, that I account it rather an Honour than a Reflection on the Ancient and Mo- dern Divines (gone to Heaven to have their Teflimonies (in Theological Debates,) back'd and confirmed with the Judgment of fo great a Man. The ( H7 ) The judicious and penetrating Cahin^hh Words on Mat. 1 9. 1 3, 14. are as here fol- low, u Nequc enim hoc leviter es~t pretereun- I dumyqwd Infantes fib i offhrri Chr) flits jubet^ f addita raticne, quoniam tali urn fit Regnum -4 Coelorum. Ac poftea voluntatemfuam opere u teftatur. Dum ipfos ample xm Tree at lone ,c benediEUoneq^fuo Patri commendat. Si ad- u due i Chriflo Infantes tqitm eSi. Cur rwnC^ lc ad Raptifmum recipi Symbolum noflrecaufe of fuch is the Kingdom of Hea- w ven. And afterwards he declareth his j*c Will by his Deed. When { having em- I braced them ) he commends them to his :tc Father,- by his Praying, for them, and -"his blefling of them. If it it be meet W that .Infants fhould be brought to Chrift, '" why not alfo that they fhould be received |ccto Baptifm, which is the Badge of our f Communion, and irellowlhip with Chrilt ? ct If theirs be the Kingdom of Heaven, why i" fhould the Sign be denied them? Cah. | lnft. lib. 4. cap. itf. Art. 7. » L Again the fame Calvin hath-thefe Words, f Quod am em apud Simplkem vulgum diffe- ffminant longam Amor urn feriempoft Chriflo Refurre- C H8 ) At Refurvecbionem pro ') with lay down the Cudgels, and in Pulpit and Print exprefs my Repentance and Sor« row for appearing fo zealoufly concerned to oppofe Antipedobaptifm. If my Arguments remain (till unconfuted, and the Queries here propounded be not impartially fpoken to, and refolv'd •, I hope thofe of the contrary Perfwafion will no more pretend to tell the World, that the Pedo- baptifts have nothing to plead ( either from the Sacred Scriptures, or from Antiquity ) in favour of Infant Sprinkling. If thefe Difcov-eries prove convincing^ and irrefutable, 1 heartily and fincere-ly defire, that the whole Praife hereof may be afcribed to the Only Wife God, whofe Blefled Spirit led me into the faving Know- ledge of Jbraham's Covenant, and blefled me with a holy Refolntion to vindicate and maintain the fame, in behalf of the Infant Seed of Believers, againft all Oppofers whatfoever. And let all who reap any Benefit by thefe Difcoveries join with me in fayine, Amen. They who defire to be further fatisfied of the Truth of what is molt juftly charged on Anabaptift Writers, iw. their mifre- prefenting Authors (by them quoted J for the Support of their antifcriptural Caufe ; let them, without prejudice, read the Inge- nious Obed Wills on Infant Baptifm, who hath C m ) hath -not only anfwer'd and -confuted, but alio fo particularly and effectually anato- mized Henry Danvers, for not only a Mif- reprefentcr, but an egregious Perverter of the ancient Fathers and , Councils, &c. whom he quotes in his Book againfl Infant: Baptifm, &c. that it will eafily, be perceiv- ed (Ay any Man ofSenfe; how'impofiible it isfor the molt pregnant -and fagacious of that Perfwafion ( now living J to help him out of that Quagmire, into which his match- tefs Inadvertency and unparallell'd- Dilin- genuity hath plung'd him. ,- Be fides which worthy. Authour, (\i farther Pro-vocation be given ) other plain Iciflances (hall be given of the like Abufes, which fome of the Anabaptift Writers (of later date ) have put upon fome of the molt Eminent of the Congregational Divines ) • itfhofe Reverend Names and curtaifd Ex- jieffions have been made ufe of, and ( egre- ;ioufly ) perverted, on purpofe to gain the 20 re Credit to their heterodox Opinions* Lnd that after thofe godly Divines were one to Glory. A Practice, which ( befides ic great wrong fuch Men do their own ouls) carries two monflrous Evils in its Vromb. Jirtt, It charges notorious Lies and j^own Falihoods on the Dead, who cannot |lw fpeak for themfelves-, which -is both H inhumane C If*- ) Inlnimane and bafe, and no way agreeing with the known Uzximr Nihil nifi bonum de Mortms^ nothing &ould be fpoken of the Deceafed but good. Secondly, It lays a Snare and a Net in the way of the Living, to beguile and draw them afide from the Paths of Duty ; ; Which Pra&ice is nothing fhort of Leading the Blind out of their way, which the Word oi God exprefly forbids -. Cur fed bt be thai mahth the Blind to wander out of the way And all the People fitll fay Amen, Deut. 27 18. compared with Matt. 1$. 14. I for- bear here to (hew how near this PraStd treads on the very Heels of the Romifh Je fuits Praftice. Now, whether the Anabap tifts or 1 be to blame -, they for endeavour ing to uphold their Caufe, by belying th Dead*, or I, for endeavouring to cautioj and undeceive the Living, is left to th< impartial Reader, who is unwilling to b /impofed on, to judge. TH ( jifl ) THE POSTSCRIPT. 1 I Had no fboner finilhed my Jlpfendix to the foregoing Treatife ( in this Second Impreffion ) but an Account was given ane, that one Matter Stenmt had appear'd In Print againft Infant-Baptifm, && His Book I did refolve to read, if God pleas'd to permit me, to fee whether any thing material hath been offer'd de novo which hath not ( formerly > been brought into Plea by his Predcccflbfs, in Defence of that Caufe, which he feems refolv'd to de- fend againfl all Gainfiyers of wbatPerfwa- ilon foever. But finding nothing in it that, is either Novel, or any thing tending to enervate and confute the Arguments laid down ia Defence of Infant-Baptifm, dtk I faw no lOccafion to make any further Enlargnient Ion what I have now added to the foregoing | Treatife ; unlefs to make fome Remarks oh iome Paflagcs in Matter Sunnttt Book/ To the end Mailer Stenntf% Ingenuity may [be acknowledged^ he^ and all of his Per- H 2 fwafiofl, ( *5:4 ) fwafien, be made feniible, that he is net more fixed (in his Refolution ) to Hand by that Caufc which he hath efpbufed, than I am to maintain and vindicate the contrary, until Mailer Stennet^ or fome other of his PerJTwation., fairly beats me out of the Field by the Strength of Scriptural Arguments. The firit Remark I make on Mailer Sten- nefs Book, is, the ingenuity and Learning which adorns his Book, for which"! can caliiy give him that Encomium rdf Praifc which a Man of his Character juftly defery.es, from all who are Lovers of" Learning* And this,- without (any way ) : weakening- the Caufe- 1 am now engag'd to defend, Mailer Sunmt is not the only Man of Ingenuity and Learning -who hath patronized