This book made available by the Internet Archive.

V-) »■

The Preface.

Reader^

THefirfi year of'my Miniflry I fell into A doubt about Infant-Ba-ptifm • dnd I was fo ignorant as not to underfiand the na-ture of that [olemn Covenant and Invejli-ture 5 and the Parents duty of entring the child into the Covenant with God y and what the Vow was which then was made : when time^ and light had fattsfied me^ I retained as charitable thoughts of the Anabaptifts, as of almofi any that I coffered from. About 16465 1647^, 1648. they made more Jlir among us than before: Mr. Tombes living near me 5 we continued in feace^ not talking of our difference ; For Ipurpofely avoidi^d it in publick and pri-A J vate,

The Preface.

'vAte^ unless Any asked, my opinion. At lajt his Converts came to me^ and told me that if I vpoidd net anfwer him in vpriting^ they mujl take it as an encouragement to them to be Baptized • and confejfed that he fent them^ or that they came by hu consent : To avoid long tvrhings^ one dayes difpute rvas thought a jhorter' way, ~ That difpute with many additions I was ne-ceffitated to pMtp ; with fome returns to [ome after arguings of Mr, T.V. He wrote what he thought meet on the other jide. I thought I had done with that work for ever: But in 1655 he fent to me again ^ and drew from me the Letters here recited. Thefe without my confe»t he fublijfjcd with an anfwer in the midfi of a great Book : I left his anfwer thefe nine-teen years^ or thereabouts^ without any Reply ; as alfo the re (I of his books againft me, I thought It not lawful for me to wajle my precious time on things fo little necejfary: A man. 7f/ay find words at length to fay foralmofi any caufe. I partly know what can be faidagainjl this^ and every book that J have written. And I know what / inn Reply, And I partly foreknow what they can fay to that Reply y and what I can fur ^ ther fay in the defence of it j and fo talk

The Preface.

c» till tpe hAve vfirangled arvay curChwr cy and our Time : und maft all this h^ frinted^ to enfmre poor renders ? But at laJtMr. Dan vers hath laid a neceffity upon me : / had filently paji pver all his uain Rea^oningSy and all hii accusations of my roritings^ and all hts falfifications of Authors^ had he net called me fo loud to repent of flandering fome for being Baptized naked; And when I found it my duty to [peak to thatp I thought tt fit to fay fomewhat of the rejl , pafftng hy what Mr. Wills hatk done more fully m an anfrver to his book,

'There Are trvo forts of men called Ana-baptifts among us : The one fort are fiber Godly chriftians y rvho when they are re-baptized to fatUfe their Confidences^ live among us in Chrtflian Love and peace • and I {ball be afhamed if I Love not them as heartilyy and own them not as peaceably^ as any of them {hall do either me or better men than I that differ from them. The other fort hold it unlawful to hold Communion with fuch as are not of their mind and way^ and are fchifmatically troublefome and unquiet^ in labouring to increafe their Party, Thefe are they that offend me^ and other lovers of peace. And if God would per-fwade them hut ferioujly to think of thefe A 4 obvi-

The Preface;

ohviotis quefiions^ it might fometohxt Jiop them. Qa. I. How inconfiderable a fart of the univerfal Church they hold communion vptth ? And unchurch almojl all the chur-^ ches on Earth? Qa, 2. whether they can foffibly hope that ever the church on Earth vptll Unite upon their terms , of re'jeBing aS, their Infants from the vifible Churchy and renouncing all our Infant Rights and Benefits confeued by the B^ptifmal Covenant of grace ? Qu. 3. Jndvchetherifthey continue to the vporlds end^ to fepar ate from almofi all the Churches and unchurch them^ their employment will not be fill to ferve the great enemy of Love and Concord^ a-gainft the Lord of Love and Veace^ and ag^ainft the pro fperity of faith ^ and godlinefs^ and agatnft the -welfare of the church and fouls 5 and to the fcandal and hardening of the ungodly ?

THE

The Contents.

Scft. II. The UtidmsJnfams mre mefnhen pf the ChHrchVniverfaL p.2^«

Sed. 12, to the i8. Infants were me7?fhers of the Jews Church di well as Commonwealth, p. 28» Scd. 18. Qu€ft«4» There was a Law or Precept of God obliging Parents to enter their ChiU dren into Covenant with God^ by accepting his favour y and engt^ing and- devoting them to Cod'^ and there if^as a fromife of Cod ^ ^ffi^^-ing them his mercy^ and accepting them when-devoted as afor^imdy &c. p. 31 Sed. 19, &c. Vijwle Chttrch-memberfinp what it is f And that it is a benefit, p. 32 Sed. 22. Legal-right to Infants Church-ftate gt-'uen by Gods Covenant: Mr* T.V confuted and the cafe opened, P« 3$ Se<3-^23, 24. This Right is the egeUof Gods Law ^r Covenant, ^ f • 44? — 4^ .fed. 2J, 26. The proof of Parents obligation to .: ^etnter their Children into Covenant: v^at we .. mean by a Law •, Mr. T. waheth nothing i^f Q Chttrch-memberjhipt ^ p. 46,, ——Jp 5eft, 27. Precepts oblige to duty, and the promi^ fisgive right to benefits. p. 5^ jSe^. 28* No Tranfemt faVt without Gods fla-ttucj or moral donation^ or covenantj made the Ifraelices Infants Church-members, proved y tp . Sed. 44. p. 56 Sed. 44, 45^* Infants dhurch-memberjhip infiitu-^ ted by God at mans creation and the conflitu^ tion of Gods Kingdom at the firfi, p. 72 Sed. 46. Infants Cburch-member^jip continued or renewed by the firji Law of grace made to

Adam,

The Contents.

Adam, Gen. 3. 15. f(? Sed. 49. Chrifls being

' the Head in Infancy froveth what it is brought

far J and forceth Mr. T. to grant the canfe*

p. 8i

Seft. 49. Tht fame proved by the exfofnion of this Covenant in that made to Abraham vindi^ cated againft tJffr. T. who again forfakfth his cayfe. p. gj

St^* 50. No proof that there was ever anc Church-mewber who in that fiate had an In^ fant born to him^ who was ndh* alfo a Church* member, p. 104

Seft. 51, 52, How far the Law of Natnre pro* 'vetb what I ajfert. The Chnrch-ftate of In--fants 710 difadvantage , but a great benefit :

f9 wherein proved j to Sed. 59. p. 105

Scft. 60. Afore particnlar proofs ^ as of Cain, Abel, Seth, Noahs SonSy Sec. p. 116

Seft. 70, to'/g. Proving the point fnlly from the Covenant with Abraham. ?• 124

SeA.79, to 86. The point proved hy the promifes to the Ifraelites. A virtual caufe may be long in being before it be formally a caufe , and may caufe at lafl without any change in it felfy but in the recipient. P- 130

Seft. 86. The proof from thefccond Commandment vindicated. P« 135

Seft. 87, to gi, Troofs from divers other texts.

^ P- 137

Seft.93, to g6. The cafe of Infants in the womb.

p. 140

Seft. 96,97. Thefe ftatntes not repealed. Mr. T.'s

conceit that (jods promtfe cannot be repealed ,

con-

The Contents.

confHted. p. 141

Sed.98, fo 107. Divers Queftiom offered to con-

fderation* p. 145

Sed. 107, &c. Ten Ijptmblin^ jQueftions to Mr*

T. ( pnhltjhed by hiwfelf agamfi my mU*)

P-I57

The fuller proofs from the New Teftament only named as being before handled. p, 159

ji Confutation of the many z^rguments by which Mr, T. vcGuld prove that Infants were not Church-members under Chrifi, p. 161

The Contents of the Second Part,

THE Preface : ScA. i. Of Cotitroverfies-^ how far good or bad'^ with whom fharp rebuke and earnefl contending is a duty, and with vrhom not: And whofe duty it is, p. 185

S.cl. 2. Of the weight of the prefent C^ntrover-fie^ that we make tt not greater or lef than it is : And th^ fiate of it in part, p. 198

Cbap. 1. The occafwn of this Book^y from Mr, Danvcis. p. 211

Cl'.ap. 2. More of my prefent judgement of the Anabuft;(ls and their caufe ^ with a motion to them for Communion and Peace, p. 216

Chap. 3. e^ general view of Mr, D^inycrs book,,

p. 234 Chap. 4. <L^r. Danvers Witneffes again ft Infant^

baptifm, Hi^ fad forgery againft the Dona-

tifli deteEicd : Hn marvellous falfifcation of

Auguftines

The Contents.

Auguftines third and fourth hookj againfl them ' de bapt. The faid hooks iiindicated. They prove that the Donatifts confented to Infant-hapttfmy and that the vphole Church held it^ and no Chri-Jiian thought tt vain. His forgery againfi Vincemius Vidor : His [lander of Crefconius. His flander of all the Novatians, His Jlander of the Ancient Brittains deteUed, His reafons for the Brittains being againfi Infant-bapt ifm confuted: where many wore i^ntruths are de^ tededy of them and many others. His forgeries or falfe ftories of the MelTalians, called by

him J Dadoes, Sabas, Adulphus, Simonis

His flander of Fauftus Rhegicnfis His

deceit about Albanus. Hisgrofs falff cation of Nicephorus and flander of Peter of Apamea and Zooras. His falfe ftory of Adrian Bifl)op of Corinth ^ and his falfe report of Grcgories dealing xvith him. His fable of z^gyptian Divines. His fi5iion about one Beiiniu-j, and his falfification of Beda concerning him. His forgery about Hincmarus Laudunenfis , and of Hincnftrus Rhemenfis charge againfi him. His flander of the WM^nks ^heretofore detebicd^and further ly Nauclerus. A reference to our former proofs of the antiquity of Infant-baptifm.N^zhn-Z^ns judgement. His audaciom abufe of Cyprian and the Carthage Council. My repeated affertion of the novelty of Antipedohapttfm,

, P-239

Cnap. 5, Mr. T>!s great Calumnie of my fclf re-

futedy 04 tf I had falfly reported that feme at

that time vpere baptiz.ed naked, p. 281

Chap,

The Contents^

Chap. 6. His ahufivc Citations of my Wfitings as for his caufe. p. 285

Chap. 7. His many perfonat accufations of mttx^ amined. Whence it is that fo many boldly fpeak. evil of the things they knovf not. His reproach «/ [_ every one of my Non-conforming Brethren, that my Doftrines in the particulars accufed by him are heynous to every one of them, ] vphen J remember not any one of them that hath ever to me exfrejfed his dif-fenty much lefs endeavoured to change my judgement y hiA mjtny that have frofejfed their approbation. His vain talk, of my being loft with my friends •, by vphich he imply eth that they are Hypocrites in concealing it , Mnd would makjs me one in feekjng the applaufe of man. Hit many faljhoods tn his aceufations of felf-con-tradiition and mutability» i. jihout Epifco^ pacy J 2. jibout Non-conformity r What he meaneth by my fheltring my felf in their Tents in a ftorm, and with their indulgence coming forth of my hole.] 3. Gf my friendship to Calvin and Arminius. 4. Of the parliaments eaufe^ &c. 5. Of Tradition* 6. Of Popery, 7. whether a Controverfie may have difficult oh-jeEiions againfi plain proofs. His Catalogue of my heynous errors : A ]uft demand from the Non-conformifts^ if there he any fuch, whom he dothn§t flander : and from himfelf p. 28S

Chap. 8. The new Religion of my Backzbiters : or a Catalogue of fame DoUrinesef Air. Danvers, and the reft that joyn in his accufations of my Writings^ if indeed they hold the contraries ta

that

The Contents.

-timr t^hith they accufcy as their accufation$

, feem to fptffofe •, viz. fifty fix New Command-,

- wntt and Dafhines. The good that thefe men

do. p. 313

Cfaap. 9. Mr, William Ailcn^ vindication of him-

ft If againfl: Mr- D/i mfrefort •, and my Tefti-

Tffony concerning Air^ Allen and Mr. Lamb.

P- 333

Cmtclnfkn , an Admonition to Mr* Danvers for

bisSepentance. P- 337

The Contents of the Third Part.

Chap, i.np HE frightful ajpt^ of his Reply

1 P- 345

Chap. 2. His impenitent falfe allegation of Wit^ neffes againft Infant-bapifm. Of TenuUian j vphether Cyprians DoBrine vpas uintichrif^ian. Wickliff vindicated at largCy from his exprefi . vpords, Berengarius vindicated. p. 349

Chap. 5. Mr. T>.'s juftification of his flander of the Waldenfes confuted. Hts mtnejfes examined.^ and his unfaithfulnefs opened ^ and the cafe of the Waldenfes more largely explicated^

. ... P-^79

Chap. 4. His impenitence in CaUimniating the

Donatifts and Novacians as againji Infant-ba-

ptifwy reprehended, p. 400

Chap. 5. Hts renewed Cahmny of the Old Bnt-

tains reproved, p. 402

<;:hap.

The Contents.

Chap. 6. His rafh import of Bijhofs Ufliers cen-fiire of mcy Confidered. p. 404

Poftfcript. TheTeftimony of Smzxsi^us fully open" ed : And the reports of Peter Abbas Cluniacen-fis, and Bernard Abbas Clarevallenfis. Their weak. difin^nuoHi conrfe of Printing my vpords 4s againfl my felf (in a jheet called Mr^ Baxters Arguments^ &c. cryed about theftreetf) as if the necefpty of profeffed faith for our felvesy would prove that our profejfed faith and dedicating them to Gody were not fufficient for the baptifmal reception of our Infants, p. 407

Readers,

MY pain and greater bufinefs deny me time to colleft the Printers Errata, though I fee divers -, and therefore muft leave the difcerning of them to your felves. And I again admonifh and intreat you, that tjfie deteftion of the extr aordinary falfhoods and blind temerarious audacity of Mr. D. be not imputed to the whole KebapiTing par'* ty, (to whofe Praftice Oregor. Magn, paralleleth Keordaln-ing^ ; and that his crimes abate not your Chrifijan Love and tendernefs to others, there being truly Godly, wife, and peaceable perfons, worthy of our Communion, and willing of it, of that party as well as of others. Hearken »ot to^ them that would render the Party o(Anabaptifls odious or intolerable^no more than to thofe Anabaptlfis who would perfwade thofe of their opinion to renounce Communion with all others as unbapti2ed. It is againfl this dividing fpirit on all fides that I Write and Preach.

The

CO

mwmm'mwi'iWi'i

Part L

Aij private Letters to Mr, Tombes provmg the church-memberjhip of Infants in all ages y ^'indicated from hi^ unfattsfa^or.y excepthnst

The Preface.

^i li K i 'S HE occafion and time of thefe Letters is long ago publi/hed by Mr. Tombes hinrifelf in the third Part of his Anti-PAdobaftifm y page 353. and forward •, where he printcth the faid Letters without my confent: Had I found his Anfwers fadsfadory ^ I had changed my judgement and retraced that and other fuch writings long ago. But I thought fo much otherwife of them.that I judged it not nc-ceilary, nor worth my diverting from better employment to write an anfwer to them;

f'sT,', And whatever the fingular judgement of that

B karncdt

(2)

learned and excellent ProfefTor of Theology mentioned in his Preface, was or is concerning the arguments that I, and many before and fincc have u^^d for Infant Bapcifm, and notwithftanding his opinion that it w^j introdnced in the fecond Ccn» tury^ &c. yet fo many wifcr and better men than I, think otherwife both of the caufc, and of Mr, T's v/ritings, that I hope the modefl: will allow me the honour of having very good company if I Ihould prove millaken.

^.3% No fober Chriftian will deny but that Godly men of both opinions may be faved : And' then I think no fuch Chriftian that is acquainted with the Hillory of the Church, can choofe but think that there are now in Heaven many thou-fands, if not hundred thoufands that were not againft Iflfant Baptifm, for one that was againft it : And while we differ de jure , yet without great ignorance of the ftate of the world, wc muil needs agree that de fa5fo^ the number in the Church of Chrift in all Nations and Ages that have been againft Infant Baptifm hath been fo fmall, as that they make up but a very little part of the Church triumphant: which though I take for no proof of the truth of our opinion, yet I judge it a great reafon to make me and others very tearful of turning rafhly and without cogent proof to the other fide, I know the Churches have ftill had their blemiflies; but that they (hould all iiniverfally fo err in the fubjed of Baptifm and Chriftianity it felf, is not to be believed till it be proved^

^* 4. Though

<3)

^i 4. Though Chrift be hot the Author of air^ ©f our errors, he is the healer of them.and he is the EfFedor as well as the Diredor of his Churches faiih and holinefs: And yet to fay that though ihoufands or hundred thoufands are in Heav<tn that were for Infant Baptifm, for one that waS againft ir, yet Chrift was againft even fuch a con-ftitutiveparcofhis Church ( as accounted) is nor, to be received without good proof.

^. 5. For my part I muft ftill fay, that after all that I have read for the Anabaptifts, and much more than fuch Catalogues as Mr. Danvers^ I do' not at prefent remember that I have read of any one Chriftian that held the baptizing of Infants unlawful, in many and many hundred years after Chrift •, at leaft not any that denied not Original fin .* Though indeed the Pelagians themfelves than did deny it much, yet denied not Infant Baptifm.

^, 6. But of this enough heretofore : I lay not my faith on the number of Confenters • but in a doubtful cafe I think the way that almoft all went that are in Heaven, and took it as the very entrance bf the door of life, is fafer ceteris farihm than that which few in Heaven did own : And though on earth I have more approvers than Mr.T. I think mans approbation fo poor a comfort, a« that I am forry to read in his Preface and elfe-where how much he layeth upon it. Alas, were it not more for the good of others than gur felves^^ B ;$ how

(4) how incon/iderable a matter were it, whether men-value and honour, or defpife us, and what we are thought or faid of by each other, when we are all on the borders of eternity, where the honour of this world is of no fignification ?

5^. 7. In the anfwer which I muft give to Mr. Tombes, fhould I tranfcribe all his words, and anfwer every impertinent pafTage, I fhould need-lefly weary the Reader and my fclf: I will therefore fuppofe the Reader to have his Book at hand, and to take his words as he hath given him them,; that I may not be blamed as concealing any of them. And I fhall anfwer to nothing, but what feemeth to me to need an anfwer: And for all the reft I am content that the impartial Reader judge of them as he findeth them : For I write not for fuch as need an anfwer to every word that is written, how frivolous foever , againft plaia ti*uth.

MJcTombei

('5>

ci^r. Tombes his fir/l Letter.

SIR,

NOt finding yet that Law or Ordinance of Infanrs vifil^le Church-memberr fhip which you aiTert in your book of Bapttfm to be unrepealed, I do requeil you to fet down the particular Text or Texts of Holy Scripture where you conceive xhat Law or Ordinance is written, and to tranfmif ic to mc by this bearer, that ycur allegations tnay be confidered by him who is Yours as is meet^

ty^pril ^^ 16^$, JohnTomhsso

Richard Baxters Anfwer,

Sir, / mean to fee more faid againfi what I •have aiready written^ before I will write any more jihoHt Infant Baft ifm , withoht a more "fr effing tail than I yet dtfcern, J have -difcharged my ■Confcience^ and fljcJl leave you and yonrs to take yoHr coiirfe, jdnd indeed I do not underf:and the fenfe of yonr Letter , becanfe you fo joyn tfpo ^uefiions in one ^ that I know not which of the fwo it is that yOH would have me anfwn to, Whe^

B 3 ther

CO

ther there were any Ordinances or Law of Go4 that Infants jiiould be Church-mcmbcrs ? is one ^Hejrtcn : . W> ttker thts he repealed ^ is argther : yon joyn both into of^e. For the firfi^ that Infants "Were (^hurch-mem^ers^ as you have not yet denied that I know of y fa will I not be fo uncharitable as to imagine that yon are now about it: And much Uf that y<iH fhould have the lea ft doubt whe-fher it were by Cjbds Ordination^ There are two things confiderable in the matter, Firfl^ the benefit of Chisrch-membcrjhip , with all the confe^ ^uent priviledges. It is the work. f>f ^ grant or. fromife to confer thefe^ and not diretlly of apre-ifept. Secondly^ the duty of devoting and dedica-ting the child to God^ and entring it into theCo-^ venant which confers the benefit ; and this is the Vporh^ of a Law or Precept to confiitute this duty, I am pafh ijoptbt that yon doubt, not of either of thefe: For yon cannot imagine , that any Infant had the bleffmg without a grant or promife, (that*s impoffible ; ) nor that any Parents lay under a, ^ty without an obliging law^ (for that is as im^ pojjihle* ) Taking it therefore for granted that J/OH are refolved in both thefe , and fo yield that fuch a grant and precept there was , there remains no que ft ion but whether it be repealed: which I hdve long expeBed that you Jhould prove. For citing the particular iexts in which the or^ Aination u contained , though more may be faid than is faid^ yet I (hall think^it nee dief^ tilllfet m^ ordination contained in thofe Texts which I have already mentioned to you^ proved to he re-^erfed. Nor do I k^ow that it is of fo great ufe ' "' "' *". '" ' •■'••' ■ f(f

(1)

to fland to cite the f articular Texts , 'ixhile yotjt confef in general^ that fpich a fromfe and free eft there is, hy vertne of which Jnj ants rvtre tillLhrijh ttr/^e duly TKembers of Chrtjis Chitrch (forChrifis Church It was ) even his urii'verfal vtfible Church. Still remerKber that 1 take the word [^ law ] not firitily for a precept only , hnt largely , as com-frehendtng both prcmife and precept, and I have already jhewed yon both, and fo have others*

So much of your endeavour as hath any tenden^ cy to the advancement of holinefs, I am willing to fecond you in, viz. that at the age you dtfxre people might folemnly profefs their acceptance of Chrifi, and their refolution to be his : But I hope Cod will find me better wor\!^ while I mufi flay here^ than to fpcndmy time to prove that no In^ fants of believers are within Chrifis vifible Churchy that is, are no J-nfant Difciplcs, Infant Chrifiians, Infant Qmrch-members, I know no glory it will bring to Chrifi, nor comfort to many nor fee I now any appearance of truth in it, I hlefs the Lord for the benefits of the Baptifmal Covenant that I enjoyed in infancy, and that I was dedicated fo foon to God, and not left wholly in the Kingdom and power of the Devil, They that dejfife this mercy, or account it none, or not worth the accepting, may go without it, and take that whieh they get by their ingratitude^ And I once hoped, that much lefs than fuch an inundation of direful confcquents as our eyes have feen, would have done more for the bringing of you back, te fiop the doleful breach thatyoH have made, lam fain to ^etid my time now to endcAVour the rr-

B 4 (ovtrjf

covery of fome of your Opinion who are lately turned Quakers^ or at leafl the 'preventing of others jipofiafie: which is indeed to prevent the emptying of your Churches. Which I fuppofe will be a more acceptable work^with yoH^ than again to write againft rebaptiz^ing , or for Infant Bap^ tifm. Str^ I remain your imperfeii brother^ knowing bnt in fart, yet loving the truth ,

Rich. Baxter.

Air, Tombes hk fee end Letter*

Sir ', I confefs Infants were by Gods fad: of taking the whole people of the Jews forhispeo-plcj in that eftate of the Jewiih Pjedagogy ( not by any promife or precept ^ vifible Church-members, that is, of the Congregation of JfraeL I do pot confefs that there was any Law or Ordinance determining it fhould be fo, but only a fad of <God, which is a tranfeunt thing, and I think it were a fooliiTi undertaking for me to prove the repeal of a fad. Wherefore ftill I prefs you that you would (hew me where that Law, Ordinance, Statute or Decree of God is that is repeaiable , that is, which may in congruous fence be either by a later ad faid to be repealed, or elfe to be eftablifhed as a law for ever. This I never found in your books, nor do I conceive that law is implied in any thing I grant •, and therefore I yet pray you to fet me down the particular Text or Texts of Holy Scripture where that Law is. Which need not hinder you from oppofing the Quaker^ Tin

(9)

( in which I have not and hope fhal] not be wanting j of whom I think that you are mifinfornfied that they are Anabaptifts, I think there are very few of them that were ever baptifcd, and have good evidence that they have been formerly Seekers, as you call them. And I think you do un-juftly impute the direful confequences you fpeak of to the denial of Infant Bapcifm, and to the prad^ice of adult Baptifm , and that as your felf are deceived fo you millead others. I yet ex-peA your Texts, knowing none in any of your Books that mention that law of Infants vifibic Church-memberfliip which you aflert either explicitly or implicitly, and am yours as is meet,

Bevcdly^ April ^. i6^^, JohnTomhes,

Richard Baxters fecond Letter.

Sir, If yon will needs recall me to thi< ungrateful vcork^j let me rc{^Uffl yon to tell me fully ^ exaElly and plainly, what tranjicnt f^r.tlyon me^^^n^ which you conceive without law or prom^ife did make Church-members: that fo I may k^now where the competition lieth. When I k^.owyenr meaningj I intend, God willing, to fend you a jpeedy anjwer to yoHT lafi. Tour fcHow-fervanty

April i6. 1655. Rich.Bixter*

Mr* Tombes

tMr. Tombcs his third Letter.

Sify The tranfeunt fad of God, whereby Infants were viiible Church-members, was plainly esprcft in my laft to you, to be the taking of the whole people of the t^ws for his people, which is the expreffionof zj^ojhy T>eiit, 4. 34. £aW. 6.7. Aad by it I mean that which is exprefled Levit. 20,24.. 26. when God faid, I have feve*. red you from other feofle^ hat you jhonld be mine. The fame thing is eAprelTed iA'^w^jS. 53. Ifai. 43.1. This I term [fad 3 as conceiving it mofl comprehenfive of the many particular ads in many generations, whereby he did accomplifh it. Fol. lowing herein Stephen^ Auls 7. 2. and Nehem. 9,7* I conceive it began when he called Aoraham out of Vr , Gen. 12. i. to which fucceeded in their times the enlarging of his family, removing of Loty Jjhmaely the fons of KetHrah^ Efaiiy diftin-dion by Circumcifion, the birth of//'^^c, Jacobs his leading to Fadan Aram , increaie there, removal to C^naariy tozy£gypty placing, preferving' there, and chiefly the bringing of them thence, to which principally the Scripture refers this fad , Exod. 19. 4. Levit* 11.45. Nehem. i. 10. Hof. II. I. the bringing them into the bond of the Covenant at Mount Sinaiy giving them laws, fettling their Priefthood, tabernacle, army, government, inheritance. By which fad the Infants of the Jfraelites were vifible Church-members as being part of the Congregation of Jfrael , and in like manner though not with equal right ( for they

might

plight be fold away) were the bought fervants or captives, whether Infants or of age, though their Parents were profelTed Idolaters. And this I faid was without proniifc or precept, meaning fuch promife or precept as you in your Letter fay I confefs, and you defcribe, a fromtfe conferring to Infants the benefit: of ChHrcb-rKemberJhtp with mil the confecjuent priviledges^ a frecept conflitti^ ting the duty of devoting and dedicating the child to God J ana entring into (Covenant ^ which confers fhe benefit. For though I grant the promifes to the nuural pofterky cf jibrahanty Gen, 17. 4,5, 6,7,8, and the Covenant made wirh Jfrael at Mount Sinaiy and Dent, 29, wherein Ifraei avouched God, and a precept of Circumcifion, and precepts of God by oJlfofes of calling the people, and requiring thera to enter into Covenant , £xod, 19. and Dent. 29. Yet no fuch particular promife concerning Infants vifible Church-mem-berfliip, or precept for Parents or others, concerning the folemn admifTion of Infants as vifible Church-members, befides Circumcifion, as in your Book of Baptjfm you afTert. Nor do I conceive that Infants of Ifraei were made viable Church-members by the promifes in the covenants or the precepts forenamed, but by Gods tranfeunt fad: which I have defcribed. Which I therefore term [ tranfeunt ] becaufe done m time , and fo not eternal, and paft , and fo not in congruous fence repealabie as a law, ordinance, ftatute, decree, which determines fuch a thing fball be for the future, though capable of continuance in the fame pr the like ads, or of interruption. Which con-

tinu-

ri2;

tinuance or interruption is known by narration of what God hath done, not by any legal revocation, or renewing, or continuance of a promife or precept concerning that thing. Now as the Church-memberfhip of the Ifraelites began as I conceive with ^irahams call, and was compleated when' they were brought cut of ^^gy^t to God, Exod, 19.4. (o I conceive it ceafed when upon their re-jedion of Chrifl as was fore-told Matth. 21.43. they were broken off from being Gods people , which was compleated at the deftrud:ion of Jeru^ falem^ when the temple was deftroycd, as Chrift fore-told, Luk^e 19. 43, 44. And in.^cad of the Jewiih people by the preaching of the Gofpel conr firmed by mighty (igns, God gathered to himfeif a Church of another frame in a fpiriiual way , according to the inftitution of Chrift, Matth.iS. 19, 20. Mark^i6. 15, 16. in which he included not Infants, the Jews therafelves were no part of the Chrifrian Church without repentance and faith in Chrift profefTed at leaft. ■ Having now fully, exadly, and plainly told yoik my meaning as you rcqueft, I do now expcd your fpeedy anfwer tomy laft, and therein to fulfil my requefl of fetting down the particular Texts of tioly Scriptdre wherein that law largely taken comprehending promife and precept of Infants viable Church-mcmberfhip, which ycu alTert to be r:nrepealed, is contained. Ifyou (hall in your anfwer fer down whertin the blefliii^, benefit, and -priviledgcs of Infants vifibleChurch-memberfhipy jwhich you affert unrepealed, Aai confift-, I may

better

(13)

bettet underftand you than I do: But I (hall prefs you no further than you (hall be willing in this thing. lam Yours as is nicer,

Bervdleyy j4fril 21. 165 5. John Tomhes,

Richard Baxters third Letter being long, is divided by Mr. Tomhes into fevcral {edions, and his Anfwers accordingly divided; which order I tnuft therefore obferve in my reply. The words of the Letter are.

SECT. I.

R. B. Q I R , ui frobahility of doing or receiving O goody is to me a call to aBion* Seeing no fuch probability J I told you at firfi my purpo-fes to forbear any firthcr debates with yon , till yoH had better anfwered what ^ is faid^ In yohr next yoH feemcdto deal fo plainly^ as if fomefmaH probability of good did yet appear: But in your third you fly off again and eat yonr ovpn wordsy and jumble things in much confnfwny fa that I now return again to my former thoughts. Tor you that exprejly fay and unfay^ and contradiB: your felf ^ are not likely to be brought to a candid manage-ment or fair ijfue of the Difputc. Toul fure thinks it no great matter to be driven to a felf-contradiciion ( which with ethers is to lofe the Caufe ) who fo eaftly and ex pre fly run upon it your felf

*' Mr* 7^s Anfwcr^ It was a call fufficient, &c.

Reply,

(14)

Re fly. I muft be the difcerner of my own Cat! or Reafons to write ; time is precious: As for his offence at Mr, M, and Mr. Firmin for charging him with fophiftry, and at Mr. Fi?r^ for charging him with railing, and Mr. Gatak§r for doubting ii is his difpofition to braze his forehead •, and his owa angry words hereupon, they concern not our pre-fent bufinefs.

SECT. II.

R, Bi XN yoHr fecond you fay [ Iconfc^ infant? X were by Gods fad of taking the whole people of the Jews for his people, in that eftate of the Jewifh Pedagogy, not by any promife or pr.cepc, then vifible Church-members, that is, of the Congregation cf Ifrael •, I do not confefs, that there was any Law or Ordinance determining h fhould be fo, buc only a fad of Godj which is a tranfeunt thing, &c.^ Jn your third, yon fay ^ \_ For though I grant the promifes to the natural poflerity of ^r^/7^w 5 Gen, 17*4,556,7,8. and the Covenants made with Ifrael at mount Sinai , and Dent. 29; wherein Ifrael avouched God, and a precept of Circumcifion, and precepts of God by Mofs of calling the people, and requiring of them to enter into Covenant, Exod» 19. & Dem* 29. yet no fuch pairticular promife concerning infants vifible Church-memberfhip, or precept for Parents or others concerning the folemn admillion of Infants as vifible Church-members befides Cir-^ cumcifion, as in your book of ^^/>r//z» you affert ]

B^foYt

ri5)

Before there was no {_ Law or Ordinance determining it (hould be fo, but only a fad: 3 nox9 there are Lavps or precepts and promifes that it JIjohU befo^hnt [not fuch as I aflert in my book. 3 jind if Ifiould jljew yoH never fo many^ yon may reply , they are not fuch as I ajfert m my hook^^ and wafle the time in that trial^ when it ii better for me to fee firfi what you fay to that book,: For this is but to lead us about to trifitng,

'' Mr. T's Anfwer. There is no fhadow of a *'contradidion, c^c.

Reply. Let the inipartial Reader judge.

SECT. IIL

R. B. 'Tp O make any clear worh^ upon the things JL in que ft ion y we mufl necejfarily {peak^ to the queflions dtflintily^ many of which yon too much confound. The fir ft queftion in order fit to be refolvedtSy \^ whether Infants before Chrifts in' carnation were Church-members , or not ? J yoU grant they were : and therefore this is paft difpute with m. The fecond que ft ion and the fir ft refold ved^ is \_what Church tt is that Infants were members of f ]] This you give me occafon to take in the way^ becaufe you twice explain your mean^ tngy when you confefs them Church-members , by an i i. e. of the congregation of IfraeL ] By which you feem to imply two things : Firft , that none but the Infants of the Congreaticn of Ifrael were Church-members : Secondly^ that the infants f/* Ifrael were members of no Church but what is

teon»

(-16)

tonvertihle vpith the congregation of Ifrael*'] The third queflion ;>, what it is that gives the Ifrae^ lites that denomination of [^ the Congregation of Jfrael 3 of which Infants wefe members ? Foryun jumble both together^ both canfes Civil, and Eccie^ fiajiical^ and of both thofe that make to the being and well-being. So that our enquiry miifl be ^ whether the (Congregation and the Commonwealth be the fame thing in yonrfenfe ? ~\ and what confii-tuteth it formally ? por in this you fpeak in dark^ ambiguities, The fourth queflion is , [[ Whether there wa^ any Law^ Ordinance or Precept of God concerning mans duty herein^ or obliging him to the Covenant acceptance and engagement^ and fo to men.berfnp'^ and any promife^ grantor Cove-' nant^ conferring the right of Church-memhcrflnp and the confcquent prtviledges to Infants ? ^ T9., this you fay both Tea and Nay y if I can under-ft and you , or at leaft as to muc h of the queftion concerning the heing , and part of the ejfcih of the precept and prcmifc. Tet you conclude^ that you [^ do not conceive that Infayns of Jfrael were made vtfihle Church-members by the promifes in the Covenants^ or the precepts fore-named, but by Gods tranfeunt fati, ~\ I will not fiifpefi that you imagine any other prorrnfe doth it bcfides that in the Covenant, becanfe your tying the ejfc^to the tran^ feunt faEi doth exclude them* Here we are caft upon thefe qucflions next. The fifth queftiony [^ whether there be finch precepts and pronnfies as you grant^ {or as I fiiall prove ) which yet makj 77dt Infants Church-members,^ ] The fixth quefti-ony [* Whether there be any tranfeunt faEi ofGod^

(I?)

Vphich without the efficie^2cy of precept or promife did make the Infants of JfraelChHrch-memhcrs ? J The fcventh qnefiio^iy [_ Whether thcfe which yon ha've affignedbe fichfaCis ? ] The eighth que ft ion ^ (^ which are the Texts of Scripture that contain or expreji the faid laws^ precepts^ or grants which I maintain ? ~\ this yon in/iflHpo}:^ The ninth qitefti-on^ ^ Whether fnch laws , preceps or grar.is as I Jhall prove, are capable of a repal or revocation ? ]] The tenth qnejiion^ [Whether they are a^ituHy revoked or repealed ? \

^^yiic.T's Arjfwer. The eighth queftion is the *' only queftion needful to be refolved ^ &c»

Reply. If I do too much it is but your palling ic by, and it will not trouble you.

SECT. IV.

R. B. 'VyEfore all thefe que ft ions are well hand" JD led^ we jljcnld eafily be convinced that it had been better either to have let hU alone , or el fey if we mtift needs have the other boHt^ at leafc to have agreed on our lermSy and the fating of the qneftions better before we had be.aun. jind 1 thinks that even that i^ not eafie to do, 'por when I defired your plain , exacl and full explication of one word [] tranfeunt faB ~\ and you tell me you have plainly^ fully and exacily told me your meaning: It falls oiity either through the unhappy darkjief of my own underftandi?ig^ or yours^that I know but little more of your mind than I did before , and that yon feem to me to have raifed

G mor0

(i8;

wore doubts and darknefs thany oh have refolveS and dijfipated, Tet being thm far drawn in , / /7W/ briefly fay fomewhat to the feveral queflions^ not following your defires to anfwer one alone: Vphich cannot be done to any furpofe while the fore-going are nnrefolved , becanfe it is the clearing ftp of truth, and not the ferving of your prefent ends in your writings now in hand that I mnfi intend,

^^ Mr. T's Anfwer, I afFed no more bouts with

" fuch a captious wrangler fo many doubts

*' fcem not to be from the darknefs of the un-*' derftanding, but either from the lightnefs of the *' fancy , or the bent of the will, to find a way *' to blunt the Readers attention, c^c.

Reply. This is not the Controverfie : Is your judgement alike right of perfons as of Dodrines ?

S E C T. V.

R. B. np HE fir ft queflion being refolved that JL Infants were once Chirrch-members y to the refolving of the fecond queftion , / fliall -prove thefe two Propoftions* I* That it was not cnly the Infants of the Congregation of Ifrael that were Church-members, 2. The Infants of Ifrael were members of the univerfal vifible (^hurch^ and not only of that particular Congregation. The fir ft I have proved already in my book* And 1* llaac was a Chnrch-membery yet none of the Congregation of Ifrael • it was not Ifrael till Jacobs day Si If you fay that by the ^Congregation of

Ifrael 3

(19)

ifrael ] you mean [ the feed of Abraham vphich had the promtfe of Canaan] Tet 2* J fay y that Ifhmael and Ab}[a[ums feed by Keturah a?idE{m had none of the fromife , and yet were Church^ members in their infancy, [_Jn [(23icf)a/i thy feed be called ~| that /V, that feed which had the pro-mi fe of Canaan. And fa tt was confined to Jacob, who got the blejfing and the birthright y which EidU lofiy and was excluded^ yet was of the Church frora his infancy. The Son of the bond-^ woman was not to be heir with the Son of the free-woman^ yet was Ifhmael an Infant membert, Jf you fay J that by \^the Congregation of Ifrael] yott mean all the natural fed of Abraham: 1 addy 3. The children of his bond-men born in his farni-ly^ or bought With mony^ were none 0/Abrahams natural feed , and yet were Church-members iti their infancy. If you go yet further , and fay , that by \_ the Congregation of Ifrael _] you mean. all that were at the abfolute dijpofe of Abraham or h^s fuccejforsy and fo were his own: I addy 4* The Infants of free Profelytcs were none fuch 3 and yet were Church-members, If you yet go fur'* thcr^ and fay^ that you mean by [^ the Congrega^ tion of Ifrael ] a?iy that came under the government of Abraham or his fuccejfors: then I add , 5, That the Sichemites, (7^;/. 34. were not to come under Jacobs government^ but to be his allies and neighbours , being fo many more in number than Jacob, that they concluded rather that his cattle and fubflance fiwuld be theirs •, yet were they cir" cumcifed every male , and fo were made m.embers of the vifible frofejfwg Church, for it was not

C z tH

the bare external fi^n that Jacob or his fans would ferfwade them to ^ withont the thing fgnified: For the reproach that they mentioned of giving their daughter to the uncircumcifed ^ wa6 not m the defeli of the external abfcifjjon •,/«?r/o'Mofes own fon ^ and all the Jfraelites in the -wildernefi fljould have been under the fame reproach^ and all the females continually: But it was in that they were not in (Covenant with the fame God , and did not profcf to Worflnp the fame God in his true rpay of wor(i}ip as they did. And therefore^ as Bapttz^mg is not indeed and in Scripture fence Baptizi/7g 5 if it be not ufed for engagement to Gody even into his name •, fo Circmncifion is not, indeed and in Scripture fence CircHmcifian^ unle^ ft be ufed as an engaging fign^ and they be cir^ curficifed to God,

*^ Mr. T's A-nfwer. By [ the Congregation of *^ Jfrael J I mean the fan^e v/ith the Hebrew peo-

*' pie or houfe of Abraham — by an anticipa-

*'tion, c^c.

Reply, I, That not only the Infants of Abra^-hams houfe were Church-mennbers fhall be pro-vecf.

2. Here he is forced to take in the Children of Keturah, Ifimael, and Efau^ into [ the Congregation of Ifrael 1 ^ And fo to extend Infants Church-raemberlhip further than the Jews Cora mon-vveahh. For let the Reader judge, whether the pofterity of Ijhm.aely Efau and Keturah were of that Repubh'ck, or Profelytes either, and not isifually errenfiie?,

3. He is forced to extend Infants Churcb-memberChip to whole Cities that would be buc iheir Allies, as the Sichewites were: For when he faith [^ Thty were one peo-ple ] by confent, he could not fay that they were to be their fub-jtds and fo members of their Kepubiick. And they may be [_ one peofle ] by mixture and confederacy, wkhout fubjediion. And there is no intimation that the SichemUes were to part with their former Governours and be fubjed to Jacob, And then if all the Kingd ms about would but have been accordingly ''■Jacobs confederates, it feems Mr. T. mud yield ihac their Infants had been vifible Church-members.

SECT. V L

R. B. TT was then the duty of all the Nations \. TO mid about (if not of all the Nations on earthy that could hcive information of the Jew^ ijjj Religion ) to engage themftlves and their children to God by Qircumcifion, That all that would have any alliance and cow.merce with the Jews mnft do tt^ is commonly cofife(fed: that it miifl extend to Infants^ the cafe of the Sichemites ( though deceitfully drawn to it by fome of Jacobs fons) doth filewJ and fo doth the Jewijh fraliice which they were to imitate : that the fame engage-mait to the fame God is the duty of all the worldy is commonly acknowledged^ though Divines ¥tre -not agreed whether the diflant nations were obliged to ufe Circimcifwn the Jewijhfign. The

C 3 h^fi

hefi of the Jews were z^ealoHs to make Profclytes^ and no doubt bnt the very law of nature did teach them to do their hefi for the falvation of others. To think^fuch charitable and holy works unlawful , is to think it evil to do the greatefi good. And if they mnfi perfwade the neigh-vour nations to come in to God by Covenant en-* gdgeynenty they mnft perfwade them ta bring their children with them , and to devote them to God 04 well as themfelves* For the Jews knew na other covenanting or en^ging to God* As the Sichemitcs mufl do^ fo other nations mufl do: For what priviledge had the children of the Siche-* mites above the refi of the world?

*' Mr, T's Anfwer, The argument in form *' would be thus : If it were the duty of all the ^' nations round about to engage themfelves and " their children to God by circumcilion, then it ^^ was not only the Infants of the Congregation ^' of Jfrael that were Church-members, c^c.

Reply, I. You fl^ould have (aid [^ that would have been Church-members had they done that duty J, But you can befl ferve your own turn. 2. One Supream Power maketh one Republick ( with the fubjeds ) ; And many Soveraigns make many Republicks ( asallgrant J-.'Therefore if all the Nations about had engraffed themfelves into the Congregation oUfrael but as th: Sichemitesdid, they had not made one Republick, as to humane Soveraignty : I prefume to tell you my thoughts of fuch a cafe f and fo of the Sichemites): It was the glory of Jfrael to be a Theocracy : God WJis their Soveragin^ not only as he was of all f > th?

(^3) the world ( de jure and by overruling their humane Soveraign : ) but by fpecial Revelation doing the work a Soveraign himfelf: He made them Laws ( and not Mofu) : Reappointed them Captains under him by Revelation : He decided cafes by Oracle : He gave them Judges that were Prophets , and aded by his extraordinary fpiric. Though (iJMofes is called a King, he was but an Official Magiflrate , Captain and Prophet : [] A Prophet fhall the Lord your God raife up to you like unto me, c^c. ] faith he : which had immediate refped to the form of Government and manner of fucceflion, ( as differing from the way of Kings which the Ipraelites finfully preferred afterward , cafling off this fpecial Theocracy ) though ultimately it intended Chrid. Now, this being fo, the Sichemites or any other nations who would have taken God for their Soveraign^ and come under this fpecial prophetical Theocracy, (which Circcmcifion engaged them to as refpe-ding the Laws to which it bound them) had been fo far united to Ifrael. But hotv far mighc this have extended ? To the reft that he faith I confent. If you will not hold to this you mufl fay that the Sichemites were to be of the fame Communitie with Jfrael^ and not of tl-ie fame Republick, which (ignifieth either ungoverned Communities or various Republicks confederating.

C 4 . SECT,

r24)

SECT. VII.

R. B. TN Hefters tme many of the people be-^ X came Jews^ Heft. 8. 17. who yet veere not under their government, cy4ndtohe Jews is to be of the 'jevpijh frofcjfion. And it is well known that this was to be circumctfed^ they and their little ones ( as the Profelytes were j and fo, to keep the Law of Mofes,

'^ Mr. T's Anfxfer. They were incorpo-

^' rated into the JewiOi people, e^c,

Keply, This needeth no reply byt what is given to the former.

S E C T. V 111.

R. B. '"^^HE fcattered and captivated Jews. JL themjelves were from under the Go-njernment of Abrahams fuccejfors, and yet were to CircHtncife their children oa Church-members, -

^' Mr. T's Anfwer is the fame, and the Reply *' the fame.

SECT. IX,

R. B, "yrTTMen Jon2i\freached to Ninive, />

VV w^ all the race of man among

them^ without exception^ from the greateji to the

feafiy that was to fafi and join in the humUiation :■

Ergo,

Ergo, ally even Infants as well as others , were to -partake of the rcnnjfion. If you fay , the heafis were to faft too : I anfwer^ as they were capable in their kind of part of the cwrfe^ fo were they of part of the hencft^ but their capacity was not as mans: They fijied to manifefi mans humilta-tion. And if by the hnmiliation of the aged the beafis fped the better in their kind, no wonder tf Infants Jpcd the better in theirs , and accordtno-to their capacities^ and that was to have a remiQi-en fuitable to their fin,

'' Mr. T's finfwer. Neither aged nor infants ^' were vifible Church-members, c^c.

Reply, This only proveth by parity of Reafon, their capacity of it, and that they would have been fuch , if they had truely turned to God : which yet I cannot fay that many of theiu did not according to the terms of the Common Covenant of Grace made with Adam and No'e^ though they came not under the Covenant of peculiarity : And if fo fas Repentance is to be interpreted in the bell fenfe till the contrary be proved j I leave it to the Reader, whether Gods^ laying on the Infants their fhare ( as capable ) in the humiliation , imply not fuch a fhare as they are capable of in the benefit ? And the cafe of the Ifraelites Infants fl- eweth what they were capable of.> Mr. T's denial is no difproof.

SECT,

(i6)

SECT. X.

R. B. WJ^'^^ ^ have [aid of Sem and many VV others , and their pofierity already^ J Jhall not here again repeat: and more will be faid anon to the foUoxving queflions,

^^ Mr,TsA^fwer is none, and needs no Re-

"ply-

SECT. XL

R. B, Tp HE fecond profofttion to he froved Sl ^"5 that [ the Ilraelites children vpere members of the Hniverf^l vijible (^tourch of (lorifi AS vpell as of the Congregation of Ursid J Bat this yoii did heretofore acknowledge , and therefore Jfuppofe veill not now deny, I fnffofe it fafi con-troverfe between /^; i. That Chrifl had then a Church on earths As Abraham faw Chrifis day and reioycedy and Mofes fujfered the reproach of Chrifis Heb. it* 26* and the Prophets enquired of the falvation by Qhrifi , and fearched diligently^ and prophefied of the grace to come •, and it was the fpirit of Chrifi which was in thofe Propheti fignifying the time^ and tefifying beforehand the fnfferings of Chrifl^ and the glory that jhouldfol" low, I Pet. I. 10, 11. So were they part of the Church of Chrift , and members of the body of Chrifiy and given for the edification of that body : Though it was revealed to them that the higher

fri"

friviledges cf the Church ^ftcr the cov'ing of Chrifi, were twt for them but for u>^ I Pet. 1.12. 2' I ftppofe it agreed on aljo between lu > that there was no true Church or EccUftaflical wcrfhip^ jing fociety appointed by Cod tn all the world jince the fally but the Chut ch of Chrifl^ and therefore either Infants were n^embers cf Chnjis Church 5 or of no Church of Cods inflitution. Mofes Church and Chrifts Church according to Gods infiitution were not two , but one Church. For Mofcs wa6 Chrifts Vfjcr , and his ceremonies were an obfcurer Cofpel to leadrKcn to Chrift : ^nd though the foelijJj jews by mifunderftand-ing them made afeparation^ and made Mo^ts Di-fciplesto be feparate from Chrifts Difciples^ and fo ft up the alone \^f}adows of thi>;gs to comcy yet the body is all of Chrift] Col. 2. 17. and by fo doing they violated Gods infiitution , and un-churcht thcrr/fel'ves, 3. I fuppofe it agreed alfo^ that Chrifts Church ts but one , and that evert thofe of all ages that are net at once vifble^ yet wake up one body, 4. jind that therefore who-ever is a member of aiiy particular Church is a member of the univerfaL ( Though the Church was more emnnently called Catholicity when the wall of feparation wa^ taken down. ) But Iremjem^-ber I have proved this in my Book^^ part, i.cbap. 20. and therefore pall Jay no more now.

" Mr. T's Jnfwer, The two firft are granted. ^' To the third, Though whoever is a member of ^' any particular Church is a member of the uni-^' verfal ^ yet it follows not, (which Mr. B. drives [^ at, and vainly talks of his proving) that every

^^ one who was a member of the univerfal Church, /'in that hewisa member of the Jevvih Church-*^ particular, was a vifible member of every parti-'' cular vifible Church of Chrift. 2. Nor that every "one that was a member of theuniverfal Church , *^ in that he was a member of a vifible particular *' Church of Chrift, was a vifible member of the " Jewifh particular Church, e^c.

Reply, I. None of this ever came into my thoughts which he untruly faith I drive at, c^c* What fober man could imagine either of thcfe afTertions ? What pittitul abufe of ignorant Readers is this ? 2. And what a poor put off to the point in hand > That which I faid is but that all particular vifible Churches and members, make up one vifible univerfal Church , and therefore every vifible member of any particular Church is a member cf theuniverfal? He durft not deny xhis,. and yet a flander ferveth his turn.

SECT. XIL

R, B. f^Oncerning the matter of the third qHe-V_V fiion, I ajfcrt that [_it n>a4 not only of the Jews Common-n^ealth that Infants were TKerKtbers -i but of the Church difiinti from it* ~\ This is frovedfuffciently in what is fatd befere.

*' Mr. T's Ar/Jveer. As yet I find it not proved " that the Jewifh Church was diftind from the *^ Common-wealth , or that there was not any *' member of the Church who was not of the " Common-wealth.

Re fly.

(2P )

Reply, I. It is only a formal and not a wateri-al diftindion that I medled v/ith : The formal reafonof a Church-member and a Civii-memb.r differ, at leaft after the choice of Kings, whea the Republick was conftituted by a humane head : Of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Galitfpie's Aarons Rod ; If the Jews Common-wealth be fpeclHed as a Theocracy from God the Soveraign, the Sichemites were ot it, and other nations might, 2. But many fay that fome were of the Commonwealth that were ROt of the Church, though not contrarily : And be they diftind or not, it fuffi-ceth me that Infants were of the Church,

SECT. XIII,XIV,XV,XVL

R. B. li yT(9;^fo^'fr , i. Infants were Church" 1VJl members in Abrahams family before Circumcifion^ and after when it was no Common^ wealth. So they were in Ihacs, Jacobs, c^c.

2. The banifjed^ captivated ^ fcattered Jews ^ that ceafedtobe members of their Common-wealthy yet ceafed not to be of their Church.

3. The people of the Land ^ that became Jews in Hcfters time , joyned not themfelves to their Common-wealth: Nor the Sichemites*

4. <tJ^any Trofclytes never joyned themfelves to their Common-wealth,

"Mr.T. affirmethchem all to have been Com-*' mon-wealths.

Anfwer, The word being ambiguous may in a large fenfe be extended to a family, and to a

fcatrered

(30)

fcattcrcd people that have no Soveraign ^ but 13

•not fo ufually taken.

SECT. XVIL

R.B.T^HS Children of Abraham by Ketu-X rah, when they were removed from hU family were not unchnrcheA ; and yet were no mem-hers of the Jews Common-wealth, But I jJjall take fsp with r^hat is faid for this already , nnderta^ king more largely to manifef ity when I perceive it necejfary and nfefnU

^' Mr. T's Anfwer, Abrahams children by Ke^ '^ tiirah when out of the Conamon-weahh of the " Hebrews were unchurched •, at leaft in refped " of the Church of the Hebrews,

Reply, I. What a wide gap doth that \^ at leaft ] make you, yet to fay. They were a Church or no Church, as you pleafe? 2. Reader, ufe Scripture but impartially, and in the fearofGod^ and I will leave it to thy Confcicnce to judge whether it be credible, that when God had fore^ told that j4braham would command his children and houfhold after him to keep the way of ihe Lord, Gen, 18. 19. and when Iflimael^ Keturahs children, and Efaii , were circuracifed by Gods command, and God had yet promifed the Poli-^ tical peculiarities fpecially to Ifaac , and Jacob ^ yet God would have all the grandchildren of Ijhmdely Ketttrahj Efau to be uncircumcifed : anrf all their pofterity to ceafe that ufage, as foon as they were out of Jibrahams houfe : when yec

Hiftory

Hlftory affureth us that they long continued it : Or whether God would have them circamcifed and yet be no Church-members ? Believe as evidence conftrainech thee.

S E C T. X V 11 L

R. B. ''^O the fourth que ft ion I affert that (^ i. X There was a Law or Precept of Cod ch-li^irig the Pare?2ts to enter their children into Covenant with Godyby accepting his favour^and re-inga-ging and devoting them to God^andfo entrtng them Jolemnly Church-members,~\ And \_z*there was A Covenant^ promife or grant of God^ by which he offered the Church-member^np of fome Infants and actually conferred it , where hps offer Was ac-cepted, 3 / jlionld have mentioned this firfiy find therefore will begin with the proof of this. By thefe terms Covenant^ promife, grant^ or deed of gift^ &c. we underftand that which is common to all thefe , viz» [] A fign of Gods will conferring or confirming a right to or in fome benefit J fach ^ we commonly call a Civil aU: of Collation as diflinEt from a m>ere Phyfical all of difpofaL I call it [ a fign of Gods will de jure ] becanfe that is the general nature of all his legal moral 4ilts: they are all fignal determinations de debito, vf fome dne* 2. i f^ conferring or confirming right to fome benefit j to difference it from precepts which only determine what fhall be due from us to God 5 and from threatnings , which deter-' mine what panifhment fiiall be due from God to its,

"Mr.r,

. " Mr. T, If we prove by another grant

"or deed of gift Phyfical or Moral which is not ''a promife , or by any Law which is not fuch a '' precept, he contradids not my fpeech, c^c.

Reply, Your words are \_J do not confefs thai there Viuu any Law or Ordinance determining that it Jlwnld he fo (that Infants fjottld he members of the Jewiflj Ch^irch ) hnt only a faci of God which is atranfcHnt things and [ think, it were a foolifh Hndcrtaliing to prove the Repeal of a fa^, J Perufe his words Reader.

SECT. X1X,XX,XXI.

R. B. "TJ Aving thm explained the terrtts , / .L JL prove the propofition. If Infanti Church-memher^np with the prtviledges thereof were a benefit conferred^ which fume had right to or in, then was there fome grant^ covenant , or promife^ by which this right was conferred: But the antecedent is mofi certain: Ergo j fo is the confequent. I fi4ppofe you will not deny that it was a bene ft to be the covenanted people of God, to have the Lord engaj^ed to be their God ^ and to take them for his people, to be brought fo near him , and to be fcparated from the corr^mon and unclean^ from the world, and from the ftrangeri to the Covenant of promifes^ that live as without God in the worldy and without hope.

If It were asked what benefit had the Circitm-cifion / / fippofe yon wonld fay , 7nnch everj way,

(33)

If Infant Church-member^jif were no bereft <> then they that had it, were not ( when they cam^ to age or their Parents in the mean time ) obliged to any thankfnlnefs for it. But they were obliged to be thankful for it. Ergo, it was a bent ft,

' Mr. T. Denyeth not the benefit •, but denyeih *' [ that this is to be Vifible members formally *' or connexively, for they may have all this be-" nefit who are not vifible Church-members: " <viz.» fome believing Saints that are dumb.

Reply, Mark Reader, what an iflue our Con-trovcrfies with thefe men come to ? [ Men may be the covenanted people of God, and have the Lord engaged to be their God and to take themi for his people, and be feparared from the common and unclean, from the world, from Grangers to the Covenant, g^c. and ^et be no vifible Church-members '} with them 1 Doth a dumb man (ignifie his confenc to the Covenant by any figns or not? If he do, that is vifible covenaniing. If not, how is he one of thefe covenanting and feparared people? And do you think that Mr. T. .knew not that I talk to him of vifible covenanting and feparation, and not only of a fccret un-exprefled heart-confent : What will m/Kc i Church-member then with fuch men ?

'' He next faith that [^ To be the circjmciiion is *'not all one as to be vifible Church-members-, '' Cornelipii and his houfe were vifible Church-" members, yet not the circumcifion ]].

Reply, Reader, deft thou not marvail to find •im fo plead for meagainft himfelf, or fpeak no-

P thiaT

(34) thing to the cafe? To be circumcifed then^ or haftiz^ed novp , is not all one as to be viftble ChHrch-members: But fure all the Circumcifed were, and ail the Baptized are, invefted in vifi-ble memberfhip? Is it not fo? And if CorneUus and more of the uncircumcifed alio were members, you fee it was not infeparable from Cir-cumcilion. And whom is this againft, me or him ?

''Headdeth [nor were the benefits, Rom.^. " I, 2. ( the oracles of God, a-c.) conferred to *^ them as vifible Church-members : For then all ^'vifible Church-members had been partakers of " them ].

Reply. But it was to them as members of the Jevvilh vifible Church: And if you plead for the extent of the Church to others alfo, I thank you for it.

When I fay [^ Infant Church-memberjljip wof a benefit ~\ " He faith [ Vifible Church-member-'' (hip fimply notes only a ftate, by which was *'abeneiir. ]

Reply. Only^ u an exclulive term: Reader, by this thou maift perceive the myftery of w^j^^Tg-Church-members by a tranfennt faU , withont a Law or prowife. It is no henept with thefe men, but a ftatc by whtch \va.s a benefit. Either they or I then know not at all what Church-member-fhip is : And are not ail our Volumes wifely written to trouble the world, about that Subje^ that we are not agreed )vhat it is , and about a term which we agree noc of the fenfe of? I take a ^vifible Church-member to be a vifible member of Chriil as Head of the Church and of his

Church

C35)

Church as vifible? To be a rJMemher is to be'Ji ' fan : It is therefcre as the member of a Family, School, Kingdom , a related pan! And is it no hef^efit in it /f// befides the confequents to be .vifibly united and related to Chrift and his body > to be relatively a member of the Houfhold ot God ? Sure were it but for the exclufion ot the miferie of the contrary ftate, and for the, Honour of it, fuch a Relation to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, and the Church, is fome little benefit ; ( and great to me.) ■' And whether he and Major Danvers and fuch ' others fhould make fuch a vehement ftir about it as they do, if it be no benefit , let it be copfi-dered.

SECT. XXIL

R. B. 'Tp H E next thing in the antecedent tp JL be proved u\ that there was a right conferred to this benefit^ and fome had a right in it. And I. If any had the benefit^ then had they right to or in that benefit: But fome had the be-^ Tiefity Ergo. The confequence of the major is certain. I. Becaufe the very natnre of the ve?jeft confifteth in a right to further benefits, , 2. If any had the benefit of Qntrch-memberfi^iip^ Cove-nant-interefly &:c, without right ; then they had it with Cjods confent a;nd approbation or without it» Not with it: for he ts jitfi:^ and confenteth not that any have that which he hath not fome •right to or in : Not without it: for no man ten.

have a benefit from God againfi his willy or mth^ vm it, z. If no Infants had dnly and rightful" ly received this heneft , God vpould have fome* where reprehended the nfnrpation and ahnfe of his ordinances or benefits, Bm that he doth not Oitoth'A cafe ^ Ergo. 3. God hath exprefftd this right in many Texts of Scriptftre^ of which more afterward. •

'' Mr. T. The Infants of the Jews were vifi-*' fible Church-members, not by a Legal right to *^ ity antecede?it to their being fpichwifibW Church-*' members which they or any for them might ^'claim as due: Nor Was it capable of being du-" ly and rightfully received or ufurped : For it ^' was nothing but a flate of appearing to be part " of that people, who were in appearance from " things fenfibie, Gods people; and this they had " by Gods fad of making them to be a part of ''that people viilbly, viz.* his forming them and ^'bringing them into the world, and placing

" them,

Reply, More myftery ftill 1 i. Was there no an-'; tecedcnt Law or Covenant of God, giving a jm^ foctetatis a Right cf memberfhip to zAbrahams) feed as foon as they had a being initially, and commanding them to be devoted to God in Co-'^ venant, andi Circumcifed, that they by invefliture might have a plenary Right ? Was there no fuch thing ? O but [^ this gave them not a right to it before they had it.' \ Is the poor Church to be thus abufed, and holy things thus played with ? They could not be niembrs before they h::d a being- nor could lay claim to it: But could not

Gods

j (57)

\ Gods Law, Grant or Inflrumental Covenant bo made before they were born ? And could ic not be the Jnftrument of conveying right to them as foon as they were born ? that is, as foon as they were fubjeds capable ? And is not the caufe in order of nature , though not of time before the i efPcd ? Cannot the Law of the Land be the fundamental caufe of the Right of Infants to Honours and Eftates, though till they are in being they are not capable fubjeds > Is not the Adion Ht agentis naturally antecedent to it as in fatieme ^ Is it only Gods tranfeunt faB of making them men and thefe men., and placing them in England^ which maketh Infants to be members of the En-glifh Nobility, or Gentry or Citizens or members of this Kingdom ? No •, but it is the Laws that do morally give the Jus dignitatis^ vel fo-details^ though their adion be not terminattd in any fubjed till it exift. For every man born in England is not born a Lord, or Efquire, or Citizen, no nor a free fubjed, unlefs the Law fay it fball be fo. If Foreigners or Rebels (bould have children here, and tht Law were that they fhall be Aliens, they would be no members of the Kingdom. If Mr. T. or Mr. jO's children have nothing but Generaticn^ and being hern in England to fhew for their Inheritance , their Title will not hold.

2. And might not right have been faldy plead-ded or ufurped by a counterfeit Jew ?' Or the children of fuch ? Or the children of Apoftates? who yet w^xchoxvioi Abrahams feed, and in that Land ? Whatfoever they were that Nchef?:iah ufed

D 3 (ever:-

feverely, I am fure v^ci^?^;?^ children, and the In-' fants of the Cities that were to be confumed for Idolatry, loft their right to life and Church-mem-berfhip at once by their Parents fin ; And God might if he had pleafed, have continued the Life of Apoftates children , without continuing their Church-right ^ Or Apoftates might (md no doubt multitudes did ) efcape the juftice of the Law through the fault of Magiftrates or people, and yet have no true Legal Right to Church-member-Ihip for themfelves or Infants ( born after ) : For he that hath loft his right to life, hath loft his right ( or may do ) to the priviledges and benefits cf it.

^^ He addeth [^ yet I grant, they had a right " m it, that is, that they had it by Gods dona-"tion.J

Reply, And was it not a Moral Donation then, if if gave Right > You will be forced thus to con* fute your fcli-.

^^ Mr. T. It feems to me not true, that the na-^' ture of the benefit of Infants vifible mertiber-'^ fhip confiftech in a right to further benefits.

Reply. Yet he giveth hot a word to tell us why Le ihinkeih fo. If we are at this pafs about Re-latiops and Ri^ht in general, no marvail if Infant Baftifm go for Antichriftian ; Doth not the RcLittve fiate of a Citiz^en^ or of the member of any priviledged focicty, confift in his ftate Oi Rjght to the Benefits^ Priviledges and Com-wnnion of ihe Society , and an obligation to the du.ies of a member, to the end.he may have the benefits, and the Society the benefit of his mem-'" berfiiip

(39) berfhip and duty > A conjundion of Ri^h ( i^acioL ) and obligation ccnftituceth all fuch Re^ lations. But what fliall we be agreed in that are ignorant and differ here ?

*'Next Mr. T. denieth the confequence, [^For ^* a man may have a benefit wichouc right. J

Re fly, I. And yet juO- now , ChHrch-merKber^ fljijf in Ifraei ppOi -a thtr^g that none could ufarfj or have yvithotit right ? 2. Buc I faid [] no man can have a benefit fyon> God againfl hii will or without it: ] And rhtTcfore if God give fuch a thing as Ghurch-mtaibtrfliip which confifteth in A Right to further benefits , ht thac hath it by Gods gift hath it rightfully : Natural effetis f as a prey to a thief j may be faid to be given of God improperly, by Phyfical difpofal, rohim that hath no right: But right it felt cannot be given to him that hath no right ^ nor any thing elfe/Relative or Natural, by Gods Moral or Covenant dona^ tion.

^' He [^conceiveth it to'be very erroneous that ** vifible Church-memberfhip is given out of di-<' ftributive Juftice •, for as Regeneration, fo alfo *' vifible meraberfhip are of bounty by God as *VSoveraign Lord, not of diftributive Jufthre by *'God as Judge. 2. That all that any man hath of "God he hath of debt, contrary to Ror^.^.^. ^'3. That vifible Church-memberfiiip is concei-" ved as a thing offered, and tobeduly andright-'•' fully received

Re fly. If Mr. T. and I (hall tire the Printer, and waft Paper, and trouble the world, with telling them how many errors each of us hcld^ it will

D 4 t.c

be an unsavory task, and I doubt it would be ^ much fhorter work for one of us, ( which ever it is) to enumerate the ufeful truths we hold. What I hold, be it right or wrong, I will teU ^he Reader as to this matter. I hold that Gods Kingdom is to be confidered in its Con flit ntioh and Adminiflration : The firft hath, i. The efficient, 2. The Conftitutive, 3. The final Caufes; And in the large fenfe it containeth, i. SnbjcBs on^ ly by obltgation^ ( fuch as Rebels are J 2. Snb-^clis by cofifent ^ (ox voluntary), Th^ Efficient caufe of the former is only Gods i. Making : them men , and Redeemed men quoad '^rtcium^ 2Xi^ commanding their fMbje5i:ion or confent. To the effe^iing of the fecond is befides theie required their A^aal Confent ( Parents confenting for their Infants )j without which they are but Rebels, and have no right to the benefits of the Society.

God being a King de jure before his Government is Confented to^ maketh a Law to man to command them to confent and be his voluntary fub-je^s: To thofe that confent ( as the condition) he promifeth the intcreft and bleffings of his Covenant, viz, Chrift and Lite ^ sndthreatneth the privation of thofe benefits, and forer punifhmenc CO refufing rebels: He is Lawgiver and will be Judge of Non-con [enters -, called, Unbelievers and refufers of Chrifl and Salvation; When men do c.onfent they are under his further Adminiftring Laws. The faid efficient caufes are Gods A(5l;i-ons, i. As Omnipotent Owner, 2. As Bene-fador, 3. <iy4s Sapiential Recior. i. According to the firfl, he giveth us our B.cing and frefer-

veth

^eth it, 2nd in him we Live, and Move, and Are. 2. As our BenefaUor antecedent to his Admt^ mftration^ he gave the world a Redeemer abfo-Intely^ and reprieved the world and us, and gi-veth us all common Antecedent Mercies* 3. As the Redor de jure of men not yet confenting^ he ma-keth the Law of Grace abfolucely and antecedently to any condition ( of making it) on our part. This Law hath the frcccpwe fart^ commanding confent f faith and repentance j. 2. Tht Donative or fromtf]ory part, giving us Chrifl in Relation, and right to his prefent benefits, if we co77fent ; which is the condition. 3 .And the penalty aforefaid.

The Admimfiration of the Kingdom de jure^ is the efficient of the confenting Kingdom-.Thc Admi-niftration (or Actual Government^ of the Con-fenting Kingdom , is by Legiflation , Judgement and Execution, And the Legiflation is , i. For the conflitution of the particular members that: ftall from time to time be added: 2, And the Governing of them all.

Now if God have made a Law that men fhall I e received members of Chrift.and his ChurcL' if they confent ( or Repent and Believe j and formerly to the Jfraelites , if they be Confenters ( or their feed, who confent by them ) then it is an ad oi difiribtitive jufiice of God as Judge ^ to givctliefe benefits to Confenters: And ro contra-diflinguiili an aU of bounty unlefs he fay [^ meer bounty 2 is intolerable. For God governeth us Paternally^ as a Kegent-bcnefatior : He never gave reward to a Creature, Man or Angel, which was not a Gift as to ihe value of the things and a Reward

ward only as to the or do confer endi c^ ratio reZ cipendi: It is madnefs to think that we can raej ric from God commutatively. And it's little better to thinks that bounty and diftributive jnfiice may not confift -^ yea that there can be any right i^tioad ordinem diftrihuendi from that juftice, which is not qnoad rem donatam from boHnty, It is fad therefore that the world mufl fee, that looking all how to make good an efpoufed caufe, fhould tempt fo Ancient and Learned a Divine to fubvert the Gofpel and all Ghriftianity : For what doch he lefs ? If he talk only of members by obligationy every living man is a member : This he meanech not. If he talk only of Consenting ^voluntary Members , to fay that God command-^ eth none to be fuch^ is to fay that he command" eth none to be Chriftians^ to Repent, Believe or Confent : To fay that he hath made no fromife or Donative Act in the Law of Grace, that if yon confent (repent and believe ) yon fmll have union vpith C^rifl and his Church ( or be members ) is to deny the very fumm of ail the Gofpel, and Baptifm it felf. To fay that God doth not as Judge execute his ovf^n Law and fromife , gi-ving*t\i\s anion to Confenters^ and denying it ta Refufers^ is to fay that he will not as a judge ab-folve Believers or condemn Vnbelievers. O Reader , hate fadion and partial difpuces that can make men overthrow all Chriflianity, not knowing what they do.

2. And his denying that vifible Chitrch'Tnem-bcrfiif is a thing offered , and rightly ro be accepted^ is the fame, even to deny that Chrift in-

V It eth

(A3) ijiteth any Infidel to become a Chriftian, or ever called or commanded Heathens to believe: or fehc his Minifters to compel them to come in, that his houfe may be filled.

But his flander that I fay all that man hath from God is of debt, is forged groundlefly. I fay God giveth fome benefits antecedently and abfo-lately^ and fome confequently on condition , by a Law : And none of them all are of debt as a workman deferveth his vpa^es with commutative jufiice.

It is his grofs error that vifible Church-mem-berfhip of Infants among the Jews was not a thing offered on condition of Parents faith , and to be accented or refnfed •, bnt a fiate refnlting from Gods fdSl. He feigneth a Church to be formally ^litd Thyficum fure 1 He that would not con-fent CO the Covenant was by Jfa to be put to death: And was not Circumcifion a covenanting ad? And did they not thereby profefs to take God for their God ? or would God elfe have taken them for his people? And would not renouncing God have cut them off? And would xh^rfeed then have had any right for being theirs f Indeed it is difputable how iar fome Jnceflors^ or other Proprietors might be a medium of right to fuch Apoftates feed : but as theirs^ there is no difpute,^

SECT.

SECT. XX in.