a wrong Ulauieyand who hath prov'd greatly miflakcn •in Polemical Controverfies in Theology. It is not .Art or Humane Learning (though both be good Helps ) in their proper 'Place, «when fan&ified of God, that can Jead Men into a found Underftanding of the Myftery of God's Covenant with jfa ,braham (the Ecclellaftical Reprefentative .sjtf: Father of all believing Church Mem- bers to the End of the World ) in the behalf of himfelf and his Infant-Seed. 1 hope neither Mailer Smmet nor any of his Perfwaflon, will be offended for telling ■him,- that I cannot fee of what ufe his florid Traft c Hi ) ' .Pratt can be, unlefs to let the World fee what an accomplifht -Patron the Antipedb- baptiits have gotten to advocate and folicft their "Caufe a gain ft the Pedobaptiils. \ As for the Pains he hath been at in quo- ting fo many Greek and Latin Authors, it might have been prevented, had Matter Siezmt per us' d with Care (and void of Pre* judice ) thofe Books of the Pedobaprifh, who have difcovered the linfairnefs (to fay no worfe ) of his PredecefTors, who have made- as great a (hew in quoting the /fame Authors, which now help to fill up and grace Mailer Smmtfs Book, as Matter Sten~ net now doth. All the Quotations, wherewith his Book abounds ( though he could quote ten thou-- fand more as Ancient and Learned as them) will never move me to believe any other, tut that thelnfants of encovenanted Parents have as real a Right to, and are as capable of, the Ordinance of Baptifn, as the moft adult ProfeiTor on Earth, be: his Faith never fo ilrong. Neither can they iTagger me in the ' fled- falt Belief, that the. Word '^'% frgnifies to wafh by Permit on, or fprbiuirig Water on- the Subject, until I be direct.-;-;! ro the- particular place in the Gofpel where the Spirit of God exprefieth the Act of Dip- H i . ping (.Ijro ping by the Derivative b«*7/'(* and; the Act of Baptizing by the Primitive b»v?». ' But letfft I may be thought to exceed the »foaS Bounds of a Pofticript, I (hall haftento animadvert on a few Paflages in Mr. Stennn\ Book, wherein I think him befides the Text. In Chap. £. Page 2$. Matter Stennet tells- his Reader ( peremptorily ) that T/^o-and ******& figdne the fame things vit. to Dip- This Affertion of his I have . I humbly con* ceive) overthrown in Pages 77,78,79,80,8 1 . and with inch clear Evidence of Scripture Light, as Mafter Stetmet w\\\ never be able to gain fay with Snccefs. To which I need r.o add no more, then -to recommend to the feriotis Consideration of the judicious and unprejudiced Reader, the places of Scripture, here following, that he might be the better able to judge whether Mailer Supnet or I be miftaken in the Signification we give of the Word **'**$& That the Word figaHies Warning by Sprinkling f or Pouring out) Water on the Subject, and not Dipping, will plainly ap- pear by Mar. 7. 4. sind whenthty come from the Market, except they ivafii &fy eat mt* iai p?; Bctrrl^oyleum Except they be baptized they eat not. 1 perfwade my * felf that Matter Stennet will have a greater Regard to his, Confcience, ( before God ) and to his Re- putation among Men, than to believe cur affirm* C 157) ' / affirm, that Dipping the whole Body under Water is there intended. Who can ( rationally ) think ( or be- lieve ) that the Jews and Phdrifees ih^uld^ ftrip off their common Apparel, and put- on. other Garments, fuitable to that Ce- remony of Dipping, every time they went to Dinner ? &e+ Such a Praaice-as-thh muft needs be at- tended with great lnconveniency, not only on the account of the trouble of it, but espe- cially on the account of the danger to which * fuch a Praftice would expofe the Health of their Bodies* 1 cannot think that the My- ftery of Skjohn Flayers. Cold Bathing was known to them, that they Ihould there- from take Encouragement to pradife fuch ^ frequent Dipping. If then it be unreafonable to believe,: that 'the- Baptifing pradtis'*-- by the Jsm- and Fharifeesw^ not Dipping, the true Senfe and Meaning of the place muft be;, . that the Jews and Fharifees us'd alway be- -; foie Dinner to walh their Hands, and that becaufe they frequently convers'd 'with Gentiles in. the Places of publick Concourfe, and handled things whereby they thought themfelves ceremonially defiled. Of the fame Import is Luke 11. 3& And when the Fharifee. faw *% he marvelled that he had not -fir & wajhed before Dinner. C 158 ) .-.-. t :*~u ^B-flrgjTtf *e^vs. That he was not ba£tifed bciore Dinner. Another place of Scripture, pertinent to : i yrcicnr purpofc, is 1 Cor. too. 1, .2. verj Bret ore ;/, Iirotdd not thatyejhoidd he iQrartf^ h&w that at' our Fathers were -under all faffed though the Sea. jlnd ( all baptized unto Afojes in the (loud and lYl t'K Sea. *> -rxuaetc ?er (jrk:\u> i£nrli&c. tells . them of the Signification of the £fo mucl^ controverted ) Word M^i-'f^* Whether - Mailer Stennet be able to make good Me affirms or no, by fuch folid and con- vincing Arguments as neither thwart the : Principle ofc Reafon ( planted m our Na- ~ ture) or contradict and crofs the Rades^ prefcribed by God for felf Prefervationr ^ and which tends not to deftroy the Analo- gy of Faith. If Mailer Stennet accounts.; himfelf, and thofe of his Perfwafion, excii-< fable for rejecting Mailer Rnffen his ijfp + dixity as their Rule in Matters of Faitn,.^ when Mailer Rujfen gives no folid Reafon « from God's Word, for what be fay& I hop© Mailer Sterner will not blame the Pedbbap* - tills for telling the World that they fee as t Httle Reafon for their crediting Mailer,/ Stennet^ as Mailer Stennet fees foivhis ere- - diting Mailer Rn$m, Mat. 7. 