R. B. T Am next to prove the confecjuence^ that

Jl {_this right wa6 conferred by fame grant y promise , or Covenant of God. 3 And this is as eajie as to -prove that the world ypas made by Gods power and efficiency or Will ^ or to prove that God is the owner of all things^ and no man can receive them but by his gift, i. If there he no other way pojfible for right to be conveyed from God to i^iSy bat only by his grant, promife, or Covenant, ( which we call donation , and is a moral civil aBion J ) then it is by this means that it is con^ veyed, Bnt there is no other pojfible way of fuch conveyance : Ergo, we have no right till God give iU right. His will fignifed createth our right. No man can have right to that which is wholly and abfolmely anothers^ but by his confent or wilL This will is no way known, but by feme figns of it. Thefe figns of fuch a will for conveyance of right to a benefit^ are a civil moral aEiion, called a donation or gift fimply. If the fign be in writing, we commonly call it a deed of gift. If it be by word of mouth, conferring a prefent right , %ve call It a verbal grant or gift. If it confer only a fiitnre right, we call it a promife, and fometimes a Covenant-^ andfometimes the word Covenant figmfieth both , that a^ which gives a prefent right^ and promifeth a continuance of it^ Right being a rr;-oral or civil thing , can be no way conveytd bat by a mcral or civil allion. A

(45 )

gift that was never given^ ii a contradiU:iofj, So that this fart of our controverfie is oi eafic as whether two and two he four,

*^Mr. 7^. Vifible Church-memberfhip is not a " Right , but a flate of Being ; as to be flrong, " healthy, rich , c^c. which are not given by a ^' civil moral adion, but by Providence of God **ading Phyficaliy as the Soveraign dirpofcr of

" all. I deny therefore that there is fuch

"a promife

Re^ly, Reader, it is not long of me that this Learned Ancient Divine knoweth not what a Church-member is, or elfe what is the difference between Erfiicks, or Politicks, and Phyficks, But it is our (hame that a Preacher in England fhould be found fo ignorant. God as the Fountain of naturey and Omnipotent Lord of all, is indeed the firft Caufe of Being and Aiotion as fuch : As a free BcnefaEior he is the firft Caufe of all our Good as f/ich-^ And as a Sapiential Redor, and Ecnefathr conjundly (that is, by Paternal go-vernment) he is the firft caufe of Right,

Being and Motion are the eifeds of Phyfical efficiency : Jus vel Dchitiim is the very formal ejfeEl or obje^ ot ' toral Efficiency by a Redor, and the formal objed of Ethicks. To be a Qjnrch^ member , is to have a flated Relation , confining in Right to the Benefits and cbligatton to the duty , as was faid before. He denieth this to be any Right, and to have any fuch Civil-moral caufe as Right hath, but to be cjiiid Thyftcnm as Healthy firength^ Riches^ and an anfwerable Phyfical caufe. Let the (hame of this ignorance reform

(46)

form the common error of Schools that teach nbt their children betimes the principles of Ethicks I Politicks, or Governing Order t It is a fhamc that at 16. years old any fhould be fo ignorant as thefe words import. I muft fpeak it, or I comply with the powers of darknefs, that fo fhame-fully oppofe the truth.

5ECT. XXIV.XXV.

R, B, 2. /"^ O D hath exfrejly called that aU d Vjr Covenant or fromife by vphich he conveyeth this right : which we fimll more fully mamfefl anon when we come to tt.

The fecond Fr of option to he f roved , is , that [I there was a Law or Precept of God obliging the Parents to enter their children into Covenant and Church'memberjhipy by accepting of his offer, and re-engaging them to God. 3 And this is as obvi-QHS and eajie as the former. But firfl I pall in a word here alfo explain the terms. The word r Law ~\ is fometimes taken more largely^ and un-ptly, /w comprehending the very immanent aB'soir the nature of Gody confidered without any fign to reprefent it to the creature. So many call Gods na--ture or purpofes the Eternal Law: which indeed is no law J nor can be fitly fo called. 2. It is taken properly for [_ an authoritative determination de debito conftituendo vel confirraando. ] And [o it comprehendeth all that may fitly he called (L law. Some define it, [_ JufTum majeftatis obligans aut ad obedientiam aut ad poenam.J But this leaves

cm

r47)

ottt the fremiant fart^ and fome others: So that of Grotius dothy Eft regula adionum moralium ob-ligans ad id quod redum eft. / acejuiefce in the f^fii ^^ rather in this^ which is more full and ex-aih '^\_A law is a fign of the Re^ors will confii-tHting or confirmtng right or dnenef. J That it be a flgn of the Rdiors will de debito conftituen-do vel confirmando, is the general nature of all laws. Some quarrel at the word {_figrt \ becaufe it is logical and not political: As tf Politicians jlwnld not fpeak^ logically as well as other men ! There is a twofold due : 1. What is due from us to God ( or any Re^or ; ) and this is fgntfed in the precept and prohibition^ ( or in the precept de agendo & non agendo.) 2. What jloall be due to m'^ and this is fignifedby promifes^ or the pre^ miant part of the laWy and by laws for difiribu-tion and determination of proprieties, ayill benefits are given us by Cod in a double relation^ both as ReEior and Benefa^or: or as Benefador Re-gens •, or as Redor benefaciens: though among men that fland not tn fuch a fubordmation to one another as we do to God^ they may be received. from a meer benefaSior without any regent inte* reft therein. The firfi laws do ever confiitute the debitum or right: afterward there may be renew-ed laws and precepts to urge r/ientoobey the former 5 or to do the fame thing: and the end of thcfe is either fullier to acquaint the fubjeEi with the former, or to revive the memory of them , or to excite to the obedience of them: Andthefe do not properly conflitute dnty^ becaufe it was conflitu-ted before -, but the nature and power of the a^

('48) is the fame with that which doth conflitute it^ and therefore doth corjfirm the conftitmioHj and again oblige m to what we were obliged to before, for obligations to one and the fame dnty may be mnU tithed, 3. Some take the word [^ law 3 i^ fi r^-ftrained a fence as to exclude verbal or particu^ Ur precepts , efpecially direUed bnt to one •, or a few men ^ and will only call that a law which is written^ or at leaf: a well known cnflom obliging a whole fociety in a flated way. Thefe be the^ mofi eminent fort of laws: but to fay that the reft are no laws^ is vain and groandlef ^ againf the true general definition of a LaWy and juflly rejeti-ed by the wtfeft Politicians, That which we are now to enquire after ^ is a precept^ ox the commanding part of a laWy which is ^ afign of Gods will obliging us to duty^ ] of which Jig?ts there are materially feveral forts^ as I. byavoice^ that's evidently of God: 2, by writing : 7,, by vifible works or effects: 4. by fecret impreffes^ as by inf^irati-oHj which is a law only to him that hath them*

^'Mr.T*. I alT^^rtj i. There is no^fuch offer, *' promife or Covenant: 2. That though there are '' precepts for Parents to pray for their Children, "to breed thenri up yet they are not bound

'^ to. believe thi^, that upon their own faith God "will take their Infant Children to be his, and *' will be a God to theoi, nor to accept of this " pretended offer. 3. That though Parents may

"enter into Covcnanr for their Children

" as Dent, 29. 12. they do not by this make them *' partakers of the Covenant or promife that God *' will be their God,

Keply:

Re^ly. What a deal of the Gofpel and the Churches mercy s do thefe men deny ? i, The very nature of our own Holy Covenant is, that in ic we give up to God our [elves and all that is oars according to the capacity of that all. And as our Riches are devoted hereby as capable utenfils ^ fo our Infants as capable ot Infant Relation , Obligation and Right, What is it that a fan^ified man muft not devote to God [hat is His f If you except Liberty, Health, Life, you are hypocrites: And can ^ you except C/7/7^rf77f It's true; this is but fo/«r ^s they are our own, and we fay no more i when they have a will to choofe for themfelves, they muft do it. 2.1 have fully proved Scripture commands for Parents to offer their Children to God, and that fignitieth his will to accept what he com-mandeth them to ofter. And his promifes to (hew mercy to them as theirs are plain and many, which I muft not tire the Reader with repeating.

Mr. T. addeth, That if there were fuch afro-mife and duty of accepting the pretended offer and y^'f^g^gi^g -) y^f ^^is mither did then nor doth now make Infants vifible Church-members,

Reply, /deader, are not the Anabaprifts ducftile mea where they like, as well as intradable where they diflike, that they will follow fuch a Leader as this > Promife and Duty o^ accepti?:g and re-en-gaging aggravateth the fin of Rebels that rejed: it ^ but if thefe performed, even vifihle mutual co-vcNantingy make not (^hurch-members vifiblej what doth ? You fee what he hath brought the ancienr 1 j and later Church-memberfhip , Circumcifion and i Baptifm to? I think to nothing: As tormalPon-

E* ^ tificiao:

t'fician Church-tyrants when they have mortified fome ordinance, and turned it into an Image , make an engine of it to trouble the Church, and filence the Preachers and ferious pradifers of the Gofpelwith. Thcfe men make nothing of Church-memberfliip, and thenreftlefly trouble the Church-about it.

S E C T. X X V L

^»^' T "TAvwg thtu ofened the terms [_ LaW-.IX and Precept '] J f rove the Propo/iti^. on thtis, I. If it was the dnty of the Ifraelites to accept Cods offered mercy for their Children , to engage and devote them to him in Covenant , then there vpas a Law or Precept which made this their duty, and obliged them to it. But it wa4 a dnty: Ergo, there was fuch a Law or Precepts . For the antecedent^ i. If it were not a ditty y then tt T^as either a fln^or a neutral indifferent aliion : But it was not a fin^ (fir, i. It was againft no Law^ 2, It is not reprehended ^ ) nor was it indifferenty for it was of a moral nature^ and ergo, either good or evil J yea fin or duty: Vor property perjnictere is no ail of LaWy (though many fay it is^) but a fujpenfion of an a^: and fo licitum is not mo-raliter bonum, but only non malum ; and ergo is not properly within the verge of morality, 2. If there be a penalty (and a mo ft terrible penalty) annexed for the non-performancey then it was a duty : But fuch a penalty was annexed ( as fJjall nnon be particularly fiiewed) even to be cut off from

hii

(51)

his peopley t9 he put to death^ S:c* If it Mige ad

boenain, tt did firft oblige ad obedientiam : For no

Law obligeth ad poenam , bnt for dtfobedience^

which prefuppofeth an obligatio'a to obedienceo

3. // It "Were not the ifraelites dmy to enter their

Children i>ito Gods Covenant and Qnurch^ then it

would have been none of their fin to have omitted

or refhfedfo to do : But it would have been their

gre^t and hamom fin to have omitted or refufed

It •, Ergo. Now to the confequence of the majoro

There u no duty but what is made by fome Law or

Precept as its proper efficient canfe or foundation :

I E^gOj '/ *^ ^^ ^ ^'^^y •> ^^^^^^ ^'*^^ certainly fome

I Law or Precept that made itfnch. (i^imong men we

\fay^ that a benefit obligeth to gratitude , though

there were no Law i But the meaning is^ if there

were no humane law^ and that w becaufe the Law

of God in nature requireth man to be jufi and

thankful. If there were no law of God natural

or- pofitive that did confiitute it or oblige m to it^

;here could be no duty, n There is no duty but

\^hat is made fuch by Gods fignified will ^ ^rgo,

; \no duty but what is made fuch by a Law or Pre-

\ :ept. For a Precept is the fign of Gods will oh"

' 'tging to duty. 2. Where there u no Law there ts

[10 tranfgrefjion^ Rom. 4. 15. ergo, where there

^.\s no law there is no duty •, for thefe are contra"

^\-ies: tt IS a duty not to tranfgrefi the Law, and d

\ Tanfgrejfion not to perform the duty which it re-

r <utreth of hs. There is no apparent ground ofex-

•j eption^ but in cafe of Covenant Si> Whether a man

■ nay not oblige himfelf to a duty meerly by his con-

' -ntf I ftnfwer^ i.Hem^y oblige hmfelf to ark

E 3 ^^i

C52)

^iy which he n:nfl ferform^ or elfe frove unfaith* Jul and dtjhonej} : but hi^s own obligation mak^s it not flri^ly a duty: ergo, when God makes a Covenant with man^ he u as tt were obliged in point of fidelityy but not of dnty. 2. He that obltgeth ' himfelf to an ati by fromife^ dotkoccafion an ob-ligation to dtity from God^ becapife God hath oblt^ ged men to keep their promfes. 3. So far as a rr.an may befaid to be his own Ruler, fo far may he be [aid to oblige himfelf to duty , ( that is duty to himfelf^ though the alb be for the benefit of ano* ther ^ ) hut then he may as fitly be faid to make a Law to himfelf^ or command himfelf: fo that fttll the duty (fuch as it is ) hath an anfwerable command. So that I m^ay well conclude^ that there is a laWy hecaufe there is a duty^ For nothing but a law coutd caufe that duty^ nor make that omiffion of it a fin. Where there is no law^'fin is not im-* futedj Rom. 5. 13. But the omiffion of entring Infants into Covenant with Go^ before Chrifts incarnation would have been a fin imputed •, ergo, there was a law commanding it. 2, If it was a duty to dedicate Infants to God^ or enter them in-» to Covenant with him^ then either by Gods will, or without it: certainly not without it. If by Gods willy then either by his will revealed, or unrcveal-ed. His unrevealed will cannot oblige -^ for there wants promulgation^ which ts necejfary to obligation : And no man can be bound to know Gods un-revealed willy unlefi remotely , 04 it may be long cf himfelf that it is not to him revealed* If it be Gods revealed will that mufl thm obligey then there %iis fome fign by which it was revealed* jind

C53)

if there were a fign revealing Cods will obliging US to duty^ then there \va4 a law , for thi-s is the 'Very nature of the preceptive part of a law , ( which is the principal part^ ) Jo that you may a^ well fay^ that yon are a reajonable creature^ but not a man^ as jay that men were obliged to duty by Gods revealed wtlly but yet not by a Law or Precept. 3. We jlJ a II anon produce the Law or Tre-cepty and put it out of doubt that there was fuch a thing. In the mean time I mufi confef^ I do not remember that ever J was put to dijpute a point that carrieth more of its own evidence to jhame the gain-faycr* And if you can gather Difciples even among the godly , by perfwading them that there were duties without Precepts or LdWSy and benefits without donations , covenants or promife confirming them* , then defpair of nothing for the time to come: Tou may perfwade them that there PS a Son without a Father^ or any relation without its foundation^ or effctl without its caufe^ and never doubt but the fame men will believe you , while you have the fame interefi in them , and ' ufe the fame artifice w putting eff your conceits,

Mr. 7*. would firft perfwade the Reader that I mean EOthing but CircunicifioPj

Reply. Long ago I told you that, i. The Females were not circumcifed, 2. Nor the Males for forty years in the wildernefs : And yet were all Church-menfibers by being Gods Covenanted people. And fo was Ifraelhdoxt Circumcifion.

His terms of \_ the htffing of a Goofe^ and the ' fnarling of a Cnr ] and other fuch , I account

E 3 lighter

SECT. XXVIL

R. B. np HE fifth Qjteftion requireth me to lay J., down this ajfcrtion , that [^ there is no Law or Precept of God which doth not oUige to duty ^ arid no aciual promife or donation , which doth not confer the benefit* ] This I aver on oc-cafion of your lafl Letter^ where in contradtciion to the former^ yon confef \_ the promifes to the natural ^o?ttm^'o{ Abraham y Gen. ij, and the Covenants made with Jfrael at Mount Sinai^ and Dem, 29. and a precept of Circumcifion, and precepts of God by <*Jf'fofes, of calling the people, and requiring ihcm to enter into Covenant, Exod. 19. Dent. 29. ] Tet yon [ do not conceive that the Infants of Ifrael were made vifible Church-mem-bers by the promifesin the Covenants, or the precepts tbrenamed. 3 ^ffij then either you imagine that among all thofe precepts and promifes there was yet no promife or Covenant that gave them the benefit of ^hurch-membcrjhip^ or precept concerning their entrance into that ftate •, or elfe you imagine that fuch promifes were made^ but did 72ot actually confer the benefit ^ and fuch precepts were made , but did not atlually oblige^ Tour •words are fo ambiguom in this^ that they fignife Toothing of your mind to any that knows it not fame, father way^ Eor when you. fay £ there is no fuch papicular promife concerning Infants vifible ' ' ' ■ ' Church^

05) Chorch-memberfliip, or precept, err. befide? Circumcifion, as in my Book of Baptifm I afTerr, J nho knows whether that exception of [_ Circura-.ciiion ^ be a conccffio?2 of fnch a precept or pro-mife in the cafe of (^\rcnmcifion?or if not^what fenfs it hath f and what yon imagine that precept or proTKtfe to be which I ajfert /* and before the fenfs of your one fyliable [///c/jI is aifcernedbytryi7Jg jt by a whole 'vobtry.e^ 1 d?nbtyou will make what you lift of it. Howezier if ycttjlwitld mtan^ that fiich precepts there are a^s have for their fubjetl |_ the avouching Cod to be their Gody the entring into Covenant Circumcifion ^ of Infants^ but not their Church-n^emberjlnp -^ then, I. I have proved the contrary to the negative before-^ 2. z^^nd more f)all do anon •, 3. u4nd it's a palpable con-tradiiiion to the precedent affrmative. But tf you mian that Church-memberjhip of Infants as well as others is the fubje^ or part of the fubjech of thofe premifes or precepts , and yet that Jn^ ftnts were not wade or confirmed thereby ; it is the contrary that J am afflrting , and I have no further need to prove^ than by jljewing the con-tradi5iion of your opinion to it felf, For an aBu-al Covenant or promife that doth not give right to the benefit promifed ( according to its tenor and terms , ) is like a caufe that hath no ejfeth , a Father that did never generate ^ and it is all one as to fay y a gift or Covenant which is no gift or Covenant, feeing the name is denied ^ when ^ the thing named and defined is granted. So a Precept or Law to enter Infants folemnly into C bHrch-mcmber^np , Vfhich yet obligeth nonefo to

E 4 enter

(56)

ffiter them^ is ^ gro^ a, ccntradiUion a^ to fay^ the Smhath not heat or Ifojjt^ and yet is truly ok Snn,

Mr. r. here confeiTeth, 2. That thiC Jews were Gods vif]ble_ Churcii not barely by Gods promife to them to be their God, but by th?ir fromife to Cai: Gods rail oj them made thein his Church, and theirpromifi to God wiih other ad:s made them viiibiy \o

Reply. Reader, is not all here qnTaid again by this conceffion? llnlefs he will fay that this C^//, A7id Covenant^ and Fron?ife made them all a vifible Churchy and yet none of thefe^ but their birth and flace made them rfiembers f As if any thing made the Whole Church wiiich rnade none of the Farts as fifch.

SECT. XXVIII.

R. B. T Co?}7c next to the fixth ^^ejlion,. Whether X indeed there be any tranfeunt /^^, which without the caufation of any fromife or frecept ^ did make the Ifraelites Infants Church-members,^ This yoii affirm (if^ycii vrould be nnderftood-^) Vphether this your ground of Infants Church-mew-herjloip or mine be righter^ I hope will be no hard matter for another man ( of common capacity) to difcerno By a \^ tranfeunt faEl ] thm fet as con-tradiflinU to a law, preceft or promife y either yon mean the aEi of legiflation and promife makings or fome other meerly phyfical a^o If the former, it is too ridiculom to be ufed in a feriom buftnef: Vor yoH jhould not put things in competition eX" eluding the one^ where they both mufi neeeffarily

concur ,

foncur, the Qne fla?iding in a [Hhordmation to the

other, VV^u there ever a Law or Cove nam made

in the world any other way than by a tranftunt

fad: f Sure all legislation ts by fome figmficatioff

of the Soveyaigns will. And the making of that

fign is a tra?iftnnt faB, If it be by voice^ ts

nat that tranfcunt ? If by writings ts not the ath

tranfemit f // by creation it fdf^ the aU is tran^

fennt though the ejfctl be permanent. And cer^

tamly if iegiflatten or fromtfing be your tranfc^

unt facl^ yuii do very abfitrdly put it tnoppnfition

to a law (or promtje ) it being the making offuch

a law. And the legiflation doth no way obhge

the fubjellj hat by the law fo made : nor doth the

rnakmg of a promife^ grant or covenant , confer

right to the benefit which is the fiibjed of it , any

otherwife than 06 it is the making ^f that grant

which jhall fo confer it. As the making of a kiiife

doth not cut, but the k^iife 7nade: and fo cf other

inftrH?nents, Sd that tf the law oblige not , or

the gra7it conjer not , certatydy the legiflation or

pror/iife-7r,akj.ng cannot do tt, I cannot therefore

imagine that this isycur fenfe^ without charging

yoH with too great abfurdity. As if you fliould

fay^ It is not the will of the tcftator^ i, e. his te-

ftament^ that entitleth the legatary to the legacy ,

hut it is the tr an fount faB of the teflatcr tn ma^

king that will- or it ts not the Soveratgns commif-

fwn that aiithoriz^eth a Jtidge^ fohldtery &c, hut it

is the tranfeiint fall of writing or making that

commiffwn. It is not the flgn that fignifieth , but

the tranfeunt fact of making that flgn. Were not

this a contempttbic arguing f To charge yon with

this,

(58)

$hiSy were to ir.ahe yen tantum non Hnreafotiahh.

And yet I k^cw not what to fay to yon^ that is^

hovp to underfiand yoH, For if you mean a, meer

fhyjical tranfennt faEb^ which is no fuch legijlati-*

en or frcmife'Wakjng^ then it is far nr.ore ahfurd

than the former. For jf it be not afign of Gods

vpik obliging to dmy^ or conferring benefity then

can It not fo oblige to duty \ nor confer benefits.

It is no or her tranfenyit fizli but Icgiflation that

can oblige a fuhjcch to diuy^ nor any other tran-^

feunt fa^i but fromtfe , or other donation , that

can convey right to a benefit^ or oblige the fromi^

fer. A moral or civil ejfed: muji be "produced by

a moral or civil aEiion , and not by a meer fhy^

fical aBilon ^ which is unfit to produce fuch an ali^

en effe^y and can go no higher than its own kind.

What fenfe therefore I fiiould put on your wordsj

Without making them appear unreafonable , even

much below the rates of ordinary rational peoples

difcourjey I cannot tell. For to fay^ it is not a

law but legtfiationj ts all one oi to fay^ it is not

the fundamenrum , but the laying of that founda^

tion that caufetk the relation , or from which it

doth refuh. And to fay it is an alien phyfital

aci^ which hath no fnch thing as right for its

fubjeEi or terminuis , is to confound phyfickj and

morals , and to fpeak the groffefl abfurdities -, as to

fay that the tranfeunt fad of eatings drinking ,

goingy buildings &c. do adopt fuch an one to he

your heir, I mufi: needs thinks therefore^ till you

have hetttr cleared your felf that you have here

^uit your felf as ill , and forfaken and deliver--

id up your Caufe^ as palpably as ever I k^ew man^

doy

do^ VpithoHt an exprefi confefjlon that it is naught. When men muft he tait^ht by thts ohtufe fitbttlty to prove that I?ifa??ts (loHrch-wemherJljip needed no revocation^ forfcoth \_ becaufe their Chnrch-memberfljip xcm not canfed by a law, precept^ pro-wife or covenant^ but by a tranfettnt fa^h J tha^ rvhich asyoH leave it^ the world hath fcarce heard s wore incoherent dreair, "But I pray yen remtm-her in your reply that yon being the aff.rmer of thisy mufl prove it. Which I fljall expcEl ^ rvhen yoH can prove.th.it yon can generate a man by (hit^ tng or blowing your ncfe, or by plowing and Jow-ing can produce Kings and Err-perors,

Mr. T. Here Mr. T. is at the old rranfeunt faft again: Let the Reader make his beftof it: I account it not worth the reciting ; nor his title of Canine Sceptical Rhetorick^rcgardibk,

SECT. XXIX, to XXXIX-

R, B. T iV conftderation of the feventh Quefiiony X / fljall confider the nature and cjfe^ of the tranfeunt fa^ which you here deferibe. And firft of the reafon of that narKe, Ton [ay that yon call tt [^ tranfennt ] [^ becanfe done in time and fo not eternal^ and pafi and fo not in congrnous fenfe repe ale able at a law, ordinance^ flatnte^ de^ cree which determines fnch a thing fhail be for the future. ] An<i do yon thinks this the common fenfe of the word ? or a ft reafon of your appli-* Ration of it to the thing in hand ^

J think^

(60)

7 thlnh^yopir i?Jtelkchion and volition are imma" fient at}s, and yet not eternal.

We -nfe to contradiftingnip] tranfcunt a5is from imminent, and that because they do tranfirein fub-jeAum extrancum.

But it feems you take them here as difiinii front' -permanent.

But life your fenfe as long as we underfiandit.

If it be only \_'^a(}^ atiions vphtch yoit call \_ tranfeunt ] it feems your long fad which was fo many hundred years in dohig-y was no tranfe-^ unt faU till the end of all thofe years ; and fo did, not ( by your own doSirine ) make any Church-members till the end of thofe years,

Buty Siry the jQjicflion is not-, whether it were a tranfeunt faEi that laid the foundation by legiflati-on or promife-makjng • but whether the effect were tranfeuntyor the aEl as it is in patiente : Whether the law were tranfeunt which wa^ made by a tranfeunt faEi ? and whether the moral action of that law were ■permanent or tranfennt^it being r^ofi certainly fuch a moral all that mufl produce a title , or confli-tnte a duty, Gods writing the ten (fommande^ ments in ftone was a faoi foon pafi^ but the law \ was not foon paft, nor the moral aU of that laWy viz. obligation. There are verbal laws, that have no real permanent fgn : and yet the law may be permanent, and the obligation permanent^ becaufs the fign may have a permanency in efle cognito, and fo the fignifying vertue may remain by the help of memory^ though the word did vanijh in the ^eakjng.

(61)

when yoH come to point out this tra?j[eHnt faB individiuilly^ yon Jay [ it is Gods takjn^ the -whole people of the jews for his peopley ] yyhich yon term \_fii^ I 06 conceiving it moft comprchenfive of the many particular ails m many generations whereby he did accomplijhit/} i, Idtd not wellnnderfiand before that [^ a faEi ] did fo vafily differ from an [ A^y ] as to contain the aEls ( rather than the fa^s ) of many generations*

This is a long fa^i according to your meafure^ even from Abrahams call out of Ur ; but how long it feems you are not well agreed with your ft If. I-or in the firfi part of your Letter you enumerate to the other alls that compofe this fati \_ the bringing them into the bond of the (fovenant at ^iount Sinai, giving ther/i laws , jetling their Prteflhoody Tabernacle^ Army^ Government^ Inheritance : ] But before you end , you change your mind ^ and (ay [" the Church^men:berflnp of the Ifraelitcs beg-an at 1 conceive with Abrahams c^//, and was compleated when they were brought out of itgypt to Cody Exod. 19. 4.1] But fure that was long before the fetling their inheritance. Tour fatl according to your lafl account w^u> about ^ij^ years in doing ; but according to your firfi opinio on^ it wa.s about 470. years long.

If it were one individual faB of about 470. years bng that made Infants Church-members , then they could not be Church-men':bers till that fatl was pafij For the cffech is not before the caufe^ or caufality of the efficient -, the relation cannot he before the fundamentum ^^ laid: and it feems this long faU w^ the laying of the fundamentum ;

But

But the confequent is ccrtai7ily falfe ^ for Infants were Church-member;s before the end or compleating of your long faoi : For they were Church-members (youlgrant ) when Ifhmael and l(^^c were cir-cumcifed. Ergo , it was not this long fa§ that made them Chnrch-members,

If yvH mean that it was not the whole^ hm fome fart of this long faU: that aCiually m,ade Infants Church-members , then yon would ha'Ve afflgned that fart^ when that was the thing defiredy and which you pretended exatlly to perform ; or at^ leafi you would nn have told us it comprehended all thefe aEis,

And if each particular aB: did make Infants Church- memberSy or lay a fujfcient ground of ity then itfeems that it was done before the inftitution cfCtrcumcifion, For Cods calling Abraham out of Ur was before it. So that the Children born its his houfe muft be Church-r/iembers upon that ; and a fufficient ground laid for his own to have been fuchy if he had then had a natural ijfue : And it feems then that Ifhmael was born a Church-mcm-her many years before Circumcijion*

If this be your medning^ I pray you be fo jufi and impartial as to accept of the proof which Ijhall give you of Infants Church-memberjhip before Abrahams days , if I make it appear to be as ftrong as this call of Abraham from Ur.

If you Jhould mean that fome one of thefe com-'* prehended atis Jhould of it felf make any Infants Church-member Sy then it muft beany one *^ for you no more ajfign it to one of them than to another^ ( only fay f chiefly th$ bringing them from JE"

gyptQ

gypt: 1 But fnrely fome of thefe aEls particularly cannot do it^ as the leading to Padan Aram, the removal to Canaan, to itgypc, placing^ prefervtng there J fet ling their Arn>) ^ d^c. Did any one of thcfe n^ake Infants to become Chmch-mtn.bers ?

Nay , fuppofe yon wean that all theje ad:s mnfi concur to make them memhers^(andfo that they were no members till many hundred years after the in-flitntion cfCtrcumctfon^ ) yet could not your Dy-Urine hold good: For fome of thefe aEls are of an alien nature , and no more apt to caufe infant Church-memberjJjip^ than a Bull to generate a Bird. What aptitude hath the fetUng of an Army to be any part of the caufaticn of Infants Church-mem-berfinp? None^ I think^-^ at leafl tf it be fuch an tArmy as ours : for furely the fetling of ourscau^ fed no fuch things as. yon vrellkliow. What aptitude hath the leading to Padan Aram, or removal to jEgypt, to make Infants Church-mem.bers ? Nay ^ hovp firange is it , that the removing I of Church-mem>bcrs , and fuch as had been Infant Church^members-y as lllimael, Keturahs children^ Efau J muf; caufe Infant Church-member-Jhip ? Sure it was no caufe of their own, Keturahs children were Church-members in infancy : 1 encjuire of you by what act they were made fuch ? Tou fay [^ by GodsfaEi of taki^ig the whole people of the Jews for his people^ whereof the aEl of rem>oving Keturahs children was a part, Kery good. It feems then that removing from the Congregation of Ifrael a people of the Jews, is a taking of the removed to be of that people: 6r elfe it is not only the takjvg that people ^ hit alfo the removal • . from

C64) from that people that wakcth Church'Tnemhers ^ tven the rtmoi>€il as rvill a4 the tal:j'n^ boih vohich ¥ire alike abfurdk

And I pray ycH tell me yet a little better^ how an ath can make a man a Qj^.rch-member that was one long before that was done /' Ton cannot here fay ^ that it was before in efle morali, and had a moral canfation. How then conld your chiefefl ati^ the bringing om of ^gypt > make thofe Infants Church-members that were born in >Egypc, and •were Church-members before f Or how could it be any part of the caufe f Did the bringing out of iGgypt concur to make Mofes a Church-member vphen he was in the basket on the waters ? And when you anfwer this , you may do well to go a little further^ and tell me^ how fiich an a^ con* curreth to makf him an Infarct Church-member that was dead an hundred or two hundred year's before that a5i was d.ne. For exa7nple^ how did the fetling of the Ifraelites Army^ or Inheritance^ or the Covenant on Mount Sinai, make Khmael, or Efau, or Ifaac, or J^cob Church-members i*

J deftre you alfo to tell me by the next , whet he the tiervcs and ligaments that tie all thefe idEls £?/43 d. years at leafl together^ fo as to make them one faB f And whether I may not as ground-edly mak^ a fall fufficient for this pitrpoje of the atls of an hundred or two hundred years only ? And whether you may not as well make all the ^^j/r«?w Abrahan:is call till Chrift to be onef^H^ and ajfign it to this office ?

Tou fay that you call this fad: [ tranfeunt 3 hecaufe it's \_pafl^~\ {a?id fo till it's [_pafi~\ n

feemi

[eems Ifaac and Jacob that were dead before'] ar^ no ChrHch-memhers ; ] I would then fain kncv> whether it he this fame travfcunt fad:, or fome other J that makes Infants Church-wembers fv6 hundred years after it is paft ? Jf it be thisfame^ then how comes u meet tranftunt tad to work^ ef-feEiually fo n^,any hundred years after it is paft ^ Hnlef it made a Law or Covenant which doth the deed ? If it be a new tranfeitnt fad that muft make Infants (^hurch-members after the comfleat-^ ing of this ( the fetling their inheritances •, ) then I fray yon let me know^ whether it be one fad cxr ercifed on the whole nation in grofy or mnfl it he a fad Hfon eiiery Infant member individnally f If, on the nationy remember to tell m what it was • and do not only tell us the canfe of the member-fiiif of former Infants, And feeing it mufl h^ fach as the memherjhip of every Infant tillChrifis time at lea(t mufl hecattfedby^ I pray yen remem^' her to make your worki fquare and full , and he fure to affign ns no other kindofhdiy thanwha^ yoh will prove to have been fo frequently repeat-^ ed in every age^ and fo fully extenfive to everyl Infant among the Jews^ as that it have nogapSybut? may make all members that werefo in each age/And remembery that it is no law^ precept , promife or covenant that you mnfi ajfignfor the caufe ^ for that is it you are engaged againfl: but a confiantfiAC--ceffion of tranfeunt fads extending to each indi^ Vkdital member.. O what work, have yon wade yourfelf? and what a fort of new political Do-^ Brine jhall we have from you, when thefe things an accomplijhed according to the frame you ha'^a

F begm^

__ (66)

tegunf Such as I believe the Sun fteverfaw,mf the vplfefi Lawyer in England ever read he^^ fare f IVhkh makes me the lef marvel that fi ma-» ny^fyour opinion arefo much again ft the Lawyers j for / dare fuy they will be hut few of them for you^ if thefe be your grounds^ or at leafi not for thefe your grounds*

Refly. To all this I find nothing (aid by Mr*T. tlut I think worthy the Readers trouble to reply to : Let him read it and fee. His charge c* {^foclijh excUrnationSy vanityy &:c. ^ I pafs by.

SECT, XXXIX,toXLIV.

R. B. T5 ^^ all this yet is but a light velitation : XJ The principal thing that I would en* quire into, is^ what your great comfrehenfive fa^ ts in the true nature of ity which you call [] Gods taking the whole people of the Jews to be hispeo* fU'J Doth the word {_taking~\ fignifie a meer fhy/ical taking orfu^ ; or a moraly fuch as among wen we cally a civil aBion f If it be a meer phy^ fical takings then^ i. It cannot produce a moral effe^y fuch as that in que ft ion is, 2. j4nd then it mufl have an anfwerable obje^j which muft be indii idual extftent perfons. 3 • Ji/id then you can-not 4;a 7 it one fdi^ but many thoufand :■ even as n any as there were perfons taken in to the Jews in above four hundred years, 4, And then what "Was the phyfical att which is called Gods taking ^ y^as it jttch a ttikjr^g as the Angel ufed to Lor, tlikt carried him out of ^dom •, or m the Apo-

cry*

cryfhal jiuthor mentions of Habakkuk , that vpo^ taken hy the hair of the head, and carried hy the Angel into another Conntry , to bring Daniel 4 PJefi of Pottage ? If God mttft by a phyfical appre^ hen/ion take h'Ai of them that he makss Chnrch^ members , vpe jhall be at a lof for our proof of their Churih'wemberjljip. But I cannot imagine that this PS yonr fenfe. Bnt what is it then ? Is it a phyfical a^ion thoHgh a moral caufation ojf fome phyfical effeli ? That it cannot be : for it it a political or moral effe^ that tve enquire af* ter* It necejfarily remains therefore that this bit a political moral taking that y0H here [peak of» And if fo^ then the tranfeitnt faB you Jpeak, of fffttfi needs be a civil or political aSiion, And Vfhat that can bey which is no Law y Fromife or Covenant in this cafe ^ I prny you befiow fome ftfcre diligence to inform usy and not put us off with the raw name of a iranfeunt fatl oppofed to thefe. (CertainlyJ if it be a civil or legal aBion^ the produU: or effe^ of it is jus or debitum , fome due or right: And that is either^ i. A duenefs of fomewhat from m^ ( which is either fomewhat to be donCy or fomewhat tc be given - ^ 2i Or 4 , iduenefs of fomething to t^y which is either of good , \or evil: If goody it is either by contrail or dona-^ , ^ion ( whether by a Tefiament pramiant LaWy or . jhe like: ) if evil , it is either by fome pcenal , \Law , or voluntary agreement ' Now which of ; \heje is it that your tranfeunt fa<ft produceth f To }t a member of the Churchy is to be a member of \ ^fociety taking God in Chrifl to be their Gody ^, te< tfiksn by him for his jpecial peoplei The a($

t Z which

I

C68)

Vi^\hich m^k^^s each member^ is of the fame ndturt with that' which makss the^ fociety. The relation then cfftmially containeth^ i, Aright to the great ^ benefits of Gods foveraignty over men ^ Chrifts^ hcadfiif^ and that favour ^froteEiion ^ frovifon and other hlcjfwgs , which are due from fnch a. ■powerful and gra&tom Sovera:ign to fnch SubjeciSy and from fnch a Head to his ^J^emhers: Asal^, fo a. right to my fiation in the Bodyy and to the-iinfeparable benefits thereof, 2. Jt containeth my debt of obedie?ice to God tn Chrifly* acknowledged-, and fromifed aU: 11 ally or virtually^ really orrepu-j tativdy. Now for the firft^ how can God he re^ latcd unto me a.s my Godj or Chrift a^s my Savi-viour, and I to him as one that have fuch right to him and his blefftngs , by any other way than his own free gift? This gift mufi be fome fg" nif cation of his will: For his fecret will is not a gifty but a purpofe of giving. This way of gi-'vmg therefore . is by a civiT or moral all ion ^ V(hich is a fignifying of the Donors will •, and can be by no way , but either pure donation^ con-traii,y tefiament , or law. In our cafe it muft needs partake of the nature of all thcfe, h ii not from one in any equality^ nor capable of an) (bilging compenff.tion or retribution jrom m- Being therefore from an abfolute dif-engaged Bene-fatiory it muft needs be by pure donation , or i\ cannot be ours. Tit as. he is- pleafsd as it wen to cblige htmfelf by promifcy or by his.word, am alfo to call m to a voluntary acceptancty and en gagement to certain fiaelity', gratitude and duty » nd fo is the ftipuUtory and we the promifers it

tk

the latter fart of the aBion: it is thereforejufily called a-coTJtraEi or Covenant ^ though indeed the word r Covenant J frequently fig'nifeth Gods own •promije alone. As it proceedeth from the death of the tefiator (in natural moral-repitative -he-ingj) jo it is called a teflament. And a6 it is an td of a rHlingBcnefad^or^ giving this bene ft to the governed^ to promote the ends of government , and obliging td ditty thereby , fo it par-taketh of the natnre of a law. The comrnonefb Scripture name for this ad:^ is Gods (Covenant or Promifey and fometimes his gift-^ which all figni--fie the fame thing here. It follows thereforej that either by Gads \_ taking Ifrael to be his peo^ pie "I you mean fhme civil poiitical aUion , as a Covenant^ Promife , or the like collation of the benefit, ( and then you ajjert the thing which yon deny ,) or elfe you know not what you mean , Kor Ctin makr another know it , wtthmt the dif-covery of the grojfefi abfiirdity* And 06 for the other thing which is contained in Church-mem" berfijipy the profcjfed duty of man to God, it is mo ft certain^ i. That Gods Law ,obligeth in to that duty: z. And obligeth all according to their capacities to confent to the obligatiofi , and fo to ' re-engage themfelves : 3. That^ this aViual ton-j fent profejfed doth therefore double the cbligatian'i I And thi^ by a mutual contrary Covenantor eon-, fent (whereof our part is fir ft recjiiired by a laWy ) is the relation of Church-me-mberfinp ^con-traced. Now to lay by and deTiy all this ^ and give us the general nak^d name of [^ taking for Gods peoplefj^.ii meeriy dekfory, feeing/that

(70)

C f'^ki^^ 1 w^ans this vphich yoH exclude , or ff means nothing that is true and reafonahle, jind therefore tell m better what tt means,

cyis for the Texts yon cite , Diut, 4. 34. <^ f.evit. 20. 24, 26. I King. 8. 53. irai,43. 1. In

J)eur. 4. IS mentioned not the moral ap: of God y which he made them his people , or took^ them for his own , and founded the relation: but the natural aBions whereby he refcued them from the Egyptian bondage and took^ them to himfelf or for his ufcj fervice, and honour out of that land^ But I think^fure they were his feopUy and all their Infants were Church-members before that taking i^y vertuc of a former Covenant-taking,

j^s to Levir. 20. God did perform a twofoU work, of fcparation for Ifrad. i» By his Covenant and their entrtng Covenant with him. Z.By local feparation of their bodies from others. It VSftu the firfi that made them his people , and phurch-members , and not the lafl : the lafi was only a favourable dealing with them a^ hts be-r laved* The fame I fay to the other two Texts^m Sure you cannot think, that corporal feparation wakes a Church-member, What if an i^gypti-^1 that had no part in the Covenant had pafi out with the Ifraelies, and got with them through the f.ed Sea , do yau thinks he had been therefore a Church-member ? Suppofe God had made no pro-mife or covenant with Abraham or his feedy but fnly tjaksJ^ them out of ChaMea into Canaan, and thence into iEgypt, and thence inp the Wil^ dernef , ^n^ thence it)to Canaan again: Do yon ifhink^ this much had mad€ t^em Chnrch-mem-^ • ^ hers^

Vers ? Then if the Turkj conquer Greece ^ cr the Tartar tans conquer China , they are he come QjHrch^memhers , becanfe this feems as great 4 temporal frofperity at leaft. And I think it ts fafl donbt^ that Lot vea4 a Church-member in thg midfi ef Sodom, and the Ifraelites in ^gypt be* fore they vpere brought out , as truly as after.

As to Gen. 12. i. Ads 7. 2. Nehem. 9. 7. V^hich you alfo cite , as there is not one of them that gives the leaft intimation that Infant* P^Hrch'Wemberjhip then began^ fo } jhaU further enqnire anon; whether they contain any Covenant er promife.

So Exod. 19. 4, 5. hath no word that gives the leaft intimation that God by that a5l of taking them out of ^gypt, did make Ifrael a Chnrch ^ er the Infants or any others^ members of it: But only that by fulfilling a former promtfe in the deliver ranee of a people formerly his own^ he layethfur^ ther obligations to duty on them by redbubling his Mercies. The fame I fay of Levit. 11. 45. Neh. I, 10. / Will not believe yet^ but that you believe your felfy that the Ifratlites and their Infants were as truly Church-members before ^ as after their deliverance out of ^gypt. And me-thinkj the Texts you cite might put it out of doubt» mat if God fay, Hof. ii. i, ^When Ifrael was a child I loved him , and called my Son out of -^gypt, ] Is it eafie hence to prove thsit eaUing him out of -/Egypt did make him his Son that woe none before: or to prove that Ifrael was Ced$ $on before he called him out of iEgypt ? V ytm fioitUi maints^n the former , / might cxfcU thai

<72) you jhot0 fay the like of Chrifl himfelf^ to whom the Evangelift applieth this text ♦, and fo you may\\,\ f'ove 4^ fairly ^ that Chrifl xvas none of Gods Son till he vpas called out of ^gypr, but woi made his Son by that call. Certainly the Text termeth him Gods Son that was called^ as being fo before that calL By this time I am well content that any Xvaktng man do compare your doBrine an'i mine , and try whether it be atranfeimt faU^ or a Law and Covenant , that made Infants and all others ()ourch mer^ibers: and if they do not admire that, tver a learned man jhould harbourJhch a conceit^ ss yours, and th.it 'ever a godly man fliouldbmld }i4ch a Yf eight on it , and go fo far on fiich a ground, yea and that evef ordinary godly feoplis Jjjo/ild be To blinded with fich palpable nonfenfe or abfardities, then let them flill follow you in the *i^^yK.\ for I expeEl not that reafon fhould recover them.

Reply. To :1I this I find nothing faid that lieedei'h any /orcher reply.

SECT. XLIV, XLV.

R. Bo T Ccr/ie now to the eighth Queftion^ that is JL to fpcall to the point which yon propound-ed> TvH ifige me to cite to yon the particular Texts that contain thif Law^ Ordinance^ Precept' or Covenant, To which Ianfwerthm. i. There-are two forts cf Laws •, one which firfi make a dupy I the ether which fiippofe itfo made ^ and

do only call for obedience^ and excite thereto , gt frefcribe fomewhat as a means in order thcrennto* If I could [Ijevv you no veritten law or fron?ife as firfi confiitHting the duty, or granting the fri-viledge of Chnrch-meTnberjhip , it were not the leafi difparagement to wy catife^ as long as I can jherv yon thofe following Laws which prefapfofe this. Ton know the Church of God did live about: 2000. years without any written law that we know of: where then was Cods will manifefted ahont fuch things as this , hut in tradition and nature ? If Mofcs then at the end of this 2C00. years did find this tradition^ and find all the Infants of Chttrch'tnembers in foffeffion of this benefit^ then what need he wake a new Law about it ? Or why Jljould God premife it as a new thing ^ I confef if I jhould find by any new law or promife that it did beginr but in Mofes days , I fijould thinks it fome abatement of the firength of my canfe ( thoifgh yet I thinks there would enough remain, ) 2. There are (yet higher ) two forts of laws ': the one for the c on ft it ut ion of the (^0mmon-wealth it ft If ^ the other for the admi-7itflration or government of it when it is fo con-ftitnted. The former are caUcd by fome^ Funda-mental Laws^ as laying the frame and form of the Commo?7'Wealthj and the quality of the materials^ &c. / thinks indeed) that as conftitutive of the form of the Common-wealth\^ thefe ^re fcarce -properly called Laws ^ though as they look^ forward, obliging to duty^ and prohibiting alteration^ they may. But if they be not laws, they are Comewhm higher^ and lay the ground o^ all laws

and

(74)

tutjd ohedienci^ 4nd fo are laws eminenter & vir-tualicer, though not aCinally and formally: And in owr cafe , as this confiitution did fnbjeti m t9 Cody making it our dmy ever after to obey him j fo doth it oblige ta to ackffowledge that fubje^i* on, jind the very conftitution of the Church is an aU of high beneficencey and performed by the fundamental grant or Covenant, JSlovff if this Co' V^nant and confiitation could not exprefiy be fioew^ ed in wriringj it were no diminution of the au^* thority of it , p^^i^g among men fundamental^^ are feldom written •, and when they are y. it it only as Laws obliging the fuhjeli to maintain and. adhere to the firft cQnfittution, As long there* fore as we can -prove that it is Gods will that fuccejjlvely Infants jhould be Church^memberSy it no whit invalidates the caufe if we could not fiiew the original conftitution in writings Xet fomewhat we jhallatten^pt, 3, We have full proof of Infants Church-memberfioip by Laws and Con venants concerning it , ever fince the time that there was a written word of God: and that ii fiifficient J if we could fetch it no higher, Ha^ ^ing premifed this , / come nearer to the Q^e-^ Jfion.

The firfi infiitution of Infants Church-mem--' herjl}ip de jure upon fuppofition of their exiflence^ reas tn Gods firfi conftitution of the Republick of the worldy when he became mans Govermur^and determined of his fubjecis , and members of thi Commo/i-wealth : Which Republick^ being facred , ^nd devoted to Gods worfioip and fervice , 111;^ truly a (hurch of which God WM head^ ThU

(15)

\K>as prformed by the firfi Law avd Covenant

piade either tn or upon wans creation, Thatftich

0 Covenant or projnife of felicity was made by

Cod to innocent nian^ alnjofl aU Dtvtnes agrte :

^Ht becahfe it is rather implied than exprejjed m

Mofes hnef Htfioryy fome ftw cavillers do there^

fore contradtli tu, Bnt ^ i. The thrcatntng of

death for fin, feerr.s t9 imply a prowife of life tf

he finned not, 2. ayind the New Tefiament af-

fordeth m divers pajfages that yet plamlier prove

ity which to you I neeanot recite, 3iit whether

this promife of life were natural ( a^ the threat^

ning of death was ^ ) or only pofittve and more

arbitrary , Divines are net agreed among them*

felves, Thofe that fay it was free and pofitive^

give this reafony That God could not naturally he ob^

liged to blef or felicitate the moft innocent or

perfcEi creature^ nor any creature merit of God,

Thofe that thinks it natural at the threatning wasy

fay^ It's true that Gad could not be properly ob^

ligedy becaufe he is under no Law , no more is

he obliged to pumjh, but only man obliged tofuf-

fer if he infill it: And its true that m^n can-

not ftriilly merit of God, But yet, fay they^ as

man way have a natural aptitude for fuch feli-

city^ fo Cod hath a natural propenfity to do good

according to the capacity of the fubjeEi , and hi(

works do oblige him (improperly ) in point offi^

deltty and immutability as well as his word. So

that their reafons are thefe following, i, Becaufe

Cod is as naturally prone to do good to the good,

as to do evil to the evtl^ that *f, to reward as t9

PHnifimem ^ as hu name proclaimed to MoFes,

£xod

C76)

ExoCi. 34. jhews. 2. Becaiife God making man capable of a higher felicity^ and principling him With inclin^tio?js thereto^ and giving him depres^ leve^ and other ajfe^ions for that bleffed endj even the everiaftmg fruition of Gody therefore they fay^ 43 od did in this frame af his nature give him ground to expeli fuch a felicity -^ if he finned not, Vor tlfe all thefc inclinations andaffe^ions flwuld have hcen in vain : But God made not fo noble a creature with vain inclinations and affeBions to a5i. fallacioiify and falfly, Alfo Gods workj would ■not be harmonical: So that as Gods promife is bnt a fi^nof his will obliging him improperly in point cf fidelity and immutability^ fo^ fay they^ the na-jure of man was a fign of Gods will fo far engaging him : So that as he could not Ut fin go un-punifJjed without fome breach in the harmony of hifs fapi€?itial frame of adminifiratit)n , no more could he dc7iy to perfeH: man the objcB: of thofe de-fires which he formed in htm. So that aUhough he might have made man fuch a creature oa fljould not nneffarily be punifiicd for evil j or re— xvarded for goody that isy he might have r/^ade him not a man :^ yell: having fo made him^ it is necef-fary that he be govertud as ^ man in regard of felicity oa wcR as penalty, §, Our fhilofophers and Divines do commonly prove the immortality of the foul from its natural inclinations to God and eternal felicity. And if the immortality may be fo proved from its nature , then alfo its, felicity tn cafe of rightcoufnefi, I interpofe not my felf us a fudge in this controverfie of Divines^ but I have mentioned it to the end which 1 fiiallnox^ ex^

(n)

frefs, T* It is mofl certain^ whether the reward orfromife be natural orpofrwe^ that ftuh a fiate of felictty man vpas either in or in the way to , or in fart and the way to more. And it is mofi cer^ tainj that man was made holy , dcvoted^ to God ^ an4 fit for his fervice^ and thai in this eftate according to the Law of his creation ^ he was to iyjcreafe and multiply : I; is mofi certain therefore^ that according to the fir ft law of nature^ Infant s^ flwidd have been Church-members, 2. Bat if their opinion hold^ that mak^ the reward grounded on the law of nature , and not on a meer poftive law-, ( and you fee the reafons are not contemptible, )■ then the argument would be yet more ad-vantagioHi. 3. But however it be of the title to glory or eternity^ it is mofi certain^ that according to the 'very law of nature Infants were to have been Church-members if man had flood. The firfi Text therefore that I cite for Infants Church-memberfliip, as expreffmg its original de jure, is Gen. 1.26,27,28. [So Gcd created man in his

own Image And God blefTed them, and

God faid unto them, Befruitful; and multiply, and repleniili the earth. ] Here you fee by the law of nature Infants were to have been born in Cjods Image and in innocency ^ and fo Church-mem^ hers. And note ^ that the firft bUfjjng that God fronounceth on mankind^ is y that they jtropagate Children in their ewn efiate^ to be as the Pa-r^ents were, even in Gads Image.

Kr.T. I. If this prove their Church-rnenjberniip, it proves HOC their vinble Chiirch-memberrhip.

(78;

Refly. Mark Reader, that Gods taw andWfp Jiug for che frofagation of Adams feed in his Image^ would noc have made them when born to be 'nifihle Church-memben , though members t What not fo notorious a LaWy and Cove.nant^ and BenediEhion ? No wonder if all Chriftians Infants muft be (hut out, if Innocent Adams rouft have been (hut out?

He adds, [ 2. if it prove a Law or Ordinance, yet not fuch a Law or Ordinance as i^s in qtejlion j which u not d law or Ordinance dc jure, but de eventu, that fo it (haU

be they being to be acluiUy vipble charcly-members bt"

fore admijfion according to Mr. B'^ dictates. ]

Reply, Alas, poor Readers, that muft be thus wearied I I know nothing that this LaW or Covenant giveth but a Ri^hf to real benefits that miift have anfwerable caules: I know no Right givtrt but it is evemnaUy given , nor received but it's^ eventually received, Aimiffion is an ambiguous word ; My didatesas he calls them, are i. Thac Gods Law obligeth perfons to devote therafelves and their Infants to God, by confenting to his Covenant for themfelves and them: 2. And to do this if they have opportunity in the folemn Ba-ptifmal Covenanting Ordinance: 3. And in his Covenant or La^ of Grace he projnifeth to accept them^ and fignifieth his confent to the mntnal Covenant : which is antecedently to their confent , but a conditional confent or Covenant^ but confe-^Hcntly a^iiaL 4. That accordingly natural in-terefi only is not the Reafon why a Btlie^ers Child is a Church-member, meerly becaufe he is his:' Biic God having given him povcer and obligation ¥flfoiQ dtf^ofe of his own Child for the ends of hit

Creaiioitt

(19:)

Creation and Kcdenrftiort^ be is a Church-membet initially upon heart-confent •, and by Inveftitur^ upon Sacramental confent: which X think you mean by Admijfion*

9, Saith Mr. T. if it did prm fuch a Law or Ordinmce^ yit it proves it not fuch a. promife and preapt as Mr, B. ^ fmnh.

Reply. Muft fueh dealing as this go for an an-fwer ? What's the difference }

Mr. r. addcth, 4. // it did , ytt it only prtveth it of the church by nature,

Reply, You are hard put to it, I do by this firft inftance ihew you where and when the Ordinance y Law or Grant of Infant Chhrch-memher-pip was jirfl made* And 1 leave it to any impartial Chriftian whether I prove it not certain, that God in Nature making man in his own Image with an \_ Increafe and Multiply ] fignifie nor that Infants fhould have been Holy to him , if jidam had not fmned: and fo have been mtm^ hen of the Innocent Qonrch or Kingdom of God^ Alas, many go fo much further, as to alTert as truth, that had Adam flood (nay but in that one temptation ; yea fay fome, had he but once loved God ) all his poftcrity had not been only borrt Holyy but co?2frmedas the Angels: I cannot prove that: but I can prove that they had been born ho-ly had not Adam finned, and fo had been vifihle members. And if fo that God did found Infant memberfliip in NatHre^ let awakened reafon think, whether Parents yet have not as much in-terefl in children^ and children in Parents ^ and then whftber C§d have ever rfverfi this natural

order ?

drder ? Yea whether he hath not all along cotu firmed it?At feemethout of doubt to me,

I know that Parents and Children now ar^ corrupt : but withal upon the promife of a Redeemer , [] an univerfal conditional pardon and f^ift of life in a Covenant of Grace took^ place J Let them deny it that can, and dare. And it in-tknateth no change of Gods will as to Infants conjmci interefl with their Parents, . He faith that [ the Church by Grace is only by EleEiion and Calling , not birth.^ I would defire him if he can, to tell me, whether both Cain and zy^bel were not vifible Chiirch-members in Adams family ? And whether none but the EleU are -z;/-* fihle members? And whether God call not them,. that dxt vifible members to that fiate? • "'

He faith [ //- this Law k in farc^ all an horn vplthoid fin.'\ ' . ' ^ ' y

Reply, The Covenant of Inmcincy is not \W force; but yet I may tell you what it was while it was in forcfe ; and that Infants vifible Ghurch-^ memberlhip was founded in Nature and that Law at firft: And therefore though our Innocency be loft, Parents are Parents ftiil •, And if God change' ijot his order therein, are as capable of confent-' ing to Graceioti their Childrenj as they were of being innocent for them. - --'S^ '■ ■

SEC T^

(Si)

SECT. XL VI.'

R. B, T^-^^ riext Inflitution of Jnfafits Church-X, niemb€rjl)if^ WdS at the firfi proclawa-tion of grace to fallen man , or in the firjl pro-Wife of redemption to fmners ^ in Gen* 3. 15. [] And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy feed and her feed : it fhall bruife thy head, and thou (lialt bruife his heel. ] / will pro7je that this ftndar/iental Covenant of grace or promife doth declare it to be th? will of God that hfants fliAtld be Church-members : zy^nd to this end, let va firfi coyifder what the words exprefly contain , and then what light may be fetcht from other Texts to illuflrate them: It being a kz^own rule^ that an Expofitor TKiift not turn u?irjerfds into fingklars or particularsy nor refrain and limit the Scripture generals , where the word it [elf or the nature of the fitbjeB doth fiot limit them, J may well conclude that thefe things following are comprehended in this fundamental promife, 1. That the Devil having plai-td the enemy to mankind , and brought them in-to this fin and mifery, God would not leave ther/i temedilefs, nor to that total voluntary fubjetlion to him as he might ha e done: Bftt in grace or ikndeferved mercy would engage them in a war i4gainfl hm^ in which they that conquered JJwuld ^uife his head, 2. That in this war the Lord ^Jefns Chriflj the principal feed, 'is promifed to be iHr General J whofe perfe^ nature fhoftld contatnj

G and

(82)

and hii perfecl life exprefi a perfetl enmity a^ainff Satan , and who jhoitld makj a perfe6i conqUeji over him, 3, The Lord Jefii^ vs promifed to da this work^ ^s the womans fcedj anafo as conceived of her, and born by her^ and [0 as an Infant firfi^y before he corr.es to ripenef of age. So that here an Infant Qf the \vowan is promifed to be the Gens-. rat of.th^s Arrny, and Head of the Church. This is rKof} evident: By which God doth fanttifie the humane birth^ and the Infant fiate, and ajjnre us that he doth not exclude now that a^e from the redeemed Church , which he admitted into the Church by the laws of creation* For the firfi promtfe u of an Infant born of the woman to be the Head of the Churchy and growing up to maturity, to do the works of a Head, Had God excluded the Infant fiate from the vifible Church he would vot have made the Head fi'rfi an Infant, Where note^ I. That Chrifi is the great exemplar of hi4 Church J and in things which he was capable of,, he did that fir ft in his own body^ which he would nfter do in theirs, 2. That the Head is a Mem-bcr^ even the principal (iJMember^ one of the two parts vMch confiitute the whole. As the parsim-perans and pars fubdita do conftitute each Com-mon:^wealth. So that if an Infant mufl be a mem-ber eminently fo called , then Infants are not excluded- from memberflnp^ but are hereby clearly warranted to be members of a lower na-t4ire. If an Infant may be Soveraign^ no doubt he may be a SuhielL If an Infant may be the chief Prophet of the Church , then no doubt but Infants may be Difciples, If yon ftill harp on the old

firini

(83)

'flring-^ and fay. They are no Difclfles that learn not ^ yoH may 06 well fay ^ He ts no Prophet thai teacheth not. And tf yon xvill openly deny Chrifiin Infancy to have been the Prophet of the (^hurchj I will undertake to prove the falftwod and vtlenef ofthdt opinion y as joon a^ I know yon own it. The promife then of an Infant Heady doth declare Gods mind that he will have Infants mem" hers J hecahfe the head is the principal member,

Mr. r. Tiie thing to be proved is a Law or Ordinance of God unrep^?aIcd,

Reply, The thing I am to do , is to (hew yori Vphcn and how God inflitHted Infants ChnrcH ftate •, And that he never had a Church on earth that excluded them : And particularly to (hew yod that they are included in the firfi edition of the Covenant of Grace made to Adam , which is perfeded in a fecond edition, but not repealed-This I think I have done.

Mr. T. addeth that It will not hold froin Chrills Head-fliip in Infancy, &c, i. It is not declared in Scripture, and fo a nicer pliancy: 2. Then an Infant in the womb fhould be a vinble member, beciufethen Chriil was Head of the Church : 9. Then an old man fhould not be a member ; for Chrift was not an old mm.

Reply, I , IrendtHi thought it would hold who gi-vcth this reafon of it; And I leave the Reader to confider whether the words cited prove i^tioto Sure I am, it greatly fatisfieth my judgement, that God hereby declared his will to include Infants in his Church vifibly. For the Head is t Member^ even the nobleft : Therefore one Infant is confeffed by you to be a viftble member of the Church : And if one^ it will be incumbent on you

G z to

to prove the reft uncapable or excluded. When I read that Chrift came not into the world at the ftature that Adam did, but chofe to he an Infant^ and to be ferftcmed in Infancy^ and to have Infants murdered for his fakj firfi y and to tnvtte and hfe them as he did, it is noc the rowling over of your wearifom dry denials and confident abfur-* dicies, that will perfwade me that Chrift jloHtteth out all Infants. And I am fure that the Inftance confiiteth your common exceptions againft Infants •, As that they are not Dtfctples becaufe they learn not J which yet they may be in the fame fenfe as Chriji was their zJlfafiet in infancy when he Taught not: And that their/»/v?wrydid not inca* pacitate them to be in Covenant with God^ to be Chriflians^ to be Church-members ^ &c. Chrift (hewed, in that in Infancy he bore all the Counter-relations^ and was in the Covenant of God as Mediator : and that ( as far as we can Judge ) only by a virtual and not aclual confent ( in his Infancy and humane nature ) to the Covenant of mediation.

Mr. r. faith, [ Then an infant in tk v;omb may be a Church'

member 1

Reply, Yes, in the fame fenfe as Chrift in the womb was the Churches head : not by the folemri Invejiiture of Baptifm^ but by Confent: For believing Parents do dedicate their children to God intentionally when they are in the womb : But a man would think that you your felf (hould ac^ knowledge that this dedication and fo the vifibi-lity of memberlhip, hath its gradations to perH fcdion : Are not year frofelytes vifible members in\

mi

(SO

one degree^ when they o}snly profefs Chrifllanity ( as Conji amine did ) and in ^further degree when haptifed F The inter eft of your opinion puts frivolous reafons into your mind which a child mighc fee through.

Mr. r. addcth, [ Toen an old mm [honld not be a mm' tir:\

Reply, Could you think now that you did not cheat your poor Reader, if partiality had not (hut one of your eyes ? It will follow, from \k\t ajfLrma^ tive^ that fuch a ftate of life which Chrift undertook is lawful, fuch words which he fpoke, fuch deeds which he did are lawful, because he ^/flftheni ( being not proper to rhe Mediator :) But will ic thence follow from the negative^ that no calling, no thoughts, no words, no deeds are lawful which Chrift u[ed not ? A fmgle man that hath no Wife or Children may be proved capable of Church-memberfhip, becaufe Chrift that was fuch was the chief Church-meraber,that is, the head: But will it follow that a married man therefore may be none ? Chrifts example will prove that a child of God may feera forfaken, may be crucified as aMale-fador : but not that no other are Gods children.

Mr. T. I deny not thit Chrift In Infjncy was bead of the church, nor that he was tin Prophet of the Church hi Jnfancvy underftanding it of his being the Frophet habitually and by de-ftgnation, nor that he in forne refpeci-, to wit, of Rule and p^o-teliion, was the head of the vifible Church, even of that part which is not ehcl: yet I deny that in refpeci. of that union which mal^s any members of his body, in the Scripture ac-cmions which is by his jpirit, he is the head of that part 9f tbe vipble Church which is not ele^,

G 3 Reply.

(SO

• Reply, I. And will not the Reader be fatisffed with thefe concciTions ? Mark Reader, that he granteth that Chrift an Infant was the Chnrches head, and thus lar ashe mentioneth of the Church vifible, and that he was the Prophet of the Churchy beeaufe he was fo habitually and by defgnation : Why, even fo it is that we fay an Infant may be -a Member^ a Difciple^ a Chriftian habitually and by deftgnation^ (though Iwouldufe a fitter word here than habitually: ) If this much be a reafon for the denomination in one, why not in the other? Yield Sir, or be not angry with Mr. Gataker.

2. And then what brought in your denial of fpiritfial n;ember^np to the m^i-ele^ <' Would you have made your Reader believe that it was any thing to the queftion ? And when will you prove that neither i Ccr, 12. nor any other Scripture callcth thofe members that have but fuch com-mon gifts of the (pirit^ as tongues^ miracles^ pror fhecie-y &c. rejeifted Matth, 7. 23, And that Chrifl never talkt in fohn 15. cf branches in him not bearing fruit , aud fon.e cHt off from him and withered, I am fure it was a whole Church vifible that had carnal contentious wranglers againfl the Apoftles in it, and men that were* drunk at the Lords fupper , &c, of whom Pani faith jCor» 12. 15,18, 20, 22,23, 26, 27. that they were the ^(?^f?/ Chrifi and members m par--ticnUry and common gifts are mentioned as their

Charader. '• —-

*■ ■ ^

Mr. T. that the himmi birth mi infant jlate « fmCti-fei ( by chrifls) a mt true: for thin it would be holy tit

. Reply, I deny your confequence. There are fcveral ca^fes concur to the fame falsification : Cbrifts Birth and Infancy ar<? ^iK a remote pre-faratory cai-tfe^ ofpowerlul fandification, which is ever to tndtzidii^A pcr(ons ; as all things are pure to the pure , and when they are capable fuh-j^d"s , by natural exigence and Barents cor.fe?a ^ then from all the caitfes together refuits theholinefs of that ftate : As Chnfts death end n.crits fandi-fie us, but not innrediutcly nor alove. But Divines ufe to take this word \ fa'/i[l:ifyir^r~] in an initial preparatory fcnfcj as it fignifieth the making of fuch a thing or Jlate fit for holy ufe: As Temples and Utenfils are faid to be fandified , when defigned to be ufed hoiily ( before the ufe. ) But muft they th.refore he fo ufed by all? No, but by the Priefls and Worfhippcrs ? So they ufe to fay, that Death and the Grave are fanclified by ChriJ}: How > Not to all, Or any oUhe u:igodly: But the curfc is tah^cn off^ and they are hallowed for the holy advantage of the faithful. So is it as to his 'Birth and Infancy,

Mr. T*. ^'or do I conceive any truth hut gro(? fa'jhood m that fpccch [ Had God excluded the Infmc fracc from the vi-fible Church, he would not have ?nad2 the Head firji an lifint ~\ For this doth fuftinfe this we only end" or chief

end and more in Gods eye than the faving sf firi'

virs

Reply, I prove that grof falfimd to be true, thus:

That jlate or a^e which Cod vifbly included

\ undaUually made the chief vt/tbleChurcb-mefrf^er

^ iny he did not exclnde from the vifihle Church :

, Bnt the Infant ftatc Cod vifibly inclnded, and

G 4 aUually

(88)

aVtually wade the chief vifihle Chitrch-mtwherinf Therefore the Infmit flute God did not exclude from the vifihle (^hitrah.

The reafon of the Major is because to include and exclude are contraries. The Minor he con-fefTeth. If he fay that it may be included and excluded in feveral perfons, I anfwer, I here fpoke but of the St(^te or Age of Infancy as fuch , to prove that qua talis an Infant is not excluded: For if qua talis^ then it will hold ad omnes uni-verfally, and then {Ihrifthdid been excluded: And therefore the A^e is not excluded as fuch^ if in- ' eluded in one : For it rauft be a total exclufton ' ' And therefore if he will prove our Infants excln-'ded^ it muft not be qua tales as Infants , but for ' fome other reafon, (when he c n find it ^ and fo; the Age or ftate is not excluded.

2. But what man elfe could have gathered, that then this wuft be the only or chief end , and more ' in Gods eye than the failing of a fmner ? Is there ,' any more included in the affertion than barely thaf^ \_ God would not have made an Infant the- chiefs member if he would have excluded Infants as In- . fants ? ~\ Who c uld hence have found out that God hat:.! various fegrees of intention ? And we-mufl difpute which is chiefly in his eye : and that this WM only or chiefly in his eye more than faving finners. Let them difpute what is chiefly in Gods eye, that can better diftinguifh of thofc volitions which are all but h\s fimple ejfence-^ but let them do it on better reafons than thcfe. * * .Mr. T, I deny that Chrift as, mav in i^fr^icy was thi Fro- ' p^'?t'of- Ins- Church v/fi!?lyj and'm adu exercico : Let Mr. B,'

when

/89)

when k tvill affaalt, thin r^nll .^pr:ar in bis contradi^Ion, vileneji and manifold fal,honds.

Reply. That one little [_a?id'] was cunningly put in to bring you ofF-, by takjng vifthiltty and •exercife conjunctly: But are your followers To critical as to difcern the knack? i. Neither do wc fay that Infants are learners in aCiii exercito ^ andfo what is this to the matter ? 2. But Reader I cin prove to thee if thou be impartial, though not to Mr. T, that it is neither vtle nor falfe that Chrift in Infancy was the Prophet of hts Church vifihly^ ( though not in aElu exercito : )

That which vfos declared by Angels from Hea-ven , and by revelation to ^iJMary , Zacchary , Anna^ Symeon^'\\A, by Prophccie by them to others, is to be called vifthle : But that Chrift was the Head and Prophet of the Church, (habitually and by defignation2,% Mr.T. calls it J was thus declared ^^go

Mr. 71 And for his inference , if an if ant may he the chief Prophit of the church , then no doubt but Infants may he Vifciplesy I grant both: and yet deny that chri:t iv^ts-vifi-hly.y an'dibiy, in aftu exercito, /// his infancy in h>s humane nature the Prophet of his churchy or that any Infants area[iu~ ally Difciples vifibly^ till they hear the Gofpel and profef? the faith: Nor am I aloamed to aver that he is no Prophet that prophefuth not, that they are no Difciples that learn not.

Reply, Reader thou art not the perfon that I write for, if thou perceive not here his caufeno-torioufly given up, and yet a noife ofword^ufed fliaraefully to hide what he is forced to confefs.

I. He. granteth both that an Infant way be ( and vpas ) the chief Prophet of the Church , and infants way be Difciples, 2. This is it that -we

di/putc

(90)

dilute for which he exprefly granteth. 3. He denyeth the faid Pvelation titles as in aciu exerci-tOy and y^ do we'^ that is, that Chrift then pro-phefied , and Infants learn or believe, 4. He talks conBdently in this denial , as if he would have fools believe that this were the difference, and we held the contrary. 5. But he is fain to juggle in the word [ audibly J joyned to [_ vifihly J for a paltry fubterfuge, that if we prove Chipift vifthly the Prophety we may not prove him audi^ bly fo, 6. Yet it is fuch a [ vifibtUty ~] as [^ muketh one known 3 that he had in hand ^ and before denied \ht\^vifibility : ] as here ^ but if you prove that Chrift was vtjibly the Prophet , he can fay [^ but not audibly ] If you prove that he was audibly foy in that Angels and Prophets ^/z-dibly declared it, he can fay \_ but not in aEiu excr-cito 3 and by his own Prophefying •, which none denieth. 7. And yet in the end he exprefly without diftindion denieth him to be any Prophet that. Profhefieth not , or them any Difctples that learn noty when he had m terminis granted the c<yitra-ry before, and muft needs therefore grant and deny by diftindion. In fumm, our caufe is ex-prefly granted us (and expreflydenied^ we plead for no other kind of memberfhip to Infants, but fuch as Ghrifthad, nor for any other fort of vifMity^ than the vifibility of their being the feed of per-fons confenting to Gods Covenant, and Godsex-prefTed will in his word, that they fhould be of-^ fered to him by confenting Parents, and that he will accept them, and did conditionally firfi corir Jm.

SECT,

(91)

SECT. XLVII, XLVIII.

R. B. A "^ ^^^ ^'^'^ ^^ ^^^^ frocUiwed^ and the JLjl General or chief (^on^wander confli-. tHtcdy fo next here is a natural enmity pHt ima the whole feed of the Vi'ory.an^ or humane race ^ again ft the whole pdd of the Serpent that then woi^ or the Diabolical natme. This ts plain both in the Text^and in the exptrie?ic£ of the fulfilling of it. As in the inflrnmental ferpent, tt is the vphole ferpenttne nature^ that hath an enmity to the hu-wane nature^ and the whole humane nature to the ferpentinc nature •, they bcingnjcnerr.eui to m^ and ■we abhorring them oi njemn.oiu , and as fuch as our lives are in danger of: fo is it the whole hu-mane nature that ts at enmity to the Diabolical nature. Vide Mufcul. Calvin. Luther, in locum. jill men have naturally as great an abhorrence of the Devil ^ as of a ferpent , they apprehend htm to be their enemyy they abhor the very name and remembrance of him: If they do but dream of him^ it terrtfieth them ^ they are afraid of feeing him in any apparition. If they know any temptation to be from him^ fo far they diflikc tt and abhor it 5 though for the thing prefented they may che-rijh it» This is not jpectal faving grace^ but this is a great advantage to the work of fpecialgracey and to our more effeElual refiftmg of temptations^ and entertaining the help that is offered tis againfi them^ when our very natures have an enmity to the diabolical nature: m now look^ en him a^ ha-

ving

z'in^ the power of denthy a6 Gods exccutipmr and our dejhoyer arid malUiom adverfary, tyind if there he any Witch or other vpick[d perfoh that hath contracied [nch familiarity and arr.ity with him^ OA that this natural enmity u thereby overcome , that proveth not that it vpas not naturally there , hut that they by greater wick^dnc^ are grown fo far unnatural, 5. As this enmity is efiahlijlied in the nature of rnankind again ft thedi-aholical nature , fo is there a further enmity legally proclaimed againft the diabolical pravity ^ malignity and workj. Vide Parxum in locum, God will put an enmity by his laws ( both natural and pofitive) mJ^ng it the duty of mankind to take Satan for their enemy ^ to refijl , and ufe him as an enemy ^ and fight again ft him and abhor his rvorkj, andfj to liftthemfelves under the General that fighteth againft him^ to take his colours^ and to be of his Army: And this being ftok^n of the common world of mankjnd^ and net only of the ele[i {for it is not they only that are obliged to this hoftility and warfare ) belongeth to each one according to their capacities : and therefore Infants being at the Parents dijpofe ^ it is. they that are to lift them in this Army againft the enemy of ma?i^^nd^ of which more anon • 6, A third and higher enmity is yet here comprehended ^ and that is an habitual or dijpofitive enmity againft the diabolical malignity^ pravity and works^ which may be called [^ natural \ as it is the bent cr by as of our new nature. This God giweth only to his chofenj and not to all. And it contain-eth noi only their confent to lift themfelves in his

army

(n)

army againfl Satan , btft jfecWtly and properly n hatred to htm as the Prince of hnrighteoufnefs ^ and a cardial refolntion to fight againfi him and his vpork^ univerfally^ to the death , vcith a com^ placency in God and his fcrvice and fonldiers* Here take a jhort projpeli of the myfteriom bleffcd Trinity, As God is one in three^ and in his entity hath Hnity , verity and goodnefs ^ and iu his* buffed nature hath pofTe, fcire, velle, power, wif-dom and love^ fo 04 from thefe is he related both to his created and redeemed rational creatures^ as abfolnte proprietary , as foveraign ruler , and as mofi graciom benefa^ior : As Lord of onr nature he hath put the forefaid enmity between the hu-mane nature and the Diabolical : As foveraign J^nler^ he hath by legiflat ion impofed on m a fur" ther enmity as uur duty , that we fuonld be lifted in his army , profefs open hoftility againfl Sa-tan y and fight againfi him to the death* As Be-nefaClor^ he giveth jpecial grace to do this, to his chofen. As he is Lord ofallfo the firfl is done on the natures of all: Ashe is RcBor of ally but not by the fame Laws ( a^to pofitives ) fo he obligeth all to this hoflilrtyy but not all a^i he doth thofe that hear the Gofpel : z^s he is Benefatlor hv doth with his own as he lift , and makes a difference. If any fay that it is the fame enmity that is here faidto be put in all , and therefore the fame perfons in which it is put, I anfwer ^ i* There is no proof of either, A general command cr promife to a commiinity^ inay fignifie a difference rf duties or gifts to that community^ though thitt differetice be not cxprefjcd : For the nature of the fubjeB may

prove

(P4J prove iti And^ 2. 'Eoi^erience of the fnlfilling of this fromtfe or covenant , proves the difference before mentioned. Aridities weIIknown^ i^That Mofes is fo concife in the Hiftory of thefe matters. 2, And that the myfterte of grace was to he opened by degrees , and fo but darkly at the firfi 5 that It if no wonder if we find the whole fitmm of the Gojpel htre coHcht up in fo narrow ^ room^ and if each particular be not largely laid open before our eyes, 7. That we may certainly know that this promtfe Jpeakj not only of the en-jjriity that Chrifi himfelf p^uld have to Satan , and doth not engage a General without an army^ Cjod doth here exprejly mention the woman her felfy fnying [^ I will put enmity between thee and the woman 3 fo that as jhe flood in athreefoldre-fpeSi ; fhi is here her felf pojfejjcd with this threefold enmity, i. As Jhe ts the root of humane nature^ fromwhence all mankind mufl Ipring^ Jhe is pojfefl with the natural enmity to the diabolical nature , and this to be naturally conveyed or pro* pagated* 2* Ai [l^e was the root of the great Republick^ of the world , or 'that rational fociety which God as ReEhor would fapienttally govern , and her fef with her hi^^sband ( who no doubt was alfo included in the promtfe ) were the whole then exiflent race of mankind^ fo did Jlie receive a legal enmity of obligation^ which Jlie was traditionally to deliver down to all her pofleriiy , being her felf hereby obliged to liji her felf and all her Infant progeny in the Redeemers army^ againJi the proclaimed enemy , and to teach her poflerity to do the like: For thm obligatory precepts mujt

be

(95)

be broH^ht dow^. 3. j4s pe Wits one of the cho* ftn favourites of Godj (he received the habitual en^ wiry of fand:tjication : And thu u -not m her poxv(r to propagate^ though file may nfe fome rneans that are appointed thereto , and whether a promtfe of any fnch thing be made to her feed on the ufe of JHch means , 7 will not novo jtand to dtfcuf, 8. It PS not all that are pofftjjcd with the natu^ ral enmity againfl the Devil himjelf that are the Church of Chrifl: For this is but a common pre^ piirative which is tn all : Nor u it all that are obliged to the further enmity againfi the work^ of Satan : But all that on that obligation are diiely lifled in Chrtfis army againfl Satan ( by the obliged per [on ) are vifible members: and all that are by fanUifcation at an heart) enmity (habitualor aElual ) With the Kingdom of Satan , are mem^ bers of the Church called my ft teal or inviftble. This I put as gra?ned, 9. Thofe that violate this fundamental obligation^ and to their natural pra-vity jJiall add a fighting againfl Chrifl and his Kingdom for Satan and his Kingdom , are be-come themfelves the feed of the Serpent, And though they had the natural enmity with therefl of mankind in general againfl Satan ^ yet have they therewithal the habitual enmity againfl Chrifl. This much I fiippofe as out of controvert fie. But whether alfo the frfl original corrupted nature it fclf ( before any fin againfl recovering grace ) did contain an habitual enmity againfl the Kingdom of the Redeemer ? Or whether the fins of later Parents may propagate this as an additional corruption m our nature^ I will not now

ftand

(96)

fland to difcuf. Only as to our frefint bn/inefi, it is certain that the general natural enmity to Satan^ may confijl with an habitual frien'^jhip to his ways and caitfe. And though as men they may have the firfi common advantage of nature , and as [uhjeBs de jure may be under the common obligation y yea , and as lifted in Chrifts army may have many of its priviledges 5 yet for the enmity of difpofnion to Chrifts they may be under a greater curfd 10. As it is certain^ that it is not only Chrift htmfelf that is here made the vbjeB of this pro'mife , and is here called \_ the feed of the woman,~| (as is before proved^ and may be more^ and is commonly granted-^ ) fo it is to be notedy that thofe others in whom this enmity is put , are called here [ the feed of the woman, 3 and not the feed of Chrift ( though the chief of them are his feed,) And fo though the promife is made to none but the womans jeed , and no exception put in againft Infants , or any age of all her feed: TiJl you can prove that In* fants are none of her feed , we muft take this fundamental promife to Extend to Infants , and that very plainly^ without uftng any violence with the Text,

11. Some learned men do ufe no contemptible arguments to prove furthery That the fan&ifying en-mity is here promifed to the feed of the woman as her feed ( I mean thofe that go the way of Dr. Ward , (Lpkfr. Bedford, ^r. ) that is , that as the two former forts of enmity are put into all the feed of the woman ( as is explain-id) fo the fpiritual holy enmity promifed to her

feed

<97)

feed as jhe is a believer. IZ. And fome learned

men do accordingly conclude^ that the iwpety of Tarents may do much to hinder their children from that ble^fing more than by original fin they were hindred, and therefore their faith may further thcr/:. Of which though much may be fuid , / jlmll fiy no more , bccaufe I will not fland on things fo much cjuefitoned,

M. T. This tedious difcourlc of Mr. L. is indeed fcr-pentive —

Refly. They that need a Reply to any thing here (aid, Ihall have none trom me.

Sj1v„. 1. yv±-.l X»

R. B. T Come next to p'ove from other parts of JL Scripture , That the fundamental pro^ wife of Grace is thi^ to be interpreted as inclu^ ding Infants, i. If the fayne Covenant of grace when It is more fully and clearly opened , ^</ ex-prefly comprehend Infants as to be Church-members^ then is this fundamental promife fo to be un-derflood ( or then doth this alfo comprehend them, ) But the antecedent is certain , therefore fo is the confequent. The antecedent I prove from the Covenant of grace made to Abraham the Father of the faithful , which comprehended Infants for Church-members: The (Covenant made with Abraham comprehending Infants , was the fame with this in Gen. 3. but in fome things clearlier opened, Which is proved thus : Both thefe were the Cyueumt of grace and free jiifiification by faith

in the Redeemer y therefore they were the fame. For there is hut one fach. If Abraham had fomc special pronufcs additional to the main Covenanty that makes not the Covenant of free \uftfcation by faith to he divers. That this in Gen. 3. is the fromife or Covenant of grace and free jafit" ficatton is not denied^ that I know of* That the -promife to Abraham was the fame , ix evident from Rom. 4. 10^ II, 12, 13, 14. I. It is there exprejly manifefij that the Covenant whereof Cir-cumcifion was to Abraham the fcal, was the Cove* nant of free jiiflification by faith ^ Circumcifoiz it felf being a feat of the righteoufne^ of faith which Abxdhim had y yet being uncircitr/icifed ^ Wat he might be the fttihcf of belie vers , &c, 2. Tea the promife that he fJwiild he heir of the world was not mads to Abraham or to his feed through the LaWy but through the righteonfnefs of faith, . Now it is certain that this Covenant feat-ed hy Circnmcifion and made to Abraham and hi^ feedy did comprehend Infants, The confequence of the major then is^evident^ that the fame promife , eXpreJfcd more concifely^ is to be expounded by the" fime expreffcd more jidly: And it is acknowledged that the Gojpel light and grace was to he mantfefi by certain degrees.

■ Mr. r. Tliat the fi;?}-:I.imcnt2l Promife of Grace, Gen,':,, i<. doth include Infants, vvJ? never denied by me , and tlicrefore Mr. ?„ doth but wafie p^i^er and abufe rae and Ills Readers by going about to prove rr.-

Reply, If we be really of one rainci, it is pitty we fhould make men think we differ: Mark thisi conccjjhn Ilcider, [ The fmidamemal promife of

Urace'

(99)

Grace doth include Infants. ~] The Grace of that promife is our Vnion Relative to Chrifl and his Church , and the benefits internal and external belonging to Chrills menibers. Do you believe that our union with the vifible Church as fuch , and participation in its priviledges, is none of that Grace ?

Mr. T. rh's 1 deny, that it includts all Iv.ftnts, or all In-j.vits of Bslievtrs, and that any Pif.tnt is made a zifi'ok Church-member by that promife .rs the next caafe or foh ifji-i.ient, ]

Ke^ly. It will come to fomethlng anon : i. That all Infants are made Church-members by it, did any of us ever affirm ? Though if the Parents dif-fent had nothindred, and their confent had made them and their Infants capable Recipients, ic would' have been all.

2. The Covenant or Law of Grace giveth vi^ fihle Chnrch-memberflnp conditionally to all that hear it. Deny this, and you know not what you do. I firft ask you, Doth not the Law of Grace \ or Fromife) give both myflical and vifible Church-memberfhip to all that hear it that are at age and have the ufe of Reafon > (1 fpeak not of memberfhip in a particular C-hurch which fomc may want opportunity to enjoy, but in the uni-verfal, ) Deny this, and you deny Chrifls Go-fpel. Doth he not fay , He that believeth and is baptiz^ed fhall be faved: whoever believeth fiiall

not perifi] whoever will-, let him take the

water of life freely : He that cometh to rr^e I Will in no Wife cafi out: Go into the high-ways ^nd hedges^ and compel them to ccme in^ dec. If

( loo ) Gods Law, Covenant, Promife or Donation ( call it which you had rather ) do contain a conditional Gift of Chrift, pardon and life to all the adult, f which ic befeemeth none but an Infidel to deny, ) ask thy Confcience, Reader, whether this bleficd Covenant give no fuch conditional right to any I/jfafit in the world ? Are tjiey all excluded ? And why ? Are they worfe than tdeir Parents? If it give any Right to Infants conditionally as it doth to Parents.it muft be on a condition to be performed by the Parents,or fuch as are fo far entntfted. Mr. T/s talking of [ the next canfe, and the fole efficient ] feem to me the words of a man that knew not what to fay, but was refolved that he would not yield : Sir, do yoa grant that the promife maketh Infants vifible Church-members, as any caitje^ next or remvte^ fole or cooperating f ] If nor, why cheat you your fimple followers by this talk? If you do, we are agreed, and why contend you ? If Logical notions are our difference, fay fo •, I think as it is a Beneficial Kelationy the Tar cms confcnr and dedication^ and the childs being TheirSy are the di/pojttio ryjatcrniy called by fome caMfa:, Rcceptwx vel difpoftivcc: and that Gods donation is the fole efficient in which his donative word ("call it what you will j is the Inftru-ment : This is plain Logick. But you thas pro-M% that your Church-membcrfhip is it felf no b?nenc (and fo owe God no thanks for it, and yet make fuch a ftir about it) cannot indeed hold, that Gods love or mercy, or Chriils me-riis, or the Covenant or Promife ar^ givers of it to young or old •. For they give nothing hm

benefits.

benefits. Be not angry to have your abfiK-duies opened,but before you die be fober and reform ihcm.

He addcth [ I gra>it that, tk Cnvs'jaut to Abraham rr'.-r.c the covsiunt of Evangel leal Grace , though mlxt, and that it did inrAude Infants-^ and that they -were Church-mmbers^ tn

wit, of the invifible Church of the Elect — And that

Abrahams Infants in his houfe were vifihle Churrh-me?KberSy , but not by venue of the Covenant barely as Evavgelical^ but 'i by the tranfeuKt fact : and if in any refpuf by virtue of the ■■^ Covenant, it was by it as cnitaining hoa'hold or civil ^V promifesj rather than Evangelical,

Reply. About 23 and 24 years of age T was my fdf in doubt of Infant Bapiifm : But had I read fuch a Writer as ih\s agai/ifi it^ I think he would have eafily refolved rne for it. i. 77?^ Covenant to Abrahams farruly w^j a Covenant of ^Evangelical Grace^ he faith, ( And furcly fo was that to z^darriy and Noe before. ) And it included Infants , but only as EUcl in the Qonrch 1%:-vifihle. But I he conditional Promife or Covenant is confeft to include the Non-elcEh at age: And what I ISlcne of them in Infancy f Reader , How canrhis be called a Covenant, tor God only to fay [_Jxvillfave all fuch Infants 04 I elcH: _] and yet cfFer Silvacion to none of them in tie world on any condition, nor give a tirie to any perfon that can be known by themfelves or others? They confound the Decree of Gcd with his Covenant. If God had made no other Law, Promife or Covenant, with the adult, but V J will •;. fave whom I will five ~\ who would have rak*en i this for a Law or Covenant? And what right or hope doth this give to Chriftians for their Chi!-. dren more than Pvagans ?

H 3 Ai:;d

( 102)

And, Reader, if God have given no condition or charader antecedent, as a differencing reafoft or qualification of thofe that he mil fave from thofe that he will not, but only told us that he will favewhom he lift, this makeih Infants no/^^-jeUs of his Kingdom, under no Law , and fo liable to no judgement, nor to ftand in judgement with the reft of the world, but only tu be ufed as beafts or ftones, by Divine natural motion as he will. And then, how can you fay that any Infants fliall be damned, or not faved ? Or that it fhall be one of a raillion at leaft that (hall not } For if there be no Law that giveth Right to Pardon and Salvation to any one Infant in the world, and yet many are Lved, it will follow,^ I. That God is fas the prophane hy) better than his word, and will fave many to whom he never gave right to it by promife. 2. And will not the ungodly pur in for the like hopes ? If be-fides thofe that Gods Laws condemn or juftifie, God will fave many in a neutral ftate, why may he not, faith the ungodly, fave me alfo ? for Infants once deferved puniftimcnt by original fin: And if God pardon them without any reafon in' themfelves, he may do fo by me. 3. Or at leaft" he may fave all the Infants in the world for. ought you know, that die '\n Infancy.

And do all thepromifes to the feed of the//f^V/;-fuly in the fecond Commandment, and Exod, 34. 7. and many another Text, mean no fuch thing as they fpeak, as if to be the ktd of the faithfnl were no condition^ but only [_ I vpillfave my ele^i / J

And '

^ And why might not this Covenant ["_ I willfave my Eleli ] be made with C^irt^ or Cham^ or J^i-da^^ as well as with Abraham ?

2. He faith 5 Abrahms Infants wen vlfible Chiirch-:?:^^' kersj but not by the d-npsnavt' baidy ^s Ez'.vjgeflcM,']

Reply, What a hare put . off is thar, of a man that muft fay fomething ? Is it at all by the CetT-fiant 06 Evangelical ? If yea, we have our defirf. If not, what meancth \_harely'] but the nakedne(s of your ill caufe ?

3. Tlicn confRth next f And if in .ivy re'peel by viV' tne of the Cmf?iaKt ( vvhicli" it fcciiieth lie yet knowctli not after all this talk, or will not know 3 it wjs by it as cor.tjilning hoii<j^)old or ci-jil promifiS, rather thafi Evangelical. ]

Reply, See, Reader, fomcmoreof the myfterie : Infants were Church-member^ in Abrabana houfe, but Church-memberfhip fignificd but hou^ jlwld and civil promifes: Do you now perceive v/hat the Jews Infant Church-memberfhip was ? The Socinians perhaps will (ay the like of the Jews Covenant to the adult.

But we may yet miftake him , For [^ rather ~\ is not a negative ; It is V Rather than Evangdi-cai J which is but a preference^ not a denial. O for plain honefty in things divine 1

H 4 SECT.

(IG4)

SECT. L.

R.B.

2,*"^^Hat the firfi fundamental promife ii i thus to be interpreted , / further f'r'OVe by Gods confiant ad'^nni^ration in the performance of it. Concerning which I do make this challenge to you (with modefiy and fubmijfi-on,) to prove if you can, that there was ever one Church'T/iembcr that had Inf^ints born to him while he was in that efiate^ from the beginning of the world to this day^ whofe Infants alfo were not Churc.h'P?embcrs / Except only the Anaba-ptifisj who refufe or deny the mercy , and fo re-fufe to dedicate their Jnfants in Baptifm unta Chrifl. And whether -their Infants be Church' members, 1 will not determijie ajjirmativeiy or negatively at this time. I do again urge you to it^ that you may not forget it •, to prove to me^ that^ ever there was one Infant of a Church-member in the world, fnc-e the creation to this day , that was not a Church-member, ( except the Anaba-ptifls that refufe the mercy or deny it,)

Reply. Mr» T/s A^^vveris a retufingco anAver, fave a crof> challenge (' oft anfwered ) and the inftance of Timothy: To which I iay, that if Timothys Father being a Greek countermanded his communion with the Jews, he could not be a member of their policie or particular Church* ( Though if he only delayed as ^J^ofes did to arcumcife his Son, that Son might be a member 2s the children in the wildernefs were,) But his

Mothers

Mothers right alone might make him a perfon in Covenant with God as a vifible member of the Church-univerfal.

S E C T. L I.

R, B. "VyEfore I proceed to any more Texts of JJ Scrifture , / mil a little enquire in-to the light or Lava of Nature it felf j and fee what that faith to the point in hand. And firfl we fliall confider of the duty of dedicating Infants to God in Chrifi'y and next of Cods acceptance of them , and entertaining them into that eft ate, jind the frfl is mofi evidently contained in the Law of nature it felf ( at leaft upon fuppofttion that there he any hopes of Gods entertaining them ; ) which I prove thm* I. The law of Nature hindeth m to give to every one his own due : But Infants are Gods own due ^ Ergo , the law rf Nature hindeth Parents to give them up to God. By \^ gi'^i'^^g 1 ^^^^ ^ mean not an alienation of propriety^ to make that to he Gods that was not Jo hefore •, hut an acknowledgement of his right ^ with a free refignation and dedication of t e Infant to God, a^ his own ^ for his ufe andfer-vice^ when he is capable thereof. If you fay^ Infants heing not capable of doing fervice ^ fwuld 71 ot he devoted to it till they can do it ^ / an-fwer J they are capable at pre font of a legal cblir gation to future duty , and alfo of the relation which followeth that obligation^ together with the honour of a Church'menjb(r(a^ the child of a Noble

man

Cio6)

Tfjan is of his Honours and titU to his Inheri" tance) and many other mercies of the Covenant* And though (^hrift according to his humanity fvas not capable of doing the worh of a cJHedi-atoror head of the Church in his Infancy^ yet for all that he muft bt head of the Church then^ and not ( according to this arguing ) ft ay till he were cafable of doing thofe work^. And fo is it with his members.

Re fly. Here is fo little faid that needs but this remarke, that Mr. T. knoweth not how toj;deny the duty of dedication handfomly , which being Accepted of God is to Church-memberfliip as private Marriage to publick, where pubh'cation is wanting: But he denieth that Parents may dedicate them by 'Bafttfm: But if they may and muft do it -privately by heart confent , it will follow that they muft do it publickly in the inftitutcd way. As for my bold attempt in proving fo much by the Law of Nature, if he cannot confute it, let him not ftrive and fin againft jiature.

S E C T. LIL

R. B. 2.^'T^Helavp of nature bindeth all Parents X to do their befi to fecure Cods right^ and their Childrens good, and to prevent their fin and mifery : But to engage them betimes to God by fuch a dedication , doth tend to fecure Gods right, and their Childrens good, and to pre-' vent their fin and mifery •' For they are under a double obligation, which they may he minded of betimes.

( lO'-j)

times J and which may hold them the wore firo?jg-ly to their duty , and difadvantage the tempter that would draw them ojf from God,

Mr. r. Really Infant Bapufm is a difadvantage , i. In that it is the occafion whereby they take tliemlelves to be Chriftians afore tliey know what Chriftianity is, and fo ave kept in prcfumptioHj &c, 2. They are kept from the true baptifm, &c.

Reply, This nearly concerneth our caufe: I once inclined to thefe thoughts my felf: But I am fatisfied, i. That Infant Covenanting and Baptifm is no hindrance in Nature or Reaibn from fer-fonal [erioii4 Covenanting with God at age. Wc tell our Children and all the adult, that their Infant Covenanting by Parents, will ferve them but till they have Re^.fon and Will of their own to choofe for themfelves; And that without as fe-rious a faith and confent of their own then as if they had never been baptized, they cannot befa-ved : What hurt then as to this doth their Infant intereft do them ?

2. Yea doubtlefs it is a great help: For, i. To be in the way of Gods Ordinance and Benedidion is much. 2. And ( knowing you deny that ) I add , to be confcious of an early engagement, may do much to awe the minds of Children ; yea and to caufe them to love that Chrift which hath received them, and that Society to which they belong.

3. If Children till Baptized have any thoughts of dying, according to you, they mufl: have little hopes of mercy: And God accounteth not the fpirit of bondage beft , no not for Children. They cannot well be educated in the Love of

God,

(io8)

God, who muft believe that they are damned if they die, and that God hath not given them an^y promife of hfe.

4. Experience of many Moors ( fervants ) among us and in our Plantations, ( befides ancient hiftory) aflureth us, that delaying Baptifm till age tcndeth to make people delay repentance, and think I am but as I was, and if I fin longer all will be pardoned at baptifm, and I muft after live ftridlier, and therefore ( as Confla77tine and many more ) they will be baptized Chriftians when there is no remedy.

5« And experience afllireth us that it were the way to work out Chriftianity and reftore Infidelity in any Nation : For had not Chrift early po/Teffion , and were not Nations difcipled and baptized, Chriftians were like to be almoft as thin as Puritans now: and the muhitude being Infidels from a crofs intereft ( fuch as divifions caufe ) would be ready on all occafions (as they did in Japan and Monicongo ) to root them out.

I take this to be a very concerning confidera-tion, whether in reaion Infant Baptifm be like to do more good or harm. The not calling men tofe-rious Covenanting at age doth ynfpeakablcharm : To have a few good words about Confirmation in the Liturgie, and fuch as Dod. Hammonds writings of it, will not fave ignorant ungodly fouls, nor the fouls of the Paftors that betray them: I have faid my thoughts of this long ago in a Trea-tife of Confirmation.

But I muft profefs that it feemeth to me, that if Chrift had left it to our wills, it is much liker

to

to tend to tlie good of fouls, and the propagating Ghriftianity, and the ftrength of the Church, for to have both the obligation and comfort of ohr Infmt Covenant and Church ftate, and as feriom a Covenanting alfo at age^ when we pafsinto the Chhrch fiate of the Adult^ than to be without the former, and left to the expedation of adult ba-ptifm alone.

SECT. LIII, toLVIIL

R. B. nr^He law of nature bindeth Tarents in X love to. their children to enter them into the nwfi honourable and profitable fociety^ if they have bnt leave fo to do: But here Tarents have leave to enter them into the Church , which u the mofi honourable and profitable fociety. Ergo. That they have leave^ is proved^ i. Godne-m ver forhad any 7nan in the world to do this fin* cerely^ (the wicked and unbelievers cannot do it fmcerely ; ) and a not forbidding is to be interpret ted as leave in cafe of [uch farticipation of benefits : jis all laws of men in donbtful cafes are fo he interpreted y^T drheiKaa^y in the moft favoH* table fenfe» So hath Chrtfi tnyght us to interpret his own: When they jpeak of duty to God , they miift be interpreted in the flrithfi fenfe: When they Jpeak^of benefits to man^ they mufi be interpreted in the mofi favourable fenfe that they will bear,

z. It is the wore evident ^ that a not forbidding in fuch cafes is to be taksrt for have , be-

coitfs

(no)

caiife God hath fut the principle of fe If-prefer va-^ tion^ a?id defiring our ovpn welfare^ and the welfare of our (^htldren fo deeply in humane naturey that he can no more lay it by than he can ceafi to be a reafonable creature. And therefore he may lawfully aUnate or exercife this natural ne^ ceffary principle of feeking his own or childrens real happinefi , where-ever God doth not reflrain or prohibit him. We need no pofitive co?nmand to feek^Gur own or childrens happinefy but what is in the law of nature it felfj and to nfe this where' God forbiddeth not^ if good be then to be founds cannot be unlawful.

3. It PS evident from wh^t is faid before (and elfewhere) that it is more than a filent leave of Infants Church-memberjlnp that God hath *vouchfafed tts. For in the forementioned funda^ mental promife ^ explained more fully in after timeSy God figmfied his will that fo it Jhould be^ Jt cannot be denied^ but there is fome hope at leafi given to them in the firfi promife , and that in the general promife to the feed of the woman they are not excluded^ there be no excluding term. 'Upon fo much encouragement and hope then it is the duty of Parents by the law of nature to enter their Infants int{) the Crvenanty and into that fo* ciety that partake of thefe hopes , and to lift them into the Army of Chrifl,

4. It is the duty of Parents by the Law of Na^ ture J to accept of any allowed or offered benefit for their children. But the relation of a member of Chrifis Church or Army ^ is an allowed or of" fered benefit to them, Ergo^ d:c. Fcr the Major,

thefi

thefe frincifles in the law of nature do contain if» I. That the Infant is not fui juris, but ts at his Tarents dijpofe in all things that are for his good* That the Parents have power to oblige their chiU ^ dren to any future duty or fuffering , that is cer^ tainly to their own good: andfo may enter them into Covenants accordingly : And fo far the wid ofjhe father is as it were the will of the child. 2« That it is unnaturally finful for a Parent to refufe to do fuch a things when it is to the great benefit of his own child* As if a Prince would offer Honours, and LordjJups , and Immunities to htm and his heirs : if he Will not accept this for his heirs^ but only for himfelf it is unnatural, Tea^ if he will not oblige his heirs to fome fmall and reafonablc conditions for the enjoying fuch benefits, for the Minor, that this relation ts an allowed or offered benefit to Infants is manifefted already^ and more jhall be.

And thts I "ads me i,p to the fccond point, which I propounded to confider of-^ whether by the light or law of nature we can prove that Infants fiwuld have the benefit of being Church-members, fuppofing it firfl known by fupernatural revelatt-on, that Parents are of that fociety, and how ge* neral the promife is , and how gracious God is. And I. It is certain to tis by nature that Infants are capable of this benefit, if Cjod deny it not , but will give it them as well as the aged, z,It is certain that they are ad:ually members of all the Common-wealths in the world (perfedte fed im-perfed:a membra ) being fecured from violence b^ the laws, and capable of hono}ir5 and right to inheritances.

(I12j

heritancesy nnd of being real fabjeBs under oblU gations to JHiHre duties , if they furvive* And this Jlievps that they are alfo capable of being Chnrch-r/jeTTiberSy and that nature revealeth to us^ that the Infants cafe much follorveth the cafe of the Parents J efpecially in benefits. 3. Nature hath aciually taught moft feofle on earth , fo far a^ I can iearn^ to repute their Infants in the fame Re^ ligi,om fociety -with themfelves^ a^ well as in the fame civil fociety. 4. Vnder the Covenant of vporkj ( commonly fo called) or the perfect rigo-ropi6 law that God made With man in his pure nature •, the Infants fhould have been in the Churchy and a people holy to Cod , // the Parents had fo continued themfelves. And confider , I, Ihat holinef and righteoufnef were then the fame things as now^ and that in the efiahltfhing of the way of propagation^ God was no more obliged to order it foy that the children of righteous parents jhould have been born with all the per-fecitons of their Parents and enjoyed the fame priv I ledges , than he was obliged in making the Covenant of Grace to grant that Infants jhould be of the fame fociety with their Parents , and have the immunities of that fociety, • 2, We have no reafon when the defign of redemption is the magnifying of love and grace^ to thinks that love and grace are fo much lefi under the Gofpel to the members of Chrift, than under the Law to the members or feed of Adam , 04 that then all the feed fljould have partaked with the fame bleffings with the righteom Parents, and now theyjhallali be turnedout of the focietyf whereof the Parents were

mem-*

members. 5. God gives fu hmfelf the reafons of hu gradopts dealing with the children ofihe jnfl from his graciom nature , proclaiming even pardoning mercy to flow thence^ Exod. 34. and in the fecond Commandment, 6. God doth yet fliexv m that in many great and weighty rc^eBs he dealeth well or til with children for their Parents fakes: as many Texts of Scrip are fiew (and I have lately f roved at large in one of otir private difpHtes 5 that the fins of tjearer parents are tm^ futed as part of our original or natural guilt. ) So much of that.

Reply, Mr. T. faith nothing to all, that I think the Reader needeth a reply to.

SECT. LVIII,

R. B. ^KTEt before I cite any more particular X Texts , / will add this one argument from the tenour of the Covenant of grace^ as ex^ prejjed in many Texts of Scripture. <iAccording to the tenour of the Covenant of grace^ God will not refuse to be their God ani take them for his peopUy that are (in a natural or law fcnfe ) wil" ling to be his people , and to take him for their God, But the Infants of believing Parents are thus willingy Ergo. Tfse Major is unqueftionable^ The Minor isprovedfrom the very law of nature be-fore exprejfed. Infants cannot be aiiually willing themfelves in natural fenfe^ Ergo, the reafon and will of another mufl be thetrs in law fenfe^and that is of the Parentsf who have the full dijfofe of thepj,

I • and

and arc vq if ranted by the law of nature to choofc

for then} (for their good ) till they come to life of reafon themfelves. The Farents therefore by the light and lave of nature choofing the better fart for their children, and offering and devoting them to God J by the obligation of his own natural law 5 he cannot in confifiency with the free grace revealed in the Gojpely refufe thofe that are fo offered. And thofe that thpu come to him in the way that nature it felf jfrefcnbeth , he will in no wife caft onf^ Joh. . . And he will he offended with thofe that would kjep them from . him^ that are offered by thofe that have the fower to do ity though they cannot offer themfelves. For legally this aU is taken for their own. Thm I have jhewed yon fome of the fundamental title that Infants of Believers have to Church mem-berfjip^ and our obligation to dedicate them to God, Reply. Mr. T. faith \_ that fome a5is of the Pa* rents are legally taken for the childs is not denied. ~\ But here he denieth it, and I leave his denial -vi.h my copious proof in my Treatifeof In-fanr-baptifm to the Readers.

'— ' g" — ■— '

SECT. LIX.

R. B. ^"^TOu mufi now in reafonexpefiy that in* JL fants Church-memberfuip being thm efiablifjedy partly tn the Uw of nature^ and part^ iy in the fundamental prcmife^ what ts after this fpok^n of it fijould not be any new efiablifhment , but confrm At ions and mt inflations of what vpas be-

fore

frre done^ rather giving m the f^obf that fuch a lavp and fromife there is that did Jo efiablijli it, than being fuch firft eftablijliing laws or fromtfes thewfelves, ^nd from hence I may vpell add this further argument. If there be certain froof in Scripture of Infints Church-memberflnf , but none except this bcforz alledged that mak^s any mention of the beginning cf it , but all jpeaking of it as no nevp thing , then we have great reafon upon the forementioned evidence^ to ajftgn this be* ginni?:g which from Gen. 3. we have exprefi» But the former is true^ ergo, the later. Ton con-fef that Infa?Jts were. Church-members once. Ton only conceive it began when Abraham was called out of Ur. Tour conceit hath not a word to fup* port It in the Text, The right to fuch a blef" fing was then new to Abrahams y^f^5 when Khx^'• ham frft believed: But when it began to belong to Infants of Believers in general ^ no Text ex-cept this before cited doth mention. Nor doth that fromife to Abraham intimate any inception then as to theChurch-memberfhip of Infants, but only an application of a priviledge to him that in the general wa< no new thing.

Reply, To this Mr. T, ftill affirmeth that Infants Church-memberfhip was proper to the Hebrews only. Reader, though they had their peculiarities, is it credible that the Infants of that one fmall country only fhould be fo differently dealt with by Cod, from all the world eife, even He^ mch'Sy Noe's , Sem*s and all from ^dam to the end of the world , that thefe Infants only fhould be Church-members and no others!' what un-

(ii6) likely things (yea againft evidence ) can fome

believe ?

SECT. LX,LXI, LXII.

R. B. XT O W for the Texts that further inti-1^\ mate fnch a foregoing efiablijhment, I. There feems to he fome believing intimation of this in Adams naming his vpife the mother of the living: For it is to be noted what Bijhop Iflfher faith y Annal. vol. i. p. 2. Unde turn primum ( poft femenpromifTum^ mulieri Evae nomenama-rito elt impofirum, Gen. 3. 20. quod mater efTet omnium viventium non naturalem tantum vitam, fed illud quoque quod eft per fidera in femen ip-fius, Meffiam promiiTum : quomodo & poft earn Sara fidelium mater eft habita, i Pet. 3,6. Gal. 4. 31. J He pi4t this name on her after the fromife^ hecaufe fie was to be the mother of all the livings not only that live the life of nature , but that which is by faith in the ^JMe^iah her feed. So ' that 06 fje was the root of our nature , we are her natural feed-^ and 06 flje was a believer^ and we the feed of her a believer ^ fo is fje the mo-ther of a holy feedj and we that are her feed are holy^ 06 a people vifibly dedicated to God.

2. When Cain was born^ his mother called him C p^Jf^ffion ~\ becaufe jJje had obtained a' man of the Lordy that isy faith Ainfworth, \ with his favour^ and of his good will ^"\ and fo a Son of pro-^ mifey and of the Church. And therefore it is to be noted ^ that when Cain had finned by killing-

his

,

Cii7)

his brother^ God did curfe him , afid cafl him out of his frefence^ Gen. 4. 14, 16. So that he was excommunicate and fefarated from the Church of Cod^ faithK\n{vjou\\^ \_that ts^ from the place of Cods word and worfliip which in likelihood was held by AisLva the father y who being a Prophet y had taught his children how to facrtfice andferve the Lord, So on the contrary^ to come into Cods prefence or before him ^ 1 Chron. 16. 29. ts explained in Pfal. 96. 8. to be the coming into hts Courts, ~\ Very many learned men give the fume expofition of it. Now if Cain were now excommunicate, then wa6 he before of the Church : nay it is certain by his Jacrificing , and other proof y however this Text be interpreted : But no man can give the leaft reafon from Scripture to make it fo probable that he entred into the Church at any other time J as we give of his entrance at his nativity.

When Eve bare Seih, ^je fo named hiw m a Son of mercy in faith, as appointed her by the Lord to be tn Abels room^ faithful as Abel , and the father of our Lord after the fejJ) , as Ainfwonh on Gen. 4. 25. j^ndis there no intimation in tlus that Seth wo/S an Infant member of the vifible. Church ^ J confej? he that Jljail excommunicate this appointed feed , or faith , that Scth was without the Church in his infancy^ doth Jpeak^ in my ears fo improbably^ and fo unlike the Scripture , that I am very confident I jhall never believe him,

Mr.r-'s AnfwertoalU is a denial : faith he, [Tfhiefs vo ir.tl'futlon iiu!; Seth rt>as an Injmt mmhcr of the viji-hlc Chijch •-, from which Ifhmacl w.rs rioi excluded: In

(ii8)

vph/ch though I ph:e jwt Seth, I do not thmby excommm^' eate htm, or f:iy that hs was nithoat the Church in his IH-fancy.

Reply, But you fay He was vcithoHt the vifihle Chnrch: ( orelfe within and without are confiftent with you.} And whether Ijhmael was within, and Sethy and Henoch , and Sem without, I will no more difpute with you.

SECT. LXIII, to LXX. j

R. B. 1^T^**<? ^Ifi t ^^^^ ^ God hadthm cafi J_\| out C^ln^ a?7dfHpplied AbeU room by Seth, a?2d had given each of them poflertty -^ fi Vife find him in a ^fecial manner regiflring'th'6 fnccejfors of the righteom^ and putting two titles ^. on thcfe two diftintl generations^ calling fome the fons of Godj and others the daughters of men , Gen.6» 2. Suppofing that yon rejeSl the old conceits that thefe fons of God were Angels that fcH . in love with women^ the current ordinary expo-^ ^ ftion I thinks will ftand^ that thefe were the prO' geny of Seth, and other rremhers ef the Church , who are called the Sons of God -^ and that it was the progeny of Cain, and other wicked, ones^ that are called the daughters of men. Where note that they are not themfelves denominated wicj^d, bnt the children of men^ 04 being a generation fepa-rated from the Church from the birth. And the other are not themfelves affirmed to be truly gcd^ ' iy ones, but fons of God , a^ being the feed of the Saints not cafi out, bnt members of the Churchy or

the

the forts of thofe vpho were devoted to God , and fo devoted to him themfelves: a feparated generation belonging to God as his vifhle Church, Where note^ that thefe that are called the fans of Gody even the line of Seth and other godly Va-rents^ were yet fo wicked that God repe/ited that he made them ^ and deftroyed them in the fleody (paring only Noah and his family. So that it was not their own godlinef, that made them called the fans of God , hut their relation , Church ftate and vifiblc feparation from open itnchnrchcd Idolaters, (Compare this vhrafe with the likf^ Deur. 14. I. 2 Cor. 6. 18. In the former it is faid [^ ye are the children cf the Lord your God, ye ihall not cut your felves, &c, \ where the whole feople^ Inf^ts and ally are called Gods children^ OA"being a people feparated to him fron'i the Idc-Icitrotis world •, and fo in the next verf. called a holy people unto God, peculiar to him, Grc, Arid 2 Cor. 6, 8. Come out from among them , and be ye feparare, c^c, and I will be a father to you, and you ffiall be my fons and daughters, faith the Lord Almighty. ~] So that Gods fans and daughters are that fociety that are feparated from Idolaters unto the worfliip of God as the vi-fihle Church is. And then it appears that the generation of the righteotts ^ even from the won^h ^ were enumerated to the rejl^ in that they are not mentioned as a people called out here and therey arid initiated at age ( there is no mention of any fuch thing : ) but as a flock;, or generation oppufed to the daughters of rnen^ or of the unchurchedy 'whv were fuch from thcir^nf^ncy

(I20)

as all will grant. For it was not the fame men that were the Parents ef thofe here called the danghtcrs of men and the fons of God (though fame of the later might be excomwtinicate when they fell:) But tt plainly intimates , that it was another fort of men that thefe were the daughters of J than thofe that were Parents to the fons of God, So Ainfworth in loc. \^The fons of God^ i.e. the men of the Church of God^ for to fuch Moks faith ^ Dtut. 14. i, dec. i John 3. i. Daughters of men , meaning of Cains pofierity-that were out of Gods Churchy Gen. 4. 14. U So our Annotations^ and many more*

An intimation of this pri'viledge^ and that they were fons of mercy and of the promtfe , appeareth in the very names of many of the chHdren of the righteomj hoth before and after the flood, which J will not (land on par-tic alar ly.

And when all the world had fo defiled them-felves , that Gad was refolved to cut them off-^ he feared Noah and his family .or fons. Though Cham was to be cur fed, yet wasi^e of the Church which worjhtpped the true God , and Jpared as a fon of Noah , and one of that fociety. And if God fo far fpared him then for his ^ Fathers fake as to houfe him in the Arh^ (the type of the Church ) he fure took, him to be of the fame fo-ciety in his infancy, and then bare him the fame favour on the fame account.

As foon as Noah came out of the Ark^ God hlejfed himfelf in his iffue, as he did Adam, Yi'ith an [^ incrcafe and multiply J and made a Cove-tia^t wi^h him and his feed aftev him. Which

Cove^

favenant though the exprejfed part of it he tbap the earth Jlwuld be drowned no more ^ and fo it; wa^ made vpith the vpick^dfl of Noahs feed^ and even with the heafts of the fields yet doth n import a fpecial favour to Noah^;/^ his feed^ as one nhom God wonld fljew a more (fecial refpe^ to , as he had done in his deliverance^ and upon this [pectal favour to him the creatures fare the better. For though the word \_ Covenant ^ be the fame to man and heaft , yet the diverfity of the promiffary and his capacity may put a different fenfe on the fame wordy as applied to each, ^nd indeed it fhould feem but a fad bleffing to Noah to hear an \_ increase and multiply ] // all his Infant poflerity muft be cafi or left out of the vtfi-ble Churchy and fo left as common or unclean^ This were to encreafe and multiply the Kingdom^ of the Devil, If he that was fo mercifully hou^ fed in the Ark. Vpith all hts children , mitfi now he fo blefi as to have all their tffue to be out of the Churchy it were a flrange change in God^ and a ftrange bleffing on Noah ! And an uncomfortable flablifnng of a. (fovenant with his feedy if all that feed mufi be fo thrufi from God and dealt with ^A the feed of cur fed Cain.

Moreover it is cert am that Noah did prophe^ tically , or at leafi truly pronounce the bleffing on Shem and Japhet. And in Shems bleffmg he bleffeth the Lord his Gody fljewtng that God was his God and fo in CovenatJt with htm. And it ts plain that it is not only the perfons , but the poferities of his three fwvs that Noah here intended. It was not Cham hiwfelf fo much as Canaan

and

and his fucceeding pofierity that mre to he fer* *vantsto Shem ^W Japhet, that is^ to their pofie* rity. And the hie^mg mtifi be to the iffue of Shem, as well as the cnrfe te the iffhe ofChom* And indeed a Hebrew Dollar would take it ill 0t that Expofitor or Divine whatfoever that floonld pre fame to exclude the Infant feed of them out of Gods Oiurch, And well they may , if in the bleffmg God be pronounced to be their God* Saith Ainfworth in loc, \^under this Shem alfo himfelf receiveth a bleffing: for bleffed is the people , whofe God Jehovah is , Pfal. 144. 15. and eternal life is implied herein , for God hath pre-prepared for them a City of whom he is not ajha^ wed to be called their'God ^ Heb. ii. 16. and Shem is the firfi man in Scripture that hath ex-prejly this honour/\

aJ^foreover in Gen, 9.27. in Japhets bleffing there is muchy though in few words^ to this pur-pofe intimated* Firft , note that the Jewijh Church is called \_ the tents of Shem. ] From whence it appeareth^ that the Church prtviledges of that people begun not with or from AbrahaiH , but were before: And that it is the fame Church that was cf Shem and of Abraham, and after all the additional promifes to Abraham, the Jewijh Church is fill denominated [^ the tents of Shem : ] now they were the tents of Shem before Abrahams days. And therefore it is clear ^ that it being the fame Church , muf: be fuppofed to have the fame fort of members cr materials: and therefore Infants muft be members before Abrahams days as well as after. That Church which

was

yoiU Sheras tenU had Infant Church-memhers (for the Jews Church 16 fo called , into which Japhec Tpas to paf: ) But the Church both before and after Abraham vpas Shems tents^ Ergo.

Tet further let it here be mtedy that it is into Shems tents that Japhec muft paf. J fuppofe that the evidence is better here for that expofition that applyeth the word \^ dwell 2 to Japhec than to Gody and fo that this is ]foken of the converfen of the CentileSy as waxy Expofitors have cleared at large. And foj as Ainfworih faith^ the fenfe is that J:^-phec fhaH be |[ united with the Churches of the JewSy the pofterity of Shcm, which was fulfilled when the Gentiles became joynt-heirs^ and of the fame body^ and ]oynt-partakers of Gods prozufe ijz ■Chrifly the flop of the partition-wall being broken down, dec, Ephef. 3.6. &: 2. 14, 19. Although it may further tn?ply the graffing of JzphQis children into the ftock.of the Qonrch^ whenShtms pofieri-ty (Ijoiild be cut ojf^ &c. ] vid. ulr. Now if it be Shems tents even the fame Church that Japhecs children wuft dwell in , then as Shems Infants Xvcre church-members , fo 7?jufl Japhets, and not all his Infarit feed be cafl or left out. So that here is a promife of Infant Church-memberfinp unto the Gentiles in thefe words.

Reply. To alJ this the fumm of Mr. T.'s an-fvvers are, i. A denial of the fenfes given of fome Texts, which I leave to the Readers exa^ mination, being refolved not to tire him with a tedious Reply. 2. He grants that their perfons were bUlTed, God their God , and their feed ill the Church; As if Gods open Covenant and

pro-

(124)

promife made them not vifible raembeirs but invi-fible.

SECT. LXX, toLXXIX.

R.B. \TrT£ come next to the Promife made W to Abraham, nvhkh I jhall fay the lef tOy hecapife yon confef it. But again note , that whereas your felf make the beginning of Gods taking the Jews to be his feofle, and fo of Infants to be members of the Church , to be at Abrahams call from Ur ^ i. Inhere is no one word of that in the Text, 2. Lot came out of Ur with Abraham, yeuy and from Haran, and lived with htm: were not Lot and his Infants Church-mem^ hers then?

3. The chief note I intend is this^ that there is m more faid then to j>rove Infants Church-mem-herSf than what we have (hewed was faid long before^ and is faid after of the Gentiles Infants^ 7to nor fo much. If therefore the pajfage of Abraham out of Ur, yea , or the -pror/^ife made to him in Haran, Gen. 12. 2, 3. will prove Infants Church-memberfijip , then have we as good proof cf it to the Gentile Church as to the Jews*

And here I note further , that in the beginning before the command for Circumcifion , yoH plainly yield that Infants Church-memberjJnp is a thing fcparable from Circumcifion^ and begun not with It , but before^ And indeed I have evinced that td yon in my Book, of Baptifm, Abraham himfelf was not made a member by Circuwcifiony

but

but circumcifed bscanfe a member of Chrifis Church by faith, Ifhmael vpas a member before^ and fo vpas Ifaac, and the Infants born in Abrahams houfe.

Whether there were any fromife or precept of this (but a meer tranfeunt faEi) let the Text lafi mentioned^ and the follovping bear witnefi, Gen» 12. 2, 3. In thee fhall all families of the earth be blefled, and^ Gen. 17.7,9,10. And I will eftablifh my Covenant between me and thee and

thy feed after thee and I will be their

God. And God faid to Abraham^ Thou fhalt keep my Covenant therefore , thou and thy feed after thee in their generations. This is my Covenant which you fhall keep between me and you, &c. to njerf 15. In all this let thefe things be noted , i. That here is an exprejS promtfe vr Covenant to Abraham and his feed after him. 2. That it is not only de pracfenti, but for the fntnre ^ called an everlafling Cove-nam* 3. That this prcmife or Covenant doth ma-'/lifefily imply and include Infants Church-member Jhip (as you confef,) 4. That yet here is not the leaft word that intimates an inftttution of it de novo, but rather the contrary plainly intimated. The promifes before Gen. 17. are mainly about the multiplication of Abrahams feed. What is that to Qourch'-memberflnp f ( except what intimates the promifed feed ^ of which anon*) Ha-gar hath a promife alfo of the multiplication of Khmaels feed. And the very precept of Circum-cifion is only one part of the Infayit membersyVVL, the males , and therefore it cannot be foundation-

(126)

of their ChHrch'Wemberjhip , 'which leaves out half the members. 5. Note that the fromife that God will be thetr Gody doth exprejly contain the Chhrch-memherjliip of the feed, 6. Note that this is more than a tranfeunt faB , Ergo, bein^ an everldfiing, Covenant, Had it been a natn^ rat tranftunt fa5i^ that had left no permanent ti^ tie behind it tn the obligation of the Covenant , then it had been null and void as joon as fpoken : then the word ofCjod is bpit a bare fomid and of no further force* 7. Note that the Apoftle ( as is faid) Rom.4. lo, 11, 12,13, doth fully manifefi to HSf that this promife was made to Abraham as a believer , and that CircHmcifion was a feal of the righteoufnefs of faith which he hady yet be-ing lineircurncifed : and therefore that the chief part of the Covenant of having God for our Gody and his taking vj as his peculiar people ^ belongs to the Gentiles as well as to the Jews, 8. And he oft jJjeweth that the faithful are Abrahams feed^ and therefore the chief bleffmgs of the pro-mife belong to all the faithful. But one of the blejfmgs wasy that their Infants jhoald be comprehended in the fame Church and Covenant-, Ergo, the Infants of the faithful who are the heirs of the fame prcmifey mufi be comprehended in it too,

9. / thinks it is not to be made light of as to this matter^ that in the great promife^ Gen. 12.3. the blejjing from Abraham in Chrifl is promifed to all the families or tribes on earthy all the families of the earth fhall be blefTed, as the Heb. Sa-mar, Arabic, or all the kindreds as the vulgar Lar, and Chald. paraph, or'all the tribes as the

Sept.

(121)

Sept. v7wj«i oil (pvKetu And donhtlefs it is hyChrifl that this bkjfwg is fromifed y and fo a G off el bleffing ( Ergo, the Syriac. adds and in thy feed, and the Arab, hath by thee.) And the Apoftle fully teftifeth that. So that as tribes , kindredsy families^ do wofi certainly comprehend the Infants^ and as tt vpas to fuch families that the promifs was made before Chrifi as to the Jevpiflo Church ^ fo is it exprefy to fuch families or tribes that the fromife is made as to the Gentiles fince Chrift,

I o. Note that as Infant Chnrch-memberfhip is here clearly implied in Infant Circamcifion , fo they are two difiinU things-^ and as the ft^n ii here commanded de novo , fo the thing figniftd (1 mean the duty of engaging and devoting to Cod as their God in (^ovenant ) is commanded with it, though not de novo, as a thing now be* ginning as the fign did. So that here is in Cir^ citmcifion not only a command to do the circnm' cifing oHtward a[iy but alfo to do it as a fign of the Covenant , and fo withal for the Parents to engage their children to God in Covenant as their Cody and devote them to him as his feparatedpe^ culiar people. So that here are two diftinU duties concHrrent, The one external newly infli-tiitcd , the other internal not newly infiitn^ ted. And therefore the former may ceafe , and yet the later fiand : and it is no proof that the later ( Covenant engagement of Infants to Cod ) is ceafedy becanfe the fign of Circitmcifion is ceafed ^ no more than it proves that fnch Covenant engagement did then begin when Circum-cifion did begin 5 or that women were not Church-

members

(128;

members feparate^j engaged, dedicated to God in Infancy^ htcanfe they vpere 7iot circumcifed. And no more than yon can prove that all Ifrad wai unchwrched in the wildernefs when they were un-ctrcHmcifcd for 40 years» So that here you have a command for entring Infants as Chmch-mem-bers. And fo you fee both promife and precept in Gen, 12. 3. & Gen. 17.

And when I confider the ParentSy breeding and tnanners of Rebekah, / think it far more probable that fie was a Church-member from her Infancy, than that jhe was entred afterwards at age^ or that floe was a heathen or infidel when Ilaac married her.

And as here are before mB?7tionedfiandingCo-venantSy fo it i^ to be noted how God intimatetk the extent of the main bleffing of them to be further than to Abrahams natural feed^ not only in the exprefs promife of the bleffing to all the nati* ens or families on earth ( of which before ) but in the ajftgned reafon of the blejfmg which is common to Abraham with other true believers, For Gen.22. 16517, 18. it is thusalledged [_becaufe thou haft done this thing , &c. And in thy feed (hall all the nations of the earth be blejfed^ becaufe thou hafl^ obeyed my voice» ] And Gen. 26. 3,4, 5. the Covenant is renewed with Ifaac, and the fame reafon afftgned , [^ becaufe that Abraham obeyed my voicey and kept my charge^ my commandments^ my fiatutes and my laws^ j How mans obedience is faid to be a caufe of Gods bleffmgj I am not de^ iermining •, but taking the words as J find them in general , / may (ioncMf ^ that they are here

gi'vsri

(129)

given as a canfe or reafon of it fome way or others And though a Jpeci.il mercy jr^<iy be given on a common ground or reafon , yet where there ts no apparent proof of the rejirtiiioTty we are to judge-the hlefftng common where the reafon t6 common : At leaft 5 // a Jpecial hlejfing be fuptradded to Abrahams feed ( upon the freenefi of Gods graccy or the eminency of Abrahams obedience^ ) yef there goes with It a mercy common to all where the reafon of the mercy u foun^. It being therefore the cafe of every true believer to be faithful and obedient ^ yea^ to prefer that before his own Itfe^ and not a fon only , it may be hence gathered , that God who hleffed Abrahams feed on that ac-County Will blef theirs on the fame^ with the fame hlcfpngs in the main ( as to his favour and ac-^ ceptance of them) though not with the fame in the variable fuperaddittonals or overplus of extern nal things.

In Exod. 12, 48. there is a law for the cireum^ tifing of all the males of firrangers that fojourn iri the landj that will keep the paffover: which com^ frehendeth their [hurch-r/ier/ibcrflnp, ai is fliewed. Reply, To all this neither do I find any new thing calling, for any anfwer, but what the con-fidering Reader can eafily make : His repeated iayings, that if [_Mmiffionbe by B^ptifr, I mufl make Parents Mmifters to baptize J a child may well anfwer. There are more Parties that ad in baptifm than one : God by his itJl'finifiers cxpref-fcth his Covenant-Gift and Confent, and deliver-^ cth it fealcd to the Receiver by the inftituted in-\efting fyrabol: The party receiving expreflech

(13°) hss confent^ and this the Parent hath power and truft to do for the child , as you may take a Leafefor your Child: Cannot the Parent do this, and fo be a Ca^fe of Reception without being a Miniiler?

SECT. LXXIX, toLXXXVI.

R.B. 'Tp/Zf promtfe to the whole people of If-X raei, Infahts anddl^ that they (l}0Pi!d h \^a peculiar people, a Kingdom of Priefij^ and a holy Nation^ J Exod 19. 5, 6. yon cannot de^ ny» This is a promtfe , and not a tranfeunt faB yyhich made no promtfe^ And the people are cal^ led to keep Cods Covenant^ that they might have this promife fulfilled to them. Tea , // yon had faid^ that it vpm a mecr tranfeunt Covenant or promife^ reaching but to the perjons then exifient^ and dying vpith them, though yon had Jpoken more fenfey yet no more truth than when you denied the^ law and prowife^ and fubftttuted a tranfeunt fa^» For , I, //■ 16 ex pre fly a promife de futuro to a Nation, z. Tea ^ and the Jpoflle ?ctcr giveth the farK£ titles to believers under the Gojpel^ in^ tmatii2g the fnlfilling of the promife even to them^ as the promife to Abraham was to the faithful who were his uncircun^ctfed feed. However^ here is a Covenant granting by way of con fir ma^ on the bhffi?ig of thurch-memberfhip to Infants with the rcfl i>/Ifrael: For certainly^ this pecu* liarity^ and hf.lintfs , and prieflood here mentio-tid^ contairiith thtir ChiiYch'rrterr.berfinp: It is

UndeniabU therefore , that fnch Church-member^ jhfp is here granted by Promtfe or Covenant , not 4U a thing then beginnings but by way of confir-mat ion of the like former grants* And it is to he noted ^ that though this fromife is made to all Ifrael, yet not to be fulfilUd to any of them ^ but on condition that they t obey Gods voice , and k^ep his Covenant^'] verf. 5. on which conditions alfo any other might have then enjoyed the fam^ hleffmgy and therefore fo may do now*

In Dect. 17. i,^. The Infants with the reft are called the children of God, and a holy and pe^ cnliar people to the Lord their God.

And Deur. 26. 14,18. theCovenant is expref^ fed [] Thou haft avouched the Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways,^ and keep his ftatuces, and his commandments, and his judgements, and to hearken to his voice. And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath promifed thee, ere. And thac thou maift be ain holy peopk, c^c. Is here no promife, when the promife is expreft f and is here no Covenant^ where the mutual Covenant is de-fcribed ? And t think^you grant that Infants arc included.

So Deur. 28.4, 9. Where the promife to the na^ tion is J that if they hearken to Cods voice and obferve his Commandments^ they JJjall be bleffsd in the fruit of their bodies^ and the Lord will efta-blifj them a holy people to him [elf ^ as he had fworn unto them. 3 Here is not only a Covenant and Promife for the future^ but alfo an oath ton^ fming itj as annexed to the fame before. Is

K i thif

this eflahlijfnn^ Covenant or Tromife hut a tran-feunt fati ? or doth not this confirm their right to the benefit promifedj which Vpas received before by the fame weans ?

And Ezra 9. 2» They dre called the holy feed.

Of that in Deut. 29. / have formerly (poke enough. It is called a Covenant, nAll Ifrael ^ith their little ones did enter the Covenant and the eluth with Cody and which he made to them. It W/u a Covenant , to eftablifh them for a people xh himfelf, and that he may be to them a God, as he had before faid and fworn. It is a Cove* nmt made even t^ith ther/t that flood not there , nhaher It be meant only of the fticceffive Ik^tXats (and then it is not a tranfeunt Covenant ) or of aU people whoever that will accept of the fame urms (and then it's not proper to Ifrael. ) It is a Covenant not fnadeto them as meer Ifraelites:^ hut as obedient to the Covenant terms^ and Co'^r iienant breaking would cut them off, verf. 19,20^' 2 r, 23, 25, 16. Is not(^hMrch-memberjhip contain-ed i:«, Gods being their God, and taking them^\ for his people thus in Covenant > Doth not the pro" mfe give them an ejlablifhed right in this bleffmg?-Is ali this then no promifey but a tranfeunt fa^i /*

Deut. 30. I9» There is a law and promife y dioofe life, that thou and thy feed may live* This is the fame Covenant which hh can fed the people to enter ^ 2 Chron. 15, and if there had] been m law for it^ there would have been no ptf^' ndty^ and then he would not have made it deaih' fo withdraw. It is the fame Covenant which Jo-Mkcaufed the people to enter, 2 Kings23. 2,3Jl

2Chron»

2 Chron. 34« 5i, 3^- Of Levir. 25/41,54, 55^ / have Ipoken elfewherey .and of fome other

^•^''- . ^•■^■^'^^v-,^^ ' •' ^^--^

Mr. r, For, the fo/e effirim. cnuje bein^ a^taUy

put ("as the Covenant and the Parents fxlieving are? IV«f. 2c. j the ejfeU mufi be In act : but it is not fo in tf^ unborn : therefore the Covenant and Parents faith are not

the folc efficient fo that though the Covenant give

a Right to a bleiling, yet it dodi not make adualiy vifi-b!e Church-members 3 witliout foipe other tranfeunc faft . '

Reply. ( The reft let the Reader make his beft of. ) We are it feems by this time in a fair way of agreement, and have almofl done our work. It feemeth by this time he could find in his heart to grant that the Covenant is an efficient caafe^ though not the fole efficient: well, we will not ftick on that : Gods love and revelation , and thrifts merits (hall be antecedent chief efficients: And he feemeth now inftead of faying ftill that ;{^ It is only by the Phyfcal tranfeunt falh ] to be content if we will fay, it is not till or witbjut that fad: ^ that is, that men' are not members of the Church till they are men. We will not be fo fowre as to deny him that much. And indeed is this all at the upfhot ? But I will not grant him tlie logical notion too eaiily, though we will not quarrel about itc I think a canfe materiaUy miay long exift before the fffiecl^ though it be not /or-maliter caufa till it effed : And I think that Gods conditional (Covenant or Tromife^ is but caufa vir'* tiialis cr aptitndinalis till it effeB , and yet may be the fole proximate efficient of our Right af* lerward: I think the childs bein^ born did not

' " K 3 efsq

Ci34) fffeSi his Right to Church Relation, Tior dotii ' pur Faith now, nor the Parents faith or confent'^ but only as a condition maj^e men capable Recipients, And I think the effe5i may begin de mvq lyithoyt any change in ihc efficient^ upon a change in the Recipient: And that the Sun unchanged is the proximate efficient of motion, light and hear, to the next exigent wight that received not his influx before it did exift: And the Covenant or ponatiye Inflrutnent of God which faith \^He. that helieyeth ^Imll be JHfitfied^ rpay effeft my Juftification when I believe and not before , though my faith ejfeB it not at all, but dijpofe th^ recipient. But I deny that the Parents faithbc' in^ pHt^ all the c^p^city of the recipient is put^y even when he is born: For if it be pofiible for the Parent to confent for himfelf and not for hi^ child , and to devote himfelf and not his child to God 5 part of the condition pf re(:eptioa i$

wanting.

As far as I perceive , could I but hope to be fo happy a difputant, as to convince Mr. T, that Church-memberfhip (vi{]ble J is any benefit at all it felf or was to the Ifraelites y he would grant me all that I plead for of the conveyance of it by Qpvenant. And if I cannot it is a hard cafe,

SE<?Ti

(IS5)

SECT. LXXXVI.

il. B. ""T^He fccond Commandment ^ Exod. 2(% jL 5, 6. Deur. 5. 9, lo. / thinks is a laWy and containeth a fromtfe or premiant fart y vcherein he promifeth to fljew mercy to the gene-rations or children of them that love him and. keep his Commandments : of which I have alfo Jpoken elfexvhere, to which 1 refer yon, I fee no reafon to dohht but here is a fiandmg promtfe , and difcovery of Gods refolution , concerning the children of all that love him , whether Jews or Gentilesy to whom this Commandment belongs: nor to doubt whether this mercy imply Church^ membership : And that this is fetcht from the ve^ ry gracioHi nature of God^ I find in his proclaim^ ing bis Name to Mofes, Exod. 34.6, 7*

Mr. r. If this mercy here imply Church-meiuberfhip to the Infaats of tJicm that love hioi to a thoufand Generations 5 then it implieth it to all the Infants in the world But there is nothing to prove that this mercy muft be Church-memhcrfhip, or that it mufl be to all th.e children of them that love God, or that it rni(ft be

to them in Infancy I incline to conceive this apro-

mife of temporal mercies, chiefly to the ip:ic'Jtfj

Reply, I. That it is not only o^temporalmer'* ciesy the words \^ Love and Hate "] as the qualification of the Parents, fceni to prove ^ and the joyning the children to the Parents m the retrir bution : And all the terms feem above fuch 3 fenfe : It is the revenge of ajealom God on Ido" lafersj and mncy to his Lovers that isfpokenof:

K 4 And

And the joyning this Command to tire- firfi; which fkleih our relation to God , with the Laws annexed in Dent, for the curting off whole Cities ( Parents and Children ) that turn from God to Idols, llieweih that it reached to Church-Commft-r.ion and Life*

2. And that it was not only to the Ifraelites (whatever you cbitfy meanj is proved boih in that it is in the Docalo£ue , and the proclaimed name of God ^ Esod. 54. 5, 6. and exemplified througliouL the Scripture and in the Gofpel.

2. As to the extent, we can hardly expeft that the world fbould endure a thouland Generations: Therefore it-can mean but that God who bound-Cth the punifhmcnt to the third and fourth generation, will fet no bounds to the fucceiiion of his mercies while our capacity continueth. And whatever the mercies be, the expoficion of this conti^^ vuAnce ^oncerneth you as much as n}e^

3. As to the conditions, I doubt not but it fup-pofech that the child at age imitate the Parents in iheir Love or Hatred ^ duty or fin ; And that if on Repentance the Parent be forgiven, his fin may not be vifited to the third and fourth. And if 5 child of Godly Parents turn wicked, the right is intercepted^

4. But the Commandment with the forefaid cxpofidon fhews, that God meaneth that his Retri-b,u ion to Parents that Love or Hate him, fiiall extend to their children as fach ^ unlefs they interrupt it at age by their own ads; And iffotheir children ^na tales^ then to Infants.

037) not in reafon be conceived to beloKg to them without, and can mean no lefs than Gods vifiblc favourjby which the Church is diff^^renccd from the v/>.rld, when Lovers and Haters are diftinguifhed fides.

And when God hath 'Recorded this decreed grAnted diJ}wanipHd mrcy to the children of the faithful as fnch in the Tables of ftone , fure it is a Vifiblc notification^ which will make them vifi^ hie favorites and Chnrch'jnerr;hers as foon as they vifibly exift.

And the quatenus feemeth to me to prove that it excendeth to all the children of the faithful^ becaufe it is to them as fuch. But irfolloweth not that it mud extend to them all alikcy as to eqnal wercies^ nor yet that the fin of Parents after may fnake no kind of forfeiture. But of this I have faid more in my Chriftian Dire^ory,

SECT. LXXXVII, to XCIV.

p.. B. TiV Pfal. 102. 28. It is a general fro^ 1 mife^ the children of thy fcrvants fnall continue, and their feed (hall be eftablifhed before ihee, Jt is ufiial in the OldTefiament to expref Cods favour, hy temporal blcljl?/gs , ?y,ore than in the Gojpel -^ but yet fill they fee lire a^ of his fa-zgnr, jis^ I will not fail thee, nor forfake thee, wight fccure Jofliua n:ore than m of temporal fiic* ccjjesy and yet not more of Gods never failing /<«-

"JOIiV^

There

rx3U

^here is a flable fromife to all Gods people in general that have children^ Pfal. 103. 17. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlafting to evcrr lafting upon them that fear him, and his righte-oufneTs unto childrens children, u4nd to be fe-cured by promife of Gods mercy and ri^hteotsfnej^ is the fiate of none without the Church,

And if they were all to be kept out of the Church, I fcarce thinks that Children would be called an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the wo^b his reward, Pfal. iij, 3. nor the manhap-^ py that hath his quiver full of them. Nor would the fucking children be called as part of the fo' lemn ajfembly to the htiwiliation , ]oel 2. 16. 2 Chron. 26.13^

There is a [landing promtfe to all the jt^^fiy Prov^ 20.7. The juft man wai1<eth in his integrity, his children are blefled alter him. There is no fort of men without the Church that is pronounced hleffcd in Scripture, A blejfed people are Gods people , and thofe are the Church feparated from the curfed world. One lower blefjing Will not de-r-f^ominate a man or focicty , a blefjed marp or fo^ ciety.

If it were a good argument then^ Deut,^, -i^^^ becaufe he loved thy fathers, therefore he chofe their feed after them, theyi it is good ft ill as to fa-^jour in general. So Deut, 10. 15. Pfal.^, 36. Trov.i\*2i, The feed of the righteous fhali be delivered. In Pfal. 37. 26. there is a general promife to, or declaration of the rightcom^ thatVxl^ feed is bleffed, and then they are Church-members,

la Ih. 61. 8, 9. it is promtfed I think, of Gd»

fjU

(IS9)

fjftltimes^ I will make an everlafting Covenant with them , and their feed fhall be known among the Gentiles, and their ofF-fpring among the people : all that fee them (hall acknowledge them, that they arc the feed which the Lord hath blef-ifed. And cap.62. 12, They iTiall call them the holy people, the redeemed of the Lord; and thou (halt be called, fought out, a city not forfaken. Cofpel promifes then extend to [ people and cities^ ] whereof Infants (tre a part, I fa, 6^, 23. they are the feed of the blefled of the Lord, and their off-fpring with them. This is plain y and full, and durable.

What is neceffary to he faid in anfwer to the common ohje^lions ^ ai [_ that experience tells us all the feed of the rtghteom are not hlejfed^ with the like , I fuppofe already done in my book^of Baptifm, All the feed of the righteous are blef-fed y though not all vpith that blejfing which can^ not f;e lofl and cafi away by themfelves when they come to age,

Mr. T.'s Anfwers all contain the difficulty of difcerning the fulHlling of thefe promifes, and fa denying that they infer vifible Church-member-fhip: and he faith j^ That without the Church a per [on may he pronounced bleffed^ is apparent from Ifhmaels blejfing^ Gen. 17. 20. when he was excluded the Covenant and caftour. ]

Reply, He was excluded the Covenant of peculiarity, but not the common Covenant of Grace rnade with mankind in Adam and Noe: And the Church was larger than the Ifraetites Nation, The reft I leave to the Reader,

# SECTi

(140)

— — ^ —4.

SECT. XCIV, XCV.

R. B. TF youfay that the word \^feed^ doth not i necejjarily incln^.e Infants* I atifvoer^ Infants are fart of the feed of the righteom , yea all their feed are firfi Infants, If therefore God have made general fromifes a^ to age and perfon^ vpho is he that dare hmit it , without jufi proof that indeed God hath limited it f Doth God fay^ that the feed of the righteous are not hieffed till they come to age f If he pronounce the feed hlejfedy they mptfi he hlejfed , when they are prfi fiich a feed: And if any one age might be rnore included than ano» therj one would think^it mufi he that wherein the^ /ire fi meerly the feed of fich as that they ft and not on any diftinB account of their own atlua^ faith or unbelief, ' For the feed of the righteous^ ^ fuchj have a promifed hleffing: But the feed of the righteoiu turning themfe Ives to unrighteouf-rtcf^ do turn from that hlejfwg^ and become aC'^ curfcd,

I fMppofe I have already been wore tediom than you, expeBed: I will therefore add no more of thefe paffagcs of Scripture , having faid that vifhich fatisfeth me formerly to the fame purpofe j and having yet feen nothing that leaves me un^ fatisfed. And alfo hecaufe one text either containing fuch a Law or Covenant as you call for^ or declaring to w that God did make fuch a Law or Covenant^ is 06 good as a thousand in point of iHuthority^

' Mr. T, Mr. B. not holding children in the womb unborn to be vifiblc Church-members, all this may be retort-e(I; They are part of the feed of the righteous.

Refly. The whole feed f in the womb and born } are taken into this relation to God which im-plyeth his bleftlng on them as feparaced from the wicked, according to their capacity : An Infant iri the womb is vifibly feparated to God, if you denominate 'viftbility froni the notoriety or viability of Gods promife that doth it: But the ferfon is net vifihle to you, though fenfible to the mother. As Chrift was the Head in the womb, fo far Infants are members -, the Parents then privately devoting them to God : I told you before, the vifibility of our (late hath feveral gradations. To quibble thus on all Gods promifes to the children of the faithful by queftions and exceptions about embryo's, abortives, c^c, is vanity.

SECT. XCVI, XCVII.

R. B. T^ HE next QHefrion th^t Ifpould fpeak, JL to tSj whether thcfe Laws , or Covenants^ or Vro'i'Kifes^ are capable ej a revocation^ or repeal ? and I {hall take this for a quefiion that needs no further debate , aniong iKen that know what a Law or Promife is. Cods' immu^ tability and perfe^iion may mak^^ jOme Law^ «»-repealable y while the fiib;e5i rtmpins: hut other^ VPife the thing it [elf is capable of it. Only where a, Promife or Law is but for a Imited time , rvhcn the time is €xfh(d it ceafeth , and the cef-

faticn

(140

fat ion is oito the nulling of ity equal to a rewP CM ion or abrogation. I put in this que flion , leff yoi fijould hereafter change your mtnd and fay ^ that indeed tt is a laxK>^ or fromife^ or covenantj by which the right of Church-memberjluf is conr ferred^ and Infants dedicated to God: but it is but a i anfeunt Law or CovenantiJ^ Anfw. Jf fo^thenit is either immediately or prefently tranfeunt^ or at a certain limited time only ^ vphen it will ceafe. Tide former ts certainly falfe and intolerable^ For^ i*They are promifesand laws for the future^ and therefore ceafe not immediately, 2. That Vpere to make God the mofi unfaithful fromifer and mutable Larv-maker in the worlds if his prO' mife and his laves ceafe as foon as they are made* Jslay it makes them to he no laws or promifes» 3 • It was one ftanding law and promtfe thai be^ Imged to the Nation of the Jews fuccejfively. And God did not make his promife anew to every In^ fant that was made a Church-member^ nor renew his law to every Varent to enter their Children into his Covenant by the fign of Circumci(ion» Were not the uncircumcifed Ifraelices in the Wilderneft rn^ide members by the efficacy of the former Covenant of God remaining in force. And did for-' mer Laws oblige to Circumcifon till Chrifl ? Elfe there were but few members^ nor but few that ctr-cumcifed warrantably-, if the promtfe and precept did extend but to the perfon that it was firji deli-: vcred to^ and every one elfe mufi Ukewifc have a-perfonal promife and precept. The Mother of Chrifl cannot then be proved to have been a Qmrch-member in Infancy* If it be faid that

thefs

ri43)

thefe promtfes were limited in the making of them^ to a certain riwe when they were to ceafe^ J fay when that is fro'ved we p}all believe ft ^ which I have not yet feen done.