2. I heartily wifh that Mailer Stennet zn$ I X were as well agreed about the Signification ,,s sf the W©?d now ifl?.Cdacrovef irej.asd In^ £u#s#f Bdfcvfeg Paints light to Baptifi%v. C x6x > as we are iii- our Refolution of believing no Man's yhft. h». any farther then he pro- duces the Word of Faith, to warrant what, he offers to be believed in Matters of Re- ligion. I cannot- fo much wonder at the Miftake. of good Men, who, have? taken Battt}^ to, figniGe any kind of Wafliing, either, by. Dipping, Sprinkling, or -pouring out Wa- ter on the Subject, as I do at Mailer Sterwet for oppoling and rejecting the Difcovery. now made, which is fo plainly demon-- flrated. by the Light of Holy Scripture, &t the goodly and learned Minifters ( now living ) into whofe Hands the foregoing Treatife hath come,. do Wonder they never. (before) took Notice of it. And indeed, liad.the lame Difcovery been made in the. t&& of thofe Ancients, and Modern Di~ •;rkes, quoted by Matter Stomet^ I do in Gha- xity believe, they durfl not reject or fin a< gainlt fuch clear light. Can any Man wonder at me, for alfert- ing, that &***» the Primitive figniiies to waft by Dipping only, and that B*ttv&7 the. Derivative iignifies to Wafii by Sprink- ling, or Pouring out Water, on the. Sub- mit,, without Dipping. When I find that' the Spirit of God never makes ufe of ^iw the Gofpel ) but in an ill Senfe, wk- aefs the Scriptures quoted by Dr. Rvjftl him- c *6j. y hrmfelf, as above in Page 8 1 , And \vjieri. the fame Spiritnever makes ufe of the Deri- vative BaW^o, but in a good fen-fe, as -e~ very obferving Reader ( who underll'ands- the' Greek ) will find in every place irk the New-Teftament, where the Holy Ghofb makes any mention of Baptifmal Warnings. And hew this carae^ to he. fo ftrangely overlookt by fo many of God's faithful Servants ( now in Glory ) who wanted, neither Learning nor Love to the Truth,, no Reafon. can be afllgn'd, but becaufe the, only wife. God faw fit it fhould be Co. Surely Mailer Stennct dares not think (much lefs affirm) that the Holy God would ( in his Revealed Will ) alwayput a difFe-- vencz between the Primitive and the Des- man ver in cafe the two. Words do not differ in, their Senfe and Signification. If Mailer Stennet can, ( herein ). difprove what L fay, I (hall be neither afhanVct nor a- fraid to -own my Errourr and forthwith embrace that Principle which now I oppofe, . To be free with Mafter Stennet^ I mwt ilncerely. afTure himr, that it cannot enter either into my Head- to conceive, or int.0* my Heart to believe, that ever the God of Love and ^lercy would appoint fuch a -Mode.* or Way of Adminiftring'Baptifm.as crofles J thofe Rules appointed ( by himfelf ) /for the i Snefervatlon of the Health anct Life of man^ C iH ) kind* and which, in fome cafes, isimpofli- ble to bepra&is'd, without hazarding botb Health and Life of Adminiftrator, and' the Subjects of Baptifm too. Ma^qv Stenneti I perfwade my felf, mult, needs be fenfibk how frequent and common it hath been for Men and Women (of fick- ly Conftitutions ) by getting wet in Head or Feet, to fall into violent Fevers, where- of they have ciy'd. And if fuch Colds got- ten by a little wet, have prov'd mortal} ftow much more dangerous muft k be for to pip the whole Body of fickly and con- sumptive Bodies, into Water in, Froft and Snow? Let Sir John Floyer aid- Matter S tenner- fay and believe what they pleafe of their Gold bathing, I ihall never account it any o- ther than a tempting the Almighty, for Men: and Women (In fuch dangerous Cafes) to expofe themfelve^to fuch eminent Dan- ger, and that upon a meer Conceit and Fan- cy, that becaufe it is an Ordinance, there- fore, no harm can. come thereby. Let none be offended at my faying a meer Fancy and Conceit, for I know not what clfe to call it, there being neither exprefs^ Command, nor yet any Example ( in tcrmi- vis ) to warrant fuch a Practice. God hatlv. promifed, I grant, Prote&ioa in all our Ways, JP/dA 91, it. But then, it wuft be alfo C i<5>) alfa granted, that by all our ways, in.tftat place, we are to underftand, thofe Ways of Duty wherein our Holy God com- mands us ta walk. We* muft not prefiime,, that becaufe God hath the fovereign Com- mand of the Elements^ and can reftrain them when and how he pleafes, that there- fore we may, without any Fear of Harm, lye- down in the frozea Water, or jump into- a flaming Fire. He who mftituted the Ordinance of Bap- tifro, hath, by his own bleffed Example, taught us how we are to refill the Devil, when tempting us to any Practice whica might expofe us to Danger, Mm. 4. .6, fr for all Chrifl knew (fall well) that God his Father was able to prevent his falling.to the Ground:, and to keep him from being hurt fin cafe he fell to the GroundJ yet he would not hearken to Satan ( fo as to gra- tifie him ) in cafting himfelf down from the Pinacle of the Temple, And he fhews the Reafoa, viz. becaufe fo to da, would be a tempting of God, which is forbidden, pent. 6m i 6. Notwithftanding the Promife ailed ged for his Encouragement, yet Chrifl: would not flir. He knew, that Promife was plead* able by no Child of God, but he who was In the actual Performance of fuck Duty as God commands, C 166 ) \Tfc will prove but a poor Argument to infill on the Experience of fo many thou- fands as are daily Dipt in thefe Kingdom?,, yea, even in Eroft. and Snow, who have. received no harm thereby. To fuch l would propole that of the Wife Man, Eccl. $.1 1 . From which place it plainly appears, that. God's Forbearance to viiit a Perfon; or a Multitude, with dererved'Punifhment>. when acYing that which difpleafeth him, is no Argument that the Praftice. of fuch will - meet with Divine Approbation. That like- wife in Ecckf 9. i. is worthy the Confidc- ration of thofe, who from their prefcnt Im- munities and Exemption from Judgment, would fain perfwade themfelves that God. loves them. Secondly, he tells his Reader in Page 53. of his 2 Chap, that the Promife mentioned in Jiffs. 2. 39. intends only the Promife of extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit, which he.lookson to be fulfilled when the Gifts of the Holy Ghoft were poured forth on the A pottles. ' I crave leave to tell Mailer Stc?wct? that this is a very poor Shift and an uncharitable Evaiion, Ext on purpofe to exclude the In- fants of Believers- from that Right Which God's merciful Covenant with. Jbrab,vn hath entailed on them. And that which manifefts it to be fo, I will lay down in three Particulars. &rMi» r 167 ) Firtf, It is -beyond Difpute-, that thoTe miraculous Gifts of the Spirit (intended by Mailer Stcnnct) were not ' confer rd on all the Believers, who were baptized by the A po files, upon their ProfefTion, but very few of them, who (favingly ) believed, had thofe Gifts given them. 