Audit falls in with the laf qneftion^ which is^

whether thefe frowtfes be indeed revoked and cea-

fed y and thefe laws repealed or ceafed, ty4nd

here it is that J have long expe^ed your foltd

proofs together with the fatisfaliory anfwer to my

arguments to the contrary. And fo I Jhall leave

this task^ in yonr hands. Sure I am that Chrifi

never came to caft out of the Churchy but to go*

ther more in: mnch lefs to cafl out all the InfantSy

even all of that age in which htmfelf wa6 head of

that Church: But to gather together in one the

children of God that were fcatteredy Johnii. 52.

And therefore he would oft have gathered all ]e-

rufalcm and Judsea, even the National Church that

then wofy unto htmfelf^ 06 the true head^ even as

a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wingsy

and they would not. It was not becanfe he would

not ( oi intending a new frame , where Infants

could have no place ) hut becaufe they would not ,

andfo caft out themfelves and their Infants, Certain^

ly it is the joy of the formerly defolate Gentiles ,

that they ftoall have many more children than

jlie that had an Husband , and not fewer ,

Gal. 4. 25 , 26 5 27. And we as Ifaac are

children of the promife , even that promife

which extended to the Infants with the Parents,

Gal. 4.28.

Mr. T. I conceived a Prom/fe not in congrunas f?^fe

ri^uUbli: For although a promife be a Law to the Pro-

nr.fcr,

(.HA)

Jenifer, yet I know hoc how congruoufly it fhould be repealed : 'Tis true, the ad of proniKing being tranfeunr ceafeth j but that cannot be repealed: that which is done cannot be Injediim:, no:: done.

Reply. 1 perceive we mufl: difpute our firft principles^ as well as our Bapufm. Reader, Gods^ promife in queftion is not a particular promife to fome one perfon only, but his Recorded Jnflrti-went of Donation^ or ftabliflied written or continued word, which is the fi^n of his will: It is the fame thing which is called , the Tremiant or Donative part of his Law, in one refpeft, and hi$ Teftament in another, and his Donation or Gift in another, and his Covenant as Conditional in another, and his Promife in another. As [^ He that believeth floail be faved J is the Rewarding or Giving part of a Law, and it is a Teftamenr,, a Covenant, a Promife, a Gift, all thefe. Mr.T, cannot fee how this promife can be repealed: what, not an. univerfal promifing Law, or Covenant or Inftrument ? The queftion is not whether it ever was 7'cfealed. but whether it be repalea-hle^ in congruous fenfe. Why m:iy not the King make a Law that every one that killeth fuch and fuch hurtful creatures ( a Fox, c^c, ) or that kil-ieth an enemy in war, (hall have fuch a reward; and repeale this Law or Promife when he feeth caufe ? I think the firft Covenant ceafed by mans fin, without repeal. But I cannot fay that no promife to the Ifradites was repealed, upon their fin 1 The non-perfox^mance of the condition depri-veth the psrty of the benefit while it is unrepealed; but may no: God thereuf on repeal the Law

or Covenant, and null the very offer to pofterity ? Is it not (o as to the Jews policie and peculiarity? What pains is taken in theEpiftleto the He-hrevcs to prove the change of the Covenant as fauhy in ccmparifon of that which had better pro-mifes? But if you will call it ameer cejfatiorj^dW is one sis to cur queflion in hand*

SECT. XCVIII.

Ro B. YyEfore I end I fijill he bold to p^t tvfo JLJ or three Qjtejiions to yoH out of your lafi Letter, Queft. i. Whether the circnnjcffed fervants of Ifrael fold at^ay to another nation ^ and fo feparated from the Civil fate of Ifrael , did eo ViO^mWitceafe to he C'^nrch-memhers^ though they forfook^ not God / And fo of the Infants if they were fold in Infancy f If you affirm it^ then prove it^ If yon deny tty then Infants might he QjHrch-rnetnbers that were not ef the Qon^mon-wealth,

. Mr. r. None v;as of right of the Jewifh Cliurch

who was noc of the Common-Tvcalth.

Reply, But my Queftion was, when withoui; for-faking God, they are forcibly feparated from the Jewifli policy and fubjeded to others, are they iiot members of the Chnrch-HniverfalhiVyihongh not of the Jews ? ^

?£CT.

(146)

SECT. XCIX.

R.B. Queft.2.1 F ( as yon fay ) ip vaas on the Jews 1 rejcciton of Chrift that they were broks^ off' from being Gods feofle^ vperethofe'thoii" fands of Jews that believed in Chrift fo broken off.J or not , who continued fucceffively a famons Church at Hierufalem, wh'^ch came to be a Tatri^ archal feat. Whether then were not the childrefj. of the Difcifles and all believing Jews Church^ members in Infancy f If noy then it was fomewhat elfe than unbelief that broke them offi

Mr, T. They were broken off from the Jewifli Church, not by unbelief, but by faith in Chrifl.

Reply, This is too fhort an anfwer to io great an evider.ce againft you. The Infants of the Chri-ftian Jews were the day before their Converfion members of the Jewilh Church and of Gods uni-verfal Church, of which the Jews were but a part: For as he that is a member of the City is a member of the Kingdom, and a part of a part is a part of the whole, fo every member of the Jews Church was a member of Gods univerfal Church. Now, i. The very Jews pohcy totally ceafed not till the deflrudion of Jerufalem at kafr. 2. But if it had, I ask, was k no mercy to be a' ntcmber both of the Jews Church and the univerfal? If not, the Jews loft nothing by being broken off ? If yea, how did the Chriftians Children forfeit it ? Was it better to be of no vifible Church, than of the univerfal ? The Jews were

" ~ * ^ ^ broken-

Cm?)

broken off by unbelief: you lay Chriftians Tb-fanes were put out of that and the whole vifiblc Church by faith, or without unbelief.

SECT. C.

R. B. Qneft. 3. ''^TTHether it he crediilethd VV he who came not to cafi out fewSy hilt to bring in CentileSy breaking dovpn the partition-xvally and making of two one Churchy would have fUch a Lin fey Woolfey Church of fatty colours^ or fever at forms: fo Oi that the Chureh at Hierufalem Jhcald have Infant members , and the Church at Ronae jhould have nonel f Jews Infants fljohld be members and not Genties ?

Mr.T. fo anfwereth as before, and needeihno other Reply,

S E C T. CI.

JR. B. Quefi:.4. TF unbelief brake them off ^ X vpill not repentance grafthe?^ In ? And fo jJjould every repenting believing JewB Infants be Church-members j*

Mr. T. Not their Infants •

}ieply. Then it would be but a part a'i the peo-' pie that would be graffcd ine

ti ^ECT.

(148)

SECT. CI I.

R. B, Qlieft. 5. \XT^^ ^^^ Chrifis Church he^ VV ' fore his incarnation Jpiri-tital^ and gathered in a jpiritnal way?

. Mr. T. The invil'ible was 5 the vifiblc Jewifh Nation was not.

Reply» Not in comparifon of the times of maturity : but the viiible Jewilh frame had the Father of fpirits for Soveraign, and commanded fpiritual duties, upon promifes of fpiritual bleilings, even life Eternal*

^ECT.CIIL

R. B. Queft. 6. TJOrv prove yon that it was a

.CjL blemijh to the old frame ,

that Infants were members /* Or that Chrifts

Chnrch then and now are of two frame sin regard

of the fiibje^j age f

- .Mr. f,.\t was a more imperfed flatc in that and other regards;; • " • '

Re fly. I called for fome proof that the Infant-memberfhip was any part of the Church-imper-fe(5tion : If it be not a blemifh, why muft it be done away : what, was the Church the worfe for Infants Rights?

SECT;

C MP)

s E c T. c n^

R^ B. Qucft.y.TiV what regard is the new X frtume bettered hy casing ont Infants which were tn the old /*

Mr. r. The Church is more fpiri ual

Re^ly. What, doth Infants Relation detradt from its fpirituality ? The adult have fouls and bodies, and fo have Infants ? The adult conoe in by the fame kind of confent for themfelves, as they make for their Infants ? The adult blemifh the Church with more carnal fins than Infants do? The Kingdom would be never the more fpiritual nor excellent, if all Infants were disfranchised : Nature teacheth all Kingdoms on earth to take them for members, though but Infant-members.

SECT. CV,

R. B. Qued. 8. ^^r\J Hether any Jew at age VV vvai a member of the old Church without frofejfmg faith (in the Articles necejfary to falvation ) repentance and obedience f And wherein the fuppofed new call and frame doth in this differ from the old-^ fave only that a, more full and expref revelation ef Chrifi , rcqui* reth a more full expref faith F

Mr. T*. 1 know net wliat profcdion crxh Jew did rnsk?, or was to make.

L 3 ^^Ph*

Reply. I would you had been as cautelous ancj modeft throughout. It is evident, that they wer^ to profcfs confent to Gods Covenant^ which thofe tjiat denied, .^ would puc to death. '

SECT.CVL

R. B. "VT^^ may fee the voords near the end of X your Letter that occafwn the [even lafi QueftionSy and towards the rraddle that occa-fioneth the firfi. As for your motion of my fully deferibing the fri-viledges of Church-members^ I fl)all add no more at thps time to what is alrea^ dy elfewhere [aid of it.

Reply. Here Mr. T". chides me for wronging hini by length; and being afraid the Reader wil| do fo too I make hafte»

SECT. CVII, CVIIL

R. B. A Nd now I have gone thm far with JLX. yoUj in an encjutry into the truth^ I entreat you he not too much offended wtth me^ if I conclude with a few ^pplicatory ^ue(lions to your felf. Queft. i. // it not an undertaking as •palpably ah fur d as nioft ever any learned fiber Divine in the world was guilty of , to ?naintain that [_ Infants were vifihle Church-members not ly any promife or precept , but by a tranfeunt faB^ and that there was no law or ordinance determining it Jljould be foy but only a faB of God^

which

which is a tranfeunt thing not repealahle ? 3 Btit cither by this fath you mean Legiflat ion and Coyenant-makin^ , or not: if yon do , x^hat a faying is it that Infants were made Church-members not by Covenant , but by a Covenant-makings not by a Law , but by a Law-making f If not , either you mnft fay^ that God makes du^ ty without any law , and gives right to the bem-fit without any fromife^ or Qjvenant-grant Oi the caufe ^ or elfe^ that it is no benefit to i^ave right to Chnrch-memberfinp, and no duty to enter into that relation^ and to accept of that benefit ^ and to be devoted to God. Which ever of thefe ways you chnfe (and one you mnfl chufe , or change your opinion) hath the world heard of any more unreafonable and ridiculom , or elfe more itnbc-feeming a Divine , from a learned fober man of that profejfion ? Pardon the high charge : Let th<^ indifferent jndge.

Reply. To this I find no anCwcr worth the reciting.

SECT. CIX.

R. B, Queft. 2. T5 it not a great difgrace to all JL your followers , that they will be led fo far into fuch ways of Schifrn, and be fo confident that they are righter and wifcr than others , and that by fuch unreafonable argttings and finfts as thefe , which one Wf^nld thinks any man jhould laugh at that knows what a Law ^ Frcmifcy or Covenant u f And do yon uot jrovc^

L 4. - thai:

.(i50

that it is not becaufe of the evidence of truth^ hiit by your meer interefi or confident words , thefe people are changed and held to your ojinion ? Do they know what \_ a tranfeunt faB is ^ that without Law or Covenant mah^s Church-members? ] ^. f'^y-i do they know this? which no man that ever breathed till now , nqr ever man will k^ow again ? And do yon not proclaim them men of df'flempered confciences , that dare go on in fuch J Schifm y on the encouragement of fuch fancies .ts were hatcht fo long after their perverfion^ and never waking man 1 thtnk^did before fo folemnly maintain ?~\

Reply. I have nothing to Tay here, but Mr, T*, feems very angry at this.

SECT. CXo

* R, B. Queft. 3» T«5 ^^ ^ot a dcjperate underta^ A k^'f^^g y ^^d dare you adven -ture on it^ to juflifie all the world before Chrijh incarnation except the Jews , from the guilt of not dedicating their children to God^ to take him to be their Godj and themfelves to be his people f Tea, to juflifie all Jews againfl this charge, that flfould negkth or refufe to engage their children to (jod in Covenant 04 members of his Church ? And doth not he that faith there is no law , fay there is no tranjgreffion ? '

Mr. r. He doth — Let him tremble at his defperatc undertaking to uphold his Lie of Infant Church-raem-berfhip and Eaptifra by liich Lies as thefe, and fear the ate of Liers. ' i?^«

M53) Reply. Charge not your felf, and I will not V I propofe it to your confideration, whether the peirfons that folcmnly take God for their God Recording to Gods Covenant, and are by his vi-fible word of Covenant, taken by God for his people, be not vifible members of the Church uni-verfal? And whether he that faith, There is no Law of God binding to do thm for his childreny do not infer that they fin not by not doing it ?

S E C T. C X I.

R. B. Queft. 4. Tn\-^^<? yon yet jufttfe alfo at 3l_J the Bar of God^ all the •world fince Qorifls incarnation from the guilt of fin J in not dedicating their children to Chrift ^ and entring them into his Covenant as members of his Church ? Dare you maintain that all the vporld is finlefs in this reJpeB f

Mr. 7; I dare juftifie the Non-baptizing them

Reply, Here you make a modeft flop. It fcem-cth you dare not juftifie men for not foiemnly dedicating them in Covenant to God, and vifi-bly engaging them to Chrift as members vifible of his Church.

SECT.

ri54j

SECT. CXIL

R. B. Queft. 5. TTAve you well confJered of iTX the fruit pf your vs^ays af-farent in England and Ireland at tht: djy ? Or have you not feen enojigh to make you fnfpe^i and fear whether indeed God own your way or not ? jind is it any wonder if poftcrity he left in con* troverjie ahoM the Hiftory of jormer times^ when you can ve?2ture , even in thefe times when the perfons are living in our company^ to tell me that ^you think, J am mtfinformed that they are Ana-taptifts , and you tbink^that there are very few of them that were ever baptiz^ed^ ] when of many that we know > and multitudes that we hear ofy there are fo few that were not before againft Infant Baptifm ^ and the Seekers firfi fuch^ and when the Quakers themfelves commonly cry down Infant Baptifm y and it is one of the quefiions that they fend to me^ and others to anfwer^ [_ how we can prove it by exprefs Scripture without con-fequences , or elfe confefs our felves falfe VrO' fhets.

Reply. The anfwer to this I leave to the Readers judgement.

SECT,

(155)

S»CT, CXIII.

R. B. Queft. 6. T T ^^/g you felt the guilt which XJL rv§ too flrongly fear you have incurred , of the perverting of fo many fonlsy opening them fuch a gap to fchifm , contempt of the <iJ^/intftryj and Apojiafie^ defraying a hopefnl reformation that cofi fo dear: or vpeaknmg our ha?7ds in the work^^ and filling the adverfaries woHths vpith fccrn^ enticing the Jefuites and Fri^ afs to feem your profelytes , and lift themfelves 4mo7Jg you^ as the hopeful party to befriend their caufcy hardning thoufands both of the Pafifls and profaney and fetling them again on their dregs , rvhen many once began to jhake ! O what a Church might we have had^ and were likely to have had ? Had it not been for the Separatifls and you ? jind what a lamentable confupon are we now brought i7jto by thefe f Have thefe things toucht your heart f

Reply, Mr. T, here is angry, and I wonder not •, one ftone he fnatcheth up from Dod. Owem Appendix, and one from the Scotch Church , and Elders, and the Church at Kederminfter^ and the Worcefterflnre Aflbciation, which few before |iira I think have faid much againft.

SECT,

(J5^)

SECT, CXI^.

R. B. Queft. 7. T5 [| a tranfemt faU , making JL Infants Church-members mth-cut Law, Tromife, or Cpvenant~]^ afufficientmC' dium to encourage you to ^jenture on all thefe hor" rid things , and run fuch haz^ards m you have done, f Or is it fofflble that an humble fiber man^ and a tender confiience , durfl make all this ha-vock^y and fland out in it fi many years confi-derately 04 you have done, and this upon fuch a palpably unreafonable pretence / JVhen you fljould prove to us the revocation of Infants Church^ memberjhip , to tell m that they had it only by a tranfeunt faU ? Is this a fafe ground to build fo great a weight on ? Sir, my confcience witneffeth, that it is not your reproach that is the end of peaking thefe unpleafmg words to you , but fome compajfidn on you ( do not fcorn it ) and more on your poor followers ; and mofi on ths Church of God which you have fo much injured and troubled^ Reply, HereMr.T. is angry again, which is the fumm.

SECT. C X V.

R. B, Queft. 8. /^^« you prove that ever there Vv was one age , or Church {particular ) on earth fince Adam till about 200 years ago^ that the Anabaptifls rofe, wherein Infants

(-157;

funis vpere not de fado taken for members of the

Church f Jf you can do it: Let pu hear your froof„

Mr.T' I can •, and for proof look back to Seft. 503 $1. and bcfides Cori^ar.tim^ Auguflm:, Na^^, Hicrom

Refly. I can find no fuch thing there: what if the four men you name were baptized at age (the fpecial reafons are told you elfewhere. ) Doth that prove that others were not baptized in Infancy ? Your 52 Sed. I think to examine in the end.

SECT. CXVL

R. B. Queft.p. /^An yon bring us }r oof of any V^ one Infant of true Church-memberi^ that "was not rightfully a Church-member himfelf from the creation tiU Chrifis days ? or from the creation till this day f except the Ana^ baptifts^rvho rejeEh the bene ft •, whofe cafe(a6 Ifaid before ) I will not frefume to determine ^

Mr.T". lean, look back to Sed". 5c, 51, 52, 57.-

Refly, I have done, and I find no fuch proof*

SECT. CXVIL

R. B. Queft, ic. Q^Eeing that Infant shave been O dc fado Church-members from the creation to this day ( as far as any re-cords can lead us ) is it likfly that the Lord, and head and all-fufficient Governour of his Churthf would have fermtttcd his Church till now

to

h be aBnally made up af fitch fuhjeBs^ 04 in regard of age be difallovped ? Jnd jujfer his Church to be vprong frar^ted till now ? Or is it a reafenable , wodep and lawful undertaking > to go about now in the end of the world to make Cjod a new fra^ med Chnrchy as to the age of the fnbje6ls /* jind is it not more mode ft and fafe^ to live quietly in a Church of that frame as all the faints in Hea-ven lived in ^ till the other day^ as a few Ana-haptifls with vile and ftnfdl means , and Mfera-hlefnccefij did attempt an alteration ?

Mr. T. here deniech the fuppofitions 1 I leave the Reader to judge how truly.

SECT. CXVIII, CXiXc

R. B, O/^, pardon the Weaknefy and bear wit f) ' i<3 the plainnef and freenefs of Yonr

faithful Brother (though not as is meet ) Rich. Baxter. May 14. 1055.

5/>, // you have any thing of momeht to fay\ in reply to thefe^ which you have not yet in your writings brought forth , / foali be willing to con-fider of it: But if you have not , / pray you tell me fo in two words , and (pare the reft of your pains ( a^ for me) and trouble me no more with matters of this nature. For truly I havenofuf^ ficient vacancy from greater works. Tea y J ark conftrained to forbear much greater than thefe, R. B. Jfter this he tells me , that whereas I preached a Sermon at Bewdley, in which I re^ fated bj mmy argumenti Infants vifble Church^

memberjhif^

memherfi'nf^ J mufi be either mntahle or hyfocriti^ valj if JdenyfHch a Law and Ordinance vphich / took^ on me then to refute , and defires a Copy of that Sermon , that he may fhcw the fad miftakes and vanity of thofe my arguments.

Reply. Reader, to Mr. T/s anger at thefe ten Queftions I muft fay, i.That the dolefulnefs of the Churches cafe conftraincd rae in grief of heart to deal,plainly with him.

2. But it was in a private letter, extorted by his importunity, and publiflied to the world by himfelf and not by me •, who confefs that this plainnefswas too great for me to have ufed to him publickLy: But fecret admonition difparageth him not to others. It hath now been by himfelf about nineteen years divulged to the world, and I did not fo much as trouble his patience by a word of anfwer, and little thought ever to do it: But Major Danvers his loud invitation hath drawn me to give them this FarewelL

TH E Reader muft here take notice that I am not here called to prove Infants Church-memberl>.ip out of the New Teftament, but to (hew out of the Old that they were vifible Church-members before by a Grant or Covenant, which thrift hath not repealed. The reft ( out of the New-Teftament ) I have done long ago in my Treatife of Infant Church-memfeerfhip and Ba-ptifm, which Mr.T. is fo much difpleafed at. And indeed I think that the proofs are plain, though taany objgSions may be difficult to be anfwered^

efpecialiy

i-rpecially by'thofe who have not throughly coti^ fidercd the cafe. When I fee together Chrifts own Infant memberfhip, and his kind reception of Infants, and his chiding ihofe that would have kept them off^ and his otfers of taking in all the Jewifli Nation into his Church, and that they were broken off by tinbelicf, and confequently the feed of Believers not broken off from the Church univerfal, and that whole houlliolds are oft faid to be baptized, and that Paul pronounceth Believers children holy , and that Chrift exprefly y zJ^atth, 2S. commandeth his Miniflers as much ^s in them liethto Difciple all iV^^^o^j baptizing, and it's prophefied that the Kingdoms* of the world fhall be made the Kingdoms of Chrift, and there is no Nation or Kingdom on earth that Infants arc not members of-. All this and much more feemeth to me a plain revelation of Gods will, that as he never had a Church which excluded Infants, fa he doth not now exclude them. And it is exprefly faid of the Jews that they were 2M haftiz^ed unto Mofes in the cloud and in thefea^ I Cor. 10. 2, where doubtlefs the Apoftle in the name had refped to our being hsptiz^ed into Chrifi , of which theirs was a typical Baptifm ., And it is not faid in vain that they were {_all ba-ftiz^ed'} including their Infants, but as part of the Analogie, as if he had faid [] c/^s vpe now are all baptized intd Chrift, 3

Thefe things feem to me a certain notification of Gods will herein • which in the forefaid fofmer Trcatifc I have iullier opened and 'im-provedy And fliould I ftand to anfwer all the

" r Vfordi

words that Mr. Tomhes hath faid againft it, j (hould needlefly tire the Reader and my Self, and lofe that time which I cannot fpare.

A Confutation of Mr, Tombes'j Reafons SeB, ^ik by "which he pctcndcth to ^rcVe that Ififants were not reckoned to the uifihle Church-Chri" fiian in the Primitive times^ nor are now*

Mr» T, I. V cydrgue thtu : If ?7o Infants were L -part of the vifible Church-Qjrifii-AH in the Trimitive times^ then whatever Ordr nance there were of their viftble memberf}fp be-forcy mnfi needs be repealed : B^t the antecedent is true^ ^rgo, the conftquent ■— The Antece^ dent I prove thm^ . If in all the days of Chrifi on earthy and the Apofiles^ tio Infant was a part or ntcmber of the vifible (Ij^rch Chrifiian , then not in the primitive times: But, dec. Ergo, &:Ca

The A^inor proved i. All vifihle menc-heri

f the Chirrch-Chrifiianwere to be baptiz^ed: But /:o Infa'nts were to be baptized: Therefore" no In--fants were vifible members of the Chrifiian Church,

Anfw. I. To the Major ; they were to tfe ba-ptifed after Chrifts baptifm was inflituted, Mato 28. 19. but not before 5 when yec the Chriftiart Church was exiftent in Chriftandhis Difciples: Therefore Chrift was not baptized in his Tnfancie.

2. To the Minor, If his bare affirmation would prove that Infants were no:: to be baptized, what need he write his books ?

M Mr.T^

(l63)

c>^r. T. 2. They were not 'viphle Members of the Church-Chrtfiian vpho were not of the body of C^rifl: But no Infant was of the vifible body of Chrifi, f roved from i Cor. 12.13 AH that were of the body of Chrifi were made to drink, into one Ifirit in the Cuf of the Lords Snpper : But no In-' fant rras made to drinks into one (ptrit ^ for none > fif them did drmk that Cupy 6cc.

ey^nfw. Denying ihe Minor, I anfwer to the proof : I. To the Major ; i, Mr. T. elfevvhere pltadeth that i Cor» 12. fpeaketh of the Church-inviiible only, and yet now he maketh it to be the vifible, 2 [All] is oft put for the Generality and not a proper miverfality : And it feemeth hard to prove that every vifible member hath the Jpirit^ which is exprefiy there faid of all the members, though whether Baprifm and the Lords Supper be included, Mr.T. elfewhere maketh difpu-table. But I grant that it is fpoken of the Church as vifible , and that all the members ordinarily having Spiritm SacramentHrny are in judgement-of charity faid to have the Spirit. 3. But if Sacraments be indeed here included as he alTert-cth, then Baptifm is firfl: included : and fo if we prove Infants Church-members , this Text will prove them to be baptizabie, according to Mr. T. Kemember that. 4. But that Mr. T.'sexpofition ' is nottrue^ that every member drinketh of the Cup in the Lords SHpfcr^ he may be turned about to confefs himfelf: For, i. Doubtlefs he thinks that ^ this Chapter fpeaketh of the Church not only as vifible ( if at all ) but as invifible alfo ^ and he oft faith that many real members of Chrifts body

dy have not the Sacrament. 2. By this his ex-pofition, his adult Baptizing (hould not make or prove any to be vifible Church-members till they drink of the Cup 5 though it were a year cr many years. 3. And no one that liveth without the Lords Supper through fcruples fabout Church-orders, or their own iitnefs, which are the cafes of multitudes ^ fhould be vifible members: Nor thofe that live where they cannot have the Sacrament : Nor any Lay-man in all the Popifh Churchy where the Cup is denied the Laity*

2. To the Minor, Infants might be baptized into one fpirit by the initiating Sacrament, in ordet to the reft to be partaked of in due time : And as not every C^Hrch-fHffenfion^ fo NatHral-Jiffpsn-fion of further priviledgcs, nullifieth not member (hi p.

cJ^r. T. 2. From i Cor. 10. 17. Allth.it were one body and one bread did -partahe of that one bread which was broken •' ^nt no Infant did p?er-take •

Anfw. I. Chrift and hi^ Dtfcipics did not pir^ take of it before the inditution: 2. No baptized perfons partake of it in the interfpace between the two Sacrsmerirs; which with feme is a long time i 3« A baprizcd perfon may die bcfore^he drink-eth that Cup; or may live where it is not lawfully to be had* 4. Church-members may be fufpended from the Lords Table. Therefore the text fpeakech not of everv member , but of the ordinary comm.unJon of capable perfons.

<L^/r* T, Eph«4. 5. The whole Church is one bodie^ and hath one Lord, and one faith: Bftt 710 Infant hath one faith ] M 2 Anfwi

( 1^4 )

y?A7/W. I. It is fpoken of the generality of the noblell' and capable men[ibers, denominating the Church : The Apoftle faith not that every mem-^ ber hath all thefe, but \' There is one Lord^ one faithj &:c.J Chrift ha3 not one Lord C being Lord himfelf as here underftood ) and yet was a n[iember : Chrid in the womb cannot be proved to have adually had that: one faith; and he was long the chief member before he was baptized ; And whether ever the twelve Apoftles were, is uncertain.

2. The Text feemeth chiefly to fpeak of the Docirine of faith\ called objeEii've faith ^ one Creed: And this the Church might have, and yet not each member adually believe. For, 3, The Parent in faith devoting himfelf and his Infant to God, his Faith and Confent is reputatively the Childs, who is ufed as a member of the Parents

aJMr.l^. 3'. They were no members of the vi-fible Churchy who were left out of the nnmher of the whole Churchy all the Believers^ the multitude of the Difciples , &C4 Bnt Infants are left vpit of the number in all "places in the New Tefla-ment^ Ergo:

Anfw. I* Many texts fpeak of all that were frefent only •, and many fpeak only of fuch as the prefent matter did concern .* And it is moft ijfual to denominate All or the Body from the Np--ilefl and Greatefl part. If you were to defcribe a Kingdom^ would you not fay that it is a Civil Society of rational creatures ( or men ) confent-ing to'the mutual Relatioi^s of King and Subjeds : - " "^ ani

and the duties of each for the common welfare ^ You would fo define it as that Reafon^ [onfent and Intention {how\^ be in the definition. Infants have none of theie in ad, and yet who doubteth but Infants are members of the Kingdom f of every Kingdom under Heaven that I have read of? ) So you know that we take Infants to be members of tur Churches now : And yet is it not ufu-al with us to fay that all the Church met to hear-, or to do this or that ? When yet the Infants and many others might be abfcnt.

The Texts Mr. T, alledgeth are. Ads i. 15. The ntimher of the names together were ^hont 120.

A?if\K>,, Though I take not the Church then to be fo numerous as fome do, yet reafon is Veafon : Can we think that when ChriO: was feen after his refHrren:ion of more than 500 Brethren at once ^ that only 120 of them were Chriftians ? And can we think that Nicodemm and Jofeph of Arima^ thea and many more, were not timerous fainthearted Chriftians ? It's like that the text mean-eth that this 120 was the number of thofe hold confirmed Chriftians who fo quickly after Chrifts death appeared in open profeilion and conjundioii with the Apoftles, and had opportunity to afTem-ble at that time and place.

The next is Ad. 2. i. They were all with one accord in one place.

An[vQ, This needcth no other, anfwer than as

before. The other texts, AEl. 2. 41,44. d- 4. 4,

:^i5,24. & 5.11,13, 14. c^6. 1,2,7. CT- 8. i»

0^15.22. I Ccr. 14.23. need no other anfwer:

M 3 . His

(166)

His expofition would foraetimes exclude women, and fomeriraes many of the men : Doih he believe no man or woman was a member of the Church, ui!^, 15.22. who did not fend men of their oven comfa»y Z' Nor any manor woman a member of the C^aii'ch at Jemfdem^ that did not being fcac-tered go ab- uc Preaching, Aci, 8, i, &c, i Cor^ J4. it is <a;d, Ton way all prophefie^ and yet worn n ai :f loi bidden.

>//,T- 4. They were no part of the Chrijlian Church vtfible to whom the things nfcrihed to the whole Church did not agree : But the things afcri^ bed to the whole Chrijtian Chnrch vifble did not agree to Infants: Ergo

A^fiv. This is fully anPvVered already. It is moft uftial to afcribe iluit to a Church or other Society which is done only by the moft confide-, rable part. As 1 laid before, when rational Con-fenr, Contrad, Intention, are afcribed to a King-dom-y which is conftituted by the confent of King and Subjects: and yet Infants are members who confent nor, fave by iheir Parents. The Chnrch meeteth to choofe a Paftor^ when yet the women rneet not ; The Church admonifheth a faulty member, when every woman doth not admonifh him: Our Churches meet all to hear, when Children meet not, whom we take for members: Thefe are not fatisfadory allegations, being contrary to common ufe of words, and to many texts of Scripture.

<iJlir, T. The Minor is proved , Matth. 16, J Bo On tki^ Rock^ vpill J bmldmy C^urch^ viz. by fmchir.g.

'j4^jfw. When Preaching converted the Parents, they devoted then^ifelves to God, and all that were in their truft and power- and that Preaching brought in by confirquence ihe Infants that did not hear. I prove it, r. Chrift cora-mandeth the difcipling of Nations and baptizing them (that is, as much as in the Preacher heth : ) But Infants are part of ihofe Nations: Therefore he commandeth the difcipling and baptizing of Infants, (as much as in the Preacher lay,7 which could be done but by the fuccef> of preaching on the Parents. 2. The Kingdoms of the world iire nade the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Chrift: But Infants are members of all thofe Kingdomi : But this is done at large elfe-where.

(L^/r. T. I Cor. 1.2. called to he Saint's-^ Ad. 2.41,47. & 5. 14. They that were added to the Church did hear and believe^ &:c,

Anfw, I will not weary the Reader with repeating the fame anfwers to the like things.

Mr. T. 5. They who are not reckoned Chrifls Difciples were not vifible Church-members: Bnt Infants are no where reckoned as Chrifls Difci--fUs: ergo.

j4nfw, I. What is faid before to the other Texts anfwereth all thefe. The Adions of adule Difciples only were in mention. 2. Infants are called Difciples, Atis 15. as I have elfewhere proved, on whofe neck the yoak of Circumcifi-on was laid • And in Matth. i8. 19. when Nations are to be difcipled, 3. Mr. T. himfelf confef-fcth that Cbfiil was habitually and by defignation a

"M 4 Fro-

Trophet in hfancy^ and that fo may Jnfants ht Dffcipies,

Air, T. 6, If i'fi the difiribntion of the members of the Church thcn^ Infants are not comj>re-hdnded^ thai Infants were not mpble Church-mevf'/oers — - ■ Biu^ ike,

Anfw. I. Here he inftanceth in i. The fex. Men and Women, 2. Jews and Gentiles, 5. Cir-cunricifion and uncircumcifion, n:ientioned, but noc Jnfa?:ts, But if Infants be of neither feXy male nor female, nor of Jews or Gentiles, nor circuKi-ci(ion nor iincircumcifion, I plead not for them.

2. If thole Texts cited by you mention not Infants , others do, as I have elfewhere proved ; Qur children are called Holy, and a blefled feeda and received by Chrift, and of fuch is the Kingdom of Gcd, ^c. And you^ confefs it of Chrift himfelf in his Infancle, and yet. npw forget it, or contradid your felf. ....

Air, T. 2. / argi'ie from the common received definitions of the vtfible Church , Ads 19. of the fhurch of England : A congregation of faithful

men &c, ' - .

Anfw. And fo Kingdoms and all Societies that Infants are members of, are accordingly defined, as is aforefaid. You cannot deny ir^ And was not the Church before Chrifts incarnation a y^f/>-ty of faithful men , when yet you confefs that Intanis were vifible parts of is ?

Mr, T. 3, / argue^ They are no vifible members: of the Chrjfiian Churchy to whom no note where--hy a vifible Chriftian Church cr ChHrch-member" pnp i4 dtfcernable^ doth agrfc V B^tP^^X* Crgo-—

(i69)

Jirffxv. When a man thinks only what to fay for his caufe, and never thinks what can be faid againft it, his judgement is of little value. !• All that agreeth to Infants which was requifite to a vifible Infant member before Chrifts coming ^ And do you noc confefs that they were members then among the Jews? 2. Did nothing in Chrift himfelf in Infancy agree wiih vifible mtmbcrlhip ? Yts. the open Revelations of God as to a vifible perfon: You confefs before as much as I need. 3, The effentiating qualiHcation of a Churchy member, is Covena'dt-confcnt^ fuch as God according to the fenfe of his offered Covenant will accept as fuch: But Infants have this Covenant-confent, feeing they confent by their Parents who are entrufted to do it for them, as if they were parts of themfelves : As the jews Infants dido Mutual confent of Gcd and themfelves by their Parents is it that makeththem members. I have oft wondered to read in orthodox Divines, that the Word purely preached, Sacraments andDifcipline, are the marks of the true Church. No doubt but Heart'Cenfent to the Baprtfmal Covenant of Grace makeih a fincere member of the true Church ( which the Infant doth by the Parent, ) and fro-fejfed confent to the fame Covenant maketh a vi-lible member (which regularly mufl be by Ba-ptifm for inveftirure.) But a true Church may long by perfecuticn be hindred from publick affem-blies, Preaching, S.icraments and Difcipline ^ And may have much corruption in all ihefe.

Mr, T. maketh this mutual confent a.s tVfo eiifijntl pretended Notes , denying either of them to bf true mark^^ jinfvc^

(170)

Afifxr, Neither the Princes confcnt alone, nor the Subjtds alondiiaketha Common-wealth : Neither the Husbands confent alone , or the Wives ciaketh a marriage •, but both conjund : So here : Mutual confent maketh a Church-member: But fo, that Gods Confent is the Donative efficient canfe , and tKuns confent is the receptive canfe y which is conditio fme qua non. They that will not impartially f^^>7i^ c/p/^/« cafes c^;?«(?rundcr-ftand them. Your unthankful denying that God bath made any fuch Promife, Covenant or Confent , is elfcwhere confuted : And if I (hall fay with Davena.nt and the Synod of Don that this Covenant being the fame that is made with Parents themfelves, giveth the Children the fame Right to Pardon and Life eternal according to their capacity, fo that faithful Parents jlionld not doubt cf the Salvation of their Children dying in hifancy ( nt Synod, Dort, Art* l,c,ij.) I could better with them bear the confequence ( of the fofs of Gratia Infantilis in fome at age ) than the confequ^ius of your turning them all out of the viiibie Church* The former I know noChri-ftian that ever oppofcd for maiiy and many hundred years after Chrift ^ and the latter the uni-verfal Church as long oppcfed ; And yet 1 will not fubfcribe that [ Jt is certain by the word of God that baptiz.ed Infants dying before aQnal fn, are certainly favedy~\ without excepting the Infants of Heathens or Infidels ^ wrongfully baptized.

Mr. T, 4» / argue : They who have not the form conftituting and denomirimng a mfbU

(^hurch^

Church-member^ are not vifhle Church-wemhers^ Bnt, Ergo. Profejfwn of faith ^s the form conflitH-tirtg^ &.'c.

^nfvQ. I. Covenant Confent is the forna con-ftlcuting ex parte Recipic:7tis^ and this they have reputa[ive!y in their Parents , whofe will is as theirs.

2. The Jews Infants had the form conftitu-ting a vifible member as youconfefs. And that wa< not circumcifion -, For th;'. 'jncircumcifed fe-iP-iies , and males too in the wildernefs were vifible members ; Ncr was it to be born of J^wj^ For apoilate Jews forfeited it, and Profelytcs of other Nations obtained it: But it was [by confent to Gods Covenant.

3. And Chrift was a vifible member by Divine Revelation. His arguings wculd make againfl Chrifts Righteoufnefs Imputed to believers, and jiJ.an7s or the Parents fins imputed to them.

Mr. T. 5. /f Jvfants be vifible Chrifiiati Church-membcrs^then there may be d vifible Church-Chrifttan which coriffs only of Infanti ofbelie-^ vers — Bnt this is . bfttrd : Ergo.

A}^fvi\ Such quibbles feem fcmething when the Will giveih them their force, i. Infants are members of all Kingdoms under Heaven : And yet there neither is nor can be a Kingdom of Infants only. 2. Members are EJfential or Inte-* gral. Becaufe the exercife of the faculties of the pars Imperans and Pars fubdita is the intended means'to the Common Good, which is the End of Government, therefore there can 'be no Go-yerned Society , Kingdom or other proper Policy

( ^7^3 cy of which men that have the ufe of Rcafonare' not members : than there be feme fuch to be the Adive part is EfTential to the Society : But' yet Infants that are yet but viniially fuch ,. are Integral members,

Mr. T, 0. / argue ; If Infants be vlfible Church-members , there is jome Qmfe of it •* But there is no Caife ; Ergo

A'^fw. The Caufe efficient is Gods Revealed Donation and Covenant Cbnfent; The Caufe Receptive or the Condition of Reception, is Thaf this he the Child of a Confenting believer,

Mr. T. To this i, Mr. T, denycth any fuch Covenant of grace to the faithful and their feed . ( which is foon faid. )

2. He faith n^ (Conditional Covettant fromifeth Jufiifcation J Salvation , on Condition of faithy and not vijible {^hurch'memberjhipj and fo belongs to all as Mr. B. o-c,

AnfvQ, I. It giveth both Juftification and vi-fible memberfhip^ that is, Right to boih and many other Covenant benefits, 2. It belongeth Conditionally to all , and Conditionally gives union with Chrift and his Church, and Pardon and life to aH : But aB:ually to 'none, till the condition be performed •, which is a believing Parents confent , and regularly his Baptifmal dedica-^ lion.

Mr. T. If there were a Covenant to the faiths, ful and their feed^ to be their God^ yet this would tjot frove their Infants Chriftian vifihle Church" memberfliif : jis he is. the G,od of Abraham, of Infants dying in the vnombs of bdisveriat the hour ofdsath--—^ ' " Artfw^

'Anfw, lis true, if they be not tbe Children ef njifbh belicz'ers ^ becaufe they are not vifibly capable fubjeds. But it bting fuchthat we fpeak of, your three inllances are abufive. i, Ahra-ham is a viliblc Church-member of the Church Triumphant where he is. I will not beHeveyou if you deny ir* 2. Infants of vifible Chriftians dying in the womb , are in that degree vifible Church-members as they arevilibleperfons: that is. It is a known thing that they are the children of God according to their capacity. 3. One vifibly believing at the hour of death is a vifible Church-member : One not vifibly believing be-longeth not to cur cafe.

Mr. T. Jf all thefe which Mr. B. makes the caitfe or condition^ may he in aci^ and the effeEh not be^ then the caiife which Mr, B, affigneth is 7iot fnfficienti But c^c, For they may dibs bC" fore the child is lorn.

Afifw, A me r quibble, i. Before he is born I tell you as far as he is vifibly the cliili of a vifible Chriftian, fo far he is a vifible unborn member : But as to .hat degree of vifible mem-berfhip which is proper to born baptizable Infants , two caufes *re wanting to the unborn : I. Gods confent or donation : For though the Promife as a donaii v Inftrum^nn was exilient a thoufand years before, m effecteth net the gift till the fubjed be Receptive or capable : God may promife a thoufand years before in diem or fnb condittoy;c , which fign^fyeth his qonfent that fo and then itfhall be due , and not othcrwifeor before. Thefe eafie things fhould not be thus

winked

(174) winked ar. 2. The Tar ems confent Is wanting l For though the Parent dedicate the child in the womb to God by promife, yet he doth not deliver him up in the bapcifmal Covenant as a vifi-ble perfon till he is born.

Mr. T, reciting my anfwer elfewhere faith ^It deferveth a [mile : For I r/!ake Chrifi hy his Law or Coven ant'grant the only caufe efficient J The reft of his words are i. 71? tell m thatjhfti^ f cation c^c* hath a further efficient after the Covenant ; which caufeth Jnfiifcability^ but not aQii-al Jufttfication without mans faith, 2. That 1 err in taking vifihle memherjlnp to be a Right, and moral effed.

Anfvp, I take not that for the pi dure of the wifeft man, whom the Painter draweth laughing or fmiling. And I am now confirmed in that fancy, i. A Tei^ament or V>^td, of Gift in di-^ em which faith At [evenyears end that landfall he yoursX^z-^ be the only efficient Inftrument,long before exiftent, and yet give you no right till the time ^ and then give it •. Becaufe it effedeth but by fignification of the Donors will. Muft the Chriftendom of Kingdoms be impetuoufly que-ftioiird by men that know not fuch rudiments as thefe ? 2. That Juftification which is given us ar Gur believing, which is \_ our Right to Imptni--ty and Life ] is the Immediate effed oftheCo^ venant Donation ^ and mans faith is no efficient but a Recipient caufe of it ( As even they confefs that call it a Receiving Inftrument: ) And yet we have it not till we believe or confent. Who would have thought that fuch am n as you had

., t' taken

tak^n your ovon fdth to be an efficient ciufe of your ovon Jnfiification , and fo that you jttfiific yoHY fclf 'f And what if one give land to you and vour heirs ? It is none of theirs till they are in being : And yet their hirth is no efficient caufe^ but only the caufe of the fubjeds receptive capacity. I am afhamedihac you put me thus to catechize you.

Mr.- T. 5. //^ vifihle Chunh-wemherjlnf be antecedent to the interefl u fcrfon hath in the Covenant-^ then the Co'venant is not the canfe of it. But ere. Ergo

Anfvc, Theword[Intereftlmay fignifie ihelnte-reft that fallen mankind hath in the Covenant as conditional antecedent to mans confent : And thus I fuppofe neither you nor I here fpeak of it. But if by my Interefl you mean, that I am the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth a pre-fent Right to its benefits, I anfwer, Some benefits follow long aker : but when I confenr,then I am the perfon to whom the Covenant giveth t frefcnt Right to union with Chrifi^ in the Brft infant and confequcntly with his Church or body in the fecond : fo that here is no iuch thing as your feigned memberfhip before Covenant interefl, that is, before a Right to that Relation by Gods donation. And as to your former dream that this is not a Right and n;oral effcd but a fhyfical , it was your felf a ad n^t t that fubjeded you to the fhame of fuch analfertion, which 1 will no more confute.

Mr. T. 6. If the Covenant ^c, be the only efficient ^ then Infants bought Orphans p/Turks,

t^hofly at our difpofe , are no vifihle memberf^

j4nf\v> No friend of truth will run into the dark with a conrroverfie, and argue a minm mtis^ Many judicious Divines think that Gods Covenant with Ahrahami Infants born in his houfe , proveththat two things go to make up the capacity of an Infant for baptifm : i. That he be his own and at his dijpofe who ofFereth him to God. 2<; Tha^ he be offered or dedicated by a C^rifenting Ovpn^r* Now their reafon is becaufe if they be our own, v^e have the difpofe of them for their good, and our wills are theirs. But the cafe is moft clear about thofe that by Generation are our oiv/Zjand darker about thofe that are by Adoption or fiirchafe our own. Now here you do nothing but deny the darker f which you cannot difprove ) and thence the plainer which we have fully proved,

Mr. T. 7. // the (Covenant or Law with the Tarents aBi'tal faith without frofeffion , make not the Varent a vifihle Chnrch-rnemhery neither doth it the child. But — Ergo.

Anjw, I grant both major and minor : He that is not known to have faith, is notavifibfe adult member : And he that is not known to be the ( juftly reputed ) child of a profefTed believer , is not an Infant Church-member. And what's this to our controverfie ? Heart confent maketh a my ft leal or invifible Chriftian and member , and Profeffed belief ( that is, Believing Confent) maketh a vifihle member of .the parent , and is necclTary to the vifible member/hip Qi the child : If I may call that Making them^

which

(^77) which is but the Difpofition of the material Re^ eeftive conflitutive caufe. It's pitty we fhould haveneed toa'kac this rate.

Mr. T. 8.7/" ferfons are vifhle Church-menj'-hers and not hy the (/yvenant vf Graces then it is not true that Chrifi ly his Law or Covenant is the fole efficient of vifible Church-memberjhip* The minor is -proved in Judas and hypocrites,

Anfw. I. They are not the fole efficient •, Gods Love and mercy alfo is e(ficient.

2. You profefs your felf that the name [] Chri-ftian and Church-member ] are equivocal as to the fincere and ihe hypocrites : If they be not the fame things, no wonder if they have not the fame caufes. That Donation or Covenant may be the fole neareft Inftrumental efficient of True memberfhip, and yet not of Equivocal.

3. God who is our Paternal Beneficient Ruler doth give fome of his benefics by his Law or Covenant abfolutely and antecedently to mans conditions , and fome confequently as Rewards: And Gods Laws having firft a Preceptive part, as ^well as a Donative or Premiant, a Right m.ay accrue in foro ecclef<& to an hypocrite from than precept : As e, g, God antecedently dorh by his Covenant give the world an Impunity as to the punifhment of Drowning it : And fo by Jiis common Law of Grace he givcth the world many common mercies by a Redeemer , and perhaps many by that you call a phyfical ad, immediately. And by his Law he ( having given a conditional pardon and life to all ) commandeth his Miniflers to offer it, and All men to Accept it,

N and

and bis Minifters to judge by mens profeffion, and to ufe profeffed Accepters as real ; becaufe we cannot fee the heart. This being fo, when the hypocrite profelTeth his confenr, the Law obligeth the Minifter and Church to receive it, by which in foro eccle/tah^ hath aright to his Church fta-tion. And Chrift himfeif called Juda^^ and fent him out to Preach, and his mandates were as Laws. So that the Right that an hypocrite hath, he hath by theLaw which obligeth theChurch to ufe him as a true believer , upon his profeffing to be fuch. None of this can be denyed. But fniids was called immediately by Chrift himfeif •, and his {^follow me ] was a precept which gave him a Right to his Relation.

Mr. T. 9. Jf Infants are vifble members by the Covenant on Condition that the Parents 3cc„ then either the next Parents or in any generati^ en precedent &c.

Anfw, The next Parents that are Owners of the'child, and have the truft and power ofdif-pofing of him or covenanting for him : And the Reafon is, becaufe they have !• THat Profriety^ and 2. That tntft and power.

Mr. T. 10. Jf an Infants vifthleChHrch-meni' herfhip be by the Covenant on the Parents aUaal believing , and not a bare profepon^ then it is a thing that cannot be knovpn^ &c.

Anfw. I pitty Readers that muftbe troubled with fuchkind of talk. i. The Right pi the child is upon |~ the Believing Parents dedication of that child to God by coafenting that he be in the mutual Covenant, ~}

2. Heart

2. Heart confent known only to God givcth no Right coram ecclefia^ known to men, but only tofuch mercy as God who only knoweih it, givcth without the Churches judgtraenr.

3. Believing and profeiiion qualifie for Right-in the Judgement both of God and of the Church.

4. Profefiion without confenting faith, quali-fieth for Ri;i:^ht, in the Churches judgement according to Gods Command, who biddetli them To judge and do : Wrangle nor againft plain truth.

Mr. T. II. If other Chriflian ^riviledgeshe not conveyed by aC^ovenant ufon the Parents f^ithy rvithoHt the pcrfons own ath and confent^ then mither this. But &c. Not to be a Bdievsr ^ a

difctphy a zJ^inifier.j a Son oj God — Thsre is

the like reafonfor them as for this.

zy^nfw. Priviledges are i. Proper to the adulr, ( thofe concern not our cafe, as to be Alimfters) or common to them with Infants : 2. Priviledges confift either in Fhyfical qualities or other rhyfical accidents ( and chefe are given by phyfcal jiciiony and fuch is Knowled^e^ Belief Love , Gifts of utterance^ healthy Sec) Or in Rrrht and Moral Relation^ ( Ji^i Debitum^ oblt^atto ) Thefe are given hy Moral means ^ that is by Z^-nifcation of the Donors willy by precept ( obli-g\ngy) prom ife ox ftgnal Donation y which is the Inftrument of conveyance by that fignificatioii ( As a Tcftament, Deed of Gift, Ad ofpardon a:id oblivion, &c, are among men. ) Now do v-u think thatthereafonof P/n'/2L-^/^<^/m>/ andi^/<7-ralRighiSjRelattons and dunes is the lame ?

2. As a Difciplc , or believer, fignifieth one that is Repmacively fuch jure Relattonisy and as a Son 0/G'j^ liguiiieth an Adopted heir of heaven^ loved of God as a reconciled father in Chrifl ] fo Infants are fuch : You fay f after J that Chrtfl was habi:k.alLy and by defignsLtion the Head and Prophet of the liourch in Infancy , 2nd /^ mihgt Infants be difciples : And will you now deny it ? Again I will fay though it offend you, that there is no trufcing to that mans jndgement that looketh all ( or partially ) on one fide , and fludiech fo ea-g2*'ly what will ferve his caufe, as that he cannot- nr'rid what niay be (aid againft it. See here what two abhorainations you thruft onyourpit-tiful followers (which yet I know you hold not your felf , but the heat of your fpirit in dcfire of vi(5tory draweth you to fay you nnind not what) You conclude that none is \ A Son of God J without hi< own confent : And fo I. AH Infants are certainly fhut out of Heaven : for they are no Sons of God without their confent ( neither by Eledion, Chrifts intercellion, Covenant or Gift ;) And I think you will not fay that they confent : And if no fons^ no hetrs ; For the Inheritance is only of children : And if no fons ^ then are they not Regenerate^ which is' but to be made fons of God by anew Generation, and renewed to his Image. And do you damn all Infants >

2. And confider whether you deny not Chrift in Infancy to have been the Son of God according to his humane nature ? For you can never , prove that in that nature he a^mlly confcnted

in the womb or in his Infancy. But partralay is rafhand blind.

Mr. T. 12. Jf there be no Law or or din mice of Cjod unrepealed by which either thi<s Infant vifible Church-member flip is granted^ or the lifi-ing of Infants or entring into the vifible Church Chrijiian is made a duty , then it is not a canfe of Infants vifible Charch-memberjloip which Mr« B. ajfignsydcc.

Anfw, I have here proved to you fuch a Law and Covenant before Chrifts Incarnation , and formerly at large proved it to becominued and renewed by fpccial fignification of Chrids will fince his Incarnation in the Gofpel. Review now your pittiful Reafons againft it.

N 3

The Second Tart : A

CONFUTATION

O F THE

I Strange Forgeries

Againft ihe

ANTIQUITY

O F

Infant Baptism^

And of his many Calumnies ag;ainft

iTiy Self and my Wiicings, with a Catalogue of 5 6 New ComiTiaadments and . Dodrines^ which he and the Sectaries who joya with him in thofc

Calumnies fecm to own. ^ 1 — — -- - -

By ^chard 'Baxter.

LONDON^ Printed for Ncvil Simmns and Jonathm Rch^nfon. 1675.

(i85)

The P R E F A C £•

SECT. L

1, of Co?itroverfies : 2. Oftheivetght of this Controverfie.

I

^* I. 'T^T is a thing that all are not duely irt^ formed oi^Howfar ControverfialWri^ tings and DijpHtes are to be fra^i^ fed by pous and feaceable men ? And here ( as in almoft all things elfe ) men are hardly cured of one extream but by another.

L No doubt but the extream which hath far moft injured the Church of Chrift, hath been the excef of Dijputing s and given juft occafion to Sr. H. W.'s motto, [_ The Itch of Dijputing makes the Scab of the Church , "1 which is eafily dif-cernable, both in the Caufe and the Effects.

5^. 2. I. In the caufe it is too notorious , that ordinarily it proceedeth from the depravation of the three faculties of the foul , Toteftative , In-tslUBrje , V<ilitiv€ , ia the three great Principles

CxB6)

cipks of iniquity, Pride , Ignorance and wrath: 0. 3, !• Did not Pride caufc men much to overvalue their oven farts 2lx\^ worthy Cohtrover-fie would have fhrunk into a narrower cdmpstfs before this day: Men would have come to one another as friends to be viformed of what they know not, by enquiry and gentle conferences, if not as children to School, to leai*n : And if. grace by hard fludies had given one man more infight intc^ any matters than another, hunlility would readily have acknowledged Gods gifts, antl defired to have the benefit of a friendly communication -and whereever God had fct up a lighty the Children of his family would have been ready to work by it t It v<^ould not have httw fo hard as now it is for an Ignorant man to know his Igng-rance^ nor to difcern when another knoweth mofe than he.

^. 4. But now, alas; a multitude that under-ftand not half their Cacechifm hear their Teachers as Matters hear their Scholars, to know whether they fay their lefTon welJ or not: And the Preacher that faith as they would have him, may pafs for orthodox at leaft, if not for a very wife man, becaufe he is, fo far, as wife as they: But if he will prefume to teach them more than they know, they fufpec^ him of herefie, and the repetition of his Sermon which they make, is to mangle fome fentences which they had not wit enough to underftand, and thence to proclaim ( or whifper abroad at leaft ) that the Preached hath fome dangerous errors, ( and doth not know fo much as they-, ) unlefs it be fome lufciousun^-

whole-

wholefom notions that he offereth them, or be a militant wrangler and would lift them under him as his troop, to ferve him in fome new raifed war, and then corrupt nature can magnitie novel-ties as if they were new revelations from Heaven.

^. 5. And O that the TV^c^^rj Wanted not the fenfe of their intellectual imperfedions, as well as the people I But too many think that when they are all ordained into the faire office^ the honour of the fame office is equally due to them all, and confequently all that honour of Knovpledge^ Tarts and Piety^ without which the honour of the office cannot be well kept up. And fo when they all walk in the fame robes and are called by the fame titles, matters which they never underftocd, mull pafs according to the major vote, or at leaft, they mufl not be contradided , nor their ignorance made known : And therefore when they have owned or tittered a Dodrine or Sentence, their honour is engaged to make it good •, And they find a far eafier way to make oftentation of the Knowledge which they have not, by robes, titles and big words, than to macerite their bodies by imploying their minds in (crious Icng unwearied ftuilies, till they have received into their minds the well digefted frame of facred truths.

^. 6. And if this tribe can keep the major vote ( as it muft be a ftrangely happy country where they do not ) whoii^er will be wiftr than they ^ iVall be a heretick. But if it fall out better, and they be the weaker fart^ they will make up their honour by the way oi[jnguUrity among fem^ny as

they

they can get to believe, that they arc mafters of fome excellent truths which almoft all the Chri-(tian world is unacquainted with.

^. 7. And even in men otherwife truly pious, there is fo much remaining j)ricie as is greatly gratified by /insularity: SelfijhneJ^ and the Old man are but One^ And an opinion that is peculiarly their o\vn^ is as lovely to them, as their own Children in comparifon of others: Ifthey can fay, ego frimtu inveni , it is fweeteft : If not, yet to be one of a lingular Society, that is fuppofed wi-fer, and better and more excellent in their way of worfliip than all others, is very comfortable to tbem^ that by taking the eleA to be fewer than they are, do judge it a good mark to hold what few hold, and do as few do,

^» 8. And there may be a conjunllion pf good and evil in the cau[e of thefe effeds.

And from hence we now live among many that fall into various kinds of Sefts, and every one hopeth for the comforts o^ fingularity in their way. Many turn Quakers, becaufe they diXtfingalar^ in their aufteritics : And many Congregations will not endure the finging of Gods Praife in Pfalms, at leaft in Davids Pfalms ^ and fome will not have the Scriptures read , and fome are againft humane learning and ftudies, and fome againft Preaching upon a Text, and Praying before and after Sermon, and fome againft ordinary Family-worfhip, and many ftartle if they hear the Creed, the Lords-Prayer and Commandments; and hence alfo the Dodrine of denying all Chriftians Infants Church-memberfliip hath profpered.

^. 9, And

^. 9. And too many honeft perfons in oppo-ficion to ungodlinefs, are difaffeded to lawful and laudable things in the worfhip of God meerly becaufe the Vngodly ufe them : When as experience telleth all the world, that they that have no Religion in fincerity, will ufually joyn with the Religion that is uppermort ; And fo if good Rulers and Teachers fet up that which is beft, the befl: will be outwardly the way of the ungodly •, and if we muft needs be (ingular from them wc muft take the worft, and leave them the beft : to their felf deceit and our fhame.

5$ 10. I have thought by this weaknefs of fome fingular people, that, if God fhould but let us have a King and other Rulers that were Anti-nomians, and againft Infant Baptifm, and againft finging Pfalms, and againft the ufe of the Creed and Lords Prayer, and fuch other things, and withal were themfelves of wicked lives, and would make Laws for their own way, and impofe it on the people , fo that the ungodly multitude did fall into this way, it would prefently cure moft that are now for fuch opinions: And though the Godly and the wicked muft be greatly differenced in the Church , yet before we are aware , our fecret Pride fets in with this defire of difcipline, and maketh us much defire to feena eminently Good^ by a more notable and confpi-cuous difference from the common fort of Chri-ftians than God in Scripture or reafon doth allow.

2. And how much Jgrnrance hath to do in all

Cipo)

our controverfies , would foon be acknowledged if the queftion concerned hot our felves : For every difputer accufeth his adverfary of J^-norance : If they be of ten minds (inConfitknt^ nine of them muft needs be erroneous, and therefore Ignorant , and yet every one chargeth it on the reft, and thinks that he alone is free. , Alas, that mans foul, which here muft ;^d in fuch a puddle of brains, and in fo frail a receptive engine as it here ufeth. (hould have fuch high and confident thoughts of its own untryed and un-digefted conceptions that will not let Ignorance be acknowledged or cured / Moft certainly we are all fo dark and weak, that it is but a/(?W7 G'r^^t necejfary things, or fuch as are very fldn , which we have caufe to be confident of , without all fufpicion of miftake. Moft certainly natural dulnefsy or fhort and fuperficial ftudies ,-through (loth or diverfions, or want of right teachers, or an early reception of wrong methods or opinions, leading unto more, and many fuch caufes, doih and will keep not only moft Chriftians , but moft Teachers of the Church in fo low a meafure of Knowledge, as unficteth them to ' mafter and manage very difficult controveriies : And yet fad experience telieth us, that he that h leaft able to fpeakjis oft leaft able to hold his tongue ^ And it's too rare to find a man that is not Ignorant of his Igno-rance,and that chargeth not him with Pride that will prefumc to contradid him. What wonder then ifdifputes beendlefs?

<^. 12.?. And that wrath is in the caufe neetfs no proof but experience, v/hile we fee men come

funh

ynh with^ militant difpofitions, and animofitv is their valour, and how to make their adverfaries feem contemptible or odious is their work.

0. 13. 2. And if I fhould but open to you the Difputing evil, in the effen:s as I have done in the Canfis^ what a woful tragedy, of 1500 years duration , ihouldjl prefent you with ? Bur I rtiall put off that part of the work, fuppofing that fight and experience do inform you more eiledually than words can do.

^. 14. On all thefe accounts I flili fay as Tafil, The fervant of the Lord nuifl not ( need-lelly ) flrive^ nor meddle with thofe wranglings which minifter jQHcflions rather than godly edifying which is in faith : For the end of the Commandment is Love out of a pure hearty and ^ good Confcience and faith tmfeig?ied : And the high pretenders are too often ][^ frond ^ knowing nothings but doting about <^ueftions and/rz/e; of words'^ whereof cometh envy ^ ft^if^-i railing y evil furmijingy perverfe dtfpiittngs of men of cor^ y-upt mmds and deftttuteof the truth,

<. 15. II. But yet for all this, as Politicians ufe to tell Tyrants, that if God and wm\ did but fecurethem from all refiftancc, men would flie from them as from Tigers or Crocodiles, and fuppofc their boundlefs uncontrouled pride and cruelty would be infatiable •, fo I fay or Hereti-lical and truly Schifmatical Contenders, that If they were oncefecured that whatever foily ^ he-reiie, or ungodly mifchievous conceits they vend, and that with the greateit induflry and turbulen-

(192)

cy to deceive the people , no man yet muff: contradid them, nor open their folly that it may be known to all, and go no further, for fear of being taken for a nian of difputation, controver-fie and ftrife , this would fo embolden them to attempt the fedudion of all forts of people, that no place would be fafe or quiet.

^. 16, It is a foolifh pretence of peacea-blenefs and quietnefs, to ftand by in filence for fear of our own or others trouble , and fee well-meaning people feduced , Chrift and his truth and name abufed, and God difhonoured, and his Churches fhaken , and made a fcorn and fcandal to the world , and all for fear of being accounted contentious. If it be lukewarm ( as they fay themfelves ) to hear dayly fwearers , curfers, fcorners, and fuch other prophane finncrs, and not give them a clofe reproor or admonition, fo much more is it to fee or hear hurtful falfhoods publifhed as the precious truths of God, and not to contradid it, nor endeavour to fave mens fouls from the infedion. If Sa-tans work mull be done without refiftance as oft as a miftaken well-meaning man will do it, there will be little fafety for the flocks.

^. 17. When Paul fore-told the Ephefians of two forts that would affault them, viz.. Grie-^ vom devouring wolves, and men arijing among themfelves that would (peak ferverfe things ta draw away dtfciples after them^ his conclufion is ^Therefore watch ] .• And what that watching is he tells Timothy^ The mouths of fuch deceivers ciuft be fiopped: not by force^ for that Timothy

had

(^93)

had no power to do ; but by evidem trnth. And Trmh hath a fower in its evidence^ if it be but rightly opened and managed. And were it not that God in all ages had enabled fome of his fervants, faiihtully and clearly to vindicate truth, and defend found dodrine , and hold fall: the form of wholefome words, and (lop ihe mouth of ignorant prtde that wrangleJi againft them, what had bexrome of us long agoe ? And though illdifputes have done much mifchief, and too often, difputing fuccedeth more according to the Parts^ interefts or advantages of the Difputers , than according to the evidence of truth : Yet for alJ fuch abufes 5 Truth mud be defended, anditfind-eih fomething even in nature (as bad as man is ^ to befriend it •, few love a plain falil.ood, unlefs where intereft greatly bribeih them : And upon tryal Truth will at lafb prevail, where fin doth not provoke God in judgement to leave men to thcdelufions which they chufe.

^. 18. If then the way be to Teach and Learn , and quietly open the evidence of truth^ and in meek^efs to inftm^ thofe that oppofe them-felves , and to avoid contentions as we avoid vpars , till other mens afTtults do make them unavoidably neceflary •, and yet not to be cowardly ^err^ytri of the Truth and Church of God, nor fuffer Satan to deceive men anrefifted, but earneftly to contend for the faith once delivered to the Saints^ It muft be confidered, I. To v/hom this earneft contending may be ufed, . I J. And by whom.

Q 4. 19.

f iP4 J

f. 19. I. We muft not be ever Jharp or ■ earnefiy i. With ihofe that are yet/r4;z^eri ro Religion , of tv^op converfion there is hofe^ and who are liker to be won by a gentler way, which more dcmonftrateth love and tendernefs, 2 T/w. 2.25,26.

^. 20. 2. Nor with Go^ly Chrifiians who fall into fuch (ins e/ infirmity as we are Iyable to , and whofe tendernefs maketh conapaffionate tender dealing fitteft to their recovery, GaU 6. I? 2, 3.

5^. 21. 3. Nor with humbled dejelled Chri-ftlans who are apter than we to aggravate their o,wn faults, and have need of comfort, to reftrain their forrows and keep them from defpair, 2 Cor* 2. 7.

55. 22. 4^ Nor with finners that under converfion and repentance are humbHng themfelves by confeflion to God and man, Luk. 15. Philem, 10,16,17.

^. 23. 5. Nor with Chriilians that differ from us in tolerable matters , and manage their differences but with tolerable infirmities, not hazarding the fafety of the Church or mens fouls.

p. 24. But in thefe cafes we muft ufe flain*[ nefs y jharfncfs and earneftmfs, 1. When in • fecret ( where mens honour with oihers is not concerned^ it is neceffary to mens convict: on and repentance ^ i, Becaufe of the Greatnefs of the fin or error , which will not be known if it be not truly opened and aggravated. 2. Or by

reafon

reafon of the hard-heartednefs or obftinacy of the (inner, that will not be convinced or humbled by eafier means.

5^. 25. 2. And when we arc called fo to ad-monifli a publick Tinner for his crinles or here-fies , which muft be opened as they arc, before he will be convinced and humbled openly before the Church.

^. 26. 3; And when the people or Churdi is in danger of being infe<^ed by the fin or error , if the evil of it be not fully and plainly opened,and the (inner rehnk^d before ally that others way hervare*

0. 27. 4. When the offender or he-rerick (heweth us by his obftinacy, that we have no caufe to cxpcft his cure and convidion, but are only to defend Gods truth and mens fouJs againft him, then he muft be ufed as Chrift did the Pharifees: and as Rulers execute malefadors not for their own good^ but for the warning of others aad prefervation of the innocent»

^. 28. 5. And when our gentle fpeechcs tend to fcandalize thofe without, and make them think that we prevaricate and favour Chriftians in their fin?.

<• 29. All thefc cafes you may fee proved

1. In Nathans dealing mth David, andChrifts with Pmr, Matth. j6,2Lnd Pauls^ GaL 2. &C»

2. In Panls dealing with the ince(^uous man , I Cor, 5. and Peters with Ananidi and his wife. I Tim, 5. 20. Thim that fm rebuke before all^ C^Ct zTim, 4. 2,Tit,i. 13. Rebuke them jliarply that they may he found in the faith ( cnttingly )

O 2 Ttt,

Tit. 2. ly. Rehnks W'/V^ all ^wfW/Vj'; efpecially when we deal with Tnttriors who muft be humbled. Tit, 3, 10, II. Mat. 23. throughout: And Eit's gentlenefs or remifnefs is our warning.

<C. 30. IT. And as to the ^erfons who n:iuft ufe this jharp^efs and earneftnefs againft errors and finners in contending for the faith, i. It is not thofe who overvalue their own conceptions, and grow fond of all that ispecuUarly their own, and infolently take all men to be enemies totriith and fairh and godlincfs, who are adverfaries to their odd opinions. 2. Nor muft inferiors rife up with infolency againft fuperiors, or the young againft their elders, and the ignorant againft the wife , on pretence of a zealous ftanding for the truth ; Though they may humbly and mo-deftly defend that which is truth indeed. 3. Nor fhouid unftudyed Chriftians prefently think hardly of any party and backbite them, and in-. veigh againft them, becaufe their Leaders call them hereticks or reproach them as erroneous dangerous men : ( asalmoft ail parties do againft each other, ) 4. Nor fhouid ihofe Miniflers who have not a through infighx into a Contro-verfie , meddle much with it, nor be too forward to reprove and reproach where they dio not underftand, nor to undertake difputes which they cannot manage. 5. But as God doth in-dow men with various gifts, if each man were imployed according to his talent, aii would have their honour and comfort, and the Church the benefit of them all. ^'Si*

CiP7) ^. 31. We have notorioufly all thefe forts ofMinifters in the world, i. Carnal, proud and worldly hypocrites , who are enemies to that which is againft their pride and worldly intereft : Thefe contend malignantly againft Godlinefs. 2. Ignorant, idle, fleflily droans , that eat and drink and mind the world, but meddle not much with controverfies. 3, ProfefTors of Religious zeal , who efpoufe fome fingular dividing way , and turn all their ftudies to make good their mi-ftakes ^ who have laudable abilities perverted by prejudice, error and intereft. 4. Honeft Preachers that ferve God in practical preaching •, but being but half ftudied in fome controverfies, are yet as forward and bufie in difputing, cen-furing and reproving diflfenrers, as if they knew as much as the caufe requireih. I would ail thefe would meddle with no controverfies, but what great neceflicy : in plain and certain cafes calls them to. 5. We have many humble truly Godly men, who as they are confcious that they are not well ftudied for controverfie , fo they meddle not with it but lay out themfelves in preaching the truths that we all agree in, and do God and his Church much fervice in quietnefs and peace : Thefe are the men that the Church is mofl beholden to, 6. Some are judicious and very fit for controverfie, but too cold in the pradical part of Religion. 7. Some excellent holy men ("like Jii^uftine) have fo digefted the matter, as to be able to defend the truth againft all adverfaries and live accordingly. Only thefe two laf^ forts fhould be imployed in fuch difputes. O ; SECT.

rip8)

SECT/IL

Of the weight arid nature of the frefent contra-; verjie*

^. i.T think it a matter in this diftrac^ed age^, JL which you may be much concerned in, to know what weight is tobe laid on thecontro-verfic about Jnfant Bapcifm that you may neither come too fhort nor go too far. For my part, when the Chriftian Parent ( or owner ) to whom God in Nature and Scripturje hath intru-fled the Infant , doth heartily dedicate him to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghoft, and con-fent that he ftand related according to the Bap-tifmal Covenant , I am none of thofe that believe that God who is a Spirit, layeth fo much upon the application of the water , as to damn any fuch Infant meerly for the want of it. And though I cannot fubfcribe to as much more, as fome would have me ( who think fo much better of their own underftandings than ever any evidence perfwaded me to do, as to judge them-felves worthy to be Creed-makers for all others, yea and to be called The Church it felf^ ) yet I approve of the fcvcnteenth Canon of the Synod of Dort Art, I. that \_ faithful Parents have, 710 caufe to doubt of the falvatiof of their children dying in Infancy 7\

^. 2. And I hope all the pious Anahap^ tifis themfelves do virtually though not adual-

f Ipp)

ly devote their children to God, and confcnt to their Covenant relation, while they vehemently plead againft it. For furely they have fo much natural afFeftion, that if they did think that God would be a God in fpecial Covenant with their children, and pardon their Original fin, and give them right to future life, upon the Parents dedication and confent, they would undoubtedly accept the gift, and be thankful ? And I believe moft of them would fay , |^ / would do all that God intrufieth and enahkth me to doy that my child may be a child of God^and I would give him up to God and accept any mercy for him as far as Gdd doth authoriz.e me fo to do,^

^» 3. And if Parents and Owners will not confent that their children be in Covenant with God and be baptized, I am not yet fatisfied what remedy we have , nor who can do it for them to as good cfFed. For if any one may do it ^ as fome plead , then all Heathens children may be fo ufed and faved ; And he that perfwadeth me that there is extant fuch a Covenant orpro-mife of God that he will fave every Heathens child that is but by any one brought to baptifra» I • He muft fhew me that text where this promift is, 2. And when he hath done , he will leave me perfvvaded that God will fave all Heathens Infants whether baptized or not. i. Becaufe I and ten thoufand more Chriftians would fit in our clofets and offer to God a\l the Infants in the world •, that is, confent that he be their reconciled God, and they his children and in Gove-qam with him ; what good roan would not defire O 4 their

(200)

their falvation? 2. And I fhauld not eafily believe that God will damn them all raeerly for wane of a ftrangers confent to favethem, were that wanting. 3. Much lefs that when we do con-feiit a thoufand or ten thoufand miles ojf^ that aH the children e. g. in China or Siana (hall be baptized and faved, that this ilall not hinder their damnation meerly becaufe the Infants and we are fo diftant that we cannot in fight and prf/ewc^ offer them to God : furely if my confent thac a TarlqdciM be baptized and faved will do it if he were with me, it may do it a mile off: and if fo, then ten thoufand miles off. 4. And if I be impowred to confent^ I fhall never believe that the bare wane of the -water will damn him, who hath all things elfe that God hath made ne-ceffary to his falvation (zs I fiid before. J I think they give too much to Baptifm , who fay that God will either fave any one by it, who want-eth other things neceflary to falvation, or that he will damn any for want of it( that is, of the wafhing of the body ) who want nothing elfe which is neceffary to falvation. And I doubt they that fayotherwife will prove difho-nourers of the Chriftian Religion, by feigning it to be too like to the Heathenifh fuperftition, laying mens falvation on a ceremony as of abfolutc ne-ceffity : And I am confident it is contrary to Chrifts redoubled leffon. Go learn what that meaneth^ I will have mercy and not facrifice : And no men Oiallunteach me this great and comfortable leffon , which Chrift hath fo induft^i-oufly taught rae, and which hath been long written

ten fo deeply on my heart, as hath made all unmercifnl ferfecuttons and feparattons^ and alienations very difpkaling lo me,

<^. 4. I have proved afterwards that even (tAngiijiine himfelf doth as on great deliberaiioa alTert that where the Miniftry of baptifm is not defpifed, Heart converfton without it fufficeth to falvation in the adult : And no fcripture or rea-fon doih make it abfolntely ncccffary to InfantSy if not to the adult,

^. 5. And if Heathens Infants are not dam« ned metjrly for want of outward baptifm, nor yet for want ohht confent of others (either becaufe that other mens confentwhoare (Irangers toihem is not necefTary to their falvation, or if it be neceffary they have it at a diftance ) then it will follow that all the Infants of Heathens are in a ftate of falvation, unlefs fomewhat elfe be yet proved neceffary to it : And if they are all faved, then fo are all Chriftians Infants alfo, or clfe they are more miferable than Heathens, And i£ you can firft believe that the Infants of all Infidels, Athcills, and ungodly Chriftians^hypocritesJ have a promife of falvation, you will next be in^ dined to think better of their Parents flatethait God alloweth you : And where is this promife?

^, 6. Some fay that the new Covenant gi-veth grace and life to all that do not ponere obicew. 'But I mufi have Gods Covenant in his own terms^ that I may have it in his own fenfe^ if I will be alTured of the benefits, Nen ponere obicem (ig-nifieth plainly no A^tm or pofittvc qualification

as

asneceflary, but only zfte^ationof hmtcontnty adion : And it is certain that the terms of Gods Covenant to the adult are clean contrary ., It is not.he that neither Believeth nor oppofeth faith jhall be faved^ or he that doth neither good nor harm , as a man in an apoplexy, or afleep ; But r he that believeth fhall be faved , and he that velieveth not jhail he damned ^ And except ye repent ye jhall all perijh ^ And without holi^ nefs none flmll fee God: J But a meer negation is no holmefi,

^. 7. And if any will feign another Cove-nant for Infants , let him fhew what and where it is \ for I know but one Covenant of graccj which taketh in the Infants with the Anthoriz^ed ParentSy whofe members or Ov^n God taketh them to be, and requireth a pofitive believing confent and dedication to God, as the pofitive condition : which is more than a Negative ( non ponere obi* cem , ) though performed by the Parent for the child : And fo the promifes throughout the Scripture run io i\\t faithful and their feed.

5^. 8. I know that God promifeth to blefs children ^^r<?//^/? many generations^iot their faithful Anceftors fake : But that is on fuppofition that fidelity continue in the line, and that apoftafie make no intercifion. Elfe all fhould be blefTed for the fake ofiVt?^, even C^4w's pollerity as well as Shem*s,

^, 9. What then is the thing madenecefla-ry ( and fufficient ) by the Covenant to their falvation , but that they be the/^f^ of the faithful devoted by them to God^ that is, that their

I

C203)

Tarents nainral , or at lead civil , whofe Ov^n rhey are, and have the power of difpofing of them for their good , do enter them by con-» f(ent into the Covenant with Chrift ? which it is fuppofed that Faithful Parents virtually did before, and will aSinally do when God doth call them to ir.

^. 10. As to them that fay , ]jhc thing further neceff^ry as the condition of the Infants acceptance and falvation \s [^ A fromife to edu^ cate the {^hild as a Chriftian if he live ] I an-fwer, J. That promife indeed is included in his dedication and confcni; •, 2. But who but the Owners of the child are capable of making fuch a promife ? funlefs is feconds promifin^. chat the Owners iha^l do their duty ) : For only he that pwneth him can edccace him ( by himfeif or others) or dtfp^e, oi him for his cducadon : who hath power > Jifpofe of another mans child , and educate him ? faey that undertake as fure-ties to do it, in cafe ihe Parents apofiatize or Me , do plainly imply, i. That till then it is the Parent that is intrufved to do it -, and therefore that the Parent muft confent to do it 5 and therefore that the Parent mul^ enter his child jn the Covenant of Chrift : 2. And that if the Parents apoftatiz^e or die ^ they will take the child themifelves as their Own ^ or elfe by what power can they educate him or difpofc of him >

<. II. They that fay, God did not fave one for the faith or confent of another ^ muft remember, I. That we are all faved for the meritoriom

Krgh^

(204)

Righteoufnefs of Chrlfi, by the way of a freeglft^ whofe condition is but [nitable acceptance : And why may not a Parent accept a domtion for his Child , who hath no will to accept n for himfelf? Shall he be certainly il ut out unto damnation? Or fhall he have that gift at^foltitelywhkh is conditional to all others f Or is he not concerned in the donation at all ? 2. And remember that we have guilt and mifery from our Parents • and iherefo?-e though life and pardon be by Chrift only, yet it is congruous chat the raeer condition of acceptance may be performed by the Parents.

<>. 11, Perhaps fome will lay all the right of Infants to the pardon of fin,, and falvation, upon fecret eledion only -, as if all that we knew of Infants Salvation were that God will fave fome whom he hath eleAed : but that there is na Promife of grace and falvation to any particular Infant in the world, as under any condition or qualification : And if this be fo, then, i. No Infant hath any Right to pardon, grace and falvation , given him by the Covenant of Grace •, No more than any eled perfon at age hath before ^ith and regeneration; Eledion gave Tanl ( nor any wicked man ) no right to pardon or falvation : Elfe eled Pagans and Infidels are juftified ^ if they have;^ ad impunitatem q^ .RegnHmC€e' lorHm, 2* And if this be fo, we have no afTurance that God will fave ten or three Infants in all the world : For he hath not told us whether he hath eleAed io many. f?. And yet we cannot be fure but that they may all or almoft all > be faved, while the number of the ekft is unrevealed,

4. Nor can we know that any more of the Children of the Faithful are faved, than of the Heathens or Infidels •, of thofc that love God and keep his Commandments, than of thofe that hate him. 5. And, in a word, we have then nopra-ffer hope, upon (/ovenant ri^ht, tiiat.God willfave any one individual Infant in the world : For we can hope ( in this proper fcnfe ) of nothing but what we do believe , and we can believe nothing but what is pro-mtfed or revealed. And fo Parents muft be thus far hopelcfs.

^.15% God who made man after his Image , teacheth him to govern according to thofe principles which are his Image : And all the Kingdoms in this world take Infants for Infant-members ; and the Laws give them Right to Honours and Inheritances, the pofleflion and ufe whereof they may have in the time and degrees that nature doth capacitate them. And can we then think that God who made a Conditional Gift of Pardon and Salvation to all the adult perfons in the world, did wholly leave out Infants, and that his Covenant giveth thera no rights at all •, no not to be members of his vi-fible Church?

^. 14. It feemeth to me a matter of doubtful confequence to alTert, that God will fave more ( yea fo great numbers as we will hope are fa-ved in Infancie ) than ever he promifed to fave, and gave any antecedent Right to Salvation to ? I doubt we Ihall open fuch a gap to the hopes of prefumptuous Heathens and Infidels this way, as will crofs our common doftrine : If God may

fw

(205;

fave whole Kingdoms and millions of Heathen^ Infants to whom he never gave Right to Salva^ tion by any gift or promife, mcerly becaufe he eleded ihem • fome will fay , why may he not do fo alfo by the Parents; at leaft renewing them all in tranfnu }

^. 15. If you fay that He giveth themfree-. ly his fan^ifying grace , and gtvieth them right to Salvation as fantiified , though he tell w not vpho are fanclifiedy I anfwer, i. Take heed left you teach the prefumptuous to fay the fame of Infidels, Heathens and almoft all, that God may in the paffages when they are dying fandifie and fave them all. 2. Still this giveth no pofiiivc hope of any particulars, nor more to Chriftians for their Children than they may have of the Children of Infidels-, nor any promife of the fphrit and fandification, as Believers have.

5<, 16. I take it therefore for the foundeft Do-drine that Gods taking the Children of the Faithful into Covenant with him, and becoming their God and taking th^m for his own, doth figni--fie no lefs than a ftate of Grace, and pardon and fight to hf^ eternal •, and that they are in this ftate upon their Parents Confent and Heart-devoting them to Cod in Chrifi^ before baptifm, but baptifm is the folemnizing and invcftiture, which openly coram Ecclefia delivereth them fof-feffion of their vifiblc Church-ftate with a fealed pardon and gift ot life : For it is not another, but the fame promife and Covenant which is made to the faithful and their feed: And all Gods promifes to the many Generations of them, in

the

(207>

the fecond Commandment and many other Texts, cannot mean any fuch little blefiings as confift with a ftate of damnation and the poffeflion of the Devil. And ail the ancient Churches in bapti-» zing of Infants were of this mind ( whom I will not defpife. ) And jihrahams cafe perfwadeth me that the Children of Natural and Civil Parents (truly their Owners ) have this right ( before they are baptized. ) But the former f natural Parents) have plainer evidence than the later (which is a darker cafe.) But as for them that think either that all Infants are faved, or all baptized Infants {jure vel injuria) though no Parent or Ovpner confent or dedicate them ( heartily , or openly ) to Cody or though they are hypocrites and truly confent not for themielves or theirs, let them prove it if they can ^ but I muft fay it is pad my power.

^. 17. I know the grand difficulty is, that then this Infant-Grace is loft in many that live to riper age. I have faid fo much of this in my Chri-ftian DireAory that I will refer the confidering Reader thither, only adding, i, That far greater abfurdities will follow the contrary opinion, and the greater are not to be chofen. I am loth again to name them. 2. That the univerfal Church ( as far as by any notice we can knoyr) did for many hundred years grant the conclufion and take it for no abfordity, but a certain truth •, yea much more, Auftin and his followers themfelves, thought more at age were truly juftified and fan-dified than were elected and did perfeverc : And fome hold that not all that have the fandifying

fpirit.

(2o8)

fplrif^ but only certain confirmed Chriftians, hare a certainty to perfevere : And others hold, that as the (pirit of Chrift is promifed to Believers, though men believe not. without the fpirit, fo that meafure of Grace which caufeth men only to believe^ as antecedent to that promifed (pint ( of Powery Love and a fonnd mind ) is but fuch as may be loft, as Adams was •, and that it is the jpirit following it (as the rooted habit ^ which cannot be loft : And oihers come yet lower, and fay that the Grace which giveth/<s2/>^ it /^//cannot be loft ( becaufe fuch have the promife of the fpirit ^ ) but yet the grace which only enableth men to Repent and Believe ( called fujjicient) may be loft before it produce the Ad: Accordingly fome think of Infant-Grace : The laft fort think that they have real pardon of original (in and right to life, and have real Grace •, but being Infants,, that grace is but fuch as will enable them-to believe if they come to age , and not infaU libly canfe it , and that this may be loft: And fo I might run over the opinions of the reft. And among all thefe the judgement of Davenant ^^ Wardj 8cc, of the lof of an Infant-ftate of Gracey as by them opened is not fo hard, as I think the contrary way will infer: And it feems by Art, i. c. ij, that the Synod of Dort was of their mind.

0. 18. Qnt darknefs about iht future ftateoi Infants SohIs^ hath occafioncd fome diverfity of thoughts about their frefent ftate. Indeed they will neither in Heaven or Hell have any work for Confcience in the review of any formr diions

good or evil: And it feemeth by NarJatiTLene before cited ( Orat, 40. ) that fome Antiencs thought as mod Papifts do, that unbaptizcd Infants have neither the joys of Heaven, nor any punifhraent but the lofs Oi' thefe: But what ftate then to place them in they know not: To think that they (hall remain in a meer potentiality of underftanding, and fhall know no more than they did here, is to equal therti with bruits, and to encourage the Socinrans who fay the like of thefe-parated fouls of the adult: And if they can allow underftanding to thofe that dted haftiz^ed^ why not to the reft? And if they ptnderftand^ they muft have grief or pleafure : But who can know more than God revealeth ?

5^. ig. In fum ; i. That God would have Parents devote their Children to him, and enter them according to their capacity in his Cavenanc (as I have elfewhere proved) is a great truth , not to be forfaken. 2. And alfo that he accept-cth into his Covenant all that are faithfully thus devoted to him, and is peculiarly their God, and fuch Children are holy. 3. That they are certainly members according to an Infant capacity of the vifible Church as they are of all Kingdoms under Heaven : Thefe are all clear and great truths. 4. And that there is far more hope of their falvation than of thofe without. 5. And I think the Covenant maketh their Salvation certain if they fo die. 6. And it feemeth tomethac the inveftiture and folemniz^ation of their Covenant with Chrift, fl^.ould be made in Infan-cie, from d^anh,zS» ip;2o. and the expofiti-

( 2IO)

on of theuniverfal Church. 7. But if any fhould think with Tertnllian and Naz.ianz,ene that the tin[ie of invcfttture and folemni^^ation is partly left to prudence, and may be delayed in cafe of health, yea or fliould thnik that Infants are not to be folemnly invefted by baptifm, but only the adult, fo they confefs hifants relation to God^ his Covenant and Church -, I would differ from fuch naen with love and peace, and mutual toleration and communion.

CHAP/

(211)

CHAP. I. The Occajion of this Writing*

^. i« A ^ ^ ^'^^ ^y %^^^^ ^"*^ '^"§ imponu-Jl\. nity unwillingly engaged at firft to meddle publickly in the ControverTie of Infant Bipcifm wiih Mr. Tomba , fo I then refolved to meddle no more with ir, iinlefs I found ti^at ne-cefiity made it an apparent duty.

0. 2. Accordingly when Mr, Tombes had printed the laft private papers wiiich paft between him and me, without my confent , I never anfwered his reply to this day -, not driving to have the laft word, and fuppofing that the ftudious impartial Reader, would find no need of a rcjoynder: For" to me his Reply feemed fo empty and next no-thingjthat I thought it umiecefTary to fay any nlore,

<$, 3. But it is now grown the cuftom among Papifts and Sedaries and almod: all the wranglers that trouble the world, to fcribble fomewhat k\\{t or nonlenfe againft that truth which they have not wit, or will, or humilicy enough to learn, and then fay to thofe that would make them wifer, yoit are anfwered-^ and itgoeth for a vidory to any foolery, if they can but fay, fnch a one that hath written againfl yon is linanfxvcred : As if we dealt on luch terms with the world in writing, as that he that fpeaketh laft, (that is, that liveth longeft ^ muft be fuppofed to be in the right. ' Or as if we knqw not when wc write againft the grofieft

V z here(ig

herefie or error, that as many words may be faid or written for it as againft ic 1

5^. 4. And O what pity is it that with the vulgar fort of well-meaning people , number goeth for vret^hr y and he feemech to be in the right to them, who is nearefi them and hath befl of-fonnrnty to talk to them a few fmooth deceitful words for his opinion, and to belie and vilifie thofe that are againft him I Not but that there are great fundamental Truths which manifeft themselves , which I hope thefe honeft fouls would not be drawn from by an Angel from Heaven: But verity no true Charity can be fo blind as to deny it, ihat in lower controverted points, the knowledge of the vulgar Religious people is fo low, that he that is lower than an Angel, or than a well-ftudied Divine, or thaa. a man of fo-ber folid reafon, may deceive them ( having firft been himfclf deceived ) if he can but fpeak niea-loHJly^ and reproach others imfHciefjtly^ by the fpi-r\t defer ibed2in^ ex or cifed \n Jant, i, at large.

<^. 5. And I crave thy pity, Reader, to my fclf and fuch as I, that our Tiryie and Employ^ ment is fo much at the wiil and mercy of fuch a fort of wrlnglin^ men. Thar rf I have it in my defire to do Gods Church fervice upon fome greater and more needful fubjed, yet it is in the power of the Devil to ftir up the corruption of honeft weli-meaning Chriftians^ to put a neceflity on me to do fome poor inconfiderable works, and leave undone the greater and more excellent,

5^. 6. For circumftances may make it a mans duty to do that as frefently mcejfary^ which with-

m

in a few years will be of no fignification, but die with the incerefts and quarrels of the age.

5^. 7. It hath pleafed the Lord , who did let loofe the S^penc upon Adam in Paradifc, to ex-ercife his ffnurch in almoft all ages with temptations from two r>rts chat feem much contrary, but are nearer in difpoficion and principles than they well underftand themfelves, I mean Church-Ty^ rarjts and Qjurch-Dtviders •, And though I ( and moft others of my quality ) have fuffered incomparably more by the former, yet it is not a little that I have fuffered by the later: And efpecially that by their flanderous and clamorous unquiet importunity, they will not.give me leave to live by them in peace, nor to ^ on in better work while I meddle not with them. I could not obtain that leave from y[r,Tombs-^ And now Mr, I>. hath been pleafed to open the mouths ot fo many of his partakers againft me, as maketh wife men tell me that 10 be filent will be to be fcandaloufly guilty of their fin. And do we live upon thefe terms, that any Railer can call us off from our better fervices when ever He and Satan pleafe?

^. 8. But my purpofe is to meddle with them but this once : And if after this thefe crying Children will bawl and wrangle and foul the houfe, and think that I am made for no better work than either to rock the Cradle or to make them clean, I will let them cry and take their courfe , and will no more believe that their humours are th^ tnafters of my time.

P 3 <f, 9. By

f 214)

^^ 9. By three or four arguments ( of his ma* king ) it hath pleafed one Major Dunvsrs a Souldier to call me to this task. i. By heaping up a Catalogue of Accufations againft my Do-drine in my Chriftian Diredory. 2. By reproaching me for not anfwering Mr. Tomhcs. 3. By proclaiming me to the world a flanderer who owe the Anabapiifts fatisfadion, for faying that many of them were Baptiz^ed nak^ci, 4, By perverfe citations of my later Writings as if they had been ferviceable to his caufe, 5. By his injury to poor fouls and the Churches peace, by his ignorant thougli confident oppolition to the truth, and writing a Volume of he knoweth not what.

5J. 10. And to add to my invitation, it is become of late a common faying among the Ana-baptills, that I am turned to their opinion or very near it, but have not humility to retrad my formeF error, and openly acknowledge what I hold.

p. II. The occafion of this is, i. Becaufe I have fo many years forborn to anfwer Mr. Ton.hcs his lad. 2. Becaufe I feek peace with them, and fpeak for it upon all occafions, and feek to abate other mens over-great oppolition to them, 3. Becaufe upon all occafions I prefs the confideration and improvement of our Baptifm , taking it for the fumm aad Charader of our Chriftianicy, and the true defcription ol Converfion, and the efTen-tial mark of Grace, and the qualification of Ca-tholick Church-mc:mbers, and the bond of all our ChriHian duty: As if none but Anabaptifts could think thuo? 5^. 12. When

^, 12. When I firft read Major Denvers BoQk» I thought fuch a Fardk could not be fo regarded as to need an Anfwer^ But when his Bookfeller came to know of me what I had againft it, as from him ; and when I heard how many thou-fands of them were Printed, I rather chofe to imitate him that had coma[fion on a headltfs mid" tittidey than him that iaia, y? fofidm vult decivi, devipiatur. And they that will not let me reft, mull bear fome of the fruits of ray difquiet* raent.

P 4 CHAP,

(216)

CHAP. II.

tJ^ore of my Judgement of the Anahaftifls and their Caitfe^ with a motton to them for peace,

^. I. T Confefs that in my Book againft Mr, X Tomhes I wrote fcveral pages enigmatically of the otfenfive fcandals of the Anabapiifts: And they that now read ihem when the cccafion is forgotten or unknown , will eiiher not under-ftand them, or think them tco fharp. But in all military Controverfies, no man is fo meet a Judge as he that is on the ground.

5f. 2. I am almoft ready to condemn my felf for that and many other things pail when I forget the opcafion of them and the ftate that we were in : But I will not deny that at that time my heart felt more than I expreft , i. When I heard Ana-baptiftry obtruded on the religious people, as a great and needtul part of their integrity : 2. An4 when they that abhorred to hear of old fcandals were bufily making more and greater ; 3, When i faw what was done againft the Parliament, by them that profeiTed to be their fervants, and ihac the Anabaptifts and their AflTociates were the for-wardeft in the work: 4. And what was done againft the King, when they had thruft out the Farlidment ^ j. And what was done in the wars againft Scotland-^ 6. And what orders pa#|lqj:fe» queftring all fuch as my felf that were tiottfeii their Engagement or Keeping their days ofpifi^i? ■ - ' . ^mg

(217)

trig and thanksgiving in caufes of blood :

7. And when I faw thefe executed on many excellent men that were Matters of CoUedges in the Univerfities, and ufeful Minifters in the Country :

8. And when I faw what that called the Little Parliament was and did, and how it was put to the Vote whether all the Parifh Minifters of En^ gland (hould be put out at once ? and carried againft them but by a few .* And that the Ana-baptifts were of the forwardeft in all this work: 5. And after when I faw how many of them turned Ranters, and read my felf fome of their Letters, full of horrid Caches and Blafphemies • All thefe things made me think that they were not friends to the Churches welfare, and this was not the way of holinefs or peace.

^, 3. All this while I defired to have lived by tliem in peace and quietnefs, but I could not obtain it : Mr. Tomhes thought that I ftood in the way of his fuccefles, even when I medled not with them. And therefore I muft be ercher converted to them or conquered, that the triumph might promote their ends. And when that quarrel was over I was glad, and purpofed to meddle with them no more.

^, 4. One of the greateft things that offended me, was that ( even in the Fariihes where there were the ableft faithful laborious Minifters ,) they laboured to gather feparated Churches, upon the account of their opinion ^ And when thev had gathered them, they were militant Churches; Prcfently that Town was in a \yar • and the meetings employed for the extolling of their opinions, -^^ ' ~ and

and vilifying the Miniftcrs and Churches that were againft thenti, and making them odious or contemptible to their followers: which could not be the work of God.

^, 5. I dare challenge any man to make it good, that ever I fought to perfecute any Anabaptifts, or ftirred up others to perfecute them for their judgements: I know not that ever I did any of them any harm, except by not being of their minds, or contradicting them.

But though my fufferings by them were nothing , (that honour being affumed by another party ) yet they have not carried it fo to me : But have convinced me that were they uppermoft they would then have had too little tendernefs for thofe that hindred their fuccefles: Even fome of Mr. Tombes his flock, my neighbours and familiar friends, I think, fought my life or ruine when I meddled not with them. When Sir George Booth had done what was done in Chejhire, I wrote a Letter to Major Beak^ at Coventryy and the Mef-fenger telling them at Bewdley that he had a Letter from me, lome of them made themfelves Soul-diers, and inarms way-laid the mefTenger, afTauIt-ed him, and took his Letters, and though they found not what I fuppofe they expedcd, yet finding in it but a great mans name, who tlien much ruled publick affairs, they fent it up to the Council to him, who fummoned Major Beak^ioLondon to anfwer it, who had never fcen it and knew nothing of it: And though he fo fcaped, I was loudly threatned ^ but General Mvnkj approach out of ScfftUnd flayed the execution of their dif-

pleafure.

pleafure. Thus did my familiar Friends unprovoked (hmt of them yet alive J,

^. 6. Indeed my judgement was and is, that the point of Infant Baptifm hath its confiderable difficuhies, which may occafion wife and good men to doubt, or to be mift-ken in ir. And many of the Roman party have taken it to be proveable only by the tradition and judgement of the Church : And Mr. Tomhes hath pubHckly intimated as if one of oi]r moft Learned and Entire puMick ProfeiTorsof Theologie in one of our llniverfities , had declared himfelf of the famt mind, viz^. that it is not to be proved by Scripture, (Mr. Danijers hath alfomade advantage of this teftrmony), ( Though of late Scripture certain -proof\s found (in the new Rubrick of the LiturgieJ for a great deal more. ) I am not of that mind, that it is not proveable by Scripture. I think I have proved it -. but not by evidence fo clear, as every good man can perceive.

<f. 7. Therefore I never took the point of it to have fuch weight, as that all ihat differed from me in it, muft be denied either Loi/f, Liberty or Com-TKunion: If I know my own heart I do as heartily love a fober godly man that is againft Infant baptifm, as I do fuch men that differ from me in other fuch Controverfies ^ and much better than one of my own judgement, who hath lefs piety and fobriery. And I make no doubt but there are among us very many fuch , even fober and religious men, as there be among other parties.

5^. 8. Nor do I think that there is {{) much malignity

(tio)

Ilgnity in the bare opinion which denieth Infant Baptifm, as that all the Anabaptifts mifcarriages fliould arife from the nature of that opinion. But I am pad doubt that they arife from the dif-eafed minds of many that hold it. When injudicious perfons lay hold upon an opinion which is not common, their fingularity kindleth a proud felfifh zeal, and they take that opinion as more peculiarly their own, than the common Articles which all Chriftians hold : And therefore they grow fond of it, and are pufc up thereby with a conceit of their extraordinary knowledge : And then they feem to themfelves more religious than cuhers, and greater friends to the tru.h: And fo Frlde and Ignorance engage them in fingnlarity and fe'paration: And thus they would do, were ic any other opinion, which they thought as highly of as this: So that i: is not an Anabaptift as fuch, but the frond Church-divider , or Separa-tift that I am moil offended ar.

5^. 9. I know that in the Ancient Churches men were lefc at liberty, both vohen they would be baptized themfelves, and when their Children (hould be baptized: And though Infant-baptifm was without any known original, fmce the Apo-ftles, yet it was not a forced thing.

5J. 10. And were it in my power it (hould be fo ftill: I would not deny Chriilian Love, nor Church'Communionj nor publick encouragements, to any pious peaceable man for being an Anabaptift : If he would not feparate for ic from the Churches, if he would live peaceably with nie, I would live peaceably with him, and fhould be

loth

loth to be behind with him in love and peace,;

^. II. It is not f I fay ) Anabaptiftry,Indepca-dency, nor any fuch opinion which I impure our calamities to'diredly: But it is (next to Church Tyranny^ th^ fykk o( feparatio?j-^ I mean, when-men cannot fo far differ in judgement from ochers, but a perverfe zeal for their opinion as fome excellent truth of God, doth inftigate them to run away from thofethat are againft it, as if they were the enemies of the truth and God, and unworthy of the Communion of fuch as they : which is nothing but a conjunction of Pride , Ignorance and Vncharitablenef ( or JHulice, )

5^. 12. I have told thefe men that when they have fpoken never fo ilarply againft TerfecntorSy it is apparent that there is much of the fame fpirit in them-ielves; One faith, of DifTcnters, Avpay vfiith/nch unworthy perfons out of the Mtnifiry or out of ihe Country: and the other hkh^jiway with fuch nnwor-' thy perfons from yoHrCommnnion: And both contrary to Chrifts fheep-mark which is Love, and both tend to make their Brethren feem unlovely : And whom they ferve by this means, whether the Prince of Love, or the Prince of Malignity, it's pity but they knew ; or at leaft would confider of it, inftead of being angry with us when we tell them of it.

^. 13. I am not therefore half fd zealous to turn men from the opinion of Anabapciftry, as I am to perfwade both them and others, that it is their duty to live together with mutual forbearance, in Love and Church-Communion notwith-ftanding fuch differertccs; For which they may " fee

(222)

fee more reafons given by one that once was of their mind and way ( Mr. William Allen in his

Retrachation of Separation^ ^ ^^Satan willnotcon- ^„^ j^j^ Perfwafive to t;/?.-lent thac yon fhoiild , . -^l^ i_

ffo^Dcrly read the Book5. 0') ^"an any ot them can

foundiy refel, though they may too eafily rejed: them.

5^. 24. I am perfwaded that the formal Mini-fters, and people, who make little more ufe of Baptifm, than to give it to Infants, and to receive it in Infancy, have been the greateft occafion of Anabapciftry among us: when the people fee thac all being Baptized in Infancy , many afterwards live all their days, and never underhand what Ba-prifm is, and few evfer folemnly and diftindlly own and renew that Covenant when they come to age, (unlefs coming to Church and receiving the Lords Supper with as little iinderftanding, be a renewing it, ) this tempteth ferious people that underftand not the matter well thetftfelves, to think that Infant-baptifm doth but pollute the Churches , by letting k\ thofe who know not what they do, and after prove prophaneor Infidels : And they think that it is the only way to re-« formation to flay till they are ready to devote ihemfelves underftandingly to God, But this is their miftake : For, i. If it were deferred till ripe-nefs of age, one part would negled it and continue Infidels; and another part would da all for-njally^ as wc fee they do now at the other Sacrament, where the fame Covenant is to berenewed* 2, There is a better remedy,

^, 15. For

f, 15. For we hold that all tliat are Eapti-zed in Infancy fhould as underftandingly, anjl as ferioufly and ( if it may be conveniwtly ) as folemnly^ own and make that Covenant with God when they come to age, as if they had never been baptized ; (if not more, as being more obliged. ) The reafons of this I have given long ago ac^ large, in a Treatife of Confirmation, written when we had hope of fetting up this Courfe, under the name of Confinnation, which fome of us pradL-fed in our AfTemblies not wiihout fuccefs. To» be ferioufly devoted to God by our Parents firft, and to be brought at age as fefioully to devote our felves to him , as any Anabaptift can do, is a much liklier way to fill the Church with ferious Chriftians, than to leave all men without the fenfe of an early Infant obligation.

^. 16. I am as fully perfwaded that Infants Church-memberfliip and Baptifm is according to Gods will, as ever I was, when I was moft engaged in the Conw:overlie: And I am perfwaded that thcfe Papers of mine to Mr. Towbes^ are fo unfatisfadorily anfwered as is worfs than no An-fwer, and fheweth how little is to be faid.

^. 17. Though the Ad of Baptizing be a duty, and fo neceflary n^cfffitate frdcefti^ yet Pro-teftants hold that it is not fo neceffury nsccffitatc mediiy but that in fome cafes thofe that are unba-ptized may be faved : As in cafe the Child 6xt before it can be done, or in cafe the abfence or delay of the Baptizer be the caufe .• Ir is true-cen* feming to his Covenant ( for our felves and thofe that we have power to confentand acceptit for)

which

C 224;

which Chrlft hath made necejfary to fahation^ and if hcftould A^mn TLtrueConfenter^ he fhould damn one that hath the Love of God, and one to whom he promifeth falvation, John 1^16^ 18.

^, 18. It is utterly incongruous to the reft of the Law of Grace, which is fpiritual, and to Chrifts alterations, who took down the Law of burdenfom Ceremonies., to think that he (hould lay fo great a ftrefs upon the very outward wafh-ing, as that he would damn trj: Believers that Love God, for want of it: when he hath done fo much to convince the world, that God feeketh fuch to worfhip him as will do it in fpirit and truth, and that Circumcifion or Uncircumcifion is. nothing, but t aich that worketh by Love : And if Penitent Loving Believers fhall not be faved," Gods promifes give us no affurance or feeurity* \ v

5^. 19. When the Apoftle, E^hef, 4.4, 5. putteth > [^ one Baptifm 2 among the neceflaries of Church-Concord y by Baptifm is meant, our folemn de» voting our felves ( and ours under that truft ) to Chrijir in. the Bi^ftifmal Covenant ^ which can mean no more but that as there are three things f on our part) in Bapafm, i. Heart-confent^ 2. Profeffion of that confent ^ 3. The Reception of waHiingas the profelling fymbol: So, i.The heart'Confent is necefTary to our membership of the Church as invifible, that is, to our union with Chrift and our falvation •, 2. The Profeffion of Corjfent as there is opponunity is necefTary, both to prove the fincerity of <5!onfent it felf, and to other mens notice of it, and fo to our member-fhip of the Church as vi(;ble; 3. And our Pro^

feffing

fefftng it by being Baptiz^ed is neceilary to the regular and orderly manner of our Profeffton : And fo far to our concord.

5^. 20. And he that kno\^^eth Baptifm to be hie et nunc his duty and yet will not receive it , (heweth his unfoundnefs by his difobedi-encc.

5$. 21. As l^aptifm is made our gi-eat duty Under that name , fo Profe]Ji&n or Confejjion of Chrift, as fuch , is ofc ihcntioned as neceflary, even to falvation, Rom, 16.9,10. 1 7^^.4.2.3; 15, Afar* 10. 32. Phil, 2. II 2 John J.

And Bapttfm being our Open confefftng and Owning Chrift by a foleran Vow and Covenant, k is principally a^ fuch that it is necelTary tofal-vation , yea and to a perfed aaettiberfhip^of the vilible Church.

c. 22. Therefore if any man that in a defart or dry' Countrey could hc-'ve no water , or that Uvcd where there is no Minifter, fhould openly before all. the people devote himfelf to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghofl, according to the Baptifmal Covenant, and folemnly pro-fefs himfelf a Chriftian, that man were a true member of the vifiblc Church, though defedive as to the mode of entrance, and were to be numbered with Chriftians : And Ccnftantine and many another were called Chriftians long before they were baptized. And it were injurious to the Rationality and fpiricuality of Chrifts Covenant , to feign him to be fo ceremonious, as to r^jed a found profefling believer for want of water.

(226)

^. 23» Though jiagnfiine be called dnrui fa* ter Infantum^ and be i^uppofed for fome pafTa-ges by many Papifts and others to damn allun-baptized perfons fave Martyrs, yec thefc following words among others, in his later times in his deliberate difputes againft the Donatifts, fully fhew his contrary judgement C which yet I believe the Intereft of his caufe againft the Do-natifts was a help to in this point) And remember that be confirmeth it in his Recradations, by retracing only the inftance of the thief on the crofs 5 as uncertain whether he was baptized or nor,

<^. 24. Aug de baptif, conr. Donat. li. 4. c. 29. [^ Qjdod etitun atqus etiam confiderans in-venio , nan tantum Pajftojjem fro nomine Chri-fti J id qitod ex Baft if mo deer at fojfe fufflere-^ fed ttiam Fidem convcrfionen^.que Cardiff fi for^ te ad celebrandum myfiermm baptifmi in an-

giifliis temfomm fncctirri nan fotefi-—: Ef

Cap, 24. Cnm Aftnifterinm baptifmi non con^ temptui religionis fed articulm necejfitatis exckt'-dit : c^ baptifmpis [quidem pot eft ineffs ubi con-verfo cordis defucrit : Converpo aittem cordis fotefl qnidera inejfe non fercefto baptifmo 5 fed contempto non fotefimequeenimnllo jpodo dicen^ da eft converfio cordis ad Deum^ cnm Deifycra" inentHm contemnithr, Coaverfion then will fay^, without baptilm ,. wheri baptitu is nor contemn,^ ed : It is the contempt that dcftroyeib, ^^d that as it provcth men unconverted. And \k(\^ he profefTerh to be his judgement after long and, great confideration,

<c. 25.'

^. 2$. Baptifr» is to Qoriflianity much like what Ordination is to ihc ficred Mimftryy and what folemn Matrimony is to Marriage, It is necefTary as a Duty^ and as a CMeam to cur vrdinary and regular admittance to the Coni-munion of the Church. But as in caie there were no Ordainer to be had, in a rar Countrey in ftyimertcay no doubt but a quahfied perfon might become a t aftoi*, rather than God ihould have no Church, nor be lokmnly woriliipped ^ And as in cafe there could be no regular joiemmz^ati-on of Marri ige ( as in fuch a vvildernefs ) a fiiblijhed corifettt may tie the knot j fo in cafe there could be no B^iptiz^ing^ a foicnm Frofeffion and Covenanting would ferve to Gods acceptance, and to a right to the Chriftian name,

^, 26. I only leave it to Chriftian Charity and wifdom to confider how far fome mens Education^ natHral weaknefs of judgement, and other impediments of information, may make their error againfi: Infant Baf tifm , to participate of fuch a Neceffity : The cafe hath its difficulties: Papifts and Proteftants confefsi it , as to vScri-pture evidence : Weak men cannot know all things; And even confiderable heads, that have heard and thought of much againft it, which they cannot anfwer, may grow very confidep.t that they are in the right, and after by that prejudice may become uncapable of what ffiould fatisfie them ; Abundance of the fons of the Church that talk flioft againft them , give fuch weak reafons for Infant Baptifm, and are fo unable to confute an Jlnahftifii as fheweth, that it k nor Mor^

(258)

knorvkd^e , but fomcwiiat elfe more incfi-ning'them to the truth therein, that keepeih them right.

5^. 27. If the cafe were , whether the Lords Supper might be Adminiftred with Beer, or Milk, where there is no Wine } Or whether Ba-prifm might be Adminiftred by Mflk or Wine, where there is no water ? fuppofe the affirming party were certainly in the right • yet if the contrary minded ''ould fay, I own Chrifls Sacrament , and folemnly profefs my confem to his Covenant ^ and I would participate as you do, but that I take it to be a fin , and with aH the means that I can ufe, in conference, reading, meditation , prayer, my judgement is not changed ,J I fhould not break fuch communion with-(uch a man, as he were capable and willing to hold with the Church. And how near fome A-nahapifis cafe is to this, I leave to conlidera-lion,

<^. 28. But m.aking no queftion but many of them are far better men than I, and knowing my felf lyable to* error, and knowing how much ChriR: in his promifes layeih upon fwcerity of Fairh and Love more than upon ceremony • and having endeavoured to learn what this meaneth, / vsfill have mercy and'/wt facrifice-^ As I am far more offended at their Schifm ^ ox fefar at ion from Communion wich our Churches, than at their opinion , fo I will here lay down thofe terms on which I am perfwaded.good andfo-ber men will be willing on both fides to agree and hold communion : Or on which I am furs

(129)

1 would gladly live in brotherly love and communion with them my felf.

5^. 29. Let the Anabaftifis confent to and profefs as foUoweih or to this fenfe.

^* [^ Though we judge Infant Baptifm diiTo-" nant from Chrifts inrtituted order, yet find-^' ing .that God hath made many promifes to the ^' feed of the faithful above others, and that Chrift " exprefTed his readinefs to receive little children *' when they were brought to him for his blef-'' ling, and knowing that all Chriftian Parents "fhould earneftly defire that their children may *^ be the children of God through Chrifl: , and '* fhould devote them to him, as far as is in their " power , and knowing that there are difficul-"ties about the extent of this power , and ** Chrifls promifes ^ we do here folemnly pro-*'fefs, that we thankfully defire all ihofe mer-*' cies for this child v;hich God hath proraifed *' to fuch in his word ^ and that we heartily " offer, devote and dedicate this child to God the *'Father, Son and Holy Ghofl, as far as he " hath given us power to do it, befeeching him ac-" cordingly to accept him: And we promife faiihful-*Myto endeavour to educate him in the nurture *' and admonition of the Lord, and as we are *' able to perfwade him when he is capable, to *'believe in Chrift, and folemnly devoie himfelf ''to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghofl in ''Baptifm. 1

Let this much be done in the Church or fo openly as may fatisfie the Church, thiit thev arc not defpifers of God: mercies, nor their cliildrea? fouls. ' 0^3 Muc.:

(230)

Much more would it tend to our quietnefs an4 £:oncord , if thofe that profefs that they cannot ^atisiie their confciences in their Infant Baptifm, Would but do as the Lirurgie doth by thofe wbofc Bapcifm is uncertain , [ If than be not Bapttz,ed, I B>iptz.c thee~\i.x\(ii fowould fay,[^J?^-ing uncertmn v^hether my Infant Baptifm be valid , If it be net I novo receive that which is ] And when they have fatisfied their confciences^ woiild live quietly in the Love and confimuni-on of the Church / Who would n6c receive th^m, though we approve noc of their way ?

i, 30. And were it in ray power as a Paftor of the Church , I would give fatisfadtion by fuch an anfwerable prcfeflion as this.

*^ [ Though it be our judgement that Infant^ ''have ever been members of Gods vifible Church,' ^' fince he had a Church and there were Infants *Mn the world, and do believe ihat Chrift: hath 'Signified in the Gofpcl that it is his gracious *'will that they fliould flill be fo • And that ''he that commanded. Mat, 28. 19. \^Go ye and ^' Difciple all Nations 'Baftiz.ing 'them ~] would ''have his MiniRers endeavour accordingly. to *^Mo ir, and barh hereby made Baptifm the re-*'gular orderly way of folemn entrance into a '' vifible Church ftate •, and therefore we devote ^^ this child to God in the Baptifmal Covenant: '' Yet vve do alfo hold, that when he cometh ^' to age, it will be his duty as ferioufly and ^'devoutly to make this Covenant with God *' underflandingly himfelf, and to dedicae him-^'felf to God the Father, Son and HolyGhod,

r230

^'as thofe rauft do that never were Baptized in ^'Infancie : And we promife to endeavour faith-*'fully as we have opportunity, to inftrud and *' periwade him fo to do , hoping that this *' his early Baptifmal dedication , and obligati-*'on to God, will rather much prepare him for *'it, than hinder it.

<5. 31. Me thinks thefe Profeflions ihould put olT the chief matter of offence and exception againfl each other , .as to the ill confequents of our opinions ? And if fober good men would by fucha mutual approach, be the more difpofed to live together in love and holy peace, how eafily (hould 1 bear the fcorns of thofe Formalins that will reproich me for fo much as motioning [ a. Teace with the Anabaftifts , even in the fame Commu-nion ! 1 Who by making it a reproach will but perfwade me, that fuch as they are lefs worthy of Chriftian Communion than fober, pious, and peaceable Anahnftifts.

f, 3Z. And if with the partial fort of them-felves fuch motions of Peace be turned into matter of contempt , and they proceed in their clamours and reviling of me, as an enemy of the truth, for being againll their way, I fhall account it no wonder nor matter of much provocation, finding in all Sed:s as well as theirs, that the injudicious fort are apt to be abufively cen-forious, and the more mens Pride^ Ignorance and uncharitahlenefs remain, the more they will fwelj into felf-conceit, and trouble the Church with a miftaking wrangling buitful fort of Zca!.

a.^ ^ 35.

^i 33. Afld as I itouft needs believe as ill cf (ome fort of Zeal as St. fames hath fpoken 6^' it. Jam. 3. and experience hath too long told the world of it; yet 1 take it for truly amiable in men , that they have a love and Zeal for Truth in general, and a hatred to that which they think to be againfl it •, and that their bit-ternefs againfl: the truth and me, is upon a fup-pofition that both are againfl: the truth and God ; for this beareth them witnefs that they have a zeal of God, though it be not according to Knowledge ; and if they knew truth indeed, ttiey would be zealous for it.

5^. 34. I conclude with this notice to thccon-tr?ry minded,that the evidence for Infants Church-meraberfliip fecmeth to me fq dear, both in nature and in Scriprure , that 1 bid them de-fpair of ever perfwading me againfl it : But if they will have any hope of changing my judgement, it muft be by confe[jingi\{tvtfible Church-membership of Infants , and proving that ytt they are not to bebaftiz^ed^zxi^ that Baptifm was appointed for initiating none but adiik con-*VErts y and not to be the common eTitrance into the (hurch : which yet I think they can never do, while the plain Law of Chrift Mat.ig, 19. and the expofition of the univerfal Church, doth ftand on record to confute (uch an opinion / But here they have more room for adifpute.

5f. 35. But ("though I exped to be cenfgred for it J I will fay once ( becaufe truth is truth J (hat tboiigh Rebaptiz^ing and Reor^aining are juftly both condemned by the ancient Chur(;hes,

and

and pronounctd altk^ ridiculoHs by GregoryMtig^ Lib, 2. £/>. Indi^. 11. x,$(6^ and many others • yet were men Rehaftiz^ed but for Certainty to them^ fclves or to the Church, and to quiet their con-fcicnces, and on fuch terms as in my Chrifltan DireAory I have (hewed that a feeming Reor-dination might in fome cafes be tolerated, and would not r^rong Infants , nor make it an occafi-on of divifion or alienation ; I know not by any Scripture or reafon that fuch Rcbaptizing is fo heinous a fin , as fhould warrant us to contemn our brethren : No though it were as faulty as the oft commemorative baptizing ufed by the tAbaj-fines.

-M1>Vf

CHAP.

(^34)

CHAP* III. 0/^ General V^iewofVit. Danvers book*

f* lu A /T^* Danvers book is entitled a Trea^ jLVI tife of Bapifm, in which he giveth us the Hiftory of Infant and Adult Bapcifm out of Antiquity , as making it appear that Infant Baptifm was not pradifed for 300 years (inhis fecond edit, it is [^ near 500. ) And in his j^p-. fend. ed. 2,\_ I cannot find that it was praUi* fed upon any till the fourth Century .'3 And he giveth us a Catalogue of witnefifes againft it. By which thofe that hold their Religion on the belief of fuch mens words, will conclude that all this is tme^ and that Infant Baptifm is z Novelty , and thofe that are againft it do go the old andCatholick^way,

f. z. Having pernfed his teftimonies on both fides 5 I am humbled and afhamed for the dul-nefs of my heart, that doth not with floods of compaflionate tears lament the pittiful condition of the feduced, that muft be thus deceived in the dark ^ and of the Churches of Chrift that muft be thus aflaulted , and ihaken, and diftra-ded , by fuch inhumane horrid means : The book being compofed, in that part of hiftory which the ftrefs of the caufe lyeth on, of fuch UNTRUTHS \nfaih and hiftory, as I pro-fefs it one of my greateft difficulties to know how to call them. Should I fay, th^c they are ' fo

(235) fo notoriotK and fhamelcfs, as that ( I fay lo^ only a Papift, ) but any fober Turk or PagaTi fhould blufh to have been guilty but of fome page or lines of them, and much more a man of any tcndernefs of confcience, the Readers would think that the language were harfli, were k never fo true, and fome would fay, Let us have [oft words and hard arguments ]. And fhould I not tell the Reader the truth of the cafe, I might help to betray him into too much fearlefnefs of his bait and fnare, and I doubt I may be guilty of untruth by concealing the /^tia-lity of his untruths : And it is not matter of Argument^ but/^^ that lam fpeakingof.

<• 3. But it pleafeth that God whofc coun. f*^ls are unfearchable , as to permit five parts of the Earth to remain yet Grangers unto Chriil, fo to permit his Church to be fo tryed and di-ftrad:ed between Church Tyranny^ and dividing feffirations , SeBs and parties^ as that in many ages it hath not been eafie to know which of thera was the more pernicious.

^. 4. And it muft grieve every confcionablc and difcerning lover of Truth and Peace, toob-ferve how thefe two Church-difturbing parties, do by their extremities cf oppofition, increafc as well as exafperate each other : As th^ Ithaci-r:« Prelates did by the Tnfcillianjfts ^ and the Prrfiilliamfls by them. The Pride , covetouC-nefs, dead formality, and cruel violence ofCler-gie Tyrants maketh the poor 5cdari«s think that they muft go fo far from them, till they have loft themfelves and know not where they are^

and as Mr. Danvers muftcrs up a catalogue of my fayings in his mode and drefs , which feera ugly to the poor man that thinks he feeih Antichnftianity mfnch Gofpel znd natural truths which he underftandeth not, ( Like that melancholy perfon, who thinks fhe feeth Spiders upon every one that comes near her, and they muft brufh them off before (he can converfe with them , though fhe be cetera fana ) •, (o thofe on the other extream think them fo fanatick, and almofl mad , that they are apt to fufped every word alraoft that they fay, of madnefs, and fometimes thereby injure the truths of the Gof-pel, and foberer people, that partake not of their guilt, and fo fay of fuch as agree with them but in aliqHo tertioy They are all alike.

p. 5. This was the main caufe which made St Martin feparate from his neighbour Bifhops, and deny communion with them to the death: Becaufe their perfecution ohhs Prifciliianifishdid fo animated the loofer fort againft ftrid Religious people, that they had brought men under the fufpicion of Prifcillianifm^ , if they did but faft^and pray,and read and talk of the Scripture. It*s eafie to fee of late who they are that have done the like.

^. 6. When this fort of men fee the weaknefs of the Sedaries , and the bold-faced fallhood which fuch as y[.T.I>anvers obtrude on the world, and hear them furioufly revile what they underhand not,it maketh them think that they are fitter for Bedlam than for humane focietie : And their confciences Juftiijc them for all the cruelties that

'they

they ufe againft citlier them , or more innocent perfons, whom in their ignorance and uncharita-blenefs they number with them.

i. 7. And on the like account when they read and hear their erroneous Dodrines, and hear their incongruous words in prayer , they think' they can never be too ftrift in fhackling them and all others in prefcribed forms : And nothing. Guieteth their Confciences in all this fo much, a$ the undeniable errors, and follies and mifcarria-ges of thofe that thus provoke them.

^, 8. But in this the Church in AngHfiines days did not think that way the wifeft cure : when he faith [^ Afferat^ m fieri fokt^ aUqnam free em in qua loqiiatur contra reguUm fidet ( mtilti qtiiffg irrHHnt in freces non folnm ah impritis laqnaci'^ httiy fed ettam ab h^reticis comfofitasy Q^ fer ig-tiorantitz fim^licitatem non eas valentes difcerne^ rcj muntur tisy arbitrante5 quod bona fint:) Nee tamen quod in eis ferverfum efi cvacuat ilU que ibi reUa funt • fed ab eis fotipps evacnatur ] Aug. de bapr. cont. Donat. f as I remember about lib.5. c. II,) O truly charitable and peaceable Dodrine! And he that will feparate from other for every difference ( or real error ) in DoArinc or Prayers, fhall have enow to feparate from him,

^. 9, I know nothing that fo much multiplicth Sedaries as the notorious mifcarriages of Church-Tyrants that oppofe them ; And T know nothing^ next carnal intereft it felf, that fo much , multiplicth and confirmerh Papiils and Church-Tyranrs, as the madnefi of the SeAaries : The

wildencfs.

(238)

wildenefs, but efpccialJy the diverficy of thejif opinions, hath done naore to increafe the number of Papifts among us than any thing that ever the Papifts themfelves could otherwife fay for theif caufe : For people fee fo many giddy with turning round, and fee fo many Seds among us, that they are confounded, and know not which to N of i but they rnuft lay hold of fomewhat that is more ftable, or be wheel-fick.

^. 10. O what a confirmation is it to a Papift* to find fuch a one as Mr. Danvers calling Gods Truths and Ordinances Antichriftian 1 Yea, our very Baptifmal Covenant and dedication to Chrift is Antichriftian, and the chief Fathers and Martyrs of the Church are Antichriftian / ( no wonder if I be fo.) And I doubt almoft all the Church of Chrift for 900 years, at leaft in this mans reckoning. And what will the Papifts defire more ? With what fcorn will they deride fach men > Wq he to him by whom offence cometh. The chief Quakers are charged by Mr. FaUo and others ( even fome of their own name J of denying the perfonand office of Chrift hinafelf: It is worth ^he enquiring whether they rejed him not as An-tichrift, and call not Chrjftignity by the name of Amiehrif^ianity ? .

CHAP.

(^39)

C H A P. I V.

Of Mr. Danvers'i kis Witnejfes agawfi Infant^ JBaptifm.

^' I. "TXT'Hen he hath told you, that Inhi^ W ''fmailfearch f fhamefully fmall) ■ ^ he cannot find there is any authentick teftimony '' that it was pradifed on any till the fourth Cen-^' tury •, he in the next words faith that it is grant-^^ cd th?it Tertulhan fpake againft it in ty^fricay "which is clear evidence that fonie had been " fpeaking for it in that corner of the world : ] This is no contradidtion with him : And did they only Jpeak^for it and not pratitfezt <* Speak once like a man : And was not that till the fgttrth CentHry f

^. 2. His Catalogue containeth three Columns : The firft of the Baptifm of the Adult : And what Chriftian ever denied this ? And what meaneththe man in labouring to prove it ? The fecond is of the Inflituting and averting of Infant-Baptifm; of which more anon. The third is of his Witnefles againft Infant-Baptifm. And the firft of thcfe mentioned in the Catalogue is TertnlUan in the third Century. By which he feemeth to confefs that till the third Century he hath no witnefs againft it. But I have laid fo much elfewherc and others more, to prove, i. That Tertnlii^ ans words prove that Infant-Baptifm de faBo was then in ufc j 2. That he only telleth his opinion

hlon of the point of convenience , but conclud^th riot againft Infant-Baptifm as unlawful ; 3. That it is moft probable he fpcaketh of the Infants of Heathens ; 4. That he fpeaketh from that flriB y?-^^/</^n>^ which ihade him plead alfo for th^ ^JHontanifls Fanatictfnt^ and againft fecond marriages^ and for his inordinate faftings^ &c. as a man differing from the Ghuirches and numbered with the Hereticks (though I think him a learned Godly man. ) And I refer it to the Readers judgement whether in my book of Infaht-Baptifm I have not proved by many other words in Ter-tullian that he was not againft all Intant-Baptifm, but for it among Chriftians.

$^.3. His next and great Witnefs is the 1)<?»^-; tifis together* This is fomething, were it true : but it is futh a kind of falfhood as t muft not name in its due epithets, left you think me over-iharp.

*' ^. 4. His words are [] Bonatns a learned man *^ in Africa taught that they fliould baptize no -*^ Children but only th^t believed and defired

«itO

jinfxv* Utterly falfe : And how doth he prove it ? By Sebafi, Frank* whom I will not fearch to fee whether he fay fo or rot. Reader, if the qiieftion be, what was done, faid or held by thou-fands of ncien twelve hundred years ago, and the Writings of them and their Adverfaries were extant, and the Hiftories written of them in that and the next Ages, would you have a man pafsby all proof from thefe, and tell you what a fellov/ of his own opinion faith eleven hundred years after ?

ter ? He brings us with great oftentation the Diach :A/jabaptifis Martyrologie and fuch like Hiilort^' of a t'ew years old, oi" fellows that knew Httlc more than as he doth, what their Party or Companions told thetti, or what they ignorantly gathered from fuch Books as are yet to be feen by us as well as by them.If Ifhould difpute what ^^/n^/^-ftin-e held, would Mr. D, fetch his proofs trom the writings of J^wtf/iV^/Vor, or George Fox^ or Ifaac Penningto}?^ yea or Mr. Tomhes to prove his aflertions, while ^agujfi;ics works are at hand to be fe-n ?

" <5, 5. So next he faith [that the followers of " Dmarm were all one wiih the Anabaptifts^ de-"nying Baprifm to Children, admitting the Be-*Mievers only thereto wh,p defired the fame J And he citeth one called Twiski

jififw* Utterly falfe 5 They held no fuch thing.

<J. 6. His next proof is indeed from an unquc-ilionable witnefs ^ he faith '' \_ AHguftines third " and fourth Books againft the Donacifts 6iO de-*'monftratc that they denied Infaiu-Bapiifm, ^^ wherein he managcth the argument for Infant-*'Baptifm againft them, with great zeal, enfor-" cing it by feveral arguments, but efpecially frrm *^ Apcflolica! Tradition , and curfing with great* *' bitternefs thf.y that fhould not embrace it.

i. 7. Anfxv* Mr. Bagjhaxv is now quite overdone in the quality of untruths: Reader., either this man had feen and read the Books of Au-^ ghfiine mentioned by him, or he had not. If not , doth he ufe Gods Church and the fouls of poor ignorant people with any. tender-

R neU

hefs of Confclence, fobriety or humanity , to

talk at this rate of Books, that he never faw or

read, which are fo common among us to be

feen ? If he underftand not Latine , how unfit is

he to give us the Hiftory of thefe antiquities ?

And how audacious to talk thus of what he know-

eth not ? If he underftand ir, what cruelty is it

to the Church to venture on fuch untruths to

fave him the labour of opening and reading the

books he talketh of? But if he have read them^ then

I can fcarce march him again among all the falfifiers

that I know in the world •, 1 dare not be fo uncha-

iritable to him as to think that ever he read them.

^. 8. The Books are feven that Aiiguftine

wrore of Baptifm againft the Donatifts: And in

them all I cannot find onefyllable of intimation

. that ever the Donatifts denied Infant-Baptifm, buc

enough to the contrary that they did not: Nor

do the third and fourth books mentioned by him

meddle with it any more than the reft : There is

not in the it^tn books nor in all the reft oi Ah^

flins books againft the Donatifts, one word that I

can find, of any fnch controverfie with them at

all; And for a man to fay that in two books he

thanageth the argitTnents for Infant^Bafttfrn

againft them with great z^eal^ dec, when there is

not one word that luppofeth them to deny it , blufh

Reader in compailion for fuch a man.

^. 9. Re.;der, the Donatifts were a great par-

, ty of men in Africa: They were Prelatical and

for Ceremonies as the other Churches were :

They differed from the reft on the account of the

'ferfond faccejfiQn of their Biiliops^ In a

time

(24 j;

time of perfection they faid (truly or faKiy was a great controverfic J that one ofilieBifhops delivered up the Church-books to ihc PerfccuLors ^ to be burnt, rather than die himfelf, when they demanded them ^ And that the Catholick Bifhops received fuccedlvely their ordination from that fnan, and called them Tradttores •, whereas the Bifhop that all their Bijlwfs had fucceflively beea ordained by, was one that had refufed to deliver tip the Church-books; And confcquently he was the right Bifhop, and they that had their fuccef-fion from him were true Bifhops and Churches, and aU the reft were no true Bidiops or Churches ^ and therefore that all their Baptifm and Sacraments were nullities, and their Communion unlawful, and that all people were bound m Confci-ence as ever they would be faved to feparate from the reft f called Cathohcks J and to cometothemi and to be rebaptized. So that their Schifm was much like the Papifts, who confine the Church to their party, and condemn all others, fave that the Papifts (ordinarily) rebapiize not (though they fay fome Monks have done it, r.selfewhere I have cited.) The Donatifts were Efifcof^l cerewoniom Separattfisy that did it on the account of a purer Epifcopal fiiccefjion^ Till their days the holy Do-Aors of the Church had almoft aU been againft drawing the fword againft Hereticks, even yyugu-fiin himfelf. But the grearnef-i of their party and the proud conceit of their greater Ztal and ftridnefs than the Catholicks had, made them (o furious that the Catholick Paftors could not live ■ quietly by them, Infomuch that fome of tbent

R 2, v;oun^ed

Wounded the Minifters in the ftrects, and fome o£ them made a lak fliarp water and fpouted into Minifters eyes as they paft the ftreet, to put out their eyes; till many fuch infolencics provoked Angufibi to change his judgement of toleration, ( and efpecially the multitudes feduced by them, ) and the Bifhops to crave the Emperors aid : The Emperor made Edids for mulds and baniflimenc to thofe that perfevered: This ( being a new way ) fo exafperared the Donatifls, that in very paflion many of tbem ( yea Bifhops) murdered themfelves to bring odium on the Catholicks, to make the people bfclicve that the cruelty of the Catholicks compelled them to it: And this was the ftate of thefe two parties •, but not a word of difference about hifant-Bapcifm between ihera th^t ever I read in either parr.

p. 10. The Controverfie between Anfli?! and them he thus flateth ; Lib. i. c. i, z. Si haheri forps potej}^ ctiam dari cur non foteft f Bafttfrh received out of' the Catholic\ or true Church arKong Schifwatickj is trite haptifm : and therefore baptifm given without by Schifmatickj is tnic baptifn7, '

" Impie faccre qui rchaftiz,are conantur orbps ^^ unit atemy c^ nos rcBc facere qui Dei Sacra^ ^^ menta imprcbare ^ r:ec in.ipfo fchifmate aude' '' mp*j : They do impioufly that endeavor to re-* ^' ba^ti ze all the united Chrifiian world, and we ^* do i^ghily who dare not deny Gods Sacraments, "no not in a'Schifi-n. J Tor Jitgufiin peaceably | be!d th; Donatifls haptifm to be true and z'alid though irregular and unlawfully given and taken,

but

but the Donatifls held all the Cathohcks Mini-ftry andbaptifm null.

^.11. Therefore he thus fummeth up their differences, cap. "i,. Duo fnnt qua, dicimm , GT* ^S^ in Catholics Ba^ttfmum^ Ct- ilUc tantuji retie ac^ dpi: Item alia duo dicimns , ejfe apttd Donatio flas baptifmitm -^ non aatem re^e accipi : Hurum fententiarum tres nojlrdi tantum fn^^t^ ivaam vcro Htrique dtcimr.s.'2 That is, ^'fTwo things wc ''fay, that there is Baptifm in the Catholick '^ Church, and that there only it is rightly rccei-*^ ved : Alfo two things more we fay, that there *' is Baptifm with the Donatifts ^ but that with ^'thetn it is not rightly received.: of ihefe fen-^'tences, three are only ours, and one is cora-" mon to us both : 3 ^i^fim held it a lin, ro be baptized among Schifmaticks, (tojoynwith their Sed ) but not a nullity.

5^. 12. Hereupon he addreflethhimfelfto evince the finfuinefs of their Schifm and unchriflianing all the Churches: And indeed he feems to think that thoDgh Baptifm w^ among them^ yet hardly SulvAtion: And his argument (though I think we muft abate for mens paffions and te^i'.pt.itiotjs) i^ , worth the Separatifls confideraiion : that baptifm that dcftroyeth ( remitteth he calls it ) not fn , is ?7vt fiving: that which is withortt h-ve renittcth not fm : But Schifmdtlcl\i ^ fauh he, have.pot love: For, Nnlli Schif/iata facercrit fi frd-tcrnoodio ?70?i excdicoj-e-rnnr: Annon cf: i?i Sthif-77i^.te odium fraternum^ Q^is hoc dixerit i Cum. C-r origo dr pertinacia Schifni^tis nidit ft alia nif odi^^m fr*itcrnmr.'\ That is, '* A"^<?r7^ ^i-ould

( H^ )

f^ make fchifms if they were not blinded by the *' hatred of their brethren: Is there not the ha* ^^ tred of brethren in Schifm ? What man will fay ^^ fo ? Whenas both the Rife and the Pertinacie ^' of Schifm is no other than the hatred of brethren, 3 But blind zeal will not let men know their own hatred , when yet they defame their brethren as no brethren^ and endeavour to have all others thi^k^ them fo bad as not to be commn^ nicated with, and feparate from them on that ac-counr.

^.13. The main (ubjed of all the reft of thefe ,feven Books of A^ifiin is to anfwer the Donatifts claim of Cyprian and his Carthage Council as on their fide: and to anfwer all the layings of himi and the feverat Bifhops of that Council. The plain truth is this : In the firft age the Churches were fo fober and charitable as not to account every erring brother and party Hereticks, but fuch as fubverted the EffentiJs of PkdigionrAntl feme of thefe corrupted the very form of Baptiim : The baptifm of thefe the Church took for null, and baptized fuch as they pretended to have ba-*ptized. Cyprian and the other (African Bifhops knowing this, and being much troubled with heretical Churches about them, ftretchcd this too far and rcbaptized them that fuch Hereiicks baptized as did not change the form of Ba^iifm , but incorporated men into their corrupt focieties: The ponatifl:s took advantage by this example and all the Reafons of the Council, to go fo much further as to take the CathoUckj for Heretick^s cr nnUwfHl Churches ^ and rshaptiz.e thofe that

they

CH7) they baptized : j4ttfiin anfvvereih all the Councils reafons, but praifeth Cyprian as a holy Martyr, and no Heretick though miftaken.

5^. 14. And it is nor enough for me to fay that all thele Books of Aufl^n have not a word of what he fpeaketh, as controverting Infant-Bapttfm with the Donatifisj but moreover, he bringeth the Do-natifls agreement with the Catholicks in the point of Infant-Baptifm, as a meditim in his arguing againft them, Lib.^.c, 23. fhewing bow much baptifm availeth, in that Chrijl him/elf xvouldbe bapiiz^ed by a fervant , and Infants that cannot themfeIves believe are baptiz,ed " [^ Quod tradi-^^tunp tenet univerfitas EccUfidt cum parvuli In-^^ fantes baptiz^antur qui nondum pojjnnt corde ere-*' dere ad jnftitiam or ore confiteri ad falntem , *' qnoA latro pot nit: Qninetiam fie n do cr vagien-*'\ do cum ineis my ft er turn celebratnr^ ipfis my flic is ^^ vocibp!^ objirepunt •, Cr tanr.en Nulliis Chriftia-** mts dixerit eos inaniter baptiz^ari. J That is, [■ Which all the * ^tjurch holdtth when little Infants are bapti- =*■ Including the Do-z.ed, who certainly cannot yet natifrs. with the heart believe to righ-tcoiifnef and with the mouth confef to Salvation : And yet no Qoriftian will fay that they are ba-ptiz^ed in vain, J

Thus he arguetH againft the Donatifts, If the whole Church hold hifant-Baptifm, and noChri-ftiau will fay that it is in vain, though iheythem-fv.^lvcs believe not and confefs not, then you flioc'd not fay all baptifm is vain becaufe we Catholicks ;iJn:imifter it, or becaufe it is received in our

R 4. Churches.

(2^2)

thurdics. The whole tenor of j4nftirjs charitar ble language to the Donatifts, and the fcope of this place Iheweth, that he here pleaded Hniver-r fat confent , and by [^ all the Church ^ and [] no Chriftian~\ includeth the Donatifts. And fo he oft argueth againft the Pelagians, who though they denied original fin, durft not differ from the whole Chriftian world by denying Infantr baf'tifm^ but pretended that it was for the convey-mce of Graccy though not for remitting fin *

5^. 15. And A^tJHn next addeth \^Etp qnif-cjuam i?i hac re. anthor.itatem divinam qnarai (Quanqu^m quod umverfa tenet Ecckfta ^nec Conctltts irjftitutumj fed femfer rctcntumefl^ 7ion mfi authontate Apofteltca tr adit urn rcQiffme cre^ dittir ) tamcn veraciter conjicere foffummy &c. ] That hy ^"^ [ And if any one in this cafe ( of In'" ^^fant'bafttfm) ask^for Divine authority (Though ^^ that which the nniverfal (or whole) Church *' doth hold , and )X>as fiat injiitnted by Councils ^^ hut was ever held^ is mo ft rightly believed to ^^be delivered by the Affiles authority) yet'we may truly conjecture ^ dec, (^and fo he paueth to che Scripcure argument from Circumci/ion. )

5f. 16. Here note, 1. That this v/as no contro-ver/te with the Donatiftsy 2. Nor with any other Seci^ but held by all the Churchy 3. That he only faith as in a Parendielis that [that which all the whole Church heldcthy and did ever hold, not in^ ftituted by any Comicily is juflly taken for an Apoftclical tradition , ] which I think few Pro-teftants or fober Chriftians will deny. Who can fmagins that Ttmothy , Titus , Sil^is and alf the

'^ V/hol?

(249) whole Church in the Apoilles daies ;ind ever fine?, ihpuld hold and agree in any thing as a part of (hrifitiin DoBrine or Worfhip, which they had not trom the Apoftles ? Had the Apoflles fo little charity as not to endeavour to redifie any of iheir errors ? 4. Note here that the Donatifts never denied this (that 'Infant-haptifm vaas ever [jeld by the whole Church to that day ^ and not inftitute^dhy any Council: ) And were not ^//y?f>, the Donatifls and ^ the whula Church liker to know \\\tuniverfality 2sA AntlqHlty cf the thing, xhan the Holland or EngUfi Anabaptifts about fourteen hundred, years af:er them ? 5. Note that hthxm^dkiScri^tur^foritalfo.

jj. 17. Indeed I find feme that before thofe tinnes had been ahove Ordinances and againfl ajl baftifm^ but none againfi Infatn-haftifm zs un-la\vjiiL\\\tidQ\:t jiugiiftine faith eliewhere^thatit is eaficr to find Heretickj that deny all baftifm^ than any that change iht form of baptizing -^Ao fuxe hath the Tradition of univerfal practice delivered down tl)e form and words of baptifm to ' us. ' •

<C. 18. Afterward pag, 230* Ed. 2. Mr. Ban^ vers cometl'i to cyiuftm again, and faith that Vincent 114^ ViUor did oppofe Audln in the point of Infant^baptifm y citing Augufl. li. 3. c. 14. dc Animx.

u4nfw. Not a word of truth : no fuch matter in that Chapter or the whole book.

^. 19. Next he faith '' [" Crefconius did alfa '-' ovfbfe Auftiii in the poi^n of Infants baptifm^ and 5' did maintain that there was no true ba-

*^ ftifm but that which adminiflred after faith.

Anfw, Utterly falfe ftill. There was no fuch controverfie between them. No wonder if he had mifcited' fentences that will thus go to falfifie whole Books, as fpeaking of that which they never meddle with I Augufiirje having written againft Tetilian ( their beft ^eaker, having of a Lawyer been made a Bifhop ) Crefconim a Donatift Grammarian interpofed for Tetilian , and perfwaded jiuftiH to gentleif thoughts of them 5 but fpeaks not a word againft Infant-bapcifm.

^.20. Nay, lib,^* cap.^i, ^////;;2 tells us that ihey held it as well as the Catholicks -. faith he, \^Circumcifionem certe fr^futii in figtira futiiri ha^tifmi (^iorijii ah antiqitis obfervatHm ejfe , wf-gare^ Ht arhitror^ non audetis: That is, ^^ Ifup-'^ P^fi yo^ dare not deny that CircHmcifion yeas ^^ ohferved by the ancients in figure of the Chri^ ^-^ ft tan bapttfm,'} It was a granted thing.

p. 21. And it was Crefcomm words to Aufiin ^Vna Reli^ioy eadem Sacramenta-, nihil in Chri-ftiana obfervatione diverfnm : ^ adhitc adverfm invicem Uboramm ? Saich Auftin^ Quare ergo re-baptiz^od Chrifttannm f "Ego non rel:?aptiz,o ; that is, " [] We have all one KeligioUy the fame Sacra-^' mentSy there is nothing in onr Chriflian obfer-^^ vat ion divers (faith Crefconim) And yet do '* Vpe ftrive againfl each other ? Why then dofi *' thou rebapttz^e a Chriftian (that diifereth not ^'from them? ) / rebaptiz^e no Chriftian^ (faith *' Aitflin,) So that here was no dtfagreement in Sacraments or any Chriftian obfervance. Only as Auftin faiih lib* 7. de hapt, r. 2. the quarrel

was

Was that the Catholicks were charged to beTV^-ditores quia ex traditorihHs, the fuccejfors of fn^ tiers: Thus being rvife and righteotu overmncb did tear and almoft ruine the Churches.