'Secondly, It is as certain, that the extraor- dinary Gifts fpoken of were conferr'd on feveral Hypocrites, who, on their Profef- fion, were Baptized Thirdly, Were it, as Matter Smnet would have it,that that Promife made.ufe of by Peter (a§a Motive- to induce and encourage the Jews to believe in the Mejfi ah) would not have had in it the force of a motive to ftir them .up to a receiving the Lord Jefus, by Faith. For Peter to have told thofe Jervs, who were labouring under the Senfe of Guilt, for mur- dering the Lord 'of Life ( whofe Blood they vyifhed may be on them and on their Chil- dren) that if they would repent and believe- they fhould receive the miraculous Gifts of the Holy Ghott y this would no way fuk the Difeafe under which they laboured. Let not Matter- Stetmei be difpleas'd for telling him,, that herein. he plainly appeals to be unskilful in the Word of Righteouf- nefs, Heb. 5-. li. in that he propofes to wounded, difpairing .Souls, fuch. an expedi- ent as hath in it no manner of fuitablenefs to to relieve them In their fpiritual Diiirefs. Who can believe that the miraculous- Gifts of the Holy Ghoft, can reach the wounded Conference of a difpairing Sinner/* Surely, if they could, I know no folid Reafon to conclude that^W^ the Traitor and other Hypocrites who had the Gift of Miracles, fhouldbe fentto Hell. Could any thing fhort of the pardoning Mercy of God ( in the virtue and merit of that Blood of his Son which thofe Jews had wickedly fhed) heal fuch Wounds in the guil- ty Confcience ? Could any thing fhort ofthis give them inward Peace and Comfort ? If then, nothing elfe but this can relieve and- eafe the felf- condemning Confcience, all the Learning aad criticising Wit whereof Ma- tter Stennet is Matter, can never difprove me,- wheal affirm that the Promife pro*, pos'd by Peter YSLjf&s-t. 39. is, andean be no other than, that Promife which God made to Abraham, and in him to his SeedjGto. 17.7. This Promife of the Covenant of Grace,. ; hath in it the flrongefb Motive and Encou- ragement that can be, to move the wounded Jews to lay hold on, that Jefus whom they liad Crucified, and whofe innocent Blood they wifhed may be on them and on their Children. By laying hold on this Crucified jefus by Eaitbj they obtain a free and full Pardon of that C i*9 ) pat their murderous Act, and all their-6* ther Sins ( original and actual J accordW to Ails \ 3. 39. And by their laying holdprt God's Covenant of Grace, they lay. a fnre Foundation whereon to bottom their Hope and Comfort concerning their poor Chil- dren. Neither of which Benefits could come by their being made Partakers of all the common Gifts of the Holy Ghofl. I cannot fee how Matter Sunnn can poffibly avoid owning himfelf in a palpable Error, about this Promife. I heartily wifh that Mafter S tenner and all of his Perfwafion, wha are fuch Enemies to Infant-Baptifm, were Better acquainted with the fpiritual Intend of God's Covenant with Abraham in behalf of himfelf and his Ecclefiaftical Seed, thea It appears they are. Their great Miftakes about this Covenant is molt certainly the Ground and Caufe of all their Hard-hearted nefs againft poor In- fants. I am( fixedly ) perfwaded that the Apoftles themfelves were of the fame Opi- nion concerning poor Infants before -they, received the Holy Ghoft, as thefe are now,. This plainly appears by their ignorantly and uncharitably rebuking thofe who were bringing their Little ones to Chrift, for which the Lord Chrift {harply rebuked them. After the Holy Ghoft. was given them, on Ghrift's Afceniion, they then were given to know ( i?o ) know the Myficry of God's Covenant witfh Abraham, and how that the Grace exhibited in that Covenant, -doth extend to the Seed of a&qal Believers, as well as to their Parents. After this the Apoilles ne- ver carried it ruggedly to poor Babes. Secondly, In Page 3$\ of his 2 Chap. He denys peremptorily that any Infants are actually in Covenant, or that they have any Right to the Seal of Kaptifm, in Right of their Parents Faith, until they themfelves do believe and profefs their Faith. Herein I crave leave to tell him, that the Infant Seed of true Believers are more firm- ly interefted in the Covenant of Abraham^ by God's own Sovereign Ad of Grace^ than they are by their own- Aft, when made actual Believers. Tho' the elect Infants of a true Believer cannot lay hold on Chrift by Faith as Adult Believers do, yet the Grace of God's Covenant hath made effectual Pro- vifion for that Defect in them, in. that it hath comprehended them in the Covenant, as plainly appears by the exprefs Words of the. Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. and ranked them among Believers, terming them fuch, as well as the moll Adult. This is plain from Mat. 18. 6. And terming them Holy, as 1 Cor. 7. 14. And owning them to be- long to the Kingdom of Heaven, witness; Mat, 19. 14. and alluring us, that in Hea- ven. '( i?i ) ven, their Angels do alway behold 1ihe Face of God, Mat. 18. 10. j What higher or greater Character was ever, or can pofllbly be given to the -molt eminent, adult Believer, that ever breath'd, to prove their Right .and Heirfhip to the -Kingdom of Glory ? And yet, poor Infants muft be. denied Water- Baptifm, the external Sign and Seal of God's Holy and Merciful Covenant, : which confers all thefe ineff imable Blef- iings and Privileges upon them, meerly be- cause they cannot fpeak for themfelves. For my part, I cannot feeany need poor Infants have of Speech, &c. to qualifie them for Baptifm, feeing they haveiuch an infallible Advocate as the Son of God to fpeak for ; them. I cannot but wonder 'how any ManVCon- rfcience (which bath the lead Sparkof fpe- rcial Grace in it ) can read, without Trem- bling, that Divine Caution in Mat.i 8. 10. and at the fame time, to be fo inflexibleand hard hearted towards : 'poor, helplefs In- fants, towards whom the Lord Jefus Ghrilfc carried -himfelffo tenderly, Mar. 10, \6. Thirdly , In chap. 4. page 75. Mafler Sten- mt tells his Reader that Infant Baptifm and fee Sign of the Crofs ( added to Baptifm) ibear an equal Date* For Proof whereof he iquotes .TtmftMy faying, that Un&ioruand the C *£* ) thoCrofs came in with Infant-Baptifm, of focp which TertHpan fpeaks. Whereas Ter- tudutn ( as quoted by Mailer Stcmm ) fpeaks not a Word of the Sign of the Crofs, as ap- pears by the Words -of the Quotation. But fuppofe Tertuiiian had affirm'd fuch a Falfhood, as is unjuftly father'd on him, on purpofe, no doubt, to expofe Infant- Baptifm, and the Sign of the Crofs to the fame.Contempt, am I bound to credit Ter- tullian in in fuch a Report ? when it is evi- dent, that there be Ancients more ancient and more found and orthodox in the Truths of the Gofpel than Tertuliian, who in their Writings, give ws Aflurance, that Infant- Baptifm bears date from the Days of the Apoftles, which cannot ( without notorious lying ) be affirm'd of the Sign of the Crofs, as the fame is us'd in the Church of Rome. Fourthly j In Chap. 6. Page 151. Matter Stennct (carefully ) quotes the Words of the Aflembly of Divines Annotations on Rom. 6. 