^.22. *' He addeth, fag, 223. Ed. 2, the fay-'*ing oiOftander^ Fuller^ BHlltnger^ that the Do-' *' nacifts and the Anabaptifts held the fame ojini'

Anfw. I. In what ? In all things or fome ? that is, in the point of Rebaptiz^ing perfons before hapttz^ed ( do you own that indeed ? ) But not as being againft Infant-baptifm. 2. So, many Pre-latifts have called the Puritans Doriatifts - and abundance of Proteftants fay that the Paptfis fuc-ceed the Dojiatifts in appropriating the Church to their party. Do not write next that they fay the Papifts are againft Infant-baptifm^ left you make your felves Antichrijlian alfo,

5J. 23. Reader, the Donatifts were fo^rf^^ a fjnrty of men and had fo great a number of Bt-pops ^ and fo many wrote againft them whofe Txorkj are yet extant^ and their caiife had fo many piiblick^ exavnnations , that I leave it to thee if thou have the brains of a man, to judge whe-ther it they had been againft Infant-baptifm in Iei time when Aujlin ftid no Chnftian dented it^ neither Opt at w^ nor Anfttn, nor any oiher ot their moft copious oppofers would ever have charged them with fuch an opinion, nor any ex-* aminers, Councils or Hiftorians of their ages ^ even when the Catalogues of -hereticks unhappily took in fo many little matters as they did, and made hereticks fome more and worfe than

they

they were? And now if JohnBecold will fay thiey were of his fide, we muft believe him,

5^. 24. His dealing with the Novatians is the fame or worfe : He feared not in the face of the Sun, to write that the Novatians ofpofed hfant-iaftifm^ and pumbreth them alfo with his party. When it is a falfliood as much aggravated as thefe particulars import, i. They were an honeftand numerous people, and fcattered almoft all over the Empire •, tolerated till Innocents time in Romey and long tolerated and much favoured by niany Emperors and Fatriarchs in Confiantinofle , be-caufe fas Socrates faithj they agreed in Do-drine with the Catholicks: And could they have denied Infant-baptifm , and not be acculed of it ? 2. They had many bitter enemies that would foon have catl: this in their teeth, 3. Many Councils had to do with them, where multitudes had op^ portunity to accufe them. 4. They were an ancient Sed, arifing even in Cyprians timQ, and long continued: And in fo many generations it would have been known. 5. They are put in the Catalogues of many Herefiographers that are keen enough , and none of them ( that ever I found) accufe them of any fuch thing: No not Epiphanies himfelf, who is moft copious, and not very backward to accufe. And fliall either J'ohn of Leyden or any of his party now in the end of 9 the world perfwade us, by flandering fo many thoufands of innocent men, that they were guilty ? And can Mr. Danvers now tell m that they held that which for a thouCand years hath \^a unknown? ^ ' ^^ ,-.

^. 25. He citeth Socrates ^ /. 7. c, 9. that i"^* iffffrf;7f banifhed them out of Rome,

jinfvp. Elfevfhere indeed Socrates and many more fay fo : But doth that prove they were againft Jnfant'bafttfm ?

^. 26. Somewhat he would fain fay at the (e-tond hand cut o^^lhajpi/jawy Obferv. 20. I hope he never read the book : JilbafpinaHs there pur* pofely decidcth the Controverfie, what the Nova-tian Herefie iv<^, in feveral Chapters, and never raentioneth any fuch opinion or fHJpicion of ihem. The fame doth that great Antiquary Jc-fuit Petavtm ♦, ( and what thefe two men knew not of the Fathers and Church-hiftory, few in the world knew, unlefs I may except Blonde I and Vjljer:) In his notes on Epiphanitu of the No-vatians, he cntreth on the fame Controverlie as jilbajpin^m did, and never mentioneth any fuch thing.

^. 27. Next he tells us that" Ecbertus and Eme-** ricus do ajfert that the Waldenfes , the new ^a* ** thariy conform to the Dotlrine and manners of the *' old^ the Novatians*

Anf\\\ But did they fay that the Novatiatts Vitxtagaijjfl Infant-B^^pttfm} Why did you cite neither words, page nor Book? And if they had, fhould two railing flanderous Papifts near a thou-fand years after Novatian be taken for witneiTes that he was againft hifant-baptifm^ againft all the Hiftory of the Church that concu-neth them to the contrary ? 5^cr^ff^ himfelf (an honell Hiftorian ) and Soz.omen alfo are ordinarily by the Papifts ac-cufed as Novatians^ becaufe they fpeak iairiy and

impartially of them as honeft tften: ( and whether ihey were or not I know not, but by their own words conjcd^ure the contrary ) And they lived when and where the Novatians were beft known.; And yet tell us not a fyliable of any fuch fuipi-cion of them.

^. 28. Next he faith, Ferln faith that the Wal^^ denfes were the off-fpring of the NovMi^nSy dri^ ven out of Rome^^o//^ Anno 400. . Anfw. Iris very probable: Therefore the PF^/-denfei were not againft Infam-baftifm. For it is certain the Novatians w^xt not: And the fame Ferin faith the Waldenfes were not. But if they had, would that prove that the Novatians were, fcven hundred or eight hundred years before ?

5^. 29. Next he citeth as Cajfanders reafon againft him that the Donatifts were for Infant-baptifm, the fixth Council of Carthage^ faying that [] All that returned from the Donatifts (honld he received into the Catholick Church withoi^t rehaftiz^ation though haftiz^ed in Infancy^ ] and faith 5 " [^ /f is hut afuppojition at beft that they ^-^might he baptizjed in Infancy or they might noty *^and can fignifie nothing againft all the former *' evidence, j And is it not fhame and pity that fo publick matters of fad: muft be handled at this rate ? What is his former evidence but fuch as humane nature may blufh at, to find that one called a man and a Chriflian^ and too good for the communion of fuch as we , fliould be guilty of ? And why talketh he of this one reafon againft him in fo publick a matter of Hiftory ? as if he knew not wha; abundance more may eafily be

pro-

produced, if it were of any need ? And how (hamefully are thefe plain words of a Conncil put off, as if all the Bifhops that lived in the fame time and Countrey with them knew not what the Donatifis hold, fo well as he and fucU as he?

. ^. 30. His next witnefles are [^ the ancient Britains that having received the Chrtfiian do-Brine and worjliip from the jipfiles times did

inttrely keep thereto vchom Auftin the Monk^

would have engaged [ efpecially in Chriftening children and kfeptng Eafler^ but in afmnch as they utterly refufed to be feduced by him therein dec,

Anfw. This is a witnefs ( being fuch a body

of mtneffes) of great importance ('as that of

the Donatifis and Novatians was ) \i it were

true : But it's all falfe ftill : And muft our own

Countrey , yea all our Chriftian Anceftors be

thus flandered ? Whether Britain received the

Chriftian dodrine and worfhip from the j^pc*

files time (^ if he mean in that time) is very

doubtful and nothing to our bufinefs : we have

no fufficient proof of any fuch thing ; The Reafon

itf the cafe maketh me conjefturc that Chriftia-

nity was firft brought hither by Soldiers, of the

Roman Legions ; efpecially fince I read in 'Beda

that the firft Temple I find any mention of was

built at or near Canterbury by fuch Soldiers,

But who ever brought it, it's like they were of

the Afian and not the Roman opinion , Cwhe-

ther Soldiers that had been in the u4/w»Legions,

or who elfe, is not known ) and it is certain

tbac.

- (25^;

tba^ they were not agaipfi: the obfemtion of Eafter : For both they and the Scots that concurred with them again ft the Romans , did ftri-dtly keep it : But all the queftion was of the dne titne^

^.31. Nor is there the leaft proof or. pro« bability that they were againfl Infant jBaptifm, I. Becaufe jingnftine the Monk that quarrelled with them, never chargeth them with it, in his Ep* to Gregory or to themfelves. 2- Beda that was downright againji them^ and a Roman x^ealoty and the ancientefl writer after (^afiins time, and lived in the fame Country with themy and k!iew them , and deferibeth all the contefis with them, yet never layeth any fuch thing to their charge ; when yet he mentioneth the Re^ baptiz^ing of One by Bijhop John , beeaiife it was an ignorant infufficient man -for the Prieft-hood, that Baptized him •, and this a rare inftance.

3. The Scots that about Eafter and other contrarieties to the Romansy were of the Britains mind , and refufed fo much as to eat with the Romans , yet are charged with no fuch thing.

4. And the controverfie continued for above an hundred years after Anflins time, and great ftir and meetings and difputes were about it, ^s Beda tells us at large, before the 5^0/i were changed : And in all that time , there would have been opportunity for their forward adverfaries ( efpe-. cially Wilfrid^ afterward St. Boniface o(Mentz.y who was the Chief ^ to have found out this matter of accufation. 5. None of the hiftorians near following thofe times do charge any fucji

thing

C*57)

thing on them. And yet were the old Brltaih againft Infant-Baptifm i

P* 32. But to puc all out of doubt take the words of Aiiftin to thena in his three deaiand^ thus by Beda recorded, Eccl. Hifl. li. 2. c. 2. [^ Vt Pafchafiio tempore celebretis •, ut (zJ^fini-fterinm ha^tiz^andi ^no Deo renafcimiir juxta rnortm RontdL fanB^JEcclefi^t^ et jipoftoltc<t Ecclt-fi£ compleatis •, nt genti Anglorum una nobifcHm pritdicetis verhnm domim'\. Thai:is, ''[^ \,That *'^you celebrate Eafier at the due time-^ 2. That *-^ye complc^it the Mini firy of Baptifm by which *' we are born again toGod ^according to theftjljion ^^(or manner) of the holy Church c/Rome,^?/^ ^^ the zy^poj%lical Qjitrch* 3. 1\m you Preach ^^ with US the word of God to the Englijl) Na-tion~}.

And what is here 0^ Infant ~B apt if7i ? How proveth he that that was meant by the Roman manner or faflfion o^ Baptizing ? Is the fnbe[i ofBaptifm, the Manner? when about the Manner indeed there were then fo many and different ceremonies ? Nay when above an hundred years before this Anflim dayes , a wifer Anfin had .told the Donattfls^ that the whole Church was agreed for Infanr-Baotifm, and no one Chrtftian. held it to be in vain ? fure this was not fo iono after, a Manner peculiar to Rome } But rliu'^ the honour of our Anceflors, and the hiftoryof the Church , and the fouls of poor ignorant Chriftians among u?, muft allbc heinoufiv wronp-C(i by the falihoods of rafh prcfuming iguoranc men •

^. 3 3. And if this had been as true as it is * falfe f that the old Britains were againft Infant-. Baptifrn ) it wbuld inform thefe men that it is not delaying Baptifrn till riper age , that will keep it from formality, nor the Church from falling into all impiety : For if our eldeft hifto-rian C?/^^ may be believed (and who may if not he?) his Countrymen me Britains^ were TrinceSy Pricfts and Teofle fallen to fuch abho-minable wickednefs, murder, drunkennefs, filthy lulls, deceit, thefc, cruelty &c. that he takes the Princes for wolves and monfters , and the Pricfts for no Priefts but traytors , ( excepting fome good men among them ) &c. It is neither Infant nor Addt Bnpifm that will fecure againft the corrupting of Churches, but Grace with either hath faved fouls.

(• 34. He cites himfelf here£<?>', quoting Me-day Polychron.znd others. And what fay they ? [] Baftiz.ing after the manner of Rome 3 And what's that to his queftion ? But he tells you that Fabian faith |^ that yoit give Chrifiendom to childrenr\ I have not Fabian to examine ; but if he do, when he knoweth that he is an empty fellow, of the other day as it were, and that he hath nothing but what cometh from Gregory^ and Beda ; and that in them there is no fuch thing : will a known falfificacion of a fabler about nine hundred years after, difprove the yet-vifi-hie words of the eldefl records , which undertake to give you not only ih^ fenfe but the very terms }

5fo 35. He proceedeth to prove by argHment

that

that the Britains were ag^iafi-Infant Ba-pifm.

I. Bccanfe they received the Scriptures ^ the Chrifttan Faith^ Doctrine and Difcipline fro:n the u4poftles and AiiaEick Churches^ who had no fuch thing m the BapttT^ing of Infants among them /

Anfw. No fuch thing in the AfiaticVs Churches ? He might as welj fay, There is now no fuch thing in England, But perhaps hee'l fay that he meaneth in the Apoflles time or foon after : Of which you have tryed pare of his ftrength. But when he hath fludied well Bifliop Vfljers Vrimordia who faith all that is to be faid for our Antiquity, he will find no proof that we had our Religion from the Apollles or any in their time.

^. 36. But ask the man whether Afia it felf long before the dayes oi Gregory had not Infant-Baptifm ? And whether they received not the cScriptures and Religion as certainly from the Afiatick^ Churches, and fo from the Apoftles, as the Britaifls did ? And- whether this will prove that at that time they were againft Infant-Baptifm ? if nor, why will it prove the fame of the Britains ?

^.37. His fecond Argument is \ Becanfe they fo fnlly priz^ed and faithfully adhered to the Scri-ptnre^ &C.]

Afifw, What will not partiality fay ? i.You

mull: believe him that Scripture is againjv ///-

fint'Baptifm : And then the coicrovirrfie h a:

an end. 2. You niufi: helnve him ho.v ciofc^ly'

S 2 thev

ftiey adhered to Scripture, if you can, when you have read Cydda^s ( who is tranllated into £n-glifh^ their neighbour^ one Dfthem^ the only cer-r tain hiftorian that knew them, who defcribeih them as I have laid, as moft flagitious heinous wicked men. Though I hope they amended after Gilda^ dayes ,yet that {hewed you how they held to Apoftolick difcipline or Scripture. The book is fo very fmall •, it is but equal to intrcac him to read it before he ufe

^ Itfeenisby fome this argument again *. 3. You orations out of it af- ^^^ ^,/-,.^, ^,^, ^hat kll that ter that he hath read •• , ji c *

it, and yet fpeaks P^^^^Le and adhere to Sen-thus! ■ pture are againft Infant-Ba^

ptffn;. Read and try whether there be not greater evidence that Cypriariy jithafioftii^^ NA;Lianz.€ne^ (^hryfofiomey AngnftinCy the iEgyptian Monks, and other fuch ftn<ft per-fons in thofe ages, at leafl the Novaitians , and I>^;;^r(/?^ (in his own judgement) prized the Scripture than the Britains i And doth it follow (in defpitc of their own profeflions and pra-difes ) that all thcfe and the reft fucli.were againfi hifant'^Bapifm <'

^.38. Were not this as good an argument ? Luther^ CalviriyZmngliHiy Bradford^Hoo^er -^ all the Martyrs in Queen Maria dayes, &c. prized the Scriptures : Ergo they were all againft Infant.Baptifm. Yea even IrJe fen dent i and Fref-hytevidns and all that prize and cleave to them now in England ?

<o 39. 3. He addech ["^^'i5fr.'?//p they did fa ^"uehernemly rejt^ him^rie Tr adit ions in the wor-'

■ ■ - "/"p

(26l)

^^flilp of God • efpectally all Romijlj Rites and '* Ceremonies j this as before undeniably appear-** ing to come from Roraes ordination and ImpO" ''fmon.]

Anfw> I. £Undeniably]\s ^ word ihztjliameth you to every inteiligcnc Reader that underftand-eth Church hiftory. Will you not confefs your felf that Cyprian and that Carthage Council, Naz^ianz^ency Bafil,] AHgnfiine &:c. were for In-fant-Baptifm > were all thefe Papifts, or Romans ? Can you prove any Roman Ordination of it before all thefe ?

2. How know you that they fo z-ehemently rejeCied humane 'Traditions in the vporflnp of God ? Did they not ufe the Aftatick Ceremonies f Did they not precifely obferve Eafier , and place Religion in keeping it on their own dayes ? Had they not Btjlwps^ and were they not Monks ^ And do you gather by Gildas that they were fuch as you dream ? And did they not Plead Tradi^ tion for their difference from Rome ?

3. And were not the Scots then of their mind, and as much agiinft Traditions as they ? and more againft vi e and formality in afid after Colmans and Coliimbanti^ dayes ? And are not the Indepetidents more againft Traditions now than the Britains were ? And are they therefore Anahaptifls f

^. 40. He addeth [] 4. " Bccaitfe Conftantine ^' the Great (the fon ^/Conftancc and the famotts *' Helena, both eminent Chrifiians) in the yci r '' 305. iv^ not Baptiz^ed till he vqm aged as be^ ^^fore^ AcleAr proof that theChriJltMS /;; Bri-

S 3 *'tain

''tain*> thofe daycs did not 'Baptlz.e theii' chiU ^^dren2»

u4^f\v. Some will laugh at thefe things, but I had*ra:her mourn for the poor peoples fnares. T. It's talfe that Constance was a Chriflian , at leafl: when Confiamine was youiig. No rcgarda-ble hiflory miketh him any better than a moderate fa'vourer of the Cbriftians. 2. It is not -proveable that Helena was one in Confiantines Infancy. 3. There is no probability that he was -born in EngUndy as many Learned men have: proved. 4. It is certain he was educated and lived in oiher Lands. 5. He was no Chrifti-an in his youth himfelf, nor profeiTed it till after he wa> Empercr : The fign of a Crofs appearing in the skies and his victory thereupon is faid to be the means. 6. He lived long at Ri>me^ and Conftantinofle, and elfewhere before he was Baptized. And was that a certain froof that none of thofe Gountreys were for hifant* Baptifm, no nor for Bapcidn at Convcrfion neither, because Canftamine was not Baptized [ 7. He kept in'with the Philofophers f having one at his Table familiar with him^ to hold all parties to him. 8. • And many 'in thofe times? thought that all Cm being pardoned at Baptifm', they mud live much ilridlier af:er they were Baptized, and were in much morfe dinger by their fin , and thertfore would not be Baptized tiJl old , as Co:^flai'itinc when he was like rodie^ And now where is this mans ckar proof that the BritM72s were A-^^haftijls ?

^. 41. $,Sx\ihht[^' Becafife of the Correfport^ ^' dency and unity that were between the French " p}rtfiians after called the Waldenfes, and them " • viz. Germanus and Lupus. ^

Anfxv, What abundance of untruths will one mans head hold •' i. Fe would make the ignorant believe that the French Churches that fent over Germa?jus and Lnpm were fuch as after were called Waldenfes: When yet before he ci-teth P^n>z laying tliat the Waldenfes w^rc the off-fpring oftheiVoz'^/^/?jbani'hedfrom^<?;;?f. Beda Hifl. EccL Itb, I. c, 17, 18, 19, 20,21. tells us brieriy that the Br it aim being infeded with Pelagianifm by A^ricoU the fon of Severian^ a Velagian Bifhop , fent to France for help, as being unable themfelves to difpute the cafe. The Bifliops of France in a great Synod agreed to fend German in Bilhop of Qy^ltijfwdore , and Ln-piij Bilhop of Trecajfe ( brother to Vincentim Lerinenfs,) Projper in his Chronicle tells us that Gerwaniis was fent by Pope Cclefline by the inftigation of Valladim a Deacon : Vfjcr reciteth and rejedeth not Baroniits his conciliation, that it was done by the Pope and FrerKh Bifhops, Germanus and Litpm come over, and work mi^ racles by the way, and here Germanus carried a box with him of the Reliques of all the Apo-ftles and many Martyrs ( Bedac.i^,) This he layeth to the eyes of a blind maid and curefl her fuddediy, which confounded the Pelagians: Thefe Reliques he buryed in St. j4lbanes Sepulchre •, And inftead of them took with him fome of the dud where Sr. Albanes bloo^ had been fhed, S 4 which

which remained red till then. And after other miracles and a vidory he returned with a pro-fperous navigation, faith Beda c, 20. by his own Merits and Su Aihanesm^xct?i\ox\, Afterwards he returned again in a fecond neeeflity with 5tf-njerm^zn^ delivered the Britains irom Pelagi-anifn[i, who yet lived in fuch wickcdnefs as Be* da after 6*^7^^ defcribeth.

Here let the Reader note againft Mr. JD^;/-vers dream, i. That this was done in 429^ And if Mr. D. could prove indeed that all the Eilhops of France tli^n were WaldenfcSy or of the judgement fo called fo long after, he would do us Knights fervice againft the Papifts in the queftion of the -perpetual visibility of the Church. But if I cite yiv.Danvers for it, I doubt they will laugh at me , and make no more of his authority than I do of the Dntch Jinabaftljts Marty rology.

, 2. Note that Frcfper faith it was the Pop€ that fent Germ arms.

3. Note that he was fent by the Bi(hops of France , who ihen did little differ from RomCy but fubmitted to his Primacy, (and Patriarchate ) in the Empire , thqugh referving their liberties • Read the Epiftles of Leo i. againft Hillary ylrcUt. and ail that ftory, and you will fee how much the Pope ufurped there betimes.

^.. Pope Celcfiine was the great maintainer of <>y(fH^HftrAe againft PelagitiSy and fo the apter todothi--'. /

5.. The Pope had before this fent PalU-dins lO the Britai'/js who received him : And

there-

therefore they were then on fomc fair terms with him.

6. Germmus and Ln^Hi were Bifhops, and they that fent hina •, and fo Antichriftian to fomc yirjahaftilts

7. Germaniu fure was not ofMr.DV. Church, that ufed ReHques fo ftrangely for working miracles ? Was this an Anahaftift ?

8* This was all done after Atignfline had written, that no Chrifiian thought Infant-B^' pifm vain : ( or about that time. ) And yet were all the Britaim then of another mind ?

9. The Bifhops of France ("with Pope C^-lejiine) took part with AHgnflrne againft Tela-gitiiy and fent Lftpfi^ with Germantu to do that work : And yet were all thcfe Bifhops againft Augtifline^ about Infant-Baptifm, which he faith ali the Chnrch Vniverfal agreed in ?

10. Laftly, the Britains were infefted with Pe-

lagianifm -, Felagim (" called tJMorgan^ being a

Britain ( and Vfl}er faith, fome fay born the fame

day with Anguflhie ) and (^elefiius a Scot or

Jri^i man •, And the Pelagians themfelves were

for Infan-tBaptifm, ( And if any Chriftians in

the world had been againft it, they would have

been the likelieft, who denyed Original fin :

Yet even they durft not deny this. ) And is it

a credible thing that all thefe ^rir^/;?^ who were

fome oiPelagim's mind, and fome o^ AuguflineSf

were yet againft both in point of Infant-Ba-

ptifm ? Yea and not a word faid of this by any

writer, when their Pclagianifm made fo great a

ftir / Yet this m;in gathereth that the Churches

(266)

0^ France were Anaha:ptifts ( contrary: to all hiftory j becaufe the WMertfes 600 years after were Anabaftifls (which is alio faife:)And the Bri- ' tains were Anaba^tifts , becaufe the Churches of France Tent two Learned men to diipute againft Pelagianifoi in England , fwhen tne unlearned Britains could not do it). Reader, will not this kind of arguing make thee an Anahaftifl ? or elfe make tbee pitty the Muced party ? O what a temptation to Popery do fuch men lay before the people / When men fee that every fuch a one that hath ignorance and pride enough to make him wife in his own eyes, (hall thus pour out falfhoods to cheat mankind, and the ignorant know not but it may all be true, ittem-pceth men to think that there mull be fome AHthoriz^ed men whom the Ignorant mu^ believe before fnch feditcerSy or elfe confufion and falf-lu5od will take place of truth, and the people will .be as children tojfed up and down^ and carry ed to and fro with every wind of do^rine. And indeed a concordant Miniftry is fo to be preferred, though it infer not 3 Roraan iefaili-fcility.

. ^, 42. 6. His laft proof that the Britains were " againfl Infant Baptifm, is becaufe Augu-f^ftine the <\y^onkwas hirr^felf fo raw and igno-*' rant in the rite ^ as to ask^ , How long the ^^Baptiz,ing of a child might be deferred^ there *' being no danger of deaths ~}

Anfw, I grow afhamed that I have medle^ with fuch a Colledor : A baculo ad angulum^ Doth it not rartier imply ttat there was no contro-

verfie

(267 ) verfie between him and the Britain about In* fant-Baptifm, feeing he never mentioned any fuch thing?

^. -43. His next witnefks againft Infant-Bu-ftifm are in the fourth Century, called by him *' DadQes , S^ha^ , j^dnlphpn , and Simonps vcho *'(faiLh he in his catalogue ) opfofe it. And *'p. 229. he faith to prove it, but that f/?^^ were ^^ charged to have an ill opinion of the Sacrament *''^of the Altar and of Infants Baptifw. And he *' cireth Htftor. Tripartita h\ 7. c. 11.f and fome ''fellow an hundred years ago.)

Anfn\ And have we here any honefter dealing than before ? Read and judge. That which the Tripartite Hiftory cited by him faith is this, that [^ There was then a Sed called Meffalians or Eiichetcs (^ known in the Catalogues of Here-ticks ) and called The Praying Hereticks ) who expedted the operation of Tome Devil thinking him to be the Spirit of God , refufing to work and giving themfelves to lie and ileep to exped Revelations ^ Indeed their opinion was that Prayer vcas all, and Baptifm and the Lords Sitp^ per were nothing , dicentes Divinum cibum nihil nee prodeffe nee Udcre ^ that the Sacred or Sacra^ mental food^ did neither profit ncr hnrt: Thefe ttKn were led by one Dadoes^ Sabbos^ Adelphi-fiiy Herman and Simeon : And Adelphtu when old ( for they hid their opinion ) bewrayed his error in a fpeech to Flavian of ^ntioch-^ that Baptifm ' doth the Baptiz.ed perfon no good, but prayer enly cxpelUth the Davil. And i» Thefe men were no more againft Infant-Baptifm than

againfi

again ft the adults Bap ifw. For they wefe ^fe-^/ip all Ordinances f^cve Fra/ere 2. They wer'(t1|| againft neither as Hnlawfnl , but againft both and other ordinances as unprofitable. 3. They car-ryed this much in fecret ; which they could not have concealed had they not Baptized Infants. 4. Some hereticks, and all Infidels and Pagans were againft all Baptifra as well as they : And doth any of this prove that any one Chri-Itian was againft Infant Baptifm moi;e thart adult? V '

d. 44, ^^ Next he tells you that Fauflus J^e^ ^^ gienfis faith that Perjonal and aliual deprevpos ** re qui fit e in every one that wa^ to be Baptiz^ed ( Fincertt and Crefconim I fpoke to before ) And he citeth not a word of his writings for it, nor any other but one Jacob Merning , I fuppofe a Dutch Anabaptifi,

Anfw. Pveader, thou feeft ftill how thou art ufed. Fan ft as Rhegienfis is a' known Author ; his works are common ^ He is commonly taken for a Semipelagian^ and he hath a book to'prove thaty^«/j are ^o^/>j,which Clandiantu JMammertm hath anfwered. But I never read one fyllable in him^ nor in any other that ever wrote of him or againft him, that fhould make one doubt whether he was for Infant-bapttfm. Could he be in fuck a ftation as he was, and have fo many writings, and fo many adverfaries, and yet hold fuch aa ©pinion and never be fufpeded? Do the Anaba-piifts no better own their canfiu ? But the words he alledgeth are but fuch as he citeth of my own; If truly cited, no doubt fpoken only of the adnlt^

(.69)

and of what the Infants do by them. But who can anfvver words not cited ? Muft we read all his works again to fee if there be fuch a word, as oft as fuch a man will talk to us at this race >

^. 45. The next is ^' [ Albanus a zealous god-*' iy Minifter in the lixth Century was put to' ** death for baptizing Believers , though baptized [^ in Infancy or by Heretick?.]

^Afjfw. Still all alike, i. Baronim is cited ^^^ 413. n. 6, when in my Book there is not a fylla-ble of any fuch matter : 2. But thereabout he hath the Hiftory of the Donatifts, who rebaptized all both old and young, as if our Separadft^ now fliould tell all Eng^Lmd , [ Ton are all out of the tyue Church which is only with m^ and if yoti come uot to pu and he not baptiz,ed in our Churches^ you have no true bapnfrn nor can be fa^ ved. 1 And for fuch rebaptizing many were troubled. And is this a wimefs againft Infant-baptifm? Shall we not have o;/f rrw^ ivor^ i'

5f. 46. His tale of Swermers he refers us for to ^JHerning and Rulicius , or Lulicim and Glmavu , men that I know nor fo well as hira-felf, and I had rather he had referred me to him-felf or Mr. Tombes.

^\ 4^. He addeth p. 251. '^ [] Nicephorus1, 17. ^^f. 9. f^ith that [[ In the year 550. one Peter ^z-^^ fliop of Apamen and Zoroarus a Monk^ in Syria *' did maintain and defend the point of dipping^ *' rebaptiz^ation or weder-dipping*

jinfw. Did Nicephorns write in Dutch ? i. Is dipping any thing to the cafe of Infants ? 2. Are you really for Rebaptiz.ing •, and are you juftify-

mg

(270)

ing it ? If not, why ciie you inftances of Rebaptu Zers ? Too many befides the Donatifts rebaptiied others to engage them to their Sed as the only Church. 3. Do you know the Hiftory of the

Council of Cakedon and Dlofcoms^ and the Ne-ftorians ? Reader, beUeve not this man any further than fenfe or great evidence conftraineth thee: That which Ntcefhorus there faith is this, [[Severus of Antioch, and Peter c/Apamea, and Zooras a .Monkey were found to curfe the Conn^ cil of Cakedon, and to hold but one nature in Chrifi ^ fraterea anahaftifmos aliaque nefanda, obfc ocHit at is -^lena facinor averager Cy that is, [] and alfo to have fraUifed Rebaftiz^tngs^ and other viU lanies full of fitch ohfcenity that is not to be named, J If he rejoyce in thefe Witnefies, is here a word of Infant^baftifm f When (hall I come to a fentence that is true ?

^.48. The next is [^ Adrian Bifiop of Co^ rinth in the feventh (fentHry did pibiickly of^ ■pofe Infant-B apt ifm , infomuch as he vpould neither Baptiz,e them hiwfelf ^ nor fuffcr them to-be Bapttz^ed by others , bnt wholly denyed Ba^ ptifm to them : Wherefore he was accufcd by Gregory Mag. 3ifwp of Rome, to John Bffl^op of LarifTa, oi appears by Gregories LetteMto the faid John, in which arnon^ otl^rs he complains againfi the faid Adrian that he tumid away children from B^^ptifm and let them die without it J for which they proceeded againfi him as a great tranfgrcjfor and bUfphefner,'^

A'-if-x, Not one true Senrtnce in all this t I. It's lalfe that Adrian pkblickly cpnofed In-

f^nt-

favO

jAnt-Baptifm. 2. It's falfe that he was accnfed for it by Gregory , or that Gregory laid any fuch thing to his ch^irge : 3. Or that they fo proceeded ^ if my books be true. Reader, the cafe in Grcgories Epiftles here cited is this. Adrian was accufed malevolently of many things ( not by Gregory) but to Gregory : Among others , that through hfm [owe Infants hr,d dyed without Baptifm, Gregory writeth to John Bi/l)op of Lartjfa on his behalf ^ and faith that [^ no one of the witncffes could fay that he knew any fuch thing by him, but that they were tf^ld fo by the mothers of fojKe children^ wh&fe f/- r-bands had fr their faults been removed ( iv-.n^ the Church) fed nee in baptiz^atos eos morti': icmpus profejfi flint occttpajfe y Jkut accufitortrr.i continebat invidiofa p^gg^flio^ cum in Dcme-triade Givitate baptiz^atos eos ejfe co?:fiiterit j that is, \^Nor did (the Wttnejfes) fay^ that they died Hnbaptiz.ed y a.s the envious faggeflion of the accufers contained ^ for it is manifefi that they were bapttz^ed in the City Deraetrias. ]

I. Is here a word that he was againfl Infant-baptifm ? 2, CouldaBifhop of fo great a City and Diocefs have been againft Infant-baptifm and none to be able to prove ir, even in envioi^ ac-cufations ? Would not every week deled: it ? _?. Would Great Gregory h2iVt thus jufiified him, if he hsd but fufpeded fuch a thing, above a hundred years after Auflin faid no one Chriftian thought Infa-nt'baptifm vain ? Was this great Pope an Anabaptift ? 4. Is it not plain by all this, dut it WJ^but iht particular children of fomer.v-

c urn-

(272)

communicate mens wives, who malicioufly accufe fiim ( not for being againft Infftnt-bapifm ^ no nor againft their Infants haftifm ; but) for delay^ ing it ? It is like, to difference them fronri the children of Church-members: And yet that they were afterward baptized. See here what a wit-ncfs he hath brought ?

^, 49. '' The next in Ris Catalogue is, [[ z/^gy-^^ ftian Divines "] but after in his book before it ^* he tells you of one Berinius an eminent learned ^^man that frofeffed inftmUion to he neee(fary be^ ^^ fore haptifm, and that without it baftifm ought *' not to be adminiftred to high or low 2 ^^^ ci-*neh BedaL^, c. 16.

Reader, the paflage in Beda is but this, That Ceadwall having conquered the Ifle of Wight gave it to Bifhop Wilfrid (no friend to Ana-baptifts ) who gave it his Sifters Son Bernwin appointing him a Prieft called HildiUy who by his labour among the Heathens converted and baptized two of the Kings Sons, who were baptized and had a ftrange deliverance. And is there a fyllablc in this ftory that Infant-baptifm is concerned in ? No nor a word of one Berinm an eminent learned man that frofejfed as he faith , though it be nothing to the purpofe: Nor was thebufinefs done as he faith in Lower Saxony but in the Ifle of Wight • fo little is there that hath the leaft kin to truth in this lamentable Reporter.

5I. 50. His Teftimony of Egyptian Divines he citeth two lare Papifts for ( inftead of juft proof ^ who neither of them ever dreamed that thofe ^Egyptians were againft Infan#Baptifm.

That

That the adult (hould be Cateehifed and intruded before Baptifnfi, all the Chriftian world agreed : That there were fome Monafteries of the -Egyptian Monks that would not hold communion with the Church of Rome , is known -, and what a turn was made among many of the Clergy after the Council of Chaicedon on Diofcorpu his account, whereupon a great body of the Southern Churches cut off from Rome^ and difown-ing them are called Ncftorians ( many injurioufly ) to this day. And Fhlgentim was di/Twaded from going to the ftrid: Hereraites and Monafticks near ^gyft 5 becaufe they were feparaied from the Roman Communion, as you may fee in Fnlgen^ tint's life. But what is all this to Infant-bapdfm?

^.51. Next he tells us that in the ninth Century HincmarHS LaHdnnenf, was againft Infant-baptifm, and recitech many words of Hificmarm jRhenenps to him.

Ar?fw. The book is Bih. Pat, SnffL To, 2. containing 55. Chapters: And if I mull read every word of fuch long books to try his Citations, I mud fpend many momhs to be able to tell you that a man told you fo many untruths: All that I can find by a curfory perufal is but this, aboi:c a Village in the other Pari ii , whom it fhould pay Tythes to, [^ hahth^u imhrcviatos ^not Infantes fine b apt If mate ^ ^ qmt homines fine Cemm^ nione inde obierunt^ cjHiC mihi in pptbiicnm objicere nolleSy ne pofic4 tibi improperarem ^ at ft alia ma-U de me fcires , ilia etiam de me dtceres, ~\ Reader , is here a fyllable againft Infant-ba-ptiftn ? Who was the accufer here ? What is in

T the

f274j ih^ 2LCCuhnon hut 2iS in Adrians to Gre^. Vfhith plainly proveth the contrary, that he was for In-fanr-baptirm and ordinarily ufed it, when the intimation was but that he had let fome Infants die without baptifm and fome men without Communi-cn ? Hath not many a Minifter among us been fo ac-cufed? And are we therefore againft Infant-ba-ptifm ? Or was Hincmarm againft adult Communion becaufe envy faid he let fome die without it ?

^.52. Reader, the truth, is I am fo weary of this work, that I cannot perfwade my felf to follow it any further, it is fo fad and loathfom a bu-iinefs that is fet before us; firter to be wept over than anfwered at large. I fliall yet take notice. of what he faith of the WalJenfes, and to that further fay, i.That I have eifewhere vindicated thciii ai:;eady from this flander. 2. That fo do many of their bitter adverfaries, in laying no fuch thing-. to their charge. Among whom to what is faid eifewhere, I add but the Teftirnony o'i Naucle*^ rus a PopiQi bitter enemy to them, who FoL 2.' ■part 2, pag, 265. reciteth their Dodrine as being.i agreeable with the body of Dodrioe held in the ■ Reformed Churches, never mentioning any denial of Infant-bapcifm, but only that they affirmed. Water to be fufficient without Oyl.

And

(275)

AN ,D now as to our Teft monies for the Common pradice of Infant-baptifm from the • daies of the Apoftles, I will not abufe the Reader by reciting again the teftiraonUs long ago recited. Let him but confider what I have there faid out cf Jffftin , IrenaHs^ Origen^ Tertulliariy Cyfrian^ Naz.ianz.e?te^ tiyinguflin and others, and I leave the matter to his Judgement.

5^. 5 3, And further where they feign Naxjan-zen to be indifferent I will add but thefe words out of his Orat, 40. 'vol. i. p. 648. £^. Morel,

''[Hafl thou an Infant? Let not naughtinefs fur-

*' prize him firft, \^ Let him be fanAified from his

"Infancy; Let him be confccrated to the fpirit

^' from his Infancie ; But doft thou fear the fcal

*' becaufe of the weaknefs of his nature ? How

" weak a minded mother art thou, and of how

" little faith ? But Hamjah ^ &:c. Thou huft no

*' need of Amulets and Inchant-

" mcnts * with which the wick- , "" '^^']^''} '^'^^ J^^?; ic t I • 1 thcns uicd to Cnil-

ed one creepeth mto the ^j.^„^

" minds of vain men , fteal-

"ing to himfelf the veneration doe to God:

^' Give him the Trinity, that great and excellent

" [^ Amulet. ]

That all this is fpoken of Baptifm is paft all

doubt : Yet Naz.ianz.en in fome cafes admitteth

of delay till three years old: But tpok baptifm

to be fo necefTary for Infants, that he ihouohc

that if any though by furprize and not the Pa-

T 2 ^ rents

rents contempt fhould die unbaptized, they fhould not goe to Heaven ( or hz Rewarded ) though he thought they fhould not go to Hell or be pu-nifhed :, lb. Orat. 40. His opinion therefore tor delay three years in cafe of fafety confided with too much apprehenfion of its necefli[y even to Infants.

<^. 54, When I read his language of holy Cyprian^ I confefs the apparition of fo frightful a fpirir, doth affright me from his dodrine. Firfiy The man (, with greater audacioufnefs than the Papids ufe the Fathers,) doth tirft attempt againfl: all confcnt of antiquity, and without any proof, to queflion the truth of the fentence of Cyprian and the Carth.^ge Council to Fidm,

Secondly^ AwA what could he fay more to betray the Pfotvftanr Caufe to the Papifts, than as after \^ Either Cyprian Z;^.^ been vilely Raffned ^ or that he hirrifdf was a notable Fathr for Anti^ chrifl , and that in him the ryjyfiery of iniquity did very firongly ^vcrk* 3

The man it feems had never read Jeremy Ste'^ phens hisj^ Edition of Cyprian de unit, EvcL and how ihofe few words of Peter and the Chare hoi Rome were added by Corrupters (though he is wiiling to believe in the general that his writings were corrupred ) But wc have certain Copies at. lea ft of fo much of them , as confute his Caufe. I remember our great Antiquary Bifhop Vfier told me that it was Tertnllian and Cyprianih^th^ took for the Chief Records of Church Antiquities, next a few'fma 11 things which give little information of matters of fad. And fome of the things

that

tbat this man fo ftarteth at, Cyprian held , and^s Epifhnniiis faith , ^11 the Chrtflian Chnrches : And mud he then be a F^cior for Antichnft ? Who then is this ^/.£« a Fador for ? Mark, Reader, whether it be any wonder if I be Momina" hie and Antichrtftian to him, when Cypriii?i and the fixty fix Bifhops with him muft come under f hypoiheticaily J that fui'picion. i. That Q//:?-/-oii who was To holy and wife a man ^ 2. That lived before Antichrifl: was born • 3. That died a Martyr for Chriil: •, 4. Who is fo great a part of the pure antiquity ^ that if youcaft himawav, v/hat will the reft be for a great time? 5. That Cyprian who is called by fome the firft Anaba-ptift, becaufe he\vas for rebaptizing thofe baptized by Hereticks; 6. That C)'/?r//j^/who fo (lifly oppofed the Bifhop oi Rojre (though himfelf was in the error ^) 7. That Cyprian whom the Do-natift$ boafted of as their p^edecefTor in rebaptizing, and Aitfirn was put to anfwer ( though with his honour •, ) S.That Cyprian who lived before anv Chriftian Emperor, when ftrift difciplinc upheld religion without and againft the Magiftrates fword •, and who wrote fo many of his Epiftles only for the rigor of Church-difcipline? O wh.t pleafure is this to Papifts ? If we be but fuch An-tirhriftians fay they, as holy ^3?W*?« and ih.^ primitive Churches were, we wili prefer it beiorc the Anabaptifts Chrifcianity ?•

5>. 55. And \{C\uriim\V2.^. Antichri/lian, where-then was the Church of Chrift ? ic will be hard to anfwer Papift or Seeker about its vilibility, or lofidtl about its reality : And what a King do ' , T 5 they

(2-]%}

they make Chrifttbat make him to have no Kingdom , that they can prove to have been exigent —«

^. 56. We will cafily gnnt him that Cyprian de iimt, .EccI, is abufed by the Papifts, and the very words cbrull in are proved lo to be by many Copies that have :hera noi: Yea, Jeremy Ste^ fii'/is Taih that there are eight Copies in England which omit twenty three of the Epiftles which are commonly received ( and it's moft credible by other Copies are Genuine : J And yet none of thefe leave out.the Epiftle to Fidi46 about Infant-baptifm,

^. 57. And whereas he faith that Cyprian ur-ged not Tradition^ I anfwer, there was no caufe: For the qutRion-wzs not vpheiker Infants jJw^ld he baptiz,ed-^ much lefs whether they were to he dedica" ted in Covetiant to God, and to be (^lourch-menchers ^ but only whether they jlioM he haptiz,ed hefor^ the eighth day: For Fidm thought that at one two or three days old they were fo unclean as made them unmeet for baptifm, and that the eighth day was the ti^me of their puriHcation ; which Cyprian and the fixty iix Bilhops confuted, and (hewed that Gods mercy accepterfi ihem from the beginning without refped to legal days. And what ufe was here for a plea from Traditi^ on for Infant'haptifioi^ v/hich was not denied ?

5^.58. And it feemsto me to be a great evidence that the Tradition of the Church was then for'it, in that this Council of Bifliops ("before true Popery was born ) To unanimoully determine of the day or tims^ and not one of them, ■> ' '~' *'■ m

no nor Pidw himfelf that raifcd the doubt, did fo much as raife any fcruple or queftion about Infant-baptifm it felf at aU : which i'ure they would have done on fuch an occafion if any or many Chriftians, or any Churches bad denied it. No wonder therefore if Angnfttn lo lon^ after fay that no Chnftian t^iks^f^ t^ ^o he in vain ?

t5. 59. Yet again I will confefs, that the words of Terttillian and Naz.ianz.en , fhew that it was long before all were agreed of the very timey or of the necelfny of baptizing Infants before any ufe cf Reafon , in cafe they were like to live to maturity : For I am perfwaded that the Apcflles and firft Minifters were fo taken up with the Converting of Infidels ( Jews and Gentiles) thar the cafe of Infant-baptifm was (0 poftponed und taken but as an Appendix to the baptifm of the adult, as that it was thought lefs needful to give it a particular exprefs mention in the Records and Hi-ftoryofthe Church. The Churches made no que-ftion of Infants Chinch-n^embcrfjip, as being nn-doiibtedly in the promife^ and devoted to God hy all faithful parents : And they took not baptifm at firH:, for their firf: Covenanting o^c Confcnt^ but for the folemniz^ation of it; and fo not for In^ fants firft real fate of relation to Qjrifi and righr to life ( which was before itj as it was to be/ic' vers before baptifm-^ ) but for the folemn invefti' titre in thofe rights : And fo Greg, Nazjan, Or,4o. giveth this brief definition of hapcifm, that ic is nothing clfc but a Covenant madercith God for a new and purer kind of life : And hereupon many who thought InfantsOjurch-members

T4 (\'iz.)

(28o)

Yvifiblej and fafi upon their Parents Covenant^ confent , thought that the time of folemniz^atton was fo far left to prudence as that ( as the Ifra-elites did Circumcilion in the wildernefsj it might be delayed a few years by fuch Parents asdefired it, till children could fomewhat anfwer for them-felves.

5^. 60. Yet after my review of this controverfie upon their urgencie , I find no proof brought by any of thefe inen , chat ever one Church m the world was without Infant-members^ (thathad Infants, ) nor one prfon in the Church againft Infant Church-memlferfiip and haftifmy from Chrifts days till the \Valdenfes f about eleven hundred or a thoufand years) except that TertMan^ who took them for Innocent and therefore Church-members J did in fome cafe advife the delay ; I fay, I find not one Chriftian or Heretick againft it: (unlefs you will impute it to them that were (^gainji allbaftifm^ which Infidels alio are. ) And though I verily believe that the Waldenfes were not againft Irifant-baptifm, nor is there full proof that any in their time were, yet becaufe I am loth to judge the Papifts utrerly ijnpudent lyars, I think it mofl: probable that in the WaLdenfes days and Countryy there was a fort of odious Hereticks, that denied Infant-baptifm, and the Refurredion, and held community of Wives and other abominations reported all together by their oppofers in thofe times.

,C H A P.

f 28^ )

• CHAP. V.

Mr. DanversV great Calumnie of my [elf refuted.

^. I. TV yfR* ^' P3g« I34« E^- I. faith thus iVi [ Tet ts not tJlir, Baxter ^fhawed to fix fftch an MominMe jlander upon i-)e Baptjfis of thts our age of baptiz^ing naked: ( rJ:tcb it fcems Vi'os fo Long the real praSitce of the padoba-ptifls ) and about rvhich he jpends three whole pages to aggravate the heynoufnef of their ciijiom (which he ts pleafcd to father on them, ) And though I am perfwaded he cannot but be cenvtn^ ccd that the thing is mofi not or ionfy falfe , a,:d brought forth by him rather out of prejndice ( not to fay malice) rather than any proof or good tefiimony he cuer received thereof - yet have I never heard that he hath done himfelf , his injii^ red neighbours and the abufed world that right as to own his great weakjiefi and fnfid jhortfiefi therein^ in any of the many Editions of thatptece^ which J humbly conceive as well defcrved a recantation as fame other things he has judged wor^ thy thereof. ]

^* 2. j4rfw. To live and die impcnicently in fo unprofitable a fin f and unpleafing to any but diabolical natures) as is the belying of others, is a very dreadful kind of folly, I would heartily wifh that },]r.Danvers and I might meet and help to bring each other to repentance, by a willing impartial examination ofeachof our guiltinefles here-

5f. 3, I never look to fpeakto therai thus mor^ nor lung to any man on earth, and in this ftati-on and with thefe thoughts I muft profefs (not thinking it lawful to belie rayfelf ) that in the year 1647. ^^ 1648. or both when Anabaptiftry be^ gan fuddenly to be obtruded with more fuccefT-ful fervency than before, I lived near Mr* Tomhes^ in a Country where fome were, and within the hearing of their pradice in other parts of the land:. And that in that beginning the common frame of Minifters and people was, that in divers places fime haftiz^ed naksd and fome did not: And that I never to my beft remembrance heard man or woman contradid that report till this man did it in this writing: And that no Ansbaptift contra-dided it to me that I then or fince converfed with : And that thereupon in 1659.1 wrote againft both fertfy thofe that baptiz^ed nal^dy and thofe that did not: And after all this when Mr. Towbes an-fwered my book and thofe very pafTages, he ne-ver denied the truth of the thing ( though he did not fo baptize himfelf funlefs he have any where elfe fince faid any thing of it which I never faw or heard of. ) And I appeal to impartial rea^fvin, whether he would not then at the time hnvede. nied it, had it been deniable: And whether this man now twenty five or fix years after be fitter to be believed in a matter of fad, than common con-fent at the prefenc time? And wheLher it be Uw-fnl for me to take all forts then livi?jg for lyars, rather than this one man that hath written us fiich a book ? and who in a negative 25 years after

can-

C283)

cannot poffibly be a competent witnefs, nonorif he had written at that tinne : For who can L\y that there was or is no fuch thing done beyond his knowledge ?

0. 4. But if Mr. D. would perfwade the world cither that I wrote that of ^// the Anab:'ptifts, or of mofij or of any in any other age, or that I have fince faid that a^iy continue the fame pradice^ he would but deceive men : for it is nothing fo.

<^. 5. I muftconfefs I did not/^^ the-perfonsba^ ftiz^cd naked^ nor do I take it to be lawful to defame any upon doubtful reports : But when it is a fame common and not denied by themfelves cither Mmifters or fcofle at the time^ I think it is to be taken fo much notice of, as the confuting of the evil doth require.

j, 6. I know not by fight that there is ever a Fornicator, Adulterer, Murderer or Thief ( as I remember) in England: And yet if I neither Write nor Preach to call fuch to repentance, left I be a Slanderer in faying that there are any fuch, I think it would be foolifli uncharitable Charity, and unrighteous juftice.

55.7. Moft Scds do in their height and heat at: firft do that which afterward they furceafe with Ihame : The Donatift Circumcellians continued. not felf-murder ; the Anabaptifls held not on to do as they did at Alnnficr, or in the time of D.t-vid Ceorge : Our Ranters continued not open fvpcaring and whoredom long; The fame of Eyi-gland which I never heard gainfaycd is that the Quakers at firfl did ^hnke and vomtt and infed: others ftrangely : And is he a lyar that faith it,

becaufe

(284)

becaufe they do not fo now ? I was at Worcefler my felf when at the Aflizes one of them went naked ( as a Prophet) before our eyes through the high ftreet, and they laid they did fo in many other places: I know not the mans name now, nor any of the muhitude of Spedators, if after twenty years and more I were called to prove it. I know by uncontrolled fame that Miftrefs Snfm Tier [on folemnly undertook to raife the dead ( ta^ king up a dead Quaker at Claines and commanding him (in vain ) to live. ) But if now after more than twenty years my witnefiTes were called for, I muft travel to the place before I could produce them.

^. 8. Yea, I never faw any Anabaptift reba-ptize ( or baptize the aged : ) But fame faith they do fo and none deny it. If it prove falfe, Ifhall be glad, and will joyn in vindicating them; And fo I fay of the prefeRt cafe • And will heartily joyn with any in reforming backbiting, and rafh ungrounded defamations of- others.

C H A p. V L

Of Mi\ Danvers'^ frequent Citations ^f my Words*

f. J, TXT"Hen I read Mr. Tombes his twenty VV Citations of mc as againft myfelf, which Mr. D, provokeih me to anfwer, and when I find Mr. D. fo often iniitating them, and ailedging my words, as jaftifying his caufe, I have no convidion on my mind that it is lawful for me to waft my time and the Readers, abouc a particular vindication of my words, fo triflingly and vainly ufed by them.

^, 2 . Either it is the authority of the Writer which they fuppofe will ferve them, or \\\t force of the arguments • or clfe it is only to make the Reader believe that the Writer is fo foolifij as not to know when he comraditicth himfelf. Th.e/r/? I may well prefume it is not: If it were^ the fame p^rfons authority would be as much more againft them as his judgement is. It it be the fecond^ v;hy do they ulc any arguments of mine, when they,are able to form fuch of their own as feem much more ufeful to them than any that I can give them } And uiiy then do they not infift only on the Argument and ncgled the Author? But feeing I muft believe that the laft is their bu-(inefs, I can have leifure to fay little more thaa this to them, that it is not my bufinefs to prove my felf no fool but to prove Infants Cburch-memki? •, nor will it make me fraart if all of

their

(2^6) '

their mind in England fo judge of me • But yet I am not fo foolilh but that I know my own mind better than they do, and can reconcile my words when ihey cannot* If this facisfie not them, ic fatisfieth me.

5^. 3. In fumm, the words of mine which they alledge againfl my felf need but thefe two things to be faid for them againft fuch filly cavils : I. That moll of them fpeak to the Queftion |[ What is the kjnd of Covenant confent reqnired in oaftifm f Whether a meer dogmatical faijh- pro^ 'fejfed f Or ths frofeffion of a faving faith 'f as' to the matter beUeved and the fincerity of the he^ lief and confent ? ] And I prove that it is no other fort of faith, but a true favmg faith as to objeB and a^ which is required and accepted of God the fearcher of hearts, as the (Condition of his Covenant: And that it is not tht Profejfionof ^ny lower fort of faith ( as to ohjeB or all ) but of this faving faith^ which the Church muft accept to the admifiion of members t A lower profefli-on will ferve for none. 2. But I flill maintain ( and I think fully proved ) that God fo far taketh the child as if he were apart of the Parent C nature and grace having committed him to his will and difpofal for his good till he have a will to choofe for himfelf) as that h'^this fort of faith and con-fent the Parent is to enter his Child into Covenant with God as well as himfelf, and that in Gods acceptance the Child doth thus truly con-fent by the believing Parent^ and doth Covenant with Gody as a child Covenanteth and confenteth repmatively amor.g men > who by his Parents is

made

(287)

made a Party in a ContraB , as in a leafe for his life, or the like. Not that in fenfn fhyfico th# perfon of the Child being the fame with the Parents doth confent in hts confent •, but that the Parent having the treble intereft in the Child, of an Ovpnevy a Governonr and a Lover ^ God by Nature and Grace conjundly alloweth and requi-reth the Parent to dedicate the Child to God, and to confent that he (hall be a member of Chrifl and his Church according to his capacity, and by that Covenanting confent to oblige the Child to live as a Chriflian when he cometh to age : And this fl^all be as acceptable to the Childs Covenant-relation and rights, as if he had done it himfelf ^ andiia this fenfe may be faid reputatively to have confented or Covenanted by his Parents , which in proper fpeech, is, They did it for him fit Gods CcmrTiMid.

^. 4, He that is not fatisfied with this General Anfwer, let him either perufe the words themfelves in my Writings, with thofe before and after that explain them, or elfe if he will do as this man doth , abufe his own underftanding and his ignorant Readers, by fuch filly wranglings animated by partiality, let him bear the Confequcnt?, and know that I have fomewhat elfe to do with my few remaining hours, than to write books on fuch infufficient invitations and expedations.

CHAP.

CHAP. VII.

Of Mr. Danvers'i many other accitfations of me,

^. I. TT was one of the old Charaders of the X Hereticks in the Apoftles dayes, To Ipeak^ evil of the things that they underflood not.

And that may well be thetr Character in which they contradid the three great confticutive parts of Ghriftianity, and all Religion, and true honefty, vitl. T R U T H, H U M J L I T Y and LOVE, by Falfljoody Trtde and Malignity^ ( called comnionly Vnchantablnefs, )

^.2. The Root of this is, when Reigning, aF4 unfanEiified heart in which thefe vices remain unmortified , covered from the owners knowledge, by a form of Godlinefs , and cfpecially a zeal for the wayes of fome Party, more honoured in the perfons eyes forwifdom, or piety than others : In others there is a great meafure of the lame "ukes mixed with trne Grace , where an evil and a good caufe are conjoyned as to fome etfeds: They love God and his Truth, and they hate all that they think againft him, they would promote piety in the world, and reprefs what they think againft it • And being perfons whofe wits and ft tidies were not fuch, as exa^nefi and large--mfs 01 knowledge do require, but yet lovers of knov/ledge , truth , and Scripture, they have

more

more knowledge than prophane fots , but IhtUy alas, little, in comparifon of that which is ne-cefTary to a methodical, accurate underftanding of the matters which frequently fill under contro-verfie •, And fo knowing but little they know not what they are ignorant of, nor wha: others know beyond them ; And it being the common vice of mans underftanding, to be hafty m judges tng before they hear or know one half that is neccHary to a true and faiihful judgement, and fo to be con^dcnt before they underftand, thefe men hereby are led to conscience in many an error : And an erring judgement firil telleth them that Truth is fallliood, and falfhood truth, that Good is evil, and evil good, that Duty is fin , and fin is duty ; awd then a good caufe and a bad, the Love of Truth and a per-verfe and partial zeal concur, ro put them on in the way of error. Ignorance and error fee them on a -wrong canfe^ and a mixt affetlion or z^ealy partly good and partly evU fpurreth them on. And in thefe the JError and Herefte and confe-qucnt fins, arc no more predominant than the canfe •, and God will have mercy on thofe ihac in ignorance, with.good meanings, oppofe many truths, and do much evil.

^» 3. And the great means of nourifhing this fin in Churches is departing from Chrifts Church order, who hath appointed Teaching and Learning to be the fetled way of getting knowledge ; And therefore required all hisdifciples to come to his Church, as little children to School, with teachable humble minds, to Learn, and not U with

(29o)

with proud wrangling minds to difputc : If alloiff children lliould fpend iheir tinae at School in difpu-ting with the Teacher and fetcing their wits againft his as in a cohflid, what would they thus Learn ?

5^, 4. Therefore Panl faith, that the fervant of the Ljrd mufl not ftrive^ and oft calleth men from ferverfe Mfpnttngs^^ndflriving about words vphich fahvert the hearers^ and from fuch con-^ tendinis as edijie not but tend to more ungodli-nefs , ^though the faith may be contended for^ and truth defended, when oppolition maketh it truly necefTary).

c. 5. When a man feeketh after knowledge as a Learner^ he meeteth it with a willing wind-^ he cometh towards it with an appetite^ and fo is a capable receiver : But when a man cometh as a dtfpHtanty he is ingaged already to one /ide, and if that be falfe he cometh out to fight ^-gainfl the truth^ with ^ fpirit of oppofitton^ ha-ttng truth as error , and good as evil-, and thinks It his amy and intereft to deftroy and fhame it if he can, and therefore is unapt to think what may hQ faidfor it , bui: ftudycth all that he caa againfi ir. And is this loathing , and oppofi-tion and fig!»i:ing againft truth the way to know it ? <S. 6. Thciefore that which hath undone the Churches peace* is, that too many Teachers, be^ ing themfelves too forward to comroverfies, have too haftily drawn in their people into their quarrels, and caft fuch bones before them in books and pulpirs-.inftcad of food, which break their teeth and fet ibenj together by the ears inftead of nourifhing than. And fo one mans hearers

are

are taught to difpute for this fort of Govern^ mentj and anothers for that fort ; one mans for free-will and anothers ^^^/w/? it • when perhaps neither they nor the maftcr of the quarrel can telJ you what tt is ? and fo of an hundred more fuch hke. The honcft hearers when they (hould be digeiling the ancient Chriftian dodrine, and learning to increafe in Love to God and man, and to pradife a holy and a heavenly life, and prepare for a comfortable death, and happy eternity by a Living faith and hope, are taught that if they be not zealots for this ofi?non or that, for Anabaftiftry , for fefaratiorij &c, if they pray by a book, or if they joyn wirh thofe that hold fuch things as they hear called by odious frightful names , they are not thtnright jLcaloui ChrtfiiartSy but corrupt or comflyers or lukewarm ; And thus each Church is made a miferable Church-militant, and trained up to waragainft each other.

5^. 7. And this ^inifters have done, partly to ftrengthen themfelves by the confent and number of their adherents, as the Captain muft conquer by his Souldiers : When they can fetagreac number on hating their adverfaries, and backbiting them, and telling the hearers wherever they €ome, to make them fecm odious, how erroneous and bad fuch and fuch men are , they think they have done much of their work ? And while they think it is for Chrtft , they know not how notably they pleafe and ferve the Devil. But I nuift remember that I have fpoken of this eilc* where, and fodifmifsir.

' U 2 t<. 8-

( 2P2 )

»

<. 8. That Mr. Danvers and his imitatefS fpe^k^evil (confidently and vehemently ) of the^ things they k^ow mt ( yea very many fuch J I am fure. But from what principle or root, or how Far that vice which produceth thefe fruits is mortified or unmortified as to all others, I am neither called nor willing to judge. I remember huw Mr. Tho. Tierce once dealt with me : When my Religious neighbour could hardly be perfwaded to communicate with thofe among them that were of his judgement, faying, they were men that would fwear and lie, and lived fcandaloufly, I thought it my duty (to keep up difcipline and yet) to moderate their cenfures by telling them what fins I thought might ftand with fome raeafure of fincere piety, and Church-communion. And what doth he but hence take advantage to tell the world how loofe my dodrine was J and what finful perfons I thought had grace ? 5o now if I ihould fay, that notwithftand-ing thefe hard-faced faldiodfis^heaped together, ^nd confidently obtruded on the ignorant, even about publick and vifible matter of fad, yet I hope the Auihor feareth God truly in other re-fpeds, and erreih through Ignorance, paffion, and temerity ; 1 fliould be told publickly ere long by one or other, that I think the moll bra-zcn-facid Lyars may be Saints : And if I deny fuch mens Goodncfs, I look to be told that I am cenforious and a reviler of godly men that dffFer irom me. Therefore I am" thankful to Chrift that he not only e.rct'tfeth us from fo hard a work as die Judging of the (incerity of others, butcaiis

m

(2p3; *

us ojf^ and faith, v^ho art thou that judgejj: ano^ ther mans fervant ? to his own mafler hefi^inds or falls : But whoever cenfure me for it_, I will fay that my judgement ftill inclineth to the hopeful and charitable part ! For fiding and error may draw good men into heinous fins.

<S. 9. That He and I do differ \njndgerrje71t and Practice, is not to be denyed : I thought our difference had been but in fo fniall and tolerable things ( till I fa:v worfe in his writings ) as (hoijld neither abate Love or forbid Communion : And thinking fo, I was thelikelier to pra-d:ife as I thought, and not to hate him and iuch as he : But I perceive he takes the ditferenccs to be far greater , and my errors and llns to be more heinous and intolerable, and therefore if he hate me (though I know not thatevei: he favv me or I him ) it is 710 wonder^ it being more agreeable to hvs 'judgement •, And alfo if he would not tolerate me were it m his power.

c. 10. If he fo greatly differ from me, and be in the right, certainly it is becaufe he is c?-ther a great deal wifcr and ?nore knowing in thefe matters, or becaufe he is 7nore confcicnahk to avoid perverting temptations, and more Godly and fit for divine lighr. I deny not either : biU from the bottom of my heart tell him, that I am fo desfly co-nfcious of the dark^nefs aiid /;;«f2i-nefs of my underfiandlng,znd my little goodnets and very ill defcrts from God, that did he bring me any confiderable evidence for his caufe, my great fufpicion of ray felf would prepare nie to U 5 hcai-

hear him : But it muft not be fuch fluff as htt here obtrudeth on us. And I muft tpll him, though I acknowledge God to be a free Bene-fador, and may give the Create ft Knowledge fo them that have leaft laboured for it -, yet while diligent fearching is his commanded means , I fliall doubt whether his eafier and fhorter fearch hath attained to fomuch more than my harder m^ longer^ til) the fruit thai! prove ir.

^, II. He tells us Ed, 2.p. 170* that l^can-'' net do my felfmore] right and my ojfended brer ^^ threnj than to clear my felf in thefe particulars '^^ which are indeed fa heinoiu , not only to every '' one of his Nonconforming brethren^ hut to mo ft F' V rot eft ants that hear them* ~\

fiAnfvQ, I. Still fuch untruths ? Do you know what moft Proteflants think that hear them ? and every one of my Nonconforming brethren /* Why fome of the wifcft of them that I know did read them over , and approved them before they were printed } Others ( many an^l many ) of the moilt judicious alfo of my acquaintance have fince profefTcd their confent : Nay piore . I remember not one Minifter that hath made me know by word or writing to me that he diffenteth from any one of all thefe heinous things. I remember that once fome objeded what they heard others fay fnot as confenting to the oppofers ) and acquiefced in my anfwers, ©r rather in the words of the book perufed. So that if every one cf my Nonconforming brethren he offended^ and Ikjiownnot of one, nor anyone pf them would ever vouchfafe ^ %yord or line to

con-

convince me, you cenfure them for woful dif-femblers or uncharitable. But I believe them ef themfelves rather than you,

^. 12. He addeth, j4nd J dare be boldtofuy^ hath given more ^ general offence , ^nd lofi Afr» Baxter /nore amongfi bus Friends *, than any thing he "^ Not fp much as did tn all hts Ufe.-Ji ^'' '^T^l'!'Tf^

y4nfrv. I. The oitence which .^rinng for Parifh Chrift dreadfully condemneth, c^nimuniou. which is fcandalizing the weak or laying fnares or ftumbling-blocks before them, to tempt them to think ill of Chrift, or Godli-nefs, or to commit any fin, I would avoid as carefully as I can , And to avoid it I have written that which ofFendeth you. • Bur the offence which is but D iff leafing dtjfenters , yea mi ft a-king men JI little regard on my own accoiinr. And your talk of my lofs ( or being loft ) doth favour fo rankly of a humane hypocritical teyyi-ptation , as maketh me remember what Chrifl: laid to Peter Math, 16.23. that would have had him fave hirafelf from fuffering, though I will not fpeak out fuch unpleafing words to you : But your tvords favour too much oi the flefh. O Sir , it is but a few moments more, and you and I (hall be in a world , where the thoughts and words of mortals, of us, will be of fmall importance to us I And themfelves are haftin^ to the day when all their thoughts perifli. O cea.fe from man whofe breath is in his noftrils : for wherein is he to be accounted of ? Would you tempt me to look to the hypocrites reward ? the U 4 arpro-

(296)

approbation of man ? O miferable reward ! Were not that book odious to you , I would refer you for my Reafons to the two Chapters of Man-^leafing and Vride : If Gods approbation feem not enough for us, why call we him our God ?

But if I have lofi [o much as you intimate, you. would perfwade me that my fervice is more than I take it to be ? I have felt little comfort in any fervice of God which coil roe nothing. But you fiiall not tempt me to over-value it fa much ^ I find no lofsatallby it. What have! loft Sir ? Not one farthing or farthings-worthy that I am aware of 1 As I lived not on any man before, fo I am never the poorer for that duty now. Is it mens ^raife or good thoughts of me ? Not one friend to my remembrance in the City, or Land hath once told me his dijfenty much lefs that I have loft his good efleem : ( Only one young man that heard me Preach came for fa-tisfadion about one of the particulars, who was fatisfled as far as I could perceive, and I wifht hira bur to read over all in my bookfabout that you jobjed concerning the Crucifix) and I heard of him no more.) And if I am fo much loflmth my friends^ and no one of them in Erjgland tell me that he diffenteth , and veherein^ fpch friends are not fo valuable as to be any of my felicity ! And do you call a man [^ lo(i 3 that Idfeth the thoughts or (the breath of man > As it is their own duty or fin^ I regard all mens thoughts or words, and fo would f leafs all men fur their good to edificati-fn .* But ^s to my ov?n comfort I can . fpanp

yoHrs

youri and theirs]^ and if you and a thoufand fucli fhould write a Cart-load of Calumnies as you have done, I think they would break but little of nfiy fleep. Set thefc arguments next before hypocrites that Uve on man : I live not oa them.

But your words do mind me , how men that are embodyed in little parties, (Tar lefs than the Donanfts or Kovatians) are inclined to take their Cabin for all the Kingdom, and their Sed: for the Church, and areaffeded with their praife or difpraife almofl: as if they were all the world. You hear your folks it feems talk againft me ( with whom backbiting is a duty ) and youfeem to dream that it is all my frten'df. If God in Chrifl will be my friend, I can fpare others.

And tell me Sir, for what friz.e or gain do you think I am lofi vptth all my friends P No man in his wits will voluntarily be lofi for nothing. Do you think it is to get other'friends that I more value ? Who be they ? Is it the Papifts ? Enquire what I get by them. Is it the Diocefan, party ? What have I got by them but fitencmg and the lofs of, all Minifterial maintenance , thefe twelve years ? And ask them whofe writings have more offended them yours or mine.

\i \ am lofi, it hath tcfl me more years hard fiiidy to be lofi , and to be erroneotu or a fool^ than it hath done you to be fame body and to be mfe •, And I tell you I never yet repented of Cofi or lof for that Truth and duty, which you bment as W\vvy\i% error and fin. But naked (rut b^

and

isind the faithful endeavours of pleafing God, in promoting that Love among Chrifts difciples, and -peace x;a his Churches which ChmchTyrantsand Se5is have fo many ages laboured ( too fuccef-fully ) to deftroy, are fleeter than to be forfa-ken either through the ferfecution of one fort or the Revilings of the other, or the lofs of all mens friendfhip upon earth.

And yet I will add , that though being long ago glutted with mens applaufe, 'as finding it a lufciom hut unwholefome thing, Sindlunng voluntarily caji up much of it my felfy I yet perceive no wane of friends, but take your words of them for meer flanders.

5^. 13. Saith Mr. D. (Pref.ed. i. ; \J'He hath '^ fo much abounded ( in contradtElions ) ( none *' more that J^knovp of •) being as you I find^ fame-** time a great oppofer , then a great defender of ^[Epifcopacy*'] •

Anfw* I. Yet I know not that ever this man ikw me C as I faid) or I him/ 2. Thisfalfliood did unhappily overflip him, my writing being fo full a confutation of it, that he can have nothing of fenfe to fay to cloak it. My judgement was for Epifcopacy 1639. by Reading Biihop Poiv-name and feme others ; But in 1640. the oath called Et cetera calling us to fvoear never to confent to the alteration of the prefent Government by A» JBl[hops, 'JBiJljopSy DeanSy Archdeacons^ dec, forced me to ftudy the wholexaufe to the bottom, (ince which time my judgement of Epifcopacy never altered ( which is 34 years ago) having fetled in the ReceptihiHty of cne fort of Epifcopacy,

ana

and the deftrahlenefs of another, and the diflike of another fore : All which I have fully published in my Difpute of Church-Government 1658. when the BiOiops here were at the iow-tft. Either this man knew me and my writings herein, or not. If not, what a man is this that dare talk thus confidently and faldy of what he knew not ? If he did,then how much more flagitious is his pradice, thus to tell the world an untruth fo notorious to himfelf ? He faith (a^ yon may find) but never tells you where. Let him tell you w/^fr^ and vchen I ever defended that Epifcopacy which I hadoppofed ?

^.14. [_ Mr. D, [^^^ Sometime for Noncon^ ^^formity ( in whofe tents he hath feemedto fljeU *' ter himfelf in the flornJ^ and with their IndnU ''^gence to come forth of his hole) and yet at *' length fo highly to di[grace the fame,

j4nfw. I, Let him (hew you if he can, where or when I have changed my judgement about Conformity , or exprefl a change fince 1640? Not that I take it for a difgrace to be mutable by growing wifer : But neceffity forced me fo Jong ago to ftudy thofe controverfies fo hard, as fixed me, and I never heard any thing fiiice which confiderably altered me therein ; Which alfo being vifible in the forefaid Dtfpnte of Liturgie^ Ceremonies , &c. written 1658. leave no cloak for this mans calumnies. See there whether I faid not more for fo 'much of Epifcopacy^ Litur-gte and Ceremonies which I took to be Uxv^ fiil , than ever I have done fince Bifliops returned ? * 2. But

2. But what doth he mean by [^Jhelterlng my felf in a florm in their tents 3-^1 cannot ima«-gine what, unlcfs fenfe and truth at once for^ iook him ! When a ftorm fell on the Nonconfor--wifts^ were their tents a hkely place for fhelter ? Had not the Conformifls] tents been likelier f Did the Nonconformijts (belter me f Frofti what, and how?

3. And what hole was it that I came out of, with their Indulgence ? Are fuch men as this the Vindicates of Gods Truth againft the Chri-llian world , that pour out untruths at fuch a rate, in defpight of the moft publick notoriety of fad ? Do I need to tell the Reader ( only for the fake of youths and forreigners) that when the Nonconformifis caufe was at the bar, when fpeaking had any room and hope, they fet me in their forlorn, and engaged me ( with my Confcicnce and defire co have prevented that which I forefaw ) in the tasks of writing and fieaking which would moft exafperatc and offend the Bilhops •, till I was I think;the firft among them that was forbidden to Preach. I continued after that in London a year, where I never had place or flock, but was a ftranger; ficknefs then forced me to remove into the Countrey. The Tents I was (bekered in, were Gods protection in my own habitation •, which if a hole I thought good enough for me. I Preacht to fuch as would hear me , till, being near the Church door , and the people numerous, Clergie-envy caufed me to be fent to the common Gaol, among malefa-dors •, As foon as I was our, another warrant

was

was put into the Officers hands to apprehend me again, and fend me to Newgate for dx months • Upon which I removed my dwelling CO the next Village out of the County : Irc-fufed none there that defired to hear me, of my Neighbours. The writings which he revileth, (hew that I lived not idle ; And I think he could wifli I had done lefs and fpoken to fewer; I came not out of that hole of many months after the Indulgence was granted : I flayed on reafons of Sel&denyal, becaufel would fore-ftall no London Minifters , nor hinder their Auditories, and therefore refolved to ftaytill they were i^tled : I came on terms of far greater Self-^ denyal^ to the great abatement of my health, (to fay nothing of my greater coft,) which now; hath again forced me at prefent to retire. You fee now at what rate thefe men inform the world , and how far they are to be believed.