4. to confirm his Reader in the Belief, that the Aflembly of Divines were for Dip- ping ( in Baptifm ) and againft Sprinkling or Pouring out Water on the Perfon, but warily conceals what the Aflembly of Di- vines fay in the Confeflion of their Faith, wherein they tell the World that Dipping in Baptifm is not neceflary, but that Bap- tifm is rightly adminiftred, by Pouring out or ( 173 ) or Sprinkling Water on the Perfbn^for v which they quote Heb. p. 10. 19, 20. jiki 2. 41, 42. A&t 16. 33. Mar. j. 4. It had, doubtlefs, been more for Matter Stennet ^Credit, either not to have mention- ed the AfTembly of Divines at all, or elfe to have quoted the Words of their Confef- fion of. Faith, as well as the Words of their Annotations. Matter Stenneis Pra&ice herein is like that of Dr. Rttjfell\ in cur- tailing the Obfervations of Learned Matter Leigh on the Word B*7r™, what feem'd to make for his Cauie, he takes Notice of it, and improves the fame to advantage his Caufe. But what he knew ( full well ) made againft him, he ( fraudulently ) concealed, which Pra&ice will neither advance God's Caufe and Intereft in the World, nor yet bring Credit or Comfort to the Authors of fuch difmgenious and unfair Practices. Fifthly^ In Chap. 6. Page 123. Matter Stennet tells his Reader, that there feems no neceffity to concludej that the 3000 con- verted by Peter's Sermon, Jlslsz. 41. were all Baptized in one Day, whereas the Word faith exprefly, that they were baptized, and" added to the Society ( or Church) of the Apoftles the very fame Day. And albeit Matter Stennet would fain perfwade his Reader, that in cafe thofe 3000 were Bapti- zed the fame Day,. yet it doth not appear that C 174 ) thztyeter baptiz'd them,and that ■theT'wclve Appftles and 70- Difciples, who were all Miniftersof Chrift, may very well be fup- pofed to have immers'd them, in much lefs time than the fpace of a Day. What Ground hath Mailer Stcmctto&vp- port his Supposition, that it was as he fup- pofes, feeing it doth not appear (by what account we have of that Work ) that the 70 Difciples were ( that Day ) with the 1 2 Apoftles; there is no mention in all the Chapter of them, neither doth it appear that any other betides Peter did* baptise them. I ( for my own part) rather believe, that that great Multitude were baptized, by Perfuiion, or fprinkling Water upon them, not by immeriing or Dipping their whole Bodies under the Water. The ground of my Belief herein is as follows. Firtt, The Apoftles wfroi were (infallibly) guided by the -unerring Spirit of Truth, they knevv that Chrift (in the' grand Com million, Mat. 2,8.- 19. ) required not to Dip the Whole Body under Water, but to wafhwith Water, by pouring out or -fprinkling the Water on the Subject. : This Mode or man- ner of Baptizing- being, moil certainly, ea - fierfor the Administrator, there being no need of an extraordinary Strength of Body to apply Water -Baptifm to' the Subiects thereof/ byf Pouring out" (or fprinkling; the c im Sprinkling the Water ; whereas Dipping or Plunging the whole Body canoot be done, in fome Cafes, without a miraculous Strength of Body. And as it is moil eafie for the Adminiftrator, fo it is moil certainly, the moll fafe way for both Adminiftrator and the Parties to be baptized, both Adult and Infants, there being in this way of Pour- ing out or Sprinkling the Water, no man- nerof Danger, to the Health and Life of Adminiflrator, though weak and infirm in Body, nor to the moft fickly and weak Con- futations, whether Adult or Infants, tho* in the fharpeft Weather that can come. It is not fb in Dipping *, befides both which this way of Baptizing by Pouring out or Sprinkling the Water on the Subjeft, doth every way more quadrate and harmonize with the Analogy which is between the ^outward Sign and the inward and fpiritual: Work of the Holy Ghoft, in regenerating the Soul, ineffectual calling, then Dipping the whole Body under Water doth. . This I have been enabled to make good in the foregoing Treatife^by fuch plain fcriptural Arguments, as remain ftill un- anfwer'd,and which Mafter 5«»»a will ne- ! ver be able to overthrow, by all the Help I the Lexiographers and Latin and Greek I Ancients in Grdc. Colkdge, ( on which he , depends) can afford this Caufe. To which I I - IwiH ( i?6 ) I will add, and by all the Arguments which his Wit and Learning can pick out of thofe pretty Romantick Stories which hisfo much admired Sir John Floytr tells him, of the Be- nefits which come by Cold bathing. They muft needs have their Faith built on a firm Foundation, who, for Arguments, run to fuch trifling and nugatory . Topicks as Sir John Floyer's Cold Bath, and Mailer Mengc^ his Mathematical Demonftration, with their wrefted s and mifunderftood Metaphors. -Sir John Floytrs Account he gives of Cold \ Bathing, in Favour of Immerfion or Dip- ping in Baptifm, will rather countenance and make for the juggling Conjurers of the JRomijh Synagogue, who make the Holy Sa- crament of Baptifm no better than a Spell or a Charm, than to induce any thinking ferious Mind to embrace Dipping in Bap- tifm to be the Mode prefcribed by the Wifdom of Chrifl,becaufeas Sir John feems to fuggeft ( and Matter Stetmet believes ) that Dipping the whole Body under Water, whether robuft and healthy, or fickly or in- firmBodies,and whether it be in hot or in the coldeft Weather which comes, fo it be done in the way of an Ordinance, it is rather a Keftorative to, and a Prefervative of, the Health of the Body, than otherwife. A pretty Device to make credulous Folk in love with Dipping. Believe this who can. For ( 177 ) For nay part I cannot. And my'Reafon is this, viz.. becaufe Cbrift hath inftituted and appointed that Holy Ordinance ( of Water ^Trfn] Kt0M a vifible SiSn> t0 fiSnifie and feal the fpintual Bleffings of the Cove- nant of Grace tb the true Believer, and to ius Church-Seed ; not to effeft miraculous Cures on Humane Bodies. , lJ?™?h .th.at there is no limiting the ^ords Almighty Power, who can work a -Cure where, when, and how hepleafes But we muft confider and believe , that i pffe ad ejje, non valet jirgumemum. We muft not "32.»