As for his talk of \_ Difgracing the Noncon^ formiftfJi it's true in two fenfes. i. As he ancf I difgrace Chriftianity by being fo ignorant and had : 2. Or if he mean not My ox^n Nonconformity but his, ( even his Nonconfbrmity to a great deal of truth and Qoriflian duty and common honefty C by concatenated falflioods ) , I have done my part ( when conftrained ) to difgrace it.

^. 15. \_Sometime a friend to Q^Wm^ and then A greater to Ai'minius J faith he.

Anfvc, I. Did he tell the Reader where by 9ne (in any words ) I contradid: the other ?

(302')

2. But fee the mifery of a Se^flarian fpirit J that taketh it for a contradidion to be a friend to Cdvin and Arminim both ? He would as this inferrcth, take it ill to be thought a friend to Ancba^tt^s and Piedobaptifts both, to Indefen^ dents and Frefuyterians and Epifeopal too. But that is to fuch as I, thegreateft duty,which to him is a fhameful contradidion : When I think none Chriftians but Anahaptifis, I will be a friend to no other as fuch : Men of fo little a Church, mufi have anfwerably little Love : Cenforioufnefs is a friend but unto few. 3. But by this your friendfhip feenneth narrower than I thought it s I thought it had extended to all the Anabaptifts^ But they are divided into [^Free^vptlUrs} and (^ Free-gracers ~] as they call them, that is, into Calvimfts and Arminians : and are you 2l friend but unto one part of them ? 4. But indeed Sir, the Controverfies intended by you under thefe names, are not fuch as a man of my poor mca-fure can Rk his judgement in very young, and promife that it fhall never change, northatlcaa take it for a fhame to grow any wifer in them^ than heretofore, though perhaps your judgement changed not from your Childhood. And I hope ( if what I have written may be publifhed) to make it appear that fuch as you that fpeak evil of what, you underftand not, are the grievous enemies of the Churches of Chrift, as to Tmthy Holinefsy and Feace^ by your militant noife about Calvi^ nijmy and aArminianifm^ ftirring up contentions, and deftroying Love, by making differences feem greater than they are •, and laying the Churches

Con-

Concord and Communion and mens falvation upon fuch queflions, as Whether the houfe jijouldbe built of Wood or Timber, f And is not thiswor-ihy of your zeal }

* i^. i6. He adds \_^^Sometimes a great Defen^ ^^ der of the Parliament andtheirCanfe^ and then ^^ none more to renounce them and betraytor them ^^for their fains, ]

Anfw, I. Was there never but One Parlia-went and One Catife /* Perhaps you mean that the Parliament Called 1640 and the ^«w?p(^as called ) and the Armies Little Parliament, and OH-very and the Army Council and all the reft of the Soveraigns were all One Parliament f Or that to fwear to the firft Parliament, or fight for them, and to fhut out and imprifon them, and to difTolve them, as Ufurpers, and to fee up one chofen by—who knows whom — and to fct up Oliver and his Son , and to pull him down again, and to fet up the ^/uwp again, and to pull them down and fet up a Council of State, ore. were all one Caufe •, And that one day it was -Treafon not to be for oneSoveraign,and another day rot to be againftthat, and for anoihcr. Your Army did not betraytor them, when they forced cue one part as Traytors firft, and thruft out the major part, after imprifoning and reproaching many worthy wife and religious men, and when they pulled down all the reft at laft ? Had you or I nwre hand in thefe matters ? Whether you know your felf I know not, but I am fure you know not me, nor what you talk of.

p. 17. It

C304)

<$. I /• It followeth [Sometimes a great Oppafer of Tradition , and anon a great defender there^

Anfva. I. If you take Tradition equivocally > you calumniate but by equivocation ^ but \'i\jhere' p/J mean [_ the fame Tradition~\ your falfhood hath not. the cioak of an equivocation. Prove what you fay by any words of mine > It is between twenty arid thirty years I think (ince I largely opened my judgement of Tradition, in the Preface to the fecond edition of ray book called the Saints Refi, which I never changed fmce. If you will" deny that your Father delivered you the Bible ( or any otherjor that the Church bath ufed both Bible and "Baftifm from the Apollles dayes till now. Let the reproach of fuch Tradition be your glory, if you will 5 It (hall be none of mine. But do you write a book to prove the Tradition of Adult Bapcifm from Chrills time to ours, and when you have done renounce and fcorn it ? See Reader, how he valueth his own work ?

<>, 18. \lt2ii^ti\\ ]^^^ Sometimes a'violent im-^' pHgner of Popery ^ and yet at laft who hath fpoken *^ more in favour of it ?~\

jinfw. Here again if by [ Topery J and [^ it J you mean the fame thing, You hold on the fame courfe : Prove it true , and take the honour of once writing a true accufation. I have not hid my judgement about Popery, having.written about feven or eight books againft it in above twenty years time, by which you may fee in comparing ihem whether I changed my judgement. If you ' cannot/refufe not to blufh. Buc

•' But i was and am a defender,of that \th\di is Fopery . and Antichrifltanity v/ich you , the Church-raembcrfhip., Covenant-incereft and Baptifm of Infants, and it's like many more parcels of the Treafures of Chrifl , which you zea-loufly rob him off, and give to Antichrift ; As too many Sedaries do, the greateft partf I doubt more than nine parrs of ten') of hi$ Kingdom or Church univerfil ; And as Divines ufc to prove that carnal minds arc enemies and haters of God, hecaufe they confefs , honour and worfaip him both in Nams^ and in refpeft of many of his At-tribures and relations and works, yet in refpcd of others they are averfe to him - fo I would be a monitor to you, and fuch like 5e(fl:aries, to tak€ heed of going much lunher, left before you know what you do , while you honour Chrifls ndir.e , and cry up fome of his Grace, and dodrines, you fhould realty haje^ oppugn and Uafpheme him, and take Chri^ himfelf iox Antichrift^ and his Churches and fervanrs for Aritichriftian. If you will take him for Antichrift that takech Infants into the vifible Church, I think it wil) prove to be C^r^/^ himfdf.

^. 19. Reader, How tig a volume wouldfl thou have me write in anfwering fuch fluff as this ? Tears are fitter than Ink, for fuch fearl.rfs,-radi, continued, vifible fallTiocds, to be deliberately publifhed to the world as tpjihs, by one that calleth himfelf a man, and a Chriitian, and feemeth zealous to nev^ Chriflen moll of the Chriftian world. Unlefs I fliouid tire ray felf and thee, I muft ftop, and cc2^k this noyfome X: ' ' ■ work-.

C505)

work ; Only one charge more which runs through much of his 'book, I will anfwer, becaufe it concerneLh the caufe it felf.

p. 20. He oft tells you that when I have called my book\^Plain ScrtptHre proof jlya there and after contradid my felf, by (aying that the cow-troverfie is difficult ] and by faying that in the fiincient Churches men were left at liberty to Ba-ptiz.e their children when they vponld, \ And I. His v^ry words prove that this is no contradidion : For thefe very words I will make fUin to a boy of ten years old, and yet the world niuft know in print that he is not able to under-fland them , and that this is worthy the conlide-ration of his profelyces. 2. My meaning I opened long ago, which he concealeth : The Proofs of Infants Church-meraberfhip are VUin : the proof therefore of their right to Biptifm is plain though not in the fame degree ? but there are 0^-jdlions Q^ difficulty which may be brought againft ic, which every weak Ghriftian (nor Minifter neither ) cannot anfwcr. And the hardefl is thar which is lictle taken notice of by themfelves, but i C impartially J opened in vay Chrifiian Dire^io" ry, ' And is it a conLradidion to fay that a do-drinc that haih Plain Proof y may be afTauIced by difficult cb;cclions ? And yet fuch as a fobtr Chriilian Ihould not be changed by, unlcfs on the fame reafons he will forfake all Chriftianity , ^i^ii his everlailing hopes : For I take the dodriii*^ of the Souls Immortali-ty to be fuch as may be Plainly f roved : But truly I take it to be five degrees above t^ie ability

( 3^7 ) iityof this Writer, to anfwer folidly ali that can be faid againft it. I take it to be PUmly pro^ liable that the Scfiptute is certainly true : And yet I take it to be quite above this confident mans ability well to folve all the diiBculties o'b-jeded ? were it but thofe poor ones of 'Bene-^ dtdm Sfinofa in his late peftilent Tra^atm The-olo^tco'PoltticM. I think I have plain prootthat God is not the Author of fin, and man is not moved in it and all his aAs as an engine by unavoidable neceiVitation ; But I defpair that ten years Trudy n[iore (hould inable this Writer, clear^ ly to folve the objedions of Hohbes or Camcro about it. In a word, though wchstve Plain proof that Chrifi is the Son of Godj I fhould be loth that the faith of this Nation (liould li^ upon the fuccefs of a difpute about it, between a crafty Infidel and this felt-conceited man.

<. 21. And why (hould my impartiality ia acknowledging the Churches liberty as to the time of Baptifm, at fird, be fo unkindly received ? I meant not, nor faid, that Chrtfl hadkk it Indifferent and to their Liberty , but that they left one another at liberty herein : Becaufe i. The firfl and great work was in feeling the Churches by converting Jews and Gentiles to the faith : And the Adult who were the adivc members, were tney that the ApoAles had moft to do with, f and therefore whofe cafe is exprefiy fpoken of.)

2. Becaufe it was a known thing that the Infants of Church members had ever been Church-members and were in pofleffion of that Rclaii-X 2 on

(3o8)

on when Chrlft and his Apoftles fet up B>-ptifoi.

3. And it was a granted cafe, that all Sand:i-fied perfons devoted themfelves and all that they h^d to God ; and every thing according to its capacity : And therefore their Infants according to their capacity, which God himfelf had before expounded.

4. And it was never tlie meaning of Chrift to lay fo much on the outward wad^iing, as many Papifts and j^mbaptifts do : But as the un-cifcunicifed Infants in the Wildernefs were ne-verthelefs Church-members and faved ; fo when Infants were in the Covenant of God by the Parents true and known confent, their damnation was not to be feared^ upon their dying unbapti-zed by furprize,

5. But yet obedience to God being necefTary , many Parents baftned their childrens Baptifm, at two or three dayes old. Others (laid till the eighth day: others longer.; and multitudes had children that were in feveral degrees enrred en the ule of reafon, when the Parents were converted , and it remained doubtful whether they wtre fas to [he Covenant ) ajtheir Parents choice 01* their own : And to this day there want not thofe that think that Baptifm was n|^t inftituted to be the ordinary initiating Sacrament of the children of Church-members, but only of Pro-felytes •, And that Chriftians Infants took their places in the Church of conrfey but Trofelytts from without only were to be Baptiz,ect, Though this" be an error, it is probable that thtre were

feme

(3^9)

fome then, as well as now of that opinion. Bu* nothing more occafioned ( as far as I can find ) the delay of Baptifm, than the fear of the danger of finning after it, efpecially of apoftafie. All held that all Cm paft was pardoned in Baptifm. And Heh»6. and lo. and other texts, and the common dodrine of the Church made them think it a very perillous thing to fin wilfully after illumination and the acknowledgement of the truth. And therefore abundance delayed their own Baptifm till age, and many were backward to Baptize their children, Ullchildifh folly and youthful lufts, and worldly temptations, ihould draw-them to trample upon the blood of the Covenant -, And on fuch accounts, all were not Baptized at one age. And divers that wei"e Ba-, ptized at age upon their own converfion from Heathenifm , were not fuddenly fo l^wvcin^-, as to be acquainted with all the cafes about their childrens righcs, but muRhave a confiderabk time to learn. For ir was ( be ic fpoken without offence to ftrider men J a General and Nar« row fort of Knowledge which the Apoftles and the Primitive Churches required in the adult as nccefTary to Baptifm, yea when they had at laft kept them long under Catechizing. For even in Jl/ii^afiines time, though all ufed the fa^e words oiBaptifm,fo few had a clear underftand-ing of the very Baptif.nal form or words , thnc (\Mn\\ng(nbifitfrn)dehaft.contr, Donat, ) hefai-h that as to the Meaning of ihofc words not only the Hereticks, jed ipfi carrmles parvnU Ecclcjt£^ fi pojfent pTigult diligentcr interro^ari , tot di-X 3 '-^^'

rjio)

tfiirjit^tes opimomm fortajfu , quot homines mime^ Tarentiir : Animalis enimhomo non fercifit^^cc, ^nmn tamcn ideo non integrum facramentum ac-fi'pihnt f

^, 22. There remaineth a Catalogue of my heyr nous errors which he hath put in the preface to his firft edition, and in the end of the fecond, and which he and fuch as he have taught many Jionefl weak people m London^ both Anahafttfts and Independents to talk frightfully and odiouf-iy of from one another behind my back. What fhould I fay to him and them ? Shall I anfwer them that never fpeak or write to me ? Shall I take this mans accufarion for a conlutation or con^ yidion ? Is fo deadly an enemy of Antichrift conceited of a felf-infallibility, or that I muft take my faith or truftfromMr.D^;7i;frj,though not from the Church, Pope, or General Council > If nor, what did the man think that a recitation fhould do with me ? Did not I know whal I had written till he told me ? •

^. 23. Bnt it is others th^t he tells it to [ Thof? others will read 7vy own vpords or, they jv/7/ not ? If they will, I will not be fo cenfo-rious of them as to think that they need any more tp his fruftration : If they will not, muft I write another b(X)k to tell them what I have written in the former ? Kow (hall I know shac they will any more read the laft than the firft > If Satan hgve fo much power over them, that he can make them err, and lie andllander and backbite as ofc ai a manprofefting zeal for the truth, will l^e his inftrun|?nt and meifcnger, ft is not

my

my writing more books that can fave them* The end muft tell them, whether lonheytell be the grcaier ioiers by it,

^. 24. I have therefore but thefe two wayes now to take : I. Whereas this man fai.h, that my do^ru}': fceweth heynons to every one of my Non^ conforming brethren^ and mofi FrotejUntSy and that I have lofl my felf among my friends^ I do demand as their duty and. my right, the Means of my convidion and reducfl on from ihcfe brethren ( if any ) whom he doth not belie : I pro-fefs my felf ready privately or publickly to give them an account of the reafons of all ray dodrine, and thankfully to retrad whatever they ihall manifefl to be an error. And I challenge any of them to prove that ever I re-fufed to be accountable to them, or denyed a fo-ber anfwcr to their reafons^ or refufcd to learn of any that would teach me, or to i udy as hard to know as they ?, or that ever partiilicy, fadi-on or worldly inicreft, bribed me to deal falOy with my confcience, and betray the truth. And if after this claim , they will be filent, I will rake them for confentcrs, or if by backbiting only any will ftill notifie their difTent, I will take them forfuch as I take this writer, and infoii e rcfpcd worfe though not in all.

<S. 25. 11. My fecond remedy is, I will go willingly to School to Mr. X>. and having laid fo much for the Learnings againft ihe D/fparmg way, 1 will become his hearer and reader, if he hav e any thing co teach me, that favourcih ^'i Truth X 4 and

and Mode fly morje than this noy^oxnc fardel dotl\ which he hath publiflied. And to that en4 I will here give him a Catalogue of the contrary opinions to mine, which I defire him folidly to prove. lihthoXdviOl iht contrary doUrines^ why doth he exclaim zgSLinG: wine, as heynomf If he do hold the contrary to what I have mth due and clear diftindion and explication opened, (and bis Readers after the perufing of all my own words together be of his mind J I then take thefe following to be their own opinions, and part of their Eeligion, which I delire them to make good, and reacijthem ra? by fufficient propf.

CHAP.

(3^3)

CHAP. VIII.

'j4 Catalogue of fame Dotirtnes of MrJ}mv€ts and the refi that with him accnfe my Chriftian Di— redory , if indeed thty hold the contrary to mine which they acciife ( as prnft be fuppofed by their accnjation) which as a LearnAr I tntrcat any of themfolidly to frovc*

OF the Queftion 49. p. S26» as cited by him (The lalihood of his inferring [] in aPoptfi? Countrey in their way of Baptizing J in that cited place which fpake only of thz Lutherans^ 1 pals by as weary of anfwering (uch : Bur

I, That it is a fin for any man ( [ufpoftng In-* fant Baptijr/i a duty) to offer his child to he Ba' j>tiz,ed where it will be done with the fign of the Crofsy or fuch ceremonies as the Lutherans nfe^ though he profefs his own diffent and diffallow^ ance of thofe ceremonies , and though he camwt lawfully have it done better ^ but mafi have that $r no Baptifm at all f

IT. That in the ancient Churches of the fe-condy thirdy and fourth ages^ it had been better to be U7ihaptiz^cd than to life a white Garment tn Baptifm as they did, or to be anoi7itcd as then, cr to tafie Milk and Honey^ though the Perfoft offering his child to fuch Baptifry had frofeffed his diffent as afonfaid f

III. That ad the Churches of Qsrifl in thofe fecond, thirdy and foHrth^ and follomng dgesy vpha were Baptiz,ed thm ( Infant or adult^ ) had 710 Baptifm but what was worfe than none : ( Though Church hiflory certifie U6 that this ufe woi fo univerfal , that it*s Joard to find any one Chrifiian in aH thofe or many after ages that ever was. againfi the lawfulnefs of ity or refufed it. ) ( By the way, it w.as but one of ^your tricks

which you know not how to for-» p. 572. ed 2y bear, ^ to foift in [_ Peril of

Law 3 when I had not fuch a word or fenfe as Fertl: As if you knew 0? no Obligation there but from PeriU }

IV» Tour fag. 375. ed. 2. \^ That anointings fifing the white Carment , Milk, and Honey^ were Blajphemow rites^ and Popifh before Popery was^ exifient ? or if otherwife , that All Chrtfis Church was Pofifh then ?

V. Your Pref.tdi. i. [ That Chrifis Mlniflers rightly ordained and dedicated to God in that fa^ cred office^ are not fo much as Relatively holy asfefarated to God therein ?

V I. That Temples , and Church VtenftU de^ voted and lawfully feparated by mm to holyufeSy either are not jujily Related to God asfafepa-ratedy or though fo feparated and Related are r» fio degree to be called Holy i

V I T. Your

VII. Tour Tref, i6. ^That no Reverence u flue to zJ^tnifiers and Church menjlls ?^

VIII. Ibid, ^ To be uncovered in the (^hurch^ and ufereverejjt carriage andgeftures there^ doth not at all tend to freferve due reverence to Cod and his worjliip ?

IX. Ibid, [] That the unjufl alienation of Tem-^ flesy Vtenftify lands, dayeSy vphich were fejara-ted by Cjod himfelf^ is no facriledge : no not to have turned the Temple of old, and the facred things to a common ufe u^ijuftly: nor the Lords d^y now. fBut thou that abhorred Idols, doft thou more than commit Sacriledge ? Even teach men fo to do, and fay It is no Sacriledge ? no not when God himfelf is the fe par at er and man the unjufi aliemter f And yet is Infant-feuptifni

. X. Ibid, [That its no facri ledge unjuftly to alienate things juflly confecrated and feparated to God by man (as (iJ^imfterSy Lands , Vtenftls^ SkC, ) ( Remember Ananias^»(s/ Saphira* )

X I. Ibid. [ That it is a fin to call a t^inifter a Priefl^ though it be done in no ill defign^ nor with any fcandal or temptation to error^ and though he that uftth the word profefs that he cloth it but as a trar?flat ion of the Greeks word [ Fresbyter ^ ^^^ ^^ God himjelf doth Rev. }• 6. and 5. 10. and 20. 6, and i Pet. 2.

5' 9* ( QH^ft'^on* Whether it is finfully ufcd in Scripture?^

X 11. Ih, \^ Accordingly it is fin to ufe the word [ Altar J for [] Table J or the word [ Sacrifice 3 for [ worfhip ] (as thanksgiving &c ) though with all the fore [aid camiom^ and thoftgh God fo ufe them intheScriftnre^ i Pet. 2.5. Hcb* 13. 15,16. Phil. 4. 18. Eph. 5. 2, Rom. 12. i, Heb. 13. 10. Rev. 6. p.and 8.3> 5. and 16. 7. And that all tioe ancient writers and Chnrches finned that fo ^ake ? j

XI IT. That no fiber Chrifiians flmtld allow each other the Liberty of fttch phrafes without cenforioptfnefs or breach of Charity and peace^ lhtd,pref.

XI V. Ibid. [^ It if a fin to fit a Rail about the Communion Table though it be not done ta any jU defign nor with fcandal , but only to keep dogs from pijfing or dunging at it^ and boyes from abu-^ fing tt.

XV. That in fuch cafe, yea though fcandal be removed by the puhlick, profeffion of the Churchy it is a fin to cor/ie to fuch a railed table to communicate ; e'^en when nofinful difiancc between the Clergie and Laity is imended,

XVI. Ibid, \_ Chrifiians ought to cenfure and condemn each other , if one come to fuch a Table ^ or Receive hieeUngffuppofing tt a lawful thing.'^

XVII.

C3I7)

;-• X Y\ t Ilfiii* t '^'^^ ^^ ^aftttd kee'j) a thanl^ ful remembrance of Gods mercy to his Churchy by an anniverfary day of folemnity , in giving them any j4pofile, Martyr-^ or extraordinary in^ ftrtifnem of his blcffrng^a^ fome k^ep their birthdays^ or wedding-dayeSjor dayes of fome great deliverance, and England the fifth of November ^ Though it be not terminated in the honour of a Saint, bat. of Cjody nor made equal to the Lords day, nor kept otherwife than Iptritually andfiouflyf

XVIII. Ibid. [_Thatforaman thatis againfi commanding the jSfiinence of Lent, and againjl obeying [uch commands as an Imitation ofChrifi's forty dayes fafling y and in all cafes of injury to our foulsy bodies^ or others •

yet to fay that he is not a- Read Rom. 14. and ble to prove it a Jin to obey judge. by meer abftinence, vchenthe Magiftrate peremptorily commandeth it , meerly in Commemoration, and not Imitation of Chrifi'i fafi: y is a fm in him that faith it^, though it be true : zy^nd confequently though it x^ould do no harm to my felf or others , / ought rather ta die than to forbear fiejh in lint, if the King command it ^

XIX. Ibid. IThat Church Mufick^(and con-fcqitently fnging which is the prime Mufck,) ^ no help to any man in the fervice of Cod?

XX.

X X. Ih* {That though he find it a hilfy it is fin for any man to nfe it ^

XXI. That either Chrifl did not joyn vcith the Jews in rvorjhif which had Mnfick^ ( in the Temple ) or elfe he finned info doing f

XXIL That the experience of prejudiced fe If-conceited men,' that klfow not what melody is^ mnfl be fet againfi the experience of others fo far as to deprive them of all fuch helps and mer>* cieSy as the other find no benefit by , (^As finging is novpcafi out of many Churches*)

XXIII. That it is no wrong to Ignorant Chrifiians to put fnch whimfies and fcruples into their heads f

XXIV. lb. {It is a fin toFow Chaflity for any man in the world^ though' it be with this ex-ceptioH or condition^ { Unlcfs any thing (ball fall out which fiiall make ic a (in to me not to marry]. And though under the mofi; extraordinary necefftties of avoiding marriage , he find fuch confirmation of his Refolutions needful t

X X V. IbJ[That it is in no Cafe lawful toks^f ^ Vow of Chaflity^ at leafi among the Papifis ? And confequently whereas Chrift faith ^ He that can' keep this faying^ Let him. It is every mans duty t9 breaks Chaftity that hath once vowed it ,

though

though it were no duty , hut a fin before, fur dohbtUfs ^yUarrtage is a fin accident ally to fitmt^ thoHgh not in its ovpn nature , and far from be^ ing a duty to all ? But according to thin doctrine^ if a man vpere eighty years oldy and utterly iwpo^ tenty and unable to breaks his <vow of Chaftity if he would, he is bound to do it , rvhtch he cannot do^ and to breaks his vow when he cann§t breaks it ? or if an old mans marriage that hath no neceffuy, would undo himf If and his (former) children ^ he is. bound to marry^ if he have but once vowed that he wtll not ^ or at leaft he way do tt? (For which of the contraries you chufe [] May or Muft^-^ *^^ uncertain* )

XXVI. lb* [That either it was a fin to fut TiUures in the Geneva Biblesy and^ fin to have cur Dutch Chimney bricks which contain aU the hiftory of the Gofpely or any other Image of Chrifi crucified wherever^ or once tofeefuch a Figure ; or elfe it is a fin to have any holy ajfeEtienftirrd ftp in our hearts by feeing it : fo that though a& things are fan6lified and pure to the pure^ and I may excite holy ajfe^ions when J fee hut a worm or flower^ or any creature , or a houfe^ or any work, of many yea when I fee the fins of thewick^^ 4d , 1 may fxir up thankfulncfs for grace ^ yet if I fie in a (^nimney piece^ or a Geneva Bi-ble, or elfe-where y the Imnge of Chrifi crucified^ it is a fin to excite holy affections thereupon ^ Th^ftgh the tv.enty one Cafts which I haze named oi un^ Uvrfnl to ufe an Image in^ be every one obferved ( 04 the Cafes of danger-^ fcavdaland aUtiy refl.)

XXVIL

(32o)

XXVII. The image of Chriji Crucified ifj ihi Imagination or mind of a Believer is a pni Therefore it is a fin to thinly of a CrucifiedChrifty or to know Chrtfi crucified^ or to love Chrifl crucified as fuch :■ for it is impojfible to think, on birrif kj^ow him or love' him as cr^cified^ witho/ft the Image, of him on the mind: Therefore Paul determined to do nothingbnt fn, when he determined to know nothing but Chrift and him crucified: (and inflead of anathematiz^ing 'them that love him not , he jhoitld have anathematiz.ed or reproved all thut love him as crucified.

Do you and your Companions know that yoii are renouncing your Bapcifm, and Chriflianity, and the Crofs of Chrift, while you would reba-prize us all ? I charge it not on you as your meaning -. But \^ it be not the downright.tonfe-quence of tlie words of all my Religious backbiters, who fay that the Image of Chrift crucified heiitteth, not our minds or imaginations, but is a: fin there, I have loft all my reafoning faculty, and know not what Man or Reafon is.

XXVIII. Ibid. &Ed.2. p. 372. IThatthe Ordination and tJ^iniflerial Office received by Any that live in Communion with the £hurch of Rome, and confequeiitly ail their baptiz^ings and other miniflrations arc not only lins ^i^f nullities: (Though they were fuch as Bernard, Malachie, Patrick, Gerfon, Ferus, Kempis, Gerard Zut-phanienfis, ^r.) And fo none of the Engbflj Nation had true buftifm from their firfi Converfl-

m by Auguftlne till the Reformation , but all di-^ td unbapttz^ed and jljonld have been baptized again : And fo Jlwnld all baptized by them m any Kingdoms of Europe or the World: and fo Luther, Zuinglius, Martyr, Mufculus, and the refl of onr frfl Reformers^ were never Chrtfinedy but all dyed unbaptiz,ed perfons , and flwnld have been bapti"^ z,ed after their converfion,

XXIX. lb. That it were better have all Europe unbaptiz^ed ( Infants and adult) than fnch Ai Bernard, Ferus, CafTander , ^c* JIjohU ba^ j>tiz,e theWy thoUgh thsy had leave to protefl againj^ all that is (infid in it^ and were put Ptpon no fiH' fnl promifesj profeffions^ or aUs themfeIves.

X X X# lb. That it is a fin for thofe in any £oHntry that can have no other^ to confent that a Paptfi Priefi do teach a Child to Speak^ or to Ready or to Writej or teach him Adufick^^ Arithmetich^^ Geometry, Latine, (jreel^ or Hebrewj Logich^^ or Grammar , or any Arty though but fuch as LaboH-rers get their daily bread by.

XXXI. lb. That it is a fm for thofe j« Italy, or any Kingdom that can have no other^ to let a Popijh Priefi teach their Children the Creed, Lords prayer and Ten-Commandments which all Chrifiians are agreed in: but it's better that they never learned a word of the Bible, or Ch, ■f.an" faithy than learn it of fuch a Priefi : fo finfuUy did Bifljop Ufher make the motion to the Prtefis in Ireland, that Protefiants and thy might joyn

(322)

in teaching the barbarous people the Creed and common principles of Religion,

XXXI I. lb. That it is a fin to hear a Po^ fijh Frtefi read Gods word or any good book 9 though it were a Protefiants, or one of the Ancient fathers : or to hear him Jpeak^ the trnefi Do-Urine^ though in a Country where it can no other vcay be heard or learned*

XXXIII. lb. That in fuch a Country nhere ; there is no other^ it is a fin to joyn with one of them in any Vrayer how good [oever ^ though cra^ ving a bleffwg on our meat^ or in a Family j or elfewhere - even in the Lords Vrayer•

XXXIV. lb. That it is necejfary to Salvation to believe that the Pope is Antichrifl^ and fo no man , woman^ or child can be faved that belie-Veth it not. And fo fince Antichrifl arofe , we have a new Article iti our Creed: Even for thofe that know not what the Pope isy whether male or female J flefh or fijlu

XXXV. lb. That it if a fin to read any good hook, in the Church befides the Scripture^any Chapter in the Apocrypha^ any Homily or Sermonj though Written by an Anabaptijl^ and though we declare what it is y and mention it for no other end but 'H^hat it is written for^ as We cite Authors as wit-fieffes: ( And yet ir is lawful for Mr. X>, to pubf-lifn many ( falily ) in Print. )

XXXVL

XX XVI. lb. That it isafmtoreadaTrayer in the Church , thongh it were the Fraycr of Chriji John 17. or of Mofes or others in the Pfalmes^ or any others.

X X X V I L lb. That if one fray zJ^r, Dan-vers to fray for him, it Is Idolatry ^ or if the fco-fie or ftck^ fray the Mtnijler to fray for them , or Children their Parents •, or if one floould do fa hy an Angel that jhonld appear to him • or to a Saint or Angel itnfeen, imagining that he were frefent ^ this is not only Suferfiitton andfo ftnfnl^ but alfo Idolatry ; which ps giving Gods frofer tvorjhif to a creature : And confccjuently it is the frofer ivorfhtp of God only , to fray him to fray for Hi to htwfclf,

XXXVIII. lb. That it is a fm to how the kjiee at the naming of JefHS-, though we renounce all in it that is fuperfiitiom and Jcandala/is^ and how equally at the name of God, Jehovah, ChriR, &€.

X X X I X» lb. That it is a fmto fiand when the Gofpel vs read^ though we be never fo weary of fittings and fland equally at the reading of all the refi of the Serif ture^ or at Sermon without difiin^ iiion •, fo heynonjly did the Vniverfal Church fin for mayiy hundred years in their long fiandt?rgs ; and fo finful a thing it is to hear in a Churih or Afeeting'flace that hath no feats^ nnlej^ we ft 9n the ground,

Y 2 XL.

X L. tb. That it is a fin to kneel rphile the Ten-Qommandments are ready though it he by women irhofe ciifiom that fofinre is ( Hpon a bof) throHoh the reft of the dales exercife ; and though it be never fo epenly declared that we take thent not for a prayery nor do it to any ill fignificati-^ on or intent.

X L I. lib. That he finneth who doth not condemn the Univerfal Church of Chrift for many hundred years ( of the greatefl antiquity that we have any records of fince the Apoftles) for their worshipping with their faces towards the E^ift ; Thgugh he jljould himfelf dtfltke that praBice and never ufe tt^ nor co-nfent to have it ufed.

X LI I. lb. That tt is a fin to fay , that any children of any wicked men in the world^ have any gti It of any of their nearer Parents finsj b-ut on-ty of Adams: ( And confequently it muji beheld that God unjujhly threatned andpunijJjed any fuch children for their Parents fin , from the dates of Cain, Cham, Pharaoh , Ifhmael y Efau, Achan, Gche^i, till the dales of that Generation threat-ned Mattb. 23. And alfo that no man receiveth <t''iy pravity from Adam neither , bccaufe it mufl pafs ta him through his next Parents and bt theirs^ and he receiveth none that is theirs: And fo all Nations are juftified againfi all guilt of any Parents fa but Adam, and warranted to deny to vonfefs any fuch guilt , or to be beholden to Chnfi or mercy for the pardon of it.y ib)ugh

Da-

David , Daniel and Nehcmiah did otherv^ife^) I fay again, cither Mr. X). and his like do re-aliy hold the contraries of the a/Tertions ot mine which he thus notifieth as heynous errors, or not -. If not , he raileth againft his Confcience in hy-pqcrifie ; If yea, then chefe propoficions which I have named to you are the contraries to mine. And it is fo curfed a thing to add two and four-ty New Commandments to the Law of God, that I who think them to be no better, do again and again defire him , to give me the full procf of aU thefe ftrangc Commandments, and teli mc where they are written ( if I have overlookc them. )

If this cannot be obtained, I call to his imitators and my backbiters to let me know, whether really they will own all thefe, and give me leave to tell the World, and the Ages to ccme, thac thefe were their Dodrines, for the love of which they whifpered or clamoured againft me.

But here he ftops and pittiech the Reader, and referreth them to my Book it felf; And I wilJ joyn with him and add, that the Reader that will think that he knoweth what I hold or wrote,by this and fuch like mens citations or reports, anil will not read the Book it felf, and all in it together that concerneth the qusflioned iubjed^ before he judge ^ I take not my felf bound to write more books to tell him what I wrote in the former, nor do I think that I am otherwife obliged to redifie his Error, than by Prayer or Coun-fel, endeavouring to bring him to fomecenderncfs of Confcience , fear of God anj fobrieiy of luind. Y 3 Bl.c

But his ftrength lieth in frightful exclamations, \^ O vpas ever the like yet heardy &:c. to palliate (abominations^ and reconcile m to IdoUtrom Poftfj names^ as Altar^ Frieflsy Sacrifices^ &c. and their ha^tifm,~\ And yet he might have known that all rhefe words are oft ufed by the ancicntcr lore of the holy Paftors of the Churches after the Apoftles, and I remember not that ever one Chriftian was againft it, or fcrcpled the ufe of them : And^ I before fhewed that they are ufed by the Holy-Ghoft in Scripture, whom I dare not accufe of IdoUtrom names , or reconciling us to them. Whether all the Papifts baptifm admini-ilred and received be nullities, and all Papifts to be 4:ebaptized,and all Proteftanrs that were baptized by Papifts? are queftions which I will not be fo vain as todifpute with one that talketh at this mans rate.

But yet we have not done with the high charges of his Preface : He faith '' [^ Oh! were not *' thofe twenty Qaeries^ fo much againfi the [elf-''^ evidencing authority of the Scriptures j in his ^' Admon. p. 142. in favour of Tradition a heyr *' ncHS provocation.) to fay no TKore of them f ~\

zAnfvc, It feems they were fo to you. But really , did you read that book and the other to Mi^« BagjJmWy and yet not fear to follow him and out-do him in notorious untruths, after fo full a convidion and warning as was given him ? Think on it, and again cry out ( But alas! whereto will not men run left to themfelves -^l there profef-(-'d and proved to yoiir friend Mr. Bagjhaw that I was for, and wrote for the fclf-evidencing authority of the Scripture^, and it is untrue that thofe

twenty

(32?;

twenty Queries or any one of them is againft k* But feeing you think oihcrwife , if indeed you held the contrary to the afTertions implied in thofe twenty. Queries, I am not at the end ot the Catalogue of your ftrange Dodrines : If you and my revilers own them, fo wilJ not fober men: e. g.

X L I I I. [ Every Chnfltan wufi fee the Co-fits of the Scripture written hy the Prophets and jipoflles own hands : Or at leafl mnji nnderflund theTranfcriptsmthe Original tongues, \

X LIV. \_ God hath promifcd unerring infal^ lihility to alt Scribes m the world that write out the Bible^ and all Printers that print it: Or at leafh to fome of them^ And we may be certain who thofe are, 2

X L V. [^ Though the feveral Copies have a multitude of differences^ it is certain none of thcifi are erroneous^ or miftaken,^

X L V !• [^ Thfffe men and women that under* fiand not Hebrew or Greek may be certain only hy feeing a Hebrew and Greeks Bible^ without a-Tranflatort^elp , that every word in it is the Vpord of God. 2

X L V 11. {_ Either he that will be fure which Copy is without mif-writings mu(i- firfi fee all the Copies tn the world theit differ ♦, or elje if he never fee hut one ( or few ) he may he certain that it IS right tn the words in which :t Y 4 diffentb

djffereth from all the reft vphtch he never faw» 2

X L V 111. \_ No corrupt or mif-wrltten (/}py ef the Serif tnre c^.n come to a true Believer^ hands : Or if it do^ he can infallibly tell us the £r-rata,'^ i •

X LI X. A true Believer that ne<ver faw the Originals can hy feeing a tranfiatipn judge of all the diverfe readings in the Originals*

L. The Tranflators are either all infallible in iranfiattng -, or elfe a true "Believer is certain Vphich of them is , and which not , and vphich tranflation among many faulty ones is fault lefs.

L I. He that never favQ all Tranflations , but perhaps but one , can by that one tell that it is truer than all the differing ones, which he never

Jaw.

LI I. cx^// this of Copies and Tranflations is known to Believers either by Prophetical Revela^' tton from Heaven , or by the fe If-evidencing de-^ fiionftration of the Copy and Tranflation which he feetk *

L 111. \^Every true Believer without being ever told it by man^ can tell by the feIf^evidencing de^ monflration of the words , that the Canticles and the Books of Judges, Ruth, Chronicles, Jonah, are (^amnical^ and that the wtfdom of Solomon, . Baruck, Pauls Epiftle to the, Laodiccans, Cla-

mens

pens to the Corinthians, ^c. are not Cdnofti-fM ,

L IV. Either Ged will giiie faith to no one that cannot read ( among all the illiterate Kingdoms of the rvorld where the Gojpel is to he preach-fdj ) or elfe all that cannot ready may without ever reading a word he certain hy fe If-evidence which readings in the differing Copies^ and which Tran-Rations are true or falje^ and which books and verfes and fentences arc Canonical and which , not^

L V. Either Cod hath promifed that every illiterate Chrtftian ( that cannot read ) Jhall hear fame one elfe read every word of the Bible to him (in Originals and Tranflations^ or one ) that he may judge j or elfe by the felf-evidence that per-fon that cannot read^nor never heard half the Bible read^ can certainly teU what words are truly or falfly written^ or TranJIatedy without ever hear" ing them.

L V I. when the greatefls Learned Linguifls dif-fer about a Legion ^ or Tr an flat ion ^ ( as the Septuagmt, Sec. ) (fuch as Lud. Capellus, Ufher, Buxcorf, Bootius, De Dieu, L' Empereur, Walton, crc. ) or when fuch oa Luther, Ahhamer, ^c. differ about a Canonical Bookj, ( as James ) it is he^ caufe they fee not that felf-evidence^ which every Chriflian may fee^ that cannot read nor was ever told tt , that one part^ (// not more ) do herein erry while their judgcniencs are contrary.

None

. None of thefe fifty fix are Articles of my Faith, nor Gods CommaHdments (that I can find.) I fay not that thefe ignorant Revilers hold all thefe ^ but I fay that He ( and They) that will openly exclaim againft the contrary affertions as heynom ^r-rorsj or tell about among the receivers of falfc. reportsy that I hold dangerous ^rre^r/for faying the contrary to thefe, doth either perfwade men that all thefe are his Opinions^ or elfe that he is an impudent Hypocrite, in reviling known truth as. heynous error; or elfe a rajh Calumniator that dare reproach or fpeak evil ofthat which he un» derftandeth not, nor will not, fo much as by reading my plain words, be at the labour to un-derftand.

Perhaps fome better minded perfon will fay. It eafteth foor Chrifiians into ferplextty to hearfuch doubts about the Scripture readings and tranfiati-onsy were they not better concealed f Anfw, They are not to be talkt of unfeafonably to uncapable perfons: They are not to be told the ignorant in-ftead of a Catechifra: But they are all publick-ly known to the learned world long ago, and lold the ignorant people by the Papifts to ill ends: And if any one will perfwade you to hold the contrary, and make you believe that all or any of thefe abfurdicies and falflioods are the true Proteftant Religion, or any part of it, and that they that hold the contrary are Popifh, it is time to vindicate the Proteftant Religion and all (ober godly Proteftants, from the fcorn of fuch imputed dotages.

But

(33^) But this is the unhappy fruit of overdoing: There are fome men artiong us, fo overmfe and overrighteoHs in defending the fufficiency of the Scriptures, that they would perfwade us, that it is fujjicient to exfound it felt without a teaching Expoficor, and to preach it felf without a Preacher, and ( by confequence from their generals } to Write and Print it felf without a Writer or ^Printer, and to bring it felf down from the Apo-ftles to every man without the hand or tongue of man, and to preserve it felf from corruption without the care of man, and to tranflate it felf without a Tranflator ♦, And that all Priared Sermons , or books of Diviniiy, all Catechifms, all Sermon notes for memory, all forms of Prayer , yea the dividing the Bible into Chapters and Ver-fes, and Printing Contents, and Citations or Re. ferences ( much more the Geneva Notes and Pi-d:ures) are all (inful additions to the Word of God. As if the [efficiency of the Statutes of the Land lay in Keeping, Printing, Tranfcribing , Pleading and Expounding themfelves, without the ufe of Scribes, Clerks, Lawyers, Law-books or Judges.

I am well afiured that God needeth not oar Lies to his Glory, and that truth and falfhood do fo ill agree, that though falfhood may fteal a cloak from truth, yet truth will never be beholden to falfhood for friendfhip and defence ^ And if ever Lies pretend any kindnefs or fervice to the truth, it is but treacheroully to fupplant it, and will turn to its difTervice and injury at laft.

f 330

In a word. All the Devils in Hell, and all the Confiftory at Rome^ could not ealily find out a more effedual way ( as far as I can underftand ) to turn multitudes to Popery, than i. By calling triith and fober Principles Antichriftian, Popery and Idolatrous: 2, And by defcribing the Religion of the enemies of Popery, as made up of Lies and Dotages: 3. And by falling all together by the ears, and breaking into a multitude of Seds, and condemning each other as unmeet to be com-r^unicatcd with ; and fo making men believe that they niuft be Papiftsor diftrafted Dotards, whofe felf-conceitednefs in Religion hath made thera pad : I fay, nothing that I know of doth tend more to multiply Papifts, than this ^ ( unlefs I may except the way of fenfuality and violence, rnur4ering fome and drawing others byfleflilyand worldly motives:) Nor do I know any thing in the world, that more quieteth the Consciences of Perfecutors and Scorners, in all that they do and fay againft us, and hindreth them more from all convidion and repentance.

Mr. Danvers endeth his book, Ed, i. with a fmart refledion on Mr. William AHen and Mr. Lamb for forfaking the caufe of Anabaptillry and Separation which they had written for: And I will end mine with a few words concerning them, concluding with a free and faithful Admonition to Mr. Danvers^ to confider whether He or They (hould be moft earneftly called to Repentance, and raoR fpeedily pradife it.

CHAP,

(335)

CHAP. IX.

REader, having the following vindication of Mr. uillen put into my hand, I think it not unmeet upon chis occafion to undeceive fome who to render his example in receding from the way of Separation wherein he was foQietinie engaged upon the account of Infant-baptifm, the lefs imita-ble, and his endeavours to draw off others, the lefs fuccefsful ; have given out that he did but turn wiih the times for worldly ends when the King came in. Whereas I can bear him witnefs that that return was made by him the year before the coming in of the King, as did fufficiently appear to me both by Letters which then pafTed between him and my felf about that atfair, and alfo by his book called >4 RetraElation of Separation^ pub-lifhed by him that fame year. Which Book I would entreat the fober Reader to get and lend to fome of the feparating mind ; they will find no temporizing or formahty in it , but a fpirit of Chrillian love and peace. And if the reafons in that Book and in his pcrfwajive to peace and uni^ ty (ince publifhcd, be fuch as none of the Sepa-ratifts can confute or fland before, they will have no reafon to impute the Authors change to carnal reafon or worldly interell. I queftion not but experience after trial, which is wont to make teachable men wifer, put him tjpon reviewing the grounds of his pradice, and fo had a great hand in that aire ration which he made. And I would have thofe

who

C334) who account it a difparageraent to a man to alter liis Judgement at any time, to tell us at what age we come under that law, when we muft grow no wifer nor no better.

And what I fay of Mr. Aliens alteration of his judgement,! muft fay alfo of Mr.I/^w^j^whom thofe that eafily judge before they know, have accufed alfo as turning with the times, when as on my knowledge his change was in 1658. or the beginning of 1659. For by letters I did foUicite him to that alteration and received his anfwers, fooner than I knew of Mr. Aliens change: And I perceive that Mr. Lambs words and example arc flighted by very many, upon two accufations, I. That he is run into the other extream of overmuch conformity: 2. That he is over hot. As to the firft, my diftancc maketh me a ftranger to his mind and practice. But as long as he con-formeth not as Minifters do, but to that which belongeth to a private man, what doth he more than Mr. Tombes hath largely written for ? And Mr. Nye hath written to prove it lawful to hear Conformifts in the Parifh Churches, and for the Magiftrates to appoint publick Teachers for the people. 2. And as to the fecond ( not juflifying my own earneftnefs, much lefs others which I am not acquainted with^ to calm' the minds of the offended I may well fay, i.That it is no v/onder if a man that is naturally of a warm and earneft fpirit, do (hew it mod when he thinks that he fpeaks for God, and Truth, and the Church, and mens Souls, 2. That it is no wonder if a man that was drawn himfelf fo deep into the

guilt.

gullr, as to be a Teacher of an Anabaptifts Church afid to write for them, be an earned exprefler of his Repentance when he is recovered, and earned! y defirous to fave others from the fnares in which he was intangled, and to do as much for Truth, Unity and peace, as ever he did againft It.

What follovees are Mr. Aliens own words* •

Worthy Sir J

1 Having fome intimation that you are about to make Tome return to the Author of a late Trea-life of Baptifm, do apprehend that if you think fit to Print this following Paper at the end of your Book, you may do the good office of removing a ftumbling-block, at which forae are too apt to dafh their foot, and thereby alfo further caution men againft being mifled by giving too much credit to the quotation of Authors, as managed by that Treatifor.

In reading a Treatife of Baptifm of the firfl: Edition, Penned by H,D. I obferved that in the two laft pages of his Poftfcript, he mentions two difcourfes that were publi 1 ed about'one and twenty years ago the one by my felf and the other by another; and faith that both of us are gone back to that which therein we call vpill-worpjip and Idola--try.

Indeed I am forry that that author fhould puc me upon any neceility of refleAing fo much up-or. him in vindicating my felf, as to tell the world

that

that upon this oceafion I having twice reviewed that Book of mine, did not find io much as the mention of either of thofe two words rvill-worpjip er idoUtryi upon iny oceafion whacfoever. Nor am I confcious to ray felf of ever being fo abfurd as once to think that, to be idolatry, which he moft untruly faith I call fo in that Book. That caufedoubtlefs whacfoever it is, is little beholding to fuch an Advocate as thinks to reconcile men to it by abufing difTente'rs.

As for the alteration I have made, I gave the world an account of the reafons and grouiids of it, in my RetraEiation of Separations publifhed in the year 1659. which was before the turn of limes, and in my perjwajive to Peace and Vnity^ fmce publifhed. And if this Author could have folidly difcovered the infufficiency of thofe rea-Ibns and grounds to juftifie fuch an alteration and my prefent pradice , he would have done his caufe better fervice in my opinion, than he hath done in his Treatife by labouring to fupport it by a mifreprefentation of perfons and their opinions. As for me, I can truly fay I have had great fatisfadion and peace in my own mind , touching the alteration I have made upon thofe grounds, not only at other times, but even then alfo when I have been near unto death in my own apprehenfion. Ai for the other perfon he mentions with me, I fuppofe he may e're long give the world an account of that alteration he alfo is charged with as a great fault.

WiL Men.

An Admonition to Mr. VanVers,

SIR,

YOur vehement importunity having greatfy. injured rae, by occafioning the lofs offomc ©t my time ( who.have none to fpare ) upon this writing, which elfe would have been needlefs-t you muft bear with me while Idefire you, fome-time alone, toanfvver thefe Queftions ferioufly toi-your Confcience.

Qnefi, I. Whether the untruths In martef of fad: which you confidently pubUfh , be not of fo! ftupendious a magnirude, as fhould have affrighted the Confcience of a Turk or Pagan ? When no lefs than four whole Bodies of men are fo flafider-cd by you, the Donatifls^ the NovatiAtu^ the Old Bnttains^ zudths lVaUe?!feSy each containing, it'4 like many hundred thoufands: And when fo many whole Qookj Cnot particular fentences only J are faliified accordingly ?

2. How great a number Vfould your untruths sipi J)ear,were they all gathered and enumerated to you? When in all the lines which I have examined I have! met with fo few that are not guilty of them > , >

3. When yon accufe my Admonition to Mr© B^l^^AiA> y and thereby fhew that you read it ^ iliould not the eviction of fourfcore undeniable untruths, in matter of fad, have been a warning id you to avoid the l\ke ?

Z 4->\Vh8-

(338)

4. Whether you do not more by fuch notorious fcandal to difhonour your felf and all that are fuch, and hinder your own fuccefTes, than many writings againft you could have done ?

5. Whether you do not fcandaloufly tempt men to juftifie the contempt of Tender Confciences^ and what is done and faid againft them by many publick Revilers on the other extream, when your Confcience pretending tendernefs can fwallow fuch Camels, while it cannot endure our Infant-bief-fings?

6. Whether men can judge it probable that fuch voluminous notorious Forgers and Slanderers , have fo much more illumination than all etJier-Chriftians, as to be meet men to call all the Chriftian world almoftto be new Chriftned, afnd to unchriften almoft all for about thirteen hundred years f to leave out the controverted time ?)

7. AVould you be believed in other things that can deliberately, in two Editions, do thus ?

8. Is it like that God will blefs fuch unmanly fcandals, to the Churches good? f unlefs as (in by overruling providence may occafion good./ Are thefe likely means to propagate truth ?

9. Wha: is the matter that men that can do all rfiis, cannot (Conform ? What durft I not juhfcribe to, if I durft do all this?

10. Is it not a difhonour to your rebaptized Chuirches to be fo polluted, and to have fo loofc. or partial a difcipline, as to fuller fuch publick fcandals as thefe : and to retain fuch a member asi you, and not bring you to repentance or excom-;

^ . municate

(3390

munlcate you ? Have our worfl Parifli Churches tiiany greater fcandals ?

If pride, partiality and paffion will not let your Confcience work upon thefe things, but you will turn them into gall inftead of repentance, atleafl; I offer them to the Confideration of others, to prevent or remedy their infedion.

And remember (which you have told the world how in Print ) that you fent your Bookfeller to me, to know what I had to fay againfl your firfl Edition, before you publifhed the fecond •, And I have here partly told you what; I was not fo idle as to anfwer your Reafons^ knowing how little a part they are of what Mr. Tombes hath faid more largely : And that I anfwer him at all, is long of you, who would not let me hold my peace. I heartily delirc your Recovery from the unthankful error , and your Repentance for the finful means of propagating it, and for your ini-jury to our early Rights and blellingSo

The Third Tart:

OBSERVATIONS

M- Danvers

R- E P L Y

M'-VVILLES:

Detcding his impenitent proceeding infalfe Accufation, in hope of his Repentance, aod the undeceiving of others, and to warn this Age to take more heed of the common rin,ofHASTY RASH JUDGING of things which they have not throughly examined, partially taking them on their Leaders trufl.

By Richard Baxter,

LONDON^ Printed for Nevil Simmons and Jonathan Rooinjon, 1675.

(343)

A Premonition.

REadcr, ttiere are two ftumbling-blocks to be taken out of thy way, which 1 had rather have had no occafion to mention. The firft is the Name and Authority of that very worthy and excellent man , Doft. T. 'Barlow y S. Th, Prof, in Oxford , which Mr. D. over and over ciceth as for his caufe. Of which till he think meet to fpeak for himfelf I only mind thee that, i. It is a fecret Letter to Mr. T. which they cite. 2, That it is unlikely that he that fubfcribeth the Articles and Liturgie of the Church of England^ is againft Infant-baptifm, when the Art. 27. faith, The Ba^ ftifff} of Yomig Children is in any vaife to be rf-tained in the Church as mofl agreeable with the JnfiitHtion of Qorift.~\

11. There is another worthy and eximiousDo-d:or of the fame llniverfity ( Dod:. Th, Tullie ) who having thought meet in a Latine Treatife of Juftification to endeavonr at large fin a zeal for Onhodoxnefs no doubt ) to confute rsy fuppofcd errors (inmy Aphorifms about twenty two years ago revoked -, taking no notice of the many Treatifes fince written by me on that fubjed, but only of a late Epiftle to Mr. ylllcns Book, ) he hath alfo thought good to warn young men to Z 4 t-ke

take heed that they do not rafhiy receive my Tbeology as bringing forth novel paradoxes, be-caufe I hold forae guilt in Children of their nearer Parents fins: exclaiming [^ O cjic&s ante The^ oloj^Qj quicmque unquam fuifits \ ] It feemeth that this Famous Learned man knew not, that this was jiuguflins judgement ( and many another ancient and modern Writer's, ) and that he is lefs for the Letany than I (that fubfcribe or declare not full aflent) who heartily pray, Remember not Lord oHr offences ^ nor the offences of our fore-fathers^ &c. This having lome refpcd to the ful> jed of this Book , I [bought meet here *to give you notice, that if God, will I hope in time to give the world yet fuller fatisfadion on both thefc iubjeds, (^ Juftification , and fecondary Original fin ; ) Though I thought my unanfwered Difpu-rations of Juftification, and other Treatifes ha^ fully done the firft; And the publifhing of fome old Papers of Original fin, I think will fully do the other«

(345) ■

Observations

ON

M'' T>anveri Reply

TO

M^- Will s.

CHAP. L

the frightful AfpeCi of his Reply,

^f, i."]^ JB^ Y Anfwer to Mr. T(7»?^f^and 1% /■ Mr. Danvers being written 1 ^1 1 about the fame time as my k, ^ JL Epiftle to Mr. Wills his book,

hath fince then beew detained in the Fnnters hand,

if/hoff delay hath allowed me the fight of Mr.

Panvs^'s Reply to Mr. Wills^ and the opportunity

CU6)

nity of animadverting on it, before mine is tonw abroad. And upon my mofl impartial confide-jfation ic reneweth the grief of my heart to think of thefe evils which it fets before me.

5^.2. I. That the fouls of poor Chriftians (hould be under the Temptations of fuch writings an4 teaching as here we find : Where fuch untruths in matter of fad are ftill jollified with fuch a face of confidence, and divulged as for God, and for the fouls of men, that moft ignorant perfons may be tempted to think that Modefly and Cha^ rity require them to believe, that they are real truths, ic being a harfli unmanly thing to judge that iuch a perfon can poffibly be fo hardened, as to ftand fo boldly to all thefe things, which have fuch publick hiftorical evid<ince, if they were all downright falfhoods.

And it is a hard task for i writer to be put to anf^er a Chriftian and a Gentleman as Mr, Danvers doth Mr. Wiils^RepL pag, 120. \^^^Know •*' that hence yoit have a further difcovery of th e *' great unfai:hfulnefs and want of confcience in " the Author, for daring thus to abufe the world *' with a Cheat, and that which be k^ov(fcth to be *'a meer forgery of his dwn] And fag. 122. " [Let it be judged whether he hath not injuri-^' oufly belied Ofiander, belied Clnniacenfis^ beli-" ed Peter Bruis^ belied, the truth, which by this *'forgery he vi;ould cover and hide-, abufedthc

*'world , belied and abufed me But much

"more fear his own confcience by this piece of ,^'folly and faiiliood.3 To be thus at \_Thou Ip-■efi J and [_ Thou Heft ~] is anunfavoury work ^

Yea

y^a !fl (o few lines to give the Lie five times «t \c2&. But for an ignorant Reader to believe wImE this jimhor hath done till he needs muft^ is yet far harder. Though we fay. He that will frvear, will lie^ and therefore we hardly believe a {wearer •, yet if a man with many hundred bloody oaths (hould affert many particulars of publick cognifance, we arc ready to think it inhumane to fufped that the man is fo inhumane as thus to fwear if fome of them were not true. Alas for the poor Church of Chrift, that muft have fuch fore temptations/ How Ihall theybewith-ftood !

^.3. 2. And how fad is it that a Chriftian man profeilmg not only Trnth and Godlinef,hut fo much ofthefe as to be above Communion with fuch as we, fhould ever degenerate into fuch a thing as his prcfent writing doth dii'cover i O what need have we to lay to heart that o^Paul^ ^om. II. be not high-minded but fear /* and to learn over and over. Jam, 3. and Chrift's words to the Sons of Thunder, ye kriow not what manner offpirit ye are of ?

^. 4. And alas, that ever the bitter voluminous Reproaches of the zeal of the prefent age, /hould have fuch a fcandal or flumbling block laid in their way , to harden them in the ju-ftification of their reproaches ! as if our Zeal were the Caufe or Cover of fuch heinous lins : Woe to the world bccaufc of offences, and woe to them by whom they come!

^.5. 4. But what a tremendous warning is this agaioft the fpirit o^unwaixnnuhkfeparatto??^

OT true Schiffffy when the fame perfon fhall venture upon all that is here wrirten by hina, who yec caketh our Infant Baprifcn for a meer AW-A'ry, and the Chriftian world that hath no other to be uncapable of the Church-Communion of fuchas he ? Me-think this is a Pillar of Salt. I well remfmber that one of the means of keeping my ancient Flock in Concord, was the terror of thefc horrid opinions and wayes which the two or three that deferted us, fell into.

CHAP^

(34^)

CHAP. IL

/f^ impnitent falfs alU^ation, cfrvi:ngj^i Infant Baftipn : TerruUian , (^c, WickliE

(* i.T have before faid, tbat I hive faid fo X much out ct' Scripcure and Anri-quir^^, for Infanrs Church-men:berfhrp and Ba-ptifm, to which I have yet feen no Anfw'er thai ihould fatisfie an impaniaiman, eirher frcm Mr. Tombes, Mr. DamerSy or any other, that I will not lofe time and labour in* replying to their frivolous exceptions. Arxi here I meddle diiz-dlybut with the matter of fad, becaafe by o-ftentation of hiflory, Mr. D. would feduce the ignorant into the belief of grofs untruths. I began with Tertnllian^ who is his firft wi:nei^, in his Catalogue , reprinted here in his reply.

<. 2. And why have we no fatisfadory »-fwer to thet'e things Yo.oft replyed ? i. Tiat TertuRuins words prove that Infant-Bapcifm wis then in cfe : And it is the matter c( fj^ rbat we are fearching after ? 2. And doth he think that Antichrift was before TertuSiMis time ? 5. The opinion of TertnllUn feemeth roc at a3 to be againft the Lawfulnefs of Infint Eaptifirr, in oeneral •, but againfl the e!igiblenefs cf it fn cafe of no apparent dinger of deach. For I have oft proved that the judgement of tha: age, and

• feme

C350)

fome folIowHig was, that none fhould be compelled to be Baptized, or to Baptize their Infants, but they ihould themfelves be chufers of the time. For the conceit of the abfolute ne-ceffity of Baptifm to falvation, came in arccrwards. And when the feed of the faithful are Holy, and in Gods Covenant or Promife, upon the Parents Mental dedication of them to God, and foin a flate of falvation, no wonder ii they were not fo hafty and peremptory for the fudden Invefli" tare into the Chriilian Church ftate, when they look it to be but the publick folemnization of a Covenant, really made and valid before. And as .Naz.ianz.ene is for Infant-Baptifra (long after^ in cafe of danger, but elfe for ilaying three or four years, till they can fpeak : fo Tertulliari feemeth to prefer delay for fuch conveniencies, as he mentioneih. 4. And if Mr. D, doubt of this, let him tell me why he faith, cunBatio uti^ lior. 5* And giveth the reafon from the inconvenience to the Sponfors. 6. And why he alfo perfwadeth the unmarried and young WidJowcs to delay their Baptifm , till they are married^ or grow corroborate to continencie, left temptation carry them to fin • And maketh this cafe of the Jike reafon with that of Infants. Did bethink thatitr was flatly unlawful for maids znd yonng vpiddovps to be Baptized ? or only lefsfafe^andeligtblejCxccpt in danger of death ? The cafe is plain. 7. And whether Jie like his other reafon, JQuidfefiinat innocens m^ ta^ adreTyiifJionemfeccatorPim ? And whether TiPr-tnEian here do not tell usthar he took thofe Infants that were Baptized to receive thereby folemn Remif-

fionr

jlion %f fin, if they had'any fin ? If he thoughi^ f^ had^one, we have little reafon to follow his opinion, 8, Whether his own words plainly (liew not what ' I have faid of him, that it was ( as Conflantine , and multitudes delayed Baptifm)for fear of falling after* wards, which they thought moft dangerous [^yF^;/j fondw tntelli^aht Bapttjmiy magis timebunt confr" ciitioneni qnam dilationem : Fidts ititegra fecura eft defalnte ]

And lib, (k jiniwa. Tertullian faith, Apofiohs €X fanElificato alterutro fexufanSios procreari aitj tarn f.v fcminu pr&Yogativa quam ex inftitntionis^

dtfciflina Omnis Anima in Adam cenfe-^^

tuKy donee in Chriflo rtcenfeatur : See the Teft there for Infants birth holinefs.

^. 3. His renewed reproaches of <7j'/>riVi<^, as ha^ ving Ancichriftian dodrine , and his renewed q'jeftioning whether there werd ever fuch a Council as that at ^^r/^^^f mentioned, are things fo audacious and grofs that they need no further anfwer. fag* 90.

' 5^. 4. And his citation of At^ftin pag. 94* [ that n'hkh had not hten ivftituted in (Itincils^ &cj is nothing againfl this authority, or to difprove its Apoftolical tradud:ion • por it is eafie for him to fee, i. That it was not whether Infants fhould be Baptized that was the queftion, but whether it fhould be done before the eighth day ? 2. That this Council was fa for from Inftttitting Infant Bapcifm, that it was never brought into doubt or que (lion among them, buttaken as the unqueftioned pradice ofihe Church. But O that fuch as Mr. D, wtduM give over-bo-

C350

tonpOring Anticbrift fo far/and rejoicing'an<^ hardningthePapiftsj as to make fuch ^% Cypiart. teachers of Antichriftian doArine ^ and Antichr^l to have been the Author of Infants Chriftening fccfore Cyfrian and Tertnlliarjs time ? The Papifts owe fuch advcrfaries thanks.

(• 5. Tag, 104. He boafts of forty more againft Infant Baptifm cited by him, as not yec humbled for hisabufe. And becaufe Mr. Wtlls, by miftake granted him Adrian and Hincmare\ he feemeth to believe himfelf the more confidently, as if they had indeed been againft Infant: Baptifm : of which before. . .

j: i. 6. Tag. 105. He reciteth his falfe ftory of j6m»^, of which before.

^. 7. Vag. 106. He reciteth his falfiiication of the Bifliop of Apamea, And turneth us for bis proofs to, fome book oft called ih^Dntch Cen-inry Writers, and the Dutch aJUartyrologie : I fuppofe both Novel and Ambaptifi Authors 5 And he may as weU turn us over to our , neigh'-, hour Anahaftifts to tell us what is written m the ancient Hiftorians and Dodors, when we have the books therafelves before us. . ^* 8. Tag. 106, 107. Heimpenitently repea-teth his flander of ^F/Vj^/^j^, referring us to his profs^ p. 283, &c. Where having before falfly told us that he v^rote another book^ called TrialogtA be-fidcs his Dialogues (when it is the fame book that is called Trialogus in the M. 5. and Dialogus in the printed Copy, as he may fee by many citations out of the Irialogmm Bifliop Vfher, de fuccejjl tcclef, v/hkh are all in the Dialogs )h^ tells

(353) US of a great many of IVkkJifes words to other purpofes, and cannot bring one line or word in which he denyeth Infant-Baptifm : But only i. The lying accufations of his adverfaries to that end , and 2. His own words which deny two Popifh tenents. i. That Baptifm faveth all ex opere operato ; When he proveth contrarily(of young and old J that where Grace concurreth, it faveth, andelfe not. 2. That Infants unbaptized are damned 5 which in charity he thinks is to be denyed : And what's this againfl their Baptifm ?

^. 9. Yea Wickjtjje exprefly aflTcrteth Infant-Ba-ptifm. Dialog, it. 4. r. 11. Iwill give the Reader Mr. Danvers words and his together.

Mr. D. Reply^ p. 106, 107. " That mci//f<? *' denyed Infant-Baptifm, I produced fo much '* evidence to prove it, from pag. 283. 10289. *' demonftrating that he not only affirmed that ^^ Believers were the only fubjeUs of Baptifm^ but '* withal that children are not Sacramentally to ** be Baptized : and what can be more expreff *' evidence in the cafe ?

"And Treat, ed. 2. p. 283. That Believen " are the only fibjet} of Baptifm, as appear-; *^ eth in his eleventh Chap, of his Trialo^m "And p. 287. as a Lollard he denyeth Infant* *' Baptifm.

AA'hether Mr. D. ever faw his cited book

I know not ; But judge of the mans credit by

the words ^He cites the eleventh Chap, noctel-

•ling us of which book. But it is the fourth

A a book

(354) book where the matter is handled as follow* ethi

WicklifFe Trialog. I. 4. Cap. 11. Et prima

*videamm abi baptifmm in Evangelio fiabihtHr:' JVam lege Mat, itlt, quomodo Chrifins manda-vit fuis^ Apoftolis , Ite^ docetey 3cc, et hinc Phi^ lifpHi baftiz^ans Ennuchnm j4[i. 8. friM inftrnxit

€Hm in fide et propter hanc for mam verbo*

rum Chrifti Mat nit. Ecclefia nofira adducit fideles pro Infante qui difcretionem nan attigerat refpondentes : et tales compatres communiter fa^ cinntj qmd filii fni quos de baptifmo elevant^ fint in Oratione domimca et fymboloinfirH^i •' et alii qui difcretionem attigerant ^ dnm inftru-trntur m fide Chrifii , ante fuum baptifmam vocantHr Catechtimeni : Hoc autem facramenthm efi tarn necejfarittm viatori , quod Chrifins dictt Nicodemo^ J oh. 3, Nifi quts renatm fuerit exaqnay &c. Ex tamaitaque amhoritate fidei. Scripturji fnnt fideles generaliter baptiz^ati : et! ordinavit ecclefia quod qu.dibet perfona fidelis-

ii. neceffitatis articnlo poterit baptiz.ari Necl

refert five immergantHr femel vel ter ; fiv^ aqU(Z fuper capita fna effUndantar -' fed facien* dum eft fecundnm confnetudinem loci quern quis' incolit , tarn in uno ritn legitimo quam in alio 1^ Quia certnm efi: qmd corporalis baptizatip pv^ lutio modicum valet , nifi adfit lotio mentis per* fijiritHm fanBum^ a peccato originali vel alluU" li* Hoc efi enim Principium tn hac fide^ quod. qiiicunqHe rite baptiz^atus fuerit , haptifmtu dg'^ let qiiodciinque peccatum invenerit in homine ba^

ptiz^nif

(355)

ptiz.Ando, Et quia ad delationem -peccaii requi-* ritur fatiifuBio , et non fotefi fieri futisfactio^ pro peccato nifi per mortem Chrifti^ tdeo dictt j(ipoflolu6 Rom. 6. QuicUnque ha^tiz^ati fimiU in Chrifio Jejlt, in mo7te ejm bapttz^ati [h-* mm,

ALITH. Sed die rogo clarim quomodo Chrifim qui tantum odivit figna [enfihilia , tan^ tarn necejfitatem falvationps pofuit tn hniufimodi lotione : yidttur enim derogare divtrino liber alt-: rati at que potent ia, quod Dens non po(fet inter-cedere toto merito fno atque pajjlone , falvare In-fa^iterfy vel adultum fidelem^ nifi vethla vel alio viante baptiz^einr communiter infideli : fimiliter , delato Infante fidelium ad ecclcjiamy ut fecundum Chrifli regulam baptizctur , et deficiente aqua vel requifitis aliis , flante pia intentione totint popu-U , interim mortno natHraliterj nuru Dei , vtde-tur grave damnationem Infant is hujufmodi defi^ nire Jpecialitery cum nee in fans ijh^ nee pop h Ins peccavit ut taltter damnaretur, Vbi efi ergo rntfertcors liberalitas (^lorifli Dei , fi talts proles fidelium propter illud quod non efi in poteflute eomm datnnabitur, cum Dem fecundum princi-pia Theologi(£, communia fit pronior ad pr^mian^ dum homines quam ad dammandum : et fpeciali-ter merito et pajfione Chrifli tantum fua tentori^ a dilatante ?

Which is thus Englifhed.

And firft let Hi fee rphere Eaptifm is ftablifiied

in the Gojpel. For read Mat. 28. how Chrifl

corhmanded his jipofilesy ^0 Teach &c. And

A a 2 hence

hence Philip BapttT^ing the Eunuch, firfi infirn-Ihd him in the Fuithy Kdi, 8. And hecaufe of this form of Chrtfis words Mzx, 28. O^r Church bringeth Believers atjfwering for the Infam wha had not attained to difcretion r And fncb Godfathers commonly make the children whom they take from "Bapttfm^ to Hre infiritlied in the Lords Prayery and the (^reed. And others that had at^ tained to difcretion^ while they are infiruUed in the^ faith ofChrifl he fore their Baptifm^are called Cate-chumeni: And tins Sacrament is fo neceffary to a vi-aiov that Chrift faith to Nicodemusjoh.3. Except a" man be born again of w.iter, &c. So that hy fa. great authority of Scripture beliefs the faithful are generallyBaptiz.ed:And the Church hath ordained that in the point of neceffi' ^ That is of death, ty *, every faithful perfon may be Baptized, Nor is it material whether they be dipped once or thrice^ cr the water be poured on their heads: but it muft be done according to the citftom of the place where one dwclleth , as well in one as in another IaW' ful rite : For it is certain that corporal Baptifm er wajlji^g little availeth unlcfs there be a wafij" *^^ ^f ^^^^ Mind by the Holy Ghofl, from Original or A(^Uil ftn. For this is a principle in this belief that whoevtr is rightly Baptiz^ed ^ Baptifm ' blotreth out whatever Jin itfindeth in the man to be BjiptiT^ed, And beeanfe fatisfaBion is neceffary to the blotting out of fin ^ and fatisfatiion for fin cannot be made but by the death of Chrifl:^ there^ fore faith the Apoftle, that as many of tu as are Baptised into Chrift^ are Baptiz^cd into his death,

ALITH.

(357)

A L I T H. Bm tell me flaw Her J pray you, how Chrifl who fo much h4teth Jenfble fgncs y h^th fut fo great neceffity of [dhation in this w.ilhing^ For it feemeth to derogate from Gods liberality and power^ that God cannot by all his merit ar:d pajjion intercede to fave an Infant or an adult he-liver , unlefs he be Baptiz.ed by an old Woman or fome othtr viant^ commonly an Lifdcl .%fo alfo , when the Infant of believers is broHght to the QoHrch , that ((O* ) according to Chrifts Rule he may be Baptiz^ed , and for want of water or other reqmfttcs , the peoples piom intention continning , he is dead in the mean time naturally by the will of Gody it feemeth hard to define that fuch an Infant is damned ^ (pecially when neither the Infant nor the people have fn-ved that he ^mild fo be damned : Where then ic the merciful Ulerality of ChriJhGod if fiich a child of believers Jiiallbe damned for that which is not m their power f when God^ according to the common Principles ef Theologie^ is proner to reward men than to damn the-ft ^ and jpccially when the merit and paffon of 0yrifl have fo far Jh etc he J out their tents ^

Toilirs WuLjtffe anAvcretli, i. Tn this Chap, thai fonie things he fpeaketh aiTertively, and fome thingi rcputarively;,androrevieweth the cafe-And i. faith that Chrill approveih outward fgns^ but not the abnfe of them. That is, i. When the Hgns of tf e old fewijh Law are kepi. 2. Ly an inmodeft cfpoL-ting them, and preferring them before Gods Decalogue. 3. By hunhcning the Church with A a 3 them

(358)

them which Chrift would have free I even raqrc than'the JfivzJJ? Church was burthened : And thus the Religious now ( faith he ) abufe them the two hft wayes.