/2Mnthe Power t0 the Win of God It Matter Stow* and thofe of his Perfwa- ■»on, do think that the Relation given tv the Authors he quotes concerning the Gnres eff^ed(byl)ippi„gthewTo?eBo! dy in the Water ) will afford a convincing Argument to prove Immerfion, the only S°/ ^""{^g that Ordinance, i hope he will allow me to ballance this with | whdt Perf°n* ( Yet living) know to beSe conceramg young Infants, who have been fo ifar gone in Fits, that all who havefeen I them have difpaired of their Life who i^^P^.. hy Pouring outthe wlte &t^\nT^m^mlHeviv'd ™* re- cover d to Ad miration. If any be fo un- chantableas toqueftion the Truth of what } here offer to Confideration, the MatS I J 2, r*€ Ct78 ) of Fad -will be effectually proved. Befldes which, there, have been too many Inftances of Perfons who have felt the Iacoveniency of being Dipt in Froit and Snow ^ fome of whom I my felf have known. . I have read, in the Writings of good Men, of fome who have been in fuch apparent Danger by the Praftice of Dipping, that both the Adminiftrator ( hirafelf ) and the Perfon to be Dipt, had, unavoidably, been drown'd, had not. a By-ftander leapt into the Water and recover'd both \ which,- in my Judgment, affords an Argument rather againft . than for Dipping. Sure I am, my Reafon tells me, that the God' of Mercy, who prefers Mercy before .Sacrifice, Matt. 9. ig. would never ap- prove of fuch a Rigidity in any of his Ser- vants, who lay fuch ftrefs on a Ceremony,- as to expofe the Life of a Man for it. \ Whenever Matter Sunmt pleafes to en- counter the Argument, grounded on the apparent difference between js*Vt« the Pri- mitive, and j8*TTi£« its Derivative. He will find more in it, then, I am apt to oelieve, he will be willing to own, to his Admirers. He will not find in it fuch a little criticifm as he fancies he found in ***** wom«\ He may fearch all his Antiquity and Lexiogra- phers, of whom he feems fi>confident, be- fore he can find out an Hebraifm to help his Caufe here. A C 179 3 hfecond Reafon, why I canndt belief that the 3000 abovementioned were bap- tized by Immerfion, is, becaufe it is not rational to judge, that' fo vafl a Multitude, who came under fuch a fudden and unex- pected Change, fhould come prepared and furniihed with Garments, fuited to fuch an Occajion, as Dipping the whole Body un- der Water. Neither doth it corrfrft^ith that Mode- fty and Decency reqBired in the GofpeJ, that they fhould be baptized Naked ; facli a Pofture not becoming fo publick and fo- lemn an Ordinance ^ in which the Eyes of God, Angels and Mm% were fixed on them, And it is as contrary to found Reafon, to believe th?y were lipped ;; '.h-? &|3©a- rel they then were, th 1 >Q] - re- pugnant to the Law r . \tioii. I cannot ice how Maffy ~M a- void here, but by flying to the thmifn Jljfykm of pretended Miracle? . The which if he doth, he wi'li thereby fall uacfe: ilvz fame Confute with that Synagogue of Rome, who are forced to rupport their lying Do- ctrines with pretended Miracles, 2 Tfcf 2, 1 1, 12. And whereas it hath been conceived, that had the Practice of Dipping been con- tinued, many new vain Niceties and Dif- I 3 putes (i8o) putes about Baptifm had been prevented'; I dare prefume, that fhould all the Pedo fcaptifts in England agree to baptize by Immerfion, on Condition the Anabaptifts would yield to baptize the Infants of be- lieving Parents, they would never yield that Point. By this it would appear, as now it doth, who are the vain Difpuurs, the Pe- dobaptifts, for maintaining and vindicating the Rights and Privileges entail'd on the Seed of Believers by God hiinfelf •, or the. Antipedobaptifts, in depriving them there- of. Any, not deprived of common Senfe,. rmift needs own it to be more commenda- ble and allowable, to contend for that which is a fubiiantial ( or an effential ) Branch of God's Covenant of Grace, then for that -which is ( at belt ) but a Ceremo- ny. The frrft of thefe, vit. that Branch1 ( or fubftantial part ) of God's Covenant, wherein the Infants of Believers are con- cern'd, is of far greater confequence, than to be fo eafily parted with by thofe, who underftand how great a Mercy and Privi- lege is, by that Branch of the Covenant,, conferred on Believers, and their poor Infants. For Illuftration fake, I will fuppofe, that [a Great Man ( by his Ml Will and Teila- ment ) fettles his Efirstc on .Matter Stwnct, and: C 181 ) and his Children ; my Reafon tells me,trfatr Mafter Stemet would not like well, that any Man ( or Party of Men ) fhould go about to nullifie that part of the Will, wherein his Infants are concern'd. And in cafe that defigning Party Ihould alleadge, for their fo doing, that Mailer Stemet\- Infants are non intelligent Subpfts, who underftand not what a Will means, neither are capable ( at prefent ) of managing fuch an Eflate, would not Mailer Stennct account: fuch a Deiign unjuft and wicked ? No man of-Senfe but would conclude, that Mafter Stennet would oppofe fuch ill defigning men ^ And would account it his Duty to fpeak and act for his poor Infant?, who can nekher-TpeaJc nor afrfor them Pelves. Whether the prefent metaphor be. apt and proper to the bujinefs la hand, I leave to Mafter SrennetU Conference to deter- mine. Some have obje&ed thus, Mailer SteweK a'gainft whom you print, he is bothr genious and a good Man, and nijti Perfwaiion are very good People, ana fore ought: not to befallen upon in iucna- Day as this. To fuch ObjeSors as thefe I anfwerv That neither Ingenuity, norGoodnefs in a Perfon or a Party, ought to gag or muzzle1 up, the Mouths, or /Pens of Minifters from - I 4 , detecting ( i8* ) dste&ing and. decrying Errours in Holy Religion. Yea, I will be bold to affirm ( let who will cenfure or condemn mc for the famej that the more ingenious and good a Perfon or Party feems to be, the more dangerous are their Errours ^ and by far the likelier they are to Spread and mfefl;, (where they come J bnwary People, who are not capable of dillinguiffiing Truth fromErrour. Satan is never more likely to enfaare, than when he transforms himfelf into an Angel of Light, 2 Cor. 1 1. 1 4, 1 \'. it is an eld Maxim, and as true now as r, That in Nomine Domini ^ imifit omne Mditrn, In the Name of the lx>rd, aU Milctifef begins. The Romifn Jeluits ( in Mafquerade ) hope, in this Day, to root out of thele Kingdoms the Proteftant Re- ligion, and the true -Upholders and Main- tainers of the fame, and that under a plau- llble and ipecious Pretence of fecuring and upholding the Church. That Mailer Stamet is an ingenious and a good Man* and that' many of that Per-fwa- hon.are gracious goed People, I have al- ready granted, But what then? Mull their fpreading Errours ( which are grown fo epidemical-), be, in Complement, conniv'd at and let alone? Sure C >*j ) Sure I am, that either the Pedobaptiffs of the Anabaptifts, mult be in an Errour, in thofe Principles wherein they oppofe each other. Both cannot be right in the fame Principle about whichthey differ. This is a Truth too plain and obvious to be deny'd. If the Anabaptifts be in the right, why do not the Obje&ors openly efpoufe them Can fe, and conform to their Principles? If the Anabaptifts be wrong and corrupt" in their Principles, why fhould the Gbje&orS blame any Man, for dete&ng and decry*- ing their Errours I and that in hopes of convincing them and recovering them from-' thofe Errours, and; likewife for preventing* the Churches of God in the Nations being - over-run with Anabaptifm. . " Secondly i Far be it froirr me to fpeak of write againft any thing that is good and^ commendable in any Man of what Party" foever. Thirdly r I abfoltitely deny, that what I ' oppofe in Matter Stermet, is any part of hlsGoodnefs, namely, his denying the DI- ■- vine Right of Believers Infant-Seed to Wa- 4 ter Baptifm, andthat baptising by Sprink- . ling or Pouring out Water on the Subject,,,, is not right Baptifm. Fourthly, I hope the Objectors vwl allovr-- me to tell them, that there are many good' Men of other Perflations, whofe errontous" 1 5 -Piii-£i>- C 184: ) Principles the Objectors will own it their Duty to oppofe and witnefs againft, not- withftanding they be otherwife good Mea in the main.. Why fhould Mafter Swmtt^ be fpared more than they? \ Suppofe Aaron ( the Saint of the Lord ) were now in London , andJbou.ld make a Golden-Calf for the- People of London to Worfftip God by, as he did in the Wilder- nefs, Exod. 34. 4^ ?. Would the Obje&oss think or fay, that the People of London eugftt to Woi;fhip God by his Image, be- aaufe Aaron was a holy, good Man? Fifthly, 1 have already infoi m'd my Rea- der how the good Spirit of Gcd.hath taught and enabled me to diHinguifh between Per- ibns and their Errours, whether the fame "fee in Principle or in Pra&ice. The Perfons of errcmious Men I love^ and fhaUr I hope7 fee ready to pay that Deference and Refpeft to. their Perfons which the Character they- %ear, calls for at my Hands. But their Er- neurs I am commanded to hate and re* jjrove: I no where find that the Holy God, viho commands my Love and Charity to be intended to the Name and Perfon of my. Brother (or Neighbour,) doth allow me ( in pretence of Charity ) to favour or .con- Dive at his Errours and Miftakes in Holy Religion^ but the contrary, as appears j£tm. 17, 22. Effxfi fc i i* Yea, God him- fetf" felf adiires - me, that to recover ^ Perfoa from the Errour of his Way* is the higher! Ad of Charity to an erring Brother, which one Chriilian is capable of expreffing to- . wards another Chriilian in this Life, Jam. 5 19, 20. And how this can be expe&ed when a Perfon's or a Party's Errour is wiiak'd at, and not difcovered and -confuted., I am not able to underftand. It will again be objected. But thofe- Points wherein we and they differ, are not Fin>- da mental. jfofo. In three particulars. Firtt, By the matchiefs Induftry of that- j Party, who fpare neither Pains nor Charge to propagate their Principles, in order t64 profelyte the Members of other Congregs-, tions both rn City and Country ( to their , way ) it mould feem they look on the Dif- ference, between -us and them to be -Funda- mental : witnefs the elaborate Iaduftry of 1 Matter Stennet^ and others of that Perfwa- - fion, in raking into, and lifting the very : Afnes c< miftaken Antiquity, to pick up~ what may trelp their bleeding Caufe. As alfo the great Charge which that Party are at in their large Subfcriptions to Matter » Stennets fo much commended Book, there being ( as I am credibly informed ) no lefs than 6500 of them fubfcribed, which at 2 K . the Book, amou nts to 6 50/, Theft Books - C 1 86 ) sre now adifperfing-up and down in Gty and Country. And albeit there be as little in the Book to the purpofe, for which is is intended, as any I have feen on that Sub-" jed j yet it being varniiht and fent out with the enticing Allurements of ftrangeTongues, &c. and bearing the Name of its Author in its Frontifpiece, it willy i doubt not, be moil taking with thofe who lead under- stand it. SecoW^,\Vhat though the Anabaptifts do own no otherFonndation (whereon to build their Hope for Salvation) but JefasChrift the Son of God. Yet, to me it feems plain, that in denying God's Holy Covenant with Abraham ( the Ecclefiailicai Repi cfentative of all believing Church -Members, and their Infant-Seed to the end of the World ) to be the Covenant of Grace, and their fhut- irjg out the Infants of Believers from fearing in the BJ'efiings of that Covenant \ and their holding and teaching, that the Sinners own perfcnal Ac~ts of Faith, and Repentance is that whicrrintkies a Sinner (ox which gives him a Right ) to the Covenant of Grace •, they cannot beexcus'd from being funda- mentally erronious, to bold and teach, that Perforial Qualifications give Right to God's free Covenant of Grace, is as truly an Er- rour againit the Foundation; as it is to make tlie C 187 ) the Virgin Mapfr or an Angel, the Object of our Hope. The Saying ol : Augufiine, the founded of the Ancients, is moft Orthodox, and to be acknowledged by all found and experien- ced ProteltantS. Gratia nullo modo gratia, nifi eft omni modo Cratmta. Grace,.faith he, is no way Grace, unlefs it be every way moil free,. Aug. de lib*. Arbk. . Thirdly^ What though it were granted, that the Anabaptiils are not fundamentally erronious •, yet confidering the fpreading and infectious Nature of Errour, and how receptive Man's corrupt Nature is of the fame, efpecialiy confidering the Mifchief al \ ready done in theChurches of Chriir, by the exorbitant Growth of Anabaptifm, thefe feveral Years pah:, it may well feem ftrange to any thinking and judicious Chriftian that any mould be blarnd for endeavour- ing to Item the Tide of fuch a fpreading and prevailing Errour, which equally threatens the unchurching all the Churches in the Kingdoms which are not of their Per fwa lion. A little Leaven Ieaveneth the whole Lump, i Cor. y 6. A little Fire in a wrong place of the Houfe ( if not prevented in time ) will foon devour a whole Town, Jam. 3.-5. -A fmall Quantity of Pqifoa- will kill the ftrongefl; Man living. And is C i88 ) ■ it is never more likely fo to do, than when it is convey'd in a Man's Drink or Phyfick. The Application of thefe Metaphors, I leave to the Care and Ingenuity of thofe who are unwilling to be infenfibly caught in the Nets of thofe who lie in wait to deceive, Ephef. 4. 14. To fuch I would-, only fay, that the near- er an Errour (in Holy Religion) comes ( in ftiew and outward Appearance; to Gefpel Truth, the more taking it is with well meaning People, who are not acquaint- ed with the Depths of Satan, Rev. 2. 24. Let fuch Perfons frequently read, withear- neft Prayer to God's Throne of Grace, that of /W, Rom. 16. 17, * 8. Fourthly, I know of no Inconveniency that can attend a ferious cautioning Churches, Families, and- particular Perfons, to have a fpecial Care they be not caught in the Nets of gilded and painted Errours. Let the times prove never fa dangerous to the Proteftant Intereft, the Objectors' will find I ftand on a Foundation whichwill ne- ver fail them that build: thereon. I am far from defigning to alienate the AfFe&ions of. Proteftant Brethren and Neighbours one from another, in fuch a gloomy Day, as to me feems to be near. For all who know mey will witnefs for me, that my Judgment is, that for all-Proteftaatsx who ssfolre not to be C 189) bcPapifts, it is their undoubted Duty, and will prove the Intereft and Safety both of Non and Conformifts, to unite as one Man,, againft the common Enemy, who feeks e^ quallythe Euine-ofall. But tho' I grant it to be the Duty of ah% both Non and Con, to unite in AfFe&ion, andxommon Intereft, I cannot fee how u- niting in erroaious Principles can. be jufti* fied. The Improvement whicfr Anabaptift Writers have made of the unwary Concep- tions of good Men, who, for want of clear- er Light, have granted,, that the Word a**-ii£«. doth, promifcuoufly,. fignifie either to Dip into, or ta Wafli by Sprinkling or Pouring out Water on the Subjed, ought . to make us the more confederate and wary how we comply with fo vigilant an Adver- fary, who watches all Occasions to lay hold of the leaft feeming Advantage,, to help their finking Caufe; As in this very Cafe about the Senfe and: Meaning, of the. Word s*»ir^ moft plainly appears. The impartial Reader may obferve how faft a Hold Mailer Sunntt takes of the Con* ceffion of good Men about this Word ; the which he backs with a new coin'd Device, 9fc. pretended Miracles, than which he could not have propos'd a more Staggering and enfnaring Temptation, to put his un- wary C *9° ) wary aad' injudicious Reader out of Con- ceit and Love with the Baptifm received in Infancy and by Sprinkling, and to. fall in love with Immerfion or Dipping. The lat- ter of thefe being attended, as he informs us, wich a miraculous Cure of bodily Dif- eafes, and that as foon as the Party immers'd is lifted up from under the Water. What can be more taking with poor credulous Perfons, who labour under malignant and prevailing Diilempers of Body, than this? Such Perfons who have but an implicit Faith to* credit this chymerical Whym, need not the Advice of thePhyiicianyor the help of Phyfick, ( the ordinary Means appointed by God for helping Humane Bodies, -when Cck or ailing ) 'tis but renouncing their Infant-Baptifrn, and fubmitting to the Cold Bath of Believers Baptifm, by being Dipped under the Water, and the Work is done. I cannot, but wonder, thk a Man of Mailer Stennm Reading, QiouloSaot remem- ber and confider, that to pretend to, and boaflsof Miracles, for the proof of a Party's Religion being the true Religion, is, by all Orthodox Proteftant Divines and Churches, accounted one of the infallible Chara&crs of a falfe Church. That the Do&rincMeliver'd by the Son of God, and tranfmitted to us by the Mi- niftry of his holy Prophets, and bleffed A pottles, C *9* ) Apoities, was confirm'd (over and over/ by Miracles from God, is granted. And that God^ is frill, and ever will be r the fame, as able to effect ( or produce > Miracles^ on anyOccailon, as ever, mulb be acknowledged. But it mull alfo be remembred, and acknowledged, that *u pflh\ ad ejfe, rton valet jfrgumenMm. We mufrr not argue from the Power,, to the ; Will of God. The Cannon of the Holy Scripture being now perfect and compleat, we are not to expeft or look for new Miracles. The Premifles confider'd, I hope, when the Impartial Reader hath duly examfrfd and weighed, in the even Ballance of God's Word, what is here offer'd ta -Cbhfidera- tion ; he will not be offended at my telling Matter Stennet, that nothing could poilibiy be offer'd in favour of Immerflon, which more expofes it to the .diflike of every inv partial and ingenuous Reader,, than this of pretended Miracles. - ' For it is but rational to conclude, that if Mafter StSnmt knew ^himfelf able to pro-*, duce but one fingle Text ( either Precept or Example, in plain Terms ) to jufrifie and make good the Do&ririe of Immerfion, he would never have expos'd himfelf at fuch a rate,, by his •treading fo near the Fo'otfteps of the ApoftoIicaL Synagogue, at : • Rome7 Rome, in flying to the Afylum of their pre- tended Miracles: As alfo his fining fo many Pages with frivolous and needlefs Quotations to fupport and Credit his Caufe. God's Truth ftands in no need of pretend- ed, lying Miracles, or of humane Tefti- monies,to recommend it to the Confcience of true Believers. God's Truth carries with it its -own Evidence, to fatisfie the renewed Confcience that is is God's Truth. I conclude with alluring Mailer Stcnnet^ and thofe of his PerfwaSon, that I am Hill (and hope to die ) in perfed Charity with him and them, notwithftandhg the Plains nefs and Sharpnefs here ufed to prevent the Spreading and Growth of Anabaptifm. And if Matter Stcnmt (or any of his Pet* fwaiion ) can enervate and confute ( by Arguments plainly Scriptural ) the Argu- ments Itid down in the foregoing Treatife, to prove th6 Divine Right of Infant Bap- tifm • and likewife to prove, that the right mode of adminiitring Water Baptifm, mu4t be by Sprinkling ( or Pouring ) the Water on the Subjeft} the next Appearance I make in Print, (hall be to acknowledge my Mifhkes (about Baptifm, &c.) to the World j and heartily to beg Pardon :of Matter Stennzt, and the reft of that Pen- fwafion, for mifreprefenting their Prin- ciples, ( as 4 have done ) in cafe my Argu- ments be proved unfcripturaL . If c