And in the Twelfth Chapter he proceedeth to anfvver the reft [_ V'tdetur rniH frobahile quod Chriflj^atls fojfet fine lot tone hujm^ infantes ^iri-tHaliter baptiz,are ^ et fer confequens falvare : Unde dicitHr communiter quod triplex efi haptif-was Ecclefi^ , viz,, bapttfmHS f^nminis , hapttfmm fangmnis , haptifrntu fiaminiij et qmlihtt eorum

companhm fn^cit ad faUtem -—— Nee audeo

ajferere quod Infantes occip pro Chriflo fint damnati — Bapti]mii^ antem faminis efi bapt, Ip. fanU:i , qni efi fimpliciter necefiarim cmli-bet homini fi falvetur, Ideo duo baptifmi priores pint figna antecedentia, et ex fiippofitione necef-faria ad ifium tertium baptifmum flaminis* Ideo abfqHc dubietate , fi ifie infenfibtlis baptif-mpcs adfuerit, haptiz^attis eft a crimine munda-tvu, Et fi ifie defuerit y quant am cun que adfint priores , bapttfmm non prodefi anima ad falntem, Ideo cHjn reEle fit infeirifibilis , o- tantpim nobis ignotm^ videthr mihi imprndem pra^fumptio tali-* ter falvationem hominls vel damnationem ex ba-ytifimo definire, Repntamns tamen abfque dnbietate flty^Quod Infantes recfte baptizati flumine^y/;/^ ba^ ftiz^ti tertio baptifmate , cum habcnt gratiam

baptifimalcm, No?i enim licet fidelibm

fupponendo baptifmnm fljiminis , baptifn^um flu^ minis omnino reUnqucre , fed neceffe efi data op-fort an it ate ctrcHriiftanti<^ ipfum accipere, Et

cum

(359)

etim omnid qu^ eveninnt de fteceffttate eveninntt did fotefl quod talis homo mn potefi falvari fi-nt tali bafttfrnate. Thus Englifhed.

[]/r feemeth to me probable that Qjrift can fftfficiently Baptiz.e Infants fpiritually without thts wajhw^^ and by CO nfc que nee ^ can Jave them. Whence it ts commonly jatd, that there is a three-fold Baptifm of the Church , that u^ the Ba-pttfm of water , the Baptifm of blood , and the Baptifm of the Spirit : ty^nd eijcry one of them to the meet , fhfjiceth to fahatton — Nor dare I ajfert that the Infants Mat. 2. lulled for Chrtfi arc damned* But the Baptifm of the fpirtt ts the Baptifm of the Holy Ghofi^ which is /imply necejfary to every one that he be faved. There-fore the other two Baptifmi are antecedent fgns^ and fuppofttively necejfary to this third Baptifm of the fpirit. Therefore without doubt where th^t infenpble baptifm is^ the Baptiz^ed perfon is clean-fed from his fm : and if that be wanting , let the former be never fo much preftnty Baptifm pro-fiteth not the foul to falvation. Seeing therefore this is infenfible , and fo much unknown to us^ it feemeth to me imprudent prefumptionfo to defi-ne mens jalvation^ or damnation by their Bapttfnr* But yet we hold without doubting^ that Infants rightly Baptiz^ed with water^ arc B^ptiTicd with the third Baptifm , when ( or feeing ) they have

B apt if mat grace. -For it is not lanful for

the faithful^ on fuppofition of the 'Baptifm of the

fpirit^ to cafi off the Baptifm of water^ but it is

mceffury to receive it , when the opportu?nty

(36o)

cf circHmflance u offered. And feeing K>phatever Cometh to pafsy doth\come to fafs of necejjityyip may be fatd that fuch a one cannot be faved rvithout fHchBaftifm. J

And to the queftion of an old woman Baptizing children in neceiHty,he faith, [^ ^\ Credimm **' tamen qnod qudcunc^ue Vetula vet abje&a per-^^ fona rite Uvante hominem cum verbis facra* *' mentalibm Baftifmum fiaminis Dem complet, J The Reader mufl: pardon the Latine to the Author or Printer , which may thus be Englifhed. £ " But we believe that what old woman foever "or abjed perfon rightly wafheth one with the *'Sacramental words, God fulfilleth the Baptifm *;*ofthe fpirif. ]

It fecmeth that whereas Tertutlian ( Mr. D,'s fir ft witnefs ) was for Lay-mens Baptizing in c?,^^ of neceffity , but not for womens^ that Wickjiffe was for womens alfo.

And to the next queftion , Whether Infants unbaptiz,ed when *3apttfm could not be hady be all damned^hz anfwereth(i:f per h^c refpondeo ad 3cc,) that is [ " And by this I anfwer your third ob-*' jedion, granting, that God if he will, may ''damn fuch an Infant, and do him no wrong, *' and if he will he can fave him : And J dare *' not define eiiher part : nor am I careful about ^' reputation , or getting evidence in the cafe ; [^ but as a dumb man am fiient, humbly cpnfef-'Mng ray ignorance , ufing ^ w\. If he will, ''^conditional words*-becaufe *^i£ is not yet clear to me, whe-

<360 '* whether fuch an Infant ftiaU be faved or damned: ^' But I know that whatever God doth in it will *' be juft and a work of mercy, to be praifed of *'all the faithful : And let not them like pre-*' fumptjous fools, pour out themfelves, that of *'their own authority, without knowledge, de-

*'fine any thing in that matter./]- ^i

" autem McU, &c. But he that faith that in this *' cafe put, an Infant fhall be faved , as ic is *' pious to believe, he doth fuperfluoully uncertain " hirafelf *, more than will ** profit him. ButtHcreare '<• That is, determine ^' fome things in Parents pow- an uncertainty. -*^ er though lapfed into a thi^g '' Pafi^ for which it is neceflary by Gods juft ** judgement, that fo it fhould come to pafs : *' Therefore he that defineth, that neither Pa-*' rents nor people fo finned, that it fhould fo '' come to pais, doth fpeak as a Pie on the head *'ofhis own knowledge. But we believe it as *' a point of faith , that nothing befalls a man " after the firft grace, unlefs fome part of raan-'' kind either merit or demerit, that this f jail come " to pafs. 3

In the next (^thirteenth ) Chapter, he proceed-cth to anfwcr the queflion [^ Quomodo aniwa tu-linm Jnfamium fine peccato attuali dccedentiHm pumenthr ( Having before fpoken of Infants dying unbapt;zcd unavoidably ) that is. How the fouls of Juch Infa?Jts jhall be pHnifljed f whether /ill equally or nnecjually ? and whether only with she pHnijhmentof lofsy or alfoof f/if .<*] . And he

con-

r3«o

(concludeih contrary to the greater part of the PaZ pifts, that they fhaH have both the -pttnijhment of Lofs and Senfe^^ and (^Notethat ) that [^ Necef^ fe eft feccata origir^alia hommnm ejfe inaqualiaj^ ficHt decedenies in originaltbHs feint fr^pter ilia in^^qualiter condemTiandi: Nam jfixta di^a omnes condemnati fro originalibm fum condemnandi tarn -poena damni quam poena fetifens ': fed impojjibilg efi quod condentnentHr (zqualiter omnino illis posfnif : ergo relinqmtHr quod peccata quibm ittas posnas demerfiernnty indqualia fnnt dicenda. ~\ That is, [] *' It muft needs be that the Original fins of *^ men are unequal, as thofe that die in Original *' fins are unequally to be condemned for them: For ** as is faid, all that are condemned for original fin '^ are condemned both with the punifhmenc of Lof§ *'and ofSenfe ♦, But it is impoffible that they *^ fhould be damned altogether equally with thofe ^'pains. Therefore it remaineth that the fins *^ by which they deferved thofe punifhments be '*^faid to be unequal J.

Reader, I have been the larger in tranfcribing and tranflating the words of Wkkltjfe^ becaufe an Author is not fo well underftood by a line or two difmembred from the refl , as by whole difcourfes : and ib that his fenfe may be paft all controverfie : Here it is vifible that Wkkjiff' was fo far from denying Infant-Baptifm , thac I. He exprefly afTerteth it, 2. He never fo much as noteth it for any controverfie, nor raaketh any doubt or queflion about it. 3. Yeahctaketb it to be bold prefumption for any to take upon them to

know.

know, whether an Infant that dyeth unavoidably unbaptized be faved or nor, but only faith God can do it if he will , and he can damn him. 4. And to thofe that fay that the Parents arc not in the fault, nor the people, feeing they intended his Baptifm, he faith, that many things come to pafs for paft fins of Parents, and people, and therefore that cannot be concluded •, and nothing after the firft grace cometh to pafs unmerited. 5. And he conciudeth that thofe of them that are damned for original fin, are punifhed with pain of lofs and fenfe, but unequally, having unequal original fins. 6. But Baptifm he afiferteth doth put away all fin in the rightly Baptized. 7. And that when Infants are rightly Baptized with water, they are Baptized with the third Baptifm having Baptifmal grace. 8. That it is according to Chrifts rule that infants be brought to the Church to be Baptized.

And now Reader, judge what a fad cafe poor honeft ignorant Chriftians are in, that muft have their fouls feduced, troubled and led into Love-killing alienations, and feparations and cenfures of Chrifls Church, and of their particular brethren , by fuch a man as this ? And whether they that dare ufe fouls at this rare , are fo much better than us, as to be above our com* munion ? Nay whether thofe that lately revile the Zeal of diflenters, as cheriibing the moil odious crimes, be not too much fcandalized and hardened by fuch dealings ? When a man as pleading

0^4^ ding for Chrift and Baptifm dare not only prinE fuch things, but ftand to them in a Cecond edition, and defend them by a fecond book, and Rage' and be C^«^^^«t in revihng thofe that tell him of his untruths ?

; ^, 10. But he hath many pretended reafons to prove that Wickjijf was againft Infant-Baptifm, and fome of them out of the very Chapters which I have tranfcribed ;, ** "i. Saith he. He ^' aflened two Sacraments. 2. That believers mufl: *' be baptized in pure water, (And what are thcfc *^ to the purpofe ?) 3 That believers are the ^^only fthje^s of Baftifm (A grofs untruth ) " ( But he giveth you the words that prove \t £ Idea ahjqpte duhitatione fi ifle infenfibilis ba-^ ftifmtis apterity baptiz,atm h cnmine eft mun" datm : c-r fi ille defnerity qnantiimcHnqm ejfent friores^ hafti[mm non ^rodeft anm(t ad falittenf}, I gave you^he words before. And did the man think that this is any thing to his purpofe ? Wickliff faith, [_ Water Baftifm faveth no foal' ( young or old ) without the Baptifm of the Spirit. ] Therefore faith Mr. D. Wickliff faith, that Believers are the only fubjetis of Baftifm, '] Will he make the Church of his mind by fuch palpable fal/hoods asthefe?

But he adds, [^ He faith that perfons are firft to be Baptiz^ed with that he calls the infenftble Baptifm^ before voater^ &c.] A^fvc. i. Utterly falie : It is his own forgery. Wickliff {mh no fuch thing that it mufl be firfl : Nay I doubt he faith quite contrary as I h^ve recited. [ Ideo

dho

C3«5)

duo baftifmi friores funt ftgna Antecedemia^ c* ex fuppojitiofje neceffaria ad iftHmtertium baptij^ wHm flaminis. 3 ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^'s man is to be believed. 2. But though Wickliff czWti Wa-ter-Baftifm an antecedent fign^ yet men: Protc-ftant Writers I think hold that believers Infants have by virtue of Gods Covenant the Ba-ptifm of the Spirit, ( that is, a feed or difpofiti-on to future gracious ads if they live) ^ and that they are in a ftate of falvation before they are Baptized, being the children of the faithful by them dedicated to God, by heart-confent, and that Baptifm is but the publick folemnization of the fame Covenant, and delivery of the blellings by way of inveftiture. Let Mr, D, read but all the teftimonies cited by Mr. Gataker in his book of Baptifm, againft Dr. Wardj and Bifliop Dave* nanty and he will fee this is no opinion proper to the Anahaptifts : And I fcarce believe that he can prov«: me and all Proteftants that hold that opinion, to be therefore againft Infant-Ba-ptifm : How then would it have proved Wick^ Itfio ?

4. He.faith that Wickliff faith that Baptifm doth not confery bnt only fgnifie grace given, J Anfrv. I. And what's that to prove, that he was againft Infant-Baptifm ? 2.And how proveth he this? Why, Fhller ont of Cochleus faith fo.

Anfw. I. But CochleHs'\s one of the moftnotable Lyars of all the Papifts that oppofed Luther^ and hath left his Calumnies to pofterity 1 And muft he be believed againft Wicklijf} 2. And

Flit'

Antler wrote but about twenty yeats ago : And muft one of our neighbours tell us what Cochleni faith was the opinion of WkkLijf^ when we can read his words our felves ? 3. But (io make this like its fellows ) even this much is untrue, ^pnlUr tells us no fuch thing out of Cochleus , but tells lis that Gregory charged Wickliff with eighteen Errors • Tho, Arundel with twenty three ^ the Council oiConjlance with /^.'^.Tho.Wddenjis with 80. Dr. Lncke with 266. and CoMem with 303. and then he reciteth 62.out ofWaUenJisy where the words are. 4, And Waldenfis is known to be a falfe accufer of him in many particulars, though a learned Papifti 5. And even this Waldenfis that faith his worft, and fought to make the moft of his errors, never here accufeth him as denying In-fant-Baptifm : And would he not have done it, had it been true?

But Mr. ^. f that by this trick which he is fa ready at, can make Herefies and Hereticks al-fo too eafily) tells us of a popifli Herepe^siz^ for Baptifm [^ to take away all fm^ to confer grace , to work^regeneration and fave the fonl^ as flill held by them that teach young children to fay J that by their Baptifm they were wade children of God , members of Qjrifl , and Inheritors fthat is, heirs) of the Kingdom of heaven. ]

Anfw. i. By this it feems the £nglijh Pro-teftants and all the reft that take this to be true dodrine , hold a Popifh Herefie, 2. Let the Reader perufe Gataker againft Davcnant of Ba-

ptifp.

( 3«7 ) ptifm, and he will find almoft all the ancient Fathers Latineand Greek of the fanie judgement: And what a pleafure is this to the Papifts to be told that almoft all the ancient Writers held their he-refie ? And then indeed Where vpas out Church and the Kingdom of Chrift before Luther^ot rather before thofe whom he oppofed ? 3. It is unqueftio-nabletrue dodrine that as Marriage-confent in private, layeth the firft ground of Marriage rights, which by folemn Matrimony are openly and regularly delivered by inveftiture, which perfedeth the title: even fo, the Heart-Confent orCovenanyngCof the perfon,or parents for Infants^ doth lay the firft ground of Chriftian right,which is folemnizedand perfeded regularly by Baptiim, which by the way of tradition or publick inveftiture, doth take avpay all gnilt of fm^ Saaramentally regenerate , and fave^ and make us children of God, members of Chrift and his Church, and heirs of heaven , who were fo before by a Private initial rights of which the Church did take lefs cogni-fance ; And one would think that no Jinaba-ftifi ftiould deny this,(called Herefie)as to the adult.

5, He next addeth from IVickJif, They are fools And frefnmpHOHs which affirm fich Infants not to he favedj which die without Baftifm ] fo Fuller words it out of Cochletis»

jinfw* I. Falfc ftill : It is not out of Coch-leui^ but Waldenfis. 2. And what's this to the cjueftion of Infant-Baptifm ?

He adds, f And Wicklijfs own words as r. 2. de Trialdg, Quod definentes parvules fdelium f" nebaftifmoy^c, J

AnfvQ. Still falfe : i 1 have before tranfcri-bed the words out of the Printed book which arc far otherwiCe-. 2. It is not depnentes but qui quicquam defimunt. 3. It is not of all children dying without Baptifm^ but of thofc that conld mt have it , being prevented by death , when it was defired. 4. He faith this of thofe that determine that they are faved alfo, 5, And inftead of c, 2. this is lib, 4. c.iz,

6. He faith ,["That all truth is contained in '^ the holy Scripture , and that which is not ori-**ginally there, is to be accounted prophane ^ *^And that we are to admit of no fcience or ^'conclufion that is not proved by Scripture *'teftimony, and that whoever holds thecontra-^^ ry opinion cannot be a Chriftian but flatly the *' Devils Champion ~\ with more fuch cited part-*^ ly out of CochLeus by Fuller , ( falfe again ) *' and partly de Verit. Script. ] a book of Wick: tiff's which I have not , and I conjeduri he n*-v€r faw : For i. I told you before the very words of Wickliffthzx. condemn only fuch abnfes of omxvardfgns^ as (hew him to be of a contrary opinion. 2. Will any fober man believe that he damned all as no Chriftians , but Cham^ pons of the Devil J that thought that fome Conclufi-ons Phyfical, Mathematical, Metaphyfical, Medicinal , Logical, ^c. may be true that are not -proved by Scripture teftimony ? and fo that almoft all Chriftiansin the world are no Chri-ilians?

^, Saitb

(359:,

7- Saieh he " [^That he (lighted the Authori:y of "General Councils, as ]FHlkr out of Cochle^ *^«i, &c.

j^r/ftv. r. Falfe again as to the Author. 2. But vvhK is that to Infant-baptifm ?

But his dired proof is out of Waldenfis faying that \Vic'4'jj im\\ that children arc not ftcra^ mentally to be baftiz^ed.

zy^nfw. I. Wxdi'^tnoiWaldenfis at haad , but have little caufe to believe Mr. D, 2. And Fnl-ler who undertakeih to recite Waldenfis charge, haih not a word of any fuch fenfe. 3, Tf bitter Papifts fo accufe him, is it therefore true ? Judge by his own words. Indeed Wickjif held that y^-cramental haptifm faveth none (young or old J without the baptifm of, the fpirit; and that it may be feparated from it : And hence was the Papifts noife againft him.

8. Saithhe *'f As a further argument that he '' denied Infant-baptifm, may appear, becaufe he "did fo vehemently impugn Confirmation, d-c.

ji^ifw. li Here we have Fuller out ofCochle^ m falfly again. 2. Are all Proteftants againft Ir=» fant-baptifm, that are againft the Popifh Sacrament of Confirmation ? What a prover is this man? Is DalUm that hath written fo large a difpa-tacion of Confirmation, an Anabapcift ? And the Englifh Nonconformifts too? 3. But in very deed, Mr. D.*s fallhood and Wickjiffs opinion for Infant-baptifm, may very probably be gathered from that (not fifteenth as he, but J fourteenth Chapt, of Confirmation : For, i. He rcprehendeth the

B b BiOiois

Ct.

a

(370)

Biihops f ;r adding fo many Ceremonies to In-* fanc-bapdroi, never blan:iing theif bapiiim it fdL 2. He aigiieth againfl coriiirniing children, as luprrfluous, becaure the fpiric is given in bapciToi it fth \^& corifirmatHr ex hoc qmdbaftiz^Mosno-ft/OS dicimm rcgaUnter Spirit urn San^nm acci-fere to ipfo qno legitime baftiz^anti^r , that is ^ And it is hence confirmed , in that we fay that our bapdzid ones do regularly receive the Holy Ghoil, in that (ox by that very thing) that *" they are lawfully baptized. ~| And he had before fa id thar ihey are ofrcrcd to Eaptifm in the Church according to Chrifis RyJe»

0* II. Af:er ail this Mr* D. addeth Wicklfs opinions againft Popery to the nun"iber of 29. But w'nat all this is tojh# cafe of Infanr-baptifm, what man bcfides himfelfcan tell? But let me tell hirn that I would not have him too eafily believe bitter adverfary Papius, left he forfeit the little relids of his o^vn credit: And that it is hot like that V/kkiiff ^^3,s againft enjoyning the Lords-Prayer as he citeth: Yea , I would not have Mr, D. come fo near the Papifts yet as Wickliff <^'A, How doth he like fuch words gs thefefTrialog. li. 4. c. 22. {o\,i 'i^'^. Et t dis efl tri-flexEcclefia • Ecclsfiafcilicet Aiditans^ DormUnSy

C^ Triiiwfhans Ecclefia Dormkns eftpra-

defiinati, in Piirgatorio patientes^ that is y

" There is fuch a threefold Church ; The mili-" tant Churth, the deeping Church, the trium-*' phant Church : The i]ee[*ing Church is

*^ the Predeilinatc fuffering in Purgatory. 3

And

AnJ lib*2iC, 10. fee what he faith of Angels and adoration of them. And c, ii, of Angels o.fices, and iheir being virtually every where. And what he hkh of Kings, and Mairinriony (^(jHod excedit aliaSacrame?jfa^ ac.J li.4. c. 19, 20. fol. 13.1, 133. Nor would I fay thac orr^nia cjha eveni^nt de rieccffitute evc/Hnnt ^ as fol. 120. a. Or ihat Deti^ poteji ejfc j4fhim fi vcltt^nt fol.po. b.

One of the worft things I like in IVtckJijf is, that he plungtih himfeif into the deepefl School-fubtihies, or di(Viculties, with kfs fub:ilty or diligence than the cafe requireih, and than Schoolmen ufe. And indeed 1 like not divers of his conclufions^ as lib. 2. c. 14. fol. 41. [^Onod Dc-iu fiecejfitat creatnrus firignLts a^ivas ad o^aemli-bet aBam fnnm : J It is fuppofed that Hohbs by the fame Dodrine overchroweth a'l the Chriftian faith : And I believe that his dod:rine there/t//. 41. and elfewhere, for merit, avA^how temporale /ic c^utfy fr^dejimationis atertm^ will d.fpleafe fume. And his diftindiion oi" Mortal and Venial fin, as //. 3. c, 5. fol. 52. And that he makcth fmal irr}fcni' fence the fin againfi ths Holy Ghofl •, And that none can know what fm is mortal in tts ^ and what not ? And cap. 6. Concedi potcfi quod mitl-ti pr^fciti pint in gratia fecundiim prxfentem //<-fiitiam : It may he granted that many reprobates tire in ( a fta^.e of ) Grace , according to their

prefent righteoufnep —: Pr^fciti ant em ?inn-

qHam funt in gratia finalis perfeverantttz : The Reprobate are never in the grace of final perfe-verance* So that he held that prefent true grace

Bb 2 was

( 572 ) Was loft by fome , as u4ufiin 6^\di , which he ex-plaineth* cap. 7. And cap. 8. again he is at his Omnia eveniunt neceffitate ahfoluta reviewing what he had (aid, and concludeth that [| no man can do better than he doth ^ but he could if God would ] and denieth not fin to be hereby necelli-tated, &c,

^.12. Pag, 115. He again impenitently re-neweth his flander of BerengariiHj as being againft Infant-baptifm : Concerning whom faith Vjloer de fnccef, Ecclef. cap. 7* p. 207. '' [^ Author *' Aoiortim , &c. The Author of the Ads of " Brnno f found in the Library of the Noble Ba-'*ron Carevff of Clopton) who faith he was at ^' this examination, faith, that they ffome of ^^-^^rengarim followers J faid that baptifm profi-*^ ted not children to faIv^ion,as alfo DeodvinmLc-*' odienfis firft from common fame, and then Gmt^ *' mnndm Arch, Averfanui on the credit of Leodi^ ^' enfis report that Bruno Andegavenjis ^ Beren-" gariw Tiironenfis ^ qnantum in ipfis erat ha-^ ^''ftifmum farvulorum evertijfe^ did as much as *' in them lay overthrow the baptifm of chil* " dren; But we find no charge ever brought " 2ig2\v[^Berengarim concerning Anabaptifm, in fo *-*' many Synods as were held againft him: Nor *' do they feem to have denied any thing elfe, *' who are faid to deny that baptifm proficeth lit-*' tie Ones to Salvation, but that Baptifm confer-*' reth Grace ex opere operato : As gathering " from the Apoftles words, He that planteth and ^' he that watereth is nothing , but God that gi^

*' veth

(375) ^*veth theincreare: ^^y Alanm li. i.corit. luret. ^' fiii tem^, takeiluhem as ifihey had faid [ Ba-" ptifm hath no efficacy either on young or old ^ ^^ therefore m.n are not bound to be bapii-'^zed.]

And that this was the plain cafe is proveabic, in that it was juft the cafe of IVicklfff ^ind the Wuldenfcs , who were faid to do" as much as in them lay to caft out Infant-baptifm, becaufe they thought that every wicked Prieft did not fandiiie them ex of ere operato, and infallibly convey Gods grace to the unprepared.

But his proofs are " [ i. The Magdeh. tell us *'that Bererigarins maintained his herefies, whicli ''they fet down to be denying Tranfulftan-*'tiation, and Baptifm to little ones, under five "heads, which Lanfrank^ Arch-Bi.lop of Can-" terbiiry anfwers at large in his book called ^' SctmilUris : and as to that of denying Infant-*' baptifm he anfwers by faying, he doth thereby *' oppofe the general Dodrine and univerfal Con-*' fent of the Church.

Anfvc. I. I have not the Maideb. at hand, but he hath little to do that will ask Illyricus^ andC?^/-liu dS{A Amfdorpiu what Lanfrm\ writeth, if he have his book before him. Thepublifher ofL^w-frankj book againft Berengartiu giveth us notice of no other, Trithemim de fcript, Ecclef, knew of no other but this, which is in Bihl. Pdtr, Toir, 6. p, 190. And I have lookt over every line of it ( fuch labour dothefe men put us toj and I find not one word where any fuch thing is mentioned

B b 3 by

f374) by LAnfrank.: but only his accufations'of Jfr, aboui Tranfubdantiation : He never once cIiargciN him as denying Infant-baptifm, nor mentioneth in^ See, Reader, -into whac hands the poor feduced ones are fallen.

<<. 15. His fecond proof is "this, ^^C^jl/^??^/"^ in " his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve faith , that ^' GuitmMnd Biihop of Averfe doih aifirm thaic ^^ he did deny baptifm to Little Ones, c^c,

Ajif\v» t. Caffander in neither of his Epiftles to the Diike of Cleve mentioneth any fuch matter. But in his Preface to his Book for Infant-baptifm to the Duke oi Cleve^ he faith that G'///>-7f:iwd faith [^ Oitod inter cateros erroreSj farvHlo-rum baptiffmm evertent^ qncm tamen err or em in fiihVxum non produjiit^ cjuod earn bUjfhemiani ut Gititm» loquitHr , ne feffiworum qmdem homitium aures toleraturds fiiret\^ c^* in Scriptkris facris locum ejus erroris tiiendi penitus non vtderet, ~]

Mark here Reader , i. Berengarius is not faid. to deny Infint-bapttfm, but to overturn it, (that is, by feme confequence it's like. ) 2. He did net fublijl) chis his opinion, but held it unpublifhed : And how then did Guitmund know it? 3, Was Berengarius as honed or as ftout a man as he is fuppofed, and yec when Infants were daily bapti-2cd, would never fp-ak out his thoughts of the evil of it ? 4. Either he baptized Infants himfelf, or not. If hedii, was he againfl it then ? What a Knave do chey make him that fofay ? If not, ^!is opinion muft needs be publifhed by his pra-QiKt^ when ^hcy whofe ears could not tolerate ir, ' ■ • would

( 375) wonlJ lefs tolerate the rcfufing of rheir Chil-drens Chriftning. 5. Was that an honeft man that would kcrcily hold an opinion \^hich he knew he had no .Scripiure lor > 6. Note that even Caffandcr there tells us, ihac indeed the Wnt-denfes though agreeing much with the Catharifisy did yet boih approve and i]1e Infanr-baprifm, f, Cji. and that this error ilepc till his age when StQrk, and MuhtJ^er rair;rd it,

0. 14. 2. But what need we ask Ca^^ndcr what Guitwund faid ? What childiih play is this? His own book is as common di^Cajjandtrsin Bibl, Pair. To, 6. f. 215. And Guithutrids words are ihefe " [[ Berer/j^arius opened thole things by " which he might pleafe worldly me'b, that love " always ( it they may do it unpunifhed ) to iin : *'to wit, deftroying as much as in him lay Law-^ ful Marriages, and overturning Infants baptifm : *' So that in one the Devil by his mouth perfwa-*' drd the worft men that it was lawful ro abufe *' all women •, and in the oiher [ Cajfato b^ptif-mate Infanti£ in ^rofiindum omnium m^Jorumj ;«f-■pote pofimoditm baptiz^andis^ imfnne mere: Lege Epift, Leodienfis Epifbopi contra Berengar, ad Henr, Reg, Franc. & eifdem pene verhii eadem jpfa ibi fcrtpta repertes ] that is , " [^ making void *"' the baptifm oi Infancie, they might ruHi unpu-'' nillied into the depth of all evils, as being af-**terward to be baptized. Read the Epiflle of *' the Bilhop of Liege tor/. H. of France againil '* BerengartHs, and there you (hall find thefefame " things written, almoft in the fame words. J

B b 4 Ani

(37^)

And now, Reader, Judge further, i. Whether this Papifl who never knew the matter himfelf, and whofebook fheweth him a/Afy bitter kWow profeffing to tranfcribe or take his words from the Biftop of Liege who took it from fame , be to be believed in his accufacions of fuch a man, when Lanfranh^ih^i difputed with him before the Pope, nor the Pope himfclf, nor any of the many Synods that examined him, and conftrained him to recant, ever mention fuch a thing? Were thefe Perfecutors think you blind or merciful herein I 2. If he be to be believed in this, why not in the firft article, of the lawfulnefs of abufing all women commonly? 3. Do not the very words [^ quantum in fe^ and everterit ] and [^ caffato ha-ftifmate'} open the cafe, that malice gathered this as a forced confequence only of fome words of BerengartHs /* It is like becaufe he defined a Sa-crament to their diflike, which Lanfrank^xt'gxO' ycth him for.

And fo fottifh a fellow was this Gaitmund that his fellow Papifts are put todifown him for faying that their Euchariftical Hoft cannot be corrupted or pucrifie , or be eaten by Mice, or any Bruits, but only (cemeth fo to be; ib. f, 230. /. 2,

(5. 15. His third proof is " [^ In the BibU Patr.

^^ Paris p.^^l. it is recorded that Dnrandm

*t' writes — the denying and as much as in them *^ lay the deftroying the baptifm of Infants, ^c.

Artfvi\ I. Did this man ever fee the Books he citeth, who citeth vag, 4.32. of the BibL Pat, as

,if

^577) if were but one Tomb or Volume, that long ago was tlevcn great Volumes, and now many more? It is like ^farg, le BigMes Edit, is that he mean-etb. The Epifllcis Tow, 3. p. 319. Qii\\t Eigne Paris 1624. The Author, (aith V^hcr de fuccef, EccL p, 196. is falily called Durandus^ and is DeodutriHs or Dictwinns, His words are ^Fama fhfrerhos Gallidc fines frAtergreffa tot am Ctrmant^ am pervaft^ ^arrqiic oTKninm no ft rum replevit an-res , qualtter Bruno cy^ndeg^ Eptfc. item Beren^ gar ins Throncnfis - — aftrnant Corpus Dorr/i-ni non tarn Corpus effe quam umhram cr figuram Corporis Domint, Le^tttma conjugia deftrnantj ^ quantum in ipfs eft, baptifryjum parvulorum ever-tant,'} This is it that Vftjer cited: i. You fee here is nothing but a Papift Prelates tale to a King, upon far fetcht fame, 2. Charging hinci equally, yea more wiih deftroying marriage,

3. And faying but [^quantum in fc\\ ofbaptifm;

4. And part of the fame is that [he King had called a Council to examine thefe things • which Council never taking notice of any fuch matter confuteth the fame. And doth Mr. D. the great enemy of Amichrift perfwade poor Anabaptifls to believe fuch fellows and tales as thefe >

^, 16. In his Reply he addeth fourthly [T/;^-anus witnefTeth that Bruno Arch-Bi ill op of Tri-crs did perfecute Berengartus for denying Infants baptifm, asp. 242.

Anfvs^* I. Again he tells us of Thuanus^ and tells not where, as if we raufl: read over five volumes in folio to be able to difprove fuch a Taleteller

feller as tliis ? But he faith Viler faith (o de fuc^ cef, EccL pa^, 252. But all ftill is falle : my book there hath not fuch a word. Vficrs words are pa^. 207. and them alfo he moft h; rribly fidlih-eth. They are but ihdt'\^BrHrfonem quoqueTre^ vtrornm Arch. Diceceft fua exfuliffe qHofdam ex Bcrengarii Sdlatorihm qui tllms Dodri?7am in "EbHrontbHs Aniaticis & aliis Belgii popnli' dif-femmabant , narrat Thua^nts, ~\ That is, |_ Thna^ nm faith th.n Brmo Arch-Biihop of Trevers expelled out of his Diocefs fome of Bcnngaripts^ followers, who fowed his dodrine, ^c. ]] fo that here is no talk of perfecuting Btrenganus ^ buc fome of his followers, nor a word of Infanr-ba-r ptifm. Was ever fuch a reporter as this man before taken for a credible perfon ? I contefs I remember not that ever I read the like, among Pa-piils or any other Sed.

In ThnanHs the words are found in his Epiftle to the King before all his works, excellently dif-fvvading him from blood , and perfection, and there is not one fylhble of Infant-baptifm ^ but only that v/hich Vilier cited: yet durft this man juftiHe thefe horrid ialfhoods in a fecond Ejdition and a Reply. ,

CHAP,

(37^)

CHAP. III.

c^/r. D.'i jHftification of his flandcr of the Wal-dcnfes, Co-njuted rr.ore largely,

C. J. IN his Reply/). loS.hereafiumeth tbi^Ca-JL lumny. And hrll he recireth their Con-fclTiun to prove it : as if he wanted matter to fill liis Book, not having one word againft Infant-ba-ptifm in that which is by himfelf recited : But it iriufl be interred, it luth a roan as ih s be to be beheved, becaufe faith is required fin the adult, and them that Covenant for Infants) and becaufe Traditions and Inventions are difclaimed, and fuch hke. Had the man dealt by the Waldenfes but as he doth by me, when citing my words he will prove that my vror^j are for him while I am againft him, (as if 1 underftood not what I fay) it had been much lefs. But to hct down the world that the Waldenfes denied Infant-baptifm for fuch filly reafons , is intolerable. It is not worth the labour to iliew him how the Prote-ftants agree with the IVuldenfes in all the points where he feigneth a difagreement, p. 112.

^. 2. Yet doth the man break out into admiration that he having with exactnefs given a fartimliir account of all thofe Confejfwns veord

for

for v»ordy a^id proved by amfle demonflra-

tions y I, That none of them vccre extant till the fixteenth Cemnry^ dec,

Anfw. Wonderful I That fuch a man fhould talk of exacinefs and demonfiration. Slay Reader a little, and teil me whether it call not for ihame and tears that one fuch Book fhould be written by a Chriftian ? Much more that this calumny fhould be thus over and over audacioufly jufli-

<. 3, In RogerWendover (our chiefeft ancient Chronicler, and one that he oft citeth himfclf, and therefore fhould have read ) In Hen, 2. foL 319. h» You have a Confeilion of the Tholoujians called Boni homines in which are thefe words *' ^Credimu^ etiam quod non falvatnr qau , nifi ^^ qui haptiz.atHr •, Ct* farvhlos falvari per ba-" pttfma, ]] That is, [_ We believe alfo that none *' is faved but he that is baptized , and that little * ^ children are faved by baptifm ]] ( For we find that it was the denial of the iaving virtue of wicked Priefts baptifm ( to young or old) as working ex opere operato^ which occafioned their accufations : ) would you have a fuller proof?

Vfier de fncccf,Eccl,c,6. p, 155, &c, giveth us the Catalogue of their opinions as reported by zy^neas Sylvim ( after Pope Fins the fe-cond ) where there is fomewhat of theirs againft Confirmation , Chrifm, Extream Undion, c^c, but not a word againfl Infant-baptifm ^ adding the confent of Jacob, Picolomin, Anton. Bon-fin, Bern, Lntz^erthiirg. Another Catalogue he

giveth out of the Magdeh, hifl. Centur, 12. c. 8. coL 1206, 1207. as taken ouc of an old ^JU.S. where is not a word againft Infant-baptifm: Yea rcciteth WtII, Reynolds 2i bitter Papifts Catalogue, where there is no fuch thing: Yea, mentioneth nine points more in whichParfons, Sandnj^Coc-ciM lay they differ from us, but none of this* And fag» 242. r. 8. he tells you of Gretfers own confelTion that they were none but the IValder/fes, that Hoveden fpeaketh of, that made the fore-faid Confellion, though accufed of Artanifm. See more teftimoniesof many others, fag. 306, 507, 308.

Thuams ( falfly cited by him as before of Be- ^ rsngarius) lib, 6. an. 2550. reciteth their opinions, }ag, 185, 186. not mentioning a word of this ^ nay , telling us that fome falfhoods were reported of them, doth not fo much as number this among the fidions. And fag, 188. he tells you of an inquiry made into their Original and Dodrine by Gul, Bell. Langaiis^ commanded by Authority thereto, wherein no fuch thing is men-tioned of them, but their avoiding Popifh fuper-flitions.

In the firft Confeflion recited by Terin ( p. 60.) they own baptifm, but fay not a word againft Infant-baptifm,

The fame is true of the fecond Confeflion recited by him, p. 62,63.

In the end of Perin you have their Catechifm, and the fumm of their Dodrine out of feveral of their old Books 5 and therein not a word againft

(382)

lofant-haptifm , but exprcfly they afTert it: Caf"^ i. p.41,42,43. in their Dodrine of the Sacraments 5 they fuy '^L -^"d for this caufe we pre-••' fent our Children in bapcifm; which they ought *'to ^0 ^ to whom the children are neareft, as *'their Parents, and they to whom God hathgi-^^ ven this charity, 3 Jutl: as WickUff* Judge now of this mans words ?

^, 4. " But his fecond Demonftratiori is from "the witnefs born againfl it by fome of iheir " moft eminent leading men, viz,, Berengarins^ *' Peter 3rHlSy HenricHs Arnoldns

A^ifvo, Beren^arim is not ufed to be reckoned as one of the IValdenfes , but if you will fo calt him, I have confuted the (lander of him before.

His proof againd Bmli is Peter Clunincenfis^ of whom I have faid enough to Mr, Tombes which I will not recite.

c. 5. It is true that fome Papifls do raile at the Walde-fifes with abominable calumnies, as guilty of the mod odious herefies, [] denying the refurredion, and the falvationof Infants, aflerting the cottimoji ufe 6f women, and abundance fuch .• J Infomuch that it is become a hardqueftion whether really there were any fuch people, or whether all were llanders : and among other things they charge them with denying Infanc-baptifm. And the Authors go fo much on fame, and (liew fo much falfhood, that many think that all are fidi-ons. But Bi(hop Vjlier ( de fnccef. EccL ) and fome others bring many teftimonies to prove that

in that age tliere were abundacce of Aianlchtts that came mo/LomharMe ^ and Irom thence came into I he country of the Waldenfts ; and that for their fakes the Papiils accufed the Waldenfes of all thefe villanies and herelies with Anabaptiiim, as ii they had been all of a mind. And though I confefs that the horrid h'es of abundance of Pa-pills of Luther 5 Calvin , ZmngUm and Other iiich, and fome experiments in this age, have given men occafion to qutftion whether all were not meer forgeries, and that nothing is to be believed that they faid of thofe times ; yet I am ready to think that there were fome fuch per-fons as they defcribe that were againft the Re-furrcdion, and for comm.on undeannefs, and denied Infants falvation and baptifm, even fuch J^<^ nichees and Arrians as afcrefaid : Not that I think it any whit ftrange that fame among fuch worldly pcrfccurors fliould belie others as much as this comes to ; bur bccaufe of the hif^orical reports of fuch Manichecs recited by Vjher ubi fnp, fag^ 225, 226j &:c. caf, 8. & Vtgnier Hifi, Ecclef. an, 1023. And that they falily took thtWaUen-fes to have been of the Manichees mind , as living among them , h all the cloak that any rea-fonable charity can afi-ord to thofe old ones that faifly accufed them : And to the later ilanderers ( Cohjfordiis, Crerfer y 6ic.) this will be no cloak, niuch lefs to Mr. Danvers if in his zeal for his Sed and way, he will own the (landers of blinded Papifts, when he crieth them down himfelf, and lath had time and means to know their calumniation. To

C3S4)

To all this, let the Reader add but the peru-fal of the grofs contradidions of their accufers againft each other, ( yea the fame Author as reported by CoHJfardiis faying one thing, and as publifhed by Gretfer faying the contrary, I mean KayneriHs, ) And let him confider of the tefti-mony of Vignier concerning an old Copy of their Dodrine Hiewed to the great .and excellent Chan-cellour of France^ Aiich, Hofpitalius , wholly agreeing with the dodrine of the later Walden-fesy and renouncing only the Popilh fupcrftiti-ons: And the tcftimony of PoflinertH) that by many old fragments and monuments which he had feen, in the language of their Country, and by the Ads yet kept of the Difputation between the Bifliop of Jpamca^xnd Mr. Arnolty and by their own Confellions which many aiTured him they hadfeen, the old Alhigenfes dodrine ^3,% altogether conform to the Frotefiants dodrine^ Vjher i p. 308. (^.10. And then judge whether the charge of Anabaptiftry, and all JUanichaan abhominati-ons be credible.

<^.6. " But ( faith Mr, D.) Caffander teftifiet-h ** in his Epiftle to the Duke of Cleve that Peter *^ Brui^ and HenricHs denied baptifm to little *^ones, affirming that only the adult (hould be *' baptized*

Anfw. Read but Caffanders Pref. and judge of the Credit of this mans accufations. i. Caffander faith, that it was the oJ^famchees and Prifcillianifis ( who were Gnoftickj faith ShU fit. Ssverpti who lived in Prifcillians time )

that

^ (385)

that brought in the errors after mentioned by him, which fwarmed in Bernards daies ^ And that this Herefie bred them that were called Cath,^rtfls^2L name belonging to one of the three feds of <iJ4<(a:uchees \ but in France they were called Albtgif/jiSy from the place, and that it was to thefc Mankhean and Prifct/ltan errours, than they added, the denyal of Infant-Bapiilm. 2. He faiihj Peter Bruis^ and Henry^ feem to have been the chief Authors of this addition •, but in a far differing fenle from the lacer Anabaftifts -^ For Peter and He72ry equally denyed Baptifm and falvation to Infants, or any but adual believers. 3. And for ihe furmife of Peter and Hetiry he taketh the word of Peter the Avbot Qumacenfis : Co that Cdff^nder doth but what Mr. D. doth, even report Qumacenfi, 4. And he profcfTeth that the Wuldeftfes called Picards , whofe re!ids were in tJHoravia and Bohemia to that day , [; d:d approve and ufe hj/afit^Ba-ptffm as con[entaneGm to the G off el ]] as I beiore cited him.

c. 7. His next proof is [ ^' Dr* Prideanx faith "in his Lm, Councils,, that Peter Br nis and Ar*-^^ nold of Brixia, were in tlic fecond Laterane *' Council cenfured for the herelie of rejeding *'Infant-Baptifmj ct-c }

Anfxv. I have feldum read an Author whofe Proofs arc hker one another : i. Why mult we be told what Dr. Prtdeaux faith of the ads of an old Council, as eafiiy k/i:--^'n by us as by him ?. 2* Reader, there is not the Icaft G c proof

(b80

proof of any fuch matter raedled with' in that Council : Peter Crab doth not fomuch asnanfie that Council : Binii^.s only te41s you that the Atts of the Council are not extant^ but that Ah^ bos Vrjpergerifts , and Otto Icrifmaenfts give us fome account of what they did, whofe words have not a fyllable about any fuch fubjed, but only that they condemned the Schifmaticks who adhered to Peter Leoy an Aattfofe. 3. But^, how came Dr. Prideaitx fo to miitake ? Anfvs^ Thofe Papers of Dr. Prtdcaitx were pofthu-tnous fhreds, which whether he would have owned we cannot tell. But that which he faith, iff f that there were thirty Canons lately publiflied as that Council's, which BeiUrmine himfelf reje-deth as falfe : And feeing I never faw that for* gery 1 cannot fay whether any fuch thing be in it, which Pridemx's words recite : But it muft be from that or from nothing. And is this a good proof for Prideanx to tell you what a forged writing faith , which Crab and Bintiu and BelLirwine ejed or take for falfe ? 4. But what if that Council had fo accufed Brnis and Ar-mid J are they to be believed of them ? But' there is no fuch thing proved.

0. 8. His next proof is from Bernard^ of whom I need to fay no more than what Caf-fcmder^ Vfier and others have oft faid , that it was the forefard Mdnicbean Hef eticks called Ca-iharifis that Bernard defcribeth by the name of* Apoftolick* And that heweht by fame (d^sLeo--dtenfis did ) which falfly accufed the Albtgenfes^

among

( 38? ) among* them aS guilty of the fame herefies . And that the fame Bernard accuKth thcfv,- that he fpake of, of other heinous things -, If you believe from him that the jit'ot^enjes were guilcy oi the one^you have the fame tcftimony that they Were guilty of the other.

c. 9. His next proof is the report oi a late Papift fc/ Ftcccomes ^ 1,2. c, i. Whom he alfo after mtiicionech in his Rfply , who as truly numbreth LHther^Calvw^ anJ Bex^a with the ad-verfaries of Infant-Bapcifm. if fuch wicnefles be his proof, he could not have chofen better for his turn than him and CochLem^ and fome fuch calumniators, of which fort I could name him more.

^. 10. "His laft wirrtefsis. Dr. Hammond "eonfelfcth that Peter Bruis and Henry his *'Scholar and the Pctrobrnfiant and Henricani *' that fprung from them oppofed Infant-Ba-*^ ptifm. J

AnfvQ. I. Not a word of Dr. Hammonds books is cited to prove this , but Mr. Tomhes his Review. And muft we know of Mr»Tombes ^hat Dr. Hcimmond held ? No wonder then if 1 and the world mud: learn what I hold my felf, and what I have written, from fuch as Mr. i).-z«-'vers and Mr* Tomhesi And why not alfo from all the reft that have written againft me ? 2» I think it not worth my labour to fearch over Dr. Hammonds books to fee whether he hath faid this or not : feeing I know that he Was my neighbour and lived fo lately that he Cq % h^d

(S88)

had no other means to know what thefe two men and their followers held, than what we and others have as well as he. You mud give us elder proofs than this. 3. And if ir were af-ferted by him or proved by others, it were no proof that the Waldenfes denyed Infant-Baptifm ^ but it would only follow that Bruis and Henry were Mamchees and not Waldenfes^ which feem-cth to be the mi (lake of their later accuftrs at leaft.

<■» II. Pa^, 120. He proveth Mr. WiMs guiUy o'iHnfaithfulmfsj warn of corifcience^ ^hea-ting^ forgery •, and aiter, pag. 12 2. of manifold Lying. Eecaufe, i. He knoweth that Clnniacen^ fis —hath given no fuch vi>ickeda?jd falfeteftlmo^ ny^^c. And how proveth he thatf [For both Oftan-der and the Magdeb, from whom he had it, give an account of Fifteen particidars &:c.] Anfw,

1. Doth that prove that CUtniac. hath no more?

2, Do they f.y that thofe fifteen are all ? 3. And doth that prove that Mr. Wills knew ity who never faith, that he ever faw Cluniaccnps book ? as it feems Mr. D. did nor, 4. Doth Mr. D, himfclf know ir, of a book never read ? See how this accufer proveth Lyes ? For my part I have not at hand either CluniacK. or Ofirnder, or the ^dagdeb. and will not be at the labour to ^tx. and fearch them for nothing.

<^. 12. Tag, 121. he fuith , \_He knowts that thefe particulars he mentions^ were not charged on Peter Bruis hut on the Aibigeo's in the foU lowing Century by other hands than Bernard

and

(3^9)

and Cluniacenfis who were dejid long he-fore,

^/ifw, I. Ho7; know vou another mans knowledge ? 2. Long before what <' Before anyluch accufations on i\\t Aibigenfes ? Rt-ad Bernards Serm. 66. in Ca^jt, Siith Vjher ( than whom few men ever knew fuch matters better, or more truly reported them J de fnccej, c. 8. f. 232. Ber?turd Serm, 65. (^ 66. in Cant, mentioneth their oftnions partly connn.on with the Manichees, partly with the Orthodox, And that the Mant-chees were before among them he before proved at large, and that they ( called (^'athari ) were by ordinary error miftaken for Waldenfes and Leonifis, And p. 236. faith he j^ Sic c^ Apoftolic:s Bcrnardm CUreval. Cathari^ Eckc berlHS Schnafig, Vope lie ants (juido Armor tca>i. at que Albige?i(]hns Regordiis Regts Franc, Chrc-yiographnSj hmrefm attiibuit quam j4poflelm frd' dixerat —— deteflaruem r?itptiivs , (^ carnem comedere prohibcmcm. (Which in Bernard 2iVA Bchertus are commonly to be feen ) Qnod itt de Manicheis in terra Albig, comn'Jorantthiis cd' rrntti potefi , ita de toto Albig. genere diihm falfijJirKum ejfe confiat ^ (ive cum Thiiano a Pet, Valdo five cum Papir, Majfomo a Pet, Briiifio

eorum ort^inemplaccat repetere And p. 237,

238. he faith, A Petro Bmfio cr ejus fucceffo-re Henrico c^iii ( Ht ex Pet. Clft77iaccnfi intelli-

gitur) per annos viginti dot}rinam fnam

diffeminamnt Albigenfinm feciam deducit P.

A-f'ijfonihSy Apoftjlicos etiam deqitthns Serm,

(390)

66* tn Cant, ag^it Bcrn^rdm^ ^ofdcm effe cfir^a.-tiir'Vh::»-:• Walacnfis cum.Fuhlicayiis,

<, 13. Pag, 123. he provech that the Wal-denfis d;cl deny Infant-Baptifm, fr^.m the Decrees of 12. feveral Princes, and Popes; For proof ,of thar. he refcrretb us to his former book. When I look there I find as cited p. 248, &c^ his evi-(J'^nce is as folioweth.

I." Dr. Vjler out of the Fragments oi Jcjuit. ?'b.y P, Pithxm tells us,- that in the time of^o-^^ ben King o\ France^ thv^y oi Aquit and Tho-^^ lonfe, (principal places of the V/aldenfes ) did "^ deny Bapiifm ( for fo they called denying " Baptifm ro little ones ) c^c.

A^fiv, Mark Reader the truftinefs of this man. I. He maketh denying Baptifm ( to fig-nifie ) only denying it to Infants , without a word of proof • 2, He leaveth out the denying of our Redeemer , denying Lawful Adarri-age , and the eating of fiejijj dec, though con-joyned, in the teftimony. 3. He feigneth this to be faid of the Waldenfes, which is exprelly faid in the hiPcory to be fpoken of the Mani-cbecs ? Is not this an excellent Prover ? The words of Pith^pu hiftory cited by t^/J^^r de fuc-cef. p, 229. are thefe, Bmerfiffe tn Gallta M^-nich^os^ &;c. Pith, \ Eveftigio exorti funt per

AqHitaniam Alanich^i feducentes jnadebant

ncgare haptifrf?Hm , fignum crucisy Ecclefanty Q" ^p/ftm Kedemptor.em feculi , honorem Sanciomm,

conjHgta legitima , efikm- carniiim — fimilimo'

do. apid Tholefa^m inventi fant Manichdti^ 0*

2pf igne crcmatl funt : c^ per diver fas Occi^ dcntu pants /UlMnth^t ^ exorti—-Of the real prcfer.ce here is noihing.

5^. 14. 2. Saith Mr. IX [ *^ Dr. Vjher 2X^0 "tells us out ot Pap. Mujjon. that 14. Cttiz^ens '' ot Orleans, were convid: of the fume hei^efie, '/for denying Bapcifmai grace, and the real '' prefence, annd burnt alive, Herbert , Li(ms and " Stephen —

A'lfxK^, Here note, i. The hiftory cited 6y V^)tr ( 'phiiii. Floriaccnfis , rffercnte MAffan.) faith, \_ abnegiihant jacrt bapnfrn^ oyattam J buE not a vjord oi I^jfarits : And it was known that the Wuldenfcs opinion was that Priefls did not ex opere opernto give the Holy Ghoft, nor Ba-ptifm without the HolyGhofl, fave any ( young or old ). 2. It addeih that i\\t\j denied pardon of fin to be received^ Aiarrtage^ rrieats -which God created^ and fat,

^, 15. 3. He addeth, [Dr. Oj7;fr tells us, . Many of this Sed were about MiU-n ,

Anfw. Vfliers words are out of Chron. Herman. ContraCi, [ Qmfdam h^ereticoSy &c, certain hereticks among other opinions of ill error^ of the Manichean Sf.^, execrating the eating of Jl Animals — were hanged— J. 1. He proveth by this, that they were not the Waldenfes, but Aia-nichees. 2. Not eating fleflj is charged on them. 3. But not a word there of 3aptifm of ymng or old.

Cc 4 5^. 15*

( ?9% )

f, 15. 3. He addeth, \_9^lfeaHt o/RaduIph, Ard. that fever at wham they called the

Manichcan SeCi denyed 'Baptifm^ &c. ]

u^k/xv. Note I, Ardcns words cited by V^-er are, [ Tales [nut dec. Sitch are the Maniche-

^n heretickj at this time — who f^ljly Jay

they kjep the life of the Apofrles ^ f^y^'^'g that they lie not^ nor fwear at all •, and on pretence of ahftinence , and continence , do damn eating fiejh and marriage : They fay that it u as hep-noma crime to go to a Wifcj as to a Mother^ or Daughter : They damn the ■ Old Teflament ,.* of the New^ fome they receive, and fame ,not ' and which is worfcj they predicate two Afakjrs. of the Worldy believe thatij ad made In^vifiblcs and the pevil vipbles. So that they fecretly adore the Devil^ who they thinkjnade their bodies* The Sacrament of the Altar they fay ts meer bread: Bapttfm they dc^-ny : They fay none can be faved but by their hands : They deny the Refmre^lion of the bo-

4y.^

J. Here is not a word of Infants •, 2. They are defcribed and called fully Manichees. 3. if this teftimony be true , believe it : If not, truft n not, or at leail forge not fuch words a$ aire not here,

#. 16. He addeth, [[Pope i^<? the Ninth in his Pecret^ to Bifbop A<^mt,2Lhout 1050. commandeth that young children be Baptized, becaufe of original fin ].

Anfvp^^ I will not turn to fte whether it be Co ; but what's this (o the purpofe ? The Pope

bid§

bids Baptize Infants : Ergo not only tbc Mani^ chees but ihe Waldenfts dcnyed it ? I deny that conftquence.

<-. 17. He add?, \_ ^^ Greg, 7. decreed 1070* ^' that ihofe young children vvhofe Parents *' were abCcnt or unknown , fhould according *' fo the Tradition of the Fathers be Baptized.]]

A^'fw. If this prove that the Waldejifcs were againft Infant-Baptifm , it will prove that Pa-pifts, Proteftanrs and all arc fo } what proving is this ? OiBernard (next cited) we fpake before.

c. 18. His. next wimefs is, \^Ecberttis a great DoUor againft the Cathariy &c.

A'ifvr, Note Reader, that this Great DoBor was a Monk , and after an Abbot •, who faith that ''the Cathartfts againft whom he wrote, ^ I. Deny and damn Marriage, 2. And ail eating of ficfh , becaufe it comes by copulation. 3. That they fay that the Devil made all *'flcfh. 4. That they do not only fayBaptifm ^'profiteth not Infants, but more commonly *'thoii<5h more privately, that no water Bapcifm *^ proiiteih any one to falvation - — And ^' that Chrift was not truly born of a Virgin, *' nor had humane flefh , but a fhew of it , nor *^rofe from the dead , but Teemed to die, and '•rife. They are Manichees : They keep the *'feaft of A^a»icheHs death : That they hold "that mens fouls are nothing but the apoftate ^^Spirits caft out of heaven , which by good '' works here may procure falvation : ] If all fbis be true, were thefe theI'Fi^/^f^r/Jr;.^ and is this

Mio

Mr. D.s praof Bihllot. Fat, To, 4. p. 2. p.

p. 19. His next proof is, [^ Erhrdrdns another great 1. o^or^ ^'c,]

Anfw. This Erhrardiis profefTeth to confute in the hereticks that he dealcih with, 1. That the Law is not of faith, but is to be reprobate o-'C, 2. He proveth itagainft them that the Prophets and Patriarchs are faved, 3. That it was the true God that gave Mofes ihe Law. 5.That God made all things and that they falfly held a Good and a Bad Mal^r of the World. 6. That children fhould be Baptized. 7. That it is lawful to marry. 9. For the Refurredion, and fo on. And are thckWaUenfessLud this man 10 be believed of them too?

5<. 20. Ermingendus another great Writer is his next ptoof.

Anjw, This Ermingardus alia^ Errnengandus^ ( we pardon him the mifnaming ) writeth a-gainft Hereticks that hold, i. That an evil God made the World. 2. That there are two Gods, a Good, and a Malignant. 3. That it was not the true God that gave Aiofes the Law. 4. That Mojts was a Magician. 5. That Marriage is unlawful, and fo on as the rell, even to the denyal of the Refurredion. And about Baptifm (C<^p. i2,fag. iz^ct^Bihi.Pat, To.4., Part, I. ) that Baptifm profits neither young nor old without the impofition of their hands. \\ Is this VL good witnefs that the Waldenfss were againfl: Infant-Baptifm ?

Rea-

(395)

Reader, I am almofl: a: the end of his proofs hc:re , and yet bive not patience thus to lole precious time , .in openinig the reft ot his abules : T!ie few remaining are hke the reft 1 Yet here he foundeth his proof of Twelve Decrees, and endcthwiihan inlbitaticn agaipft me and c-tbcrs.

^. 21, In his AV//)', f. 125. he adds Rel-7ierins •, which giveth me occalion to tell the Reader, that if he will perufe this one Author, he will better underhand the truth of the whole bufinefs , than by reading many confounders that fpeak upon fame they know not whar. This RheiKhcYHs tells us, that he v^as one of the Arch-hereticks, and among them feventeen years ; that is the Catharijh : He tells us upon his own knowledge, not only how many forts of them there were, whom ( being then an Inquifitor ) he calleth herecicks , but alfo how many Churches the Catharifis had , and what number each Church had , and where they were , and what every Sed: held , as ditferent from the re^^ Whereas many ignorant writers of ihofe times confound them. From him we have diftinct notice that the Adanichees and Cathayifts then held the horrid berefies charged on the WaUenfes^ znd that the Lio7nfis or T^ufcres de LugdHno (the true Waldcnfes and yihijienfcs ) were indeed free from them-and abouiiror/Jj/p and Church Government, they differed from thePontificiariszs the Proteftants do : But tor dodiinals (about \ rc-

defti-

deftination, Free-will , Mans Power, Venial fm, Juftiiication , Merit, £^c ) there is no re-gardable difference charged on them. Cap. 5. He givcth you a Catalogue of the Leant ft s opinions, of wnich twenty are againft the Papal Government : Then he faith, they damn the Sacraments of the Church : And here come in the words cited by Mr, D, Where note, i. That he maketh them fay that \_Catechifm ts nothing ~\ 2, Item cjuod ablntio , (^Ude datnr In-fantihiis nthil frofit, J That the xvajlnn^ which IS given to Infants^ profits not, ^ 3. That the Godfathers underfland not what they jljonld an-fwer to the Prieft, 3 4* That they rejeEi exor-

cifmes J and the bcnedi'dto?u of B^ftifif.

that a Prieft in mortal fin rnay 7iot confecrate the Sacrament^ &c. J And let the Reader note that the Popifn dodrine then was, tha^ all Baptized Infants were certainly faved, becaufe Baptized, how wicked foever the Parents, Prieft , and Godfathers were : And that all thefe (Priefts, Parents, and Godfathers^ were then fo often grolly ignorant and wicked, as became thefcandalof all good people. And note that here Reinhe-riis faith not that they rejeiJed B^nftifm of Infants^ nor held it unlavpfidy but that, i. ^b-iutiOj the outward wajhing, 2. .^<e datur^ which dc faclo was then gt^en Infants, 3. Nihil profit , profits nothings plainly meaning no more but that the children of wicked ignorant' Parents, prefented by Godfathers that know ^lot fo much as what to anfwer the Prieft, and

Ba-

Baptized by wicked Priefts who tell them that ex optre oferato ihey are now cenainly in a fta:e ot falvacion , are not faved by this wafhing , iinlefs they have alfo the Baptifm of the fpi-rit , which is not this way afcertained to them.

And accordingly they meant of Catechizing • that is, of the Popiih Catechizing only •, And of the other Sacr^.metits , as under the Popilh norion of a Sacrament which giveth grace ex opere operate. And when he faith that \_Sa' crayncmum Conjugii damnant J he openeth the my fiery of that accufacion. i. They denyed Marriage to be a Sacrament. 2. And he faith [D/-centes mortaliter peccare conjitges^ fi abfqite fpe frolts convemant, J It feems they were too rigid for Challity , but not againfl: Marri-

age.

C. 22. And that this is the true meaning of Reinherns appeareth, i. By the phrafe of the context. 2. In that he never offcreth to confute any fuch error of theirs, as the denial of the lawfulnefsof Infants Baptifm. ::. Andfpeak-i g Cap. 6. of the Orththevfes he further expound-eth ail [^ Parvulis vero non prodefi nip fmrint perfecii in [eBa, ilia ] the words before being [^ De haptifmo dicunt^ quod nihil ^jaleat , nip cfuantum valeam merit a haptiz.aritis, ] So that it is not J'ttpj^dohaptifn that he accufeth them of, but {t it Bapiifm pro/ire.h not Infants unlefs the BattiTLC'-s ( orParenis) be good-, that is, asafore-faid, When done by wicked Priefts to the children of the wickcJ. ^•23,

(39S)

<fi 2^1 And for funhcr evidence , the next Hiftoriaii added by Gretfer, ( BibL Patr. ^o. 4, Part,2.p» 776. ) Pet, Pilichdorf feemeth oneof the mofi learned and acquainted with what he wrore of any other that have then written againft the Wald€?ifeSyZx\& he refuteth their opinion of the invalidity of Sacraments, when adminiftred by wicked Preifts, c, 16,17. But never faith a word of their denying Infant-BapLifm , even when he accurately and copioiifly in Thirty fix Chapters reckons up and confutcih their differences from the Papal Church* And can we think fuch anaan ( and almoft all that confound them not with the Cathariftsihxi were Manichees) would overlook this, in fuch a perfecuting bloody time ^ when they racked every word of the poor diffen^ tg-s to make a herefie otit ?

^, 24. To Pilichdorf is added another accurate confucer of their opinions, that hach not a word of any fuch charge.

And next is added an exad: Catalogue of their ( fuppofcd ) errors to the number of Thirty fe-ven , and not a word of this among them all.

And next is added the Mjdiu examinandi hsi-reticos ; And next de erornhiu Begehpirdorum ; and have not a word of it*

Vv^hat the Panift: dodrine was you need no better informer than Lucoa Tndenfis foregoing {Part, I, 636. who writeth againd worfe per-fons ( though Gretfer intitleth it againft the JU bigefifes ) and yet chargeth them not with this J

( ^99 )

viz.. Cap. I. li. 2. r In cafe of neccffuy c^ery Neophyte ;?7^j^f Baftiz^ed^of any Lay-man^ Jew, Heretici^^ or Gtntile, But for the dignity of the Sacrament it mufl be done by a PrelbyLer or Deacon , if there be opportunity ^ and received from any other , it is not at aH to be iterated. By thus Sacrament ^ both Infants and adult are Rege-mratedof Water^ and the Spirit ^ andreceive re^ njiffion of all fnis^ with the adoption of the children cf God,

0. 25. If all this will not clear the Waldenfes at Mr. £).'jbarr, and if he look that we ihouid rake notice of his Dutch A4artyrologie ^ and his Merningw^ let him that erreth, err ftill.

CHAP.

C405)

CHAP. IV.

His Impenitence in Calumniating the Donacifts (and NovaiiansJ reprehended,

(. I. "O^cb" ^3^' ^^ ^^^ Reply he returneth.co JL this nororious calumny, and charging Mr, Willes with diiingeiiuicy he tails lo his wont-ed way of proving > i. From Sehfifltan Frank, and Trvisk^y whom I neither have at hand, nor am obliged to believe in telling me what the Dtf-riatifis held, nor to believe that Mr. L\ here f^ differs from hirafelf, as truly to report ihem* Once for all, It is ufual with Writers to charge the Anabaptifts as following the Donatifts in Re-baptizing, but not in denying Infant-baptifm : For the Dunatifis baptized again both In'ants and adult* And it is like this deceived this temerarious man.

5^,2. Next he repeateth his i^lfhoods of Crc/-coniHS, FHlgentiiis , Vine, FiEiory which I have (hewed to be done in great temerity.

5*^.3. Thirdly he repeateth his ftupendious ftan^ der of An^in a6 with much z^eal and fury in many Books oppofing the Donatifts for denying Jn^ fant-haptifn-^ of which in them all (3s far as I can find ) he haih not one fyllable, but the clear contrary, as is proved by me.

<f. 4. Bfcaufe Eckbertus and Emericus charge the Waldenfes herein oi conforming to the Dona* tiils and Novatians. i»Ic was not the Waldenfes

they

they rpake of as I proved, but the Manichean Catharifts-, 2. Or if they confounded them ihey wronged them-, 3. And if they fay as he report-eth,ihey belied the Donatifis-^ and why then Ihould I believe them } 4. But this time-robber hath tempted me once more to perufe EckbntHS the Abbot, and to read his Serm. 7. and 8. and where-ever this fubjed is his theam, and 1 find not one fyllable of any fuch matter in him of either Donatifls or Novatians -jfuch a man have we now to deal with.

^. The reft of his recitals are not worthy the recital: The Anfwer before given is fufficient. Only I fay again that his contempt of fo full a teftimony as the Decreeof a Council at that time \ for receiving withont rehaptiz,ifig fnch as the Donaiifts hjftiz.ed in Infancy^ cited by C^Jfan-tier as a cenain proof, is a proof that there i« ^vorfe than a weak judgement in faults

P4 CHAP.

(^01)

CHAP. V.

ffls renemd (^alumny of the old Brittaiiis h^^

proved.

^. I. 13 Epeating and defending Fabians fop-JLV P^ry, he arguech that it could be nothing elfe in -which they are [aid to contradiEi the yipofiolick, Catholick^ Church^ Anfw. I. If Beda fay that Anguftine tells them that in many things they do contrary to the Roman Cat ho lie k^ and the ApoflolicJ^Churchy doth it follow that the three things in which he requireth their concurrence were aH part of thofe many ? To preach the Gofpel to the Saxons was one. Is that a point that they differed from all the Apoftolick Church in ? When it feeraeth to be from no other reafon, than that they would not own the Saxons that had conquered them, nor the Papal power that would ufurp upon them : And on the faitie reafon they might as. vyell refufe to baptize the Saxons children. 2. But there is no fuch thing in the words of "Bede, as I have fhew-td [* b^t according to the manner of the Church €f_ Rome , cfrc, ] And who knoweth not that the Church of Ksme , and all in its communion ihcn called the amvrffd Ch^inb^ ufed in baptifm,

the*

(403)

^bcWhite Garment^the taflingMilk,<indHony^anci Cioryfme ^ as an jipoftolicat tradition or fuch as ihey knew no original of ? Tertitfltan and £/>/-fhaniHs alone are full witnefTes of this, if there were no more.

5^.2. There is nothing in the jcft that I think needeth a word more of anfwer than I before gave. And I fear being guilty of idle words and loft time in writing needlcfly*

Dd 2 CHAP,

C404>'

CHAP. VL

Of his venturous re fort of Eifiof Ufhers cenfitrA of me,

IN his Reply fag. 51. he faith {_ I have an ho^ nourable regard to his ferfon , and due value to hts labours J ejfecially where he has laid out him^ felf to promote pratlical holinefi (and wherein as J have judged his grcatefi excellency lies } fuppofwg had he let (^ontroverftes alone^ and ad* dided hirrfelf thereto y he would much more have furthered the peace and union he pretends to prO" mote: It having been^ as J have heardy a judgement that Bijhop Ufher made of himy that if he ferfifted in Polemical writings , he was like ta prove a trouhlery rather than a promoter of peace* ]

Here, I. See how he feareth not to make reports of the dead by this hear fay ? No wonder if by this fort of men I my felf am by backbiting fo frequently traduced, and faid to Preach and Print that which never was in my mouth or books or thoughts >

2. Should one ask hrm whom he heard this from, do you think we fhould get a fatisfying anfwer ? No <jne is here named.

3» It is poffible BifhopUj/jfr upon the coming forth of my Aphorifms {which had many crudities, andmany quarrelled at it more than there was caufcjmight fear any thing that looked like uilufual.

4« But I ask the Reader whether this be a probable report, when he underftandeth,

I. That I was for ferae weeks familiar with the Bifhop, and he never fpake a fyllable to me of fuch importance, 2. That when Dod. Kendal and I were together with him, and our queftion was what was jH^nflins jugement of Redemftton^ Pcrfeverance^ and fonie other things, he exprefly averred that my AfTertion in all thofe was the truth. 3. But I imagine this following might be the occalion of the report. Dr. Kendai had feme acquaintance with and intereft in the faid Arch-Bi/hop, and he having written two difputations againft me, I had anlwered the firft, and had drawn up part of the anfwer to the fecond ; But Mr. Fines and Dr. Kendal defired me to meet at EUliop Vfhers lodging in order to the ending of our difference. There the Bifhop motioned that we fhould promife to write againft eachoiherno more : which we did, and I caft by what I had begun. But yet Dod. K. after in a Latine Trea-tifc broke that promife (which occafioncd my verfes in the end of my Difpute of the ObjeA of Juftifying Faith againft Mr. Warner^ which fome tjnderftood not. ) Now it is not unlikely that the Bifhop might fay that if Dr. A', and 1 perfifted in that Difpute, it would but trouble the Church. I am fure he faid no moretome, nor fo much.

As for Mr. jD.'s judgement, I deferve not the

honour he giveth me, but indeed I think that of

moft men that I have had to deal with in that

kir^l, he is one of theunfirteft to make himfeh a

Dd 3' Judge,

(406)

Judge, who is fit to meddle with Controveyfe^ or to judge himfelf much fitter than me.. Doubt-lefs his knowledge bath coft him much lefs time and ftndy than mine hath done me •, And if his advantage be in greater illumination of Cods Spirit , as I ferioufly profefs to fear left I fliould want it, for my manifold fins againft the Spirit, and therefore have caufe moft earneflly to beg for it ^ fo I could wiQi that he had better manifeftcd it, than in thefe two Voluems he hath done : at Icaft by an ordinary humane friendfhip to hiftori-cal truth. For my part I had never more pub-iilhedany thing in this caufe, if my fenfe of the hurt and danger of their Separations and Divifions of Chriftians, and deftrudion of Love and Peace, had not moved me much more, than any great zeal againft bare rebaptizing, in it felf confidered, efpecially if hypothetically done»

Poft-

C407)

Poftfcript.

s

I. ^^Incc the writing of this, I have perufed Smaragdus, Peter Ahba.s CLuniacenfts^ and Bernard^ which ^^-^ were not before at hand. And I (hall give you a true account of their teftimo-

nies.

I. As for Smaragdt^^ I never before read him, but on this occafion getting his expoficion on the Epiftles and Gofpels I find that there is a great agreement indeed among Mr. Banvers witnefTes, that in his citations he is flill Hke him-felf.

j. 2. Smaragdpu on i Vet, 2. in oth Pafch, foL 87. faith, Q Sinite farvulos venire ad mcy taliHm enim efl regnum coelorum : Hanc cnimfan-Ham^ fHram cfr innocentem infamiam^ -per hap-tifmi gratiam cafia mater gignit Ecclefa ~\ 'That is ]^fHfftr little children to come to me^for cf fuch is the Kingdom of Cod ^ ^'For this ho-Dd 4 ly

^^ ly pure and innocent Infancie , the Church " their chaft Mother doth by the grace of Bi-" ptifra beget.]

vV 3. And on Mar» 16. in A[cenf. fol. ici, [[ Cum autem dicatur , Q^i vera non crediderit coiidemnabit^r^ quid hie dtcimm de farvidis^ qni per atatem adhnc credere mn 'valent ^ Nam de majoribiu nulla, qnxfiio efi : In Ecclefia ergo fahatoris per altos parvuli credmt^ ficut ex ali^ is ea qiu tills in bapttjmo remittunXHr peccata traxerunt. "]. That is, [_ He that heluveth and is *Bapt.iz,€d jJjall be favedy dec. But when it is faidy "But he that believeth not (hall be condemnedy whst fay We here to little ones who by their age are not yet able to believe f For of the elder there is no qmfion, 'therefore in the Church of our Savioury little ones believe by others , as from others they have drawn thofe fins which in Ba^ ptfm are forgiven to them^

<<, 4. A^d in fab. Pentecoft. in Ad, ig.fol^ J 03, 304. having at large opened how Cate-fhumens were injirii^ed before 'Baptifm , and defcribed approvedly their Ceremo-nies , of f^f^f^jfingj breathing on the^n^ exorciz^ing^ falty the ' Creed to be recited and under food , he addeth^ [^ Quja ergo Pnrvidi^ nccdum ratione utentes, h<f.c minime cap ere poffunt , oportet ut asm ad imtclligihiiem (Ztatem ptrveneri7ity doceantur & fidei facr,imcnta q^ confcifionis 7r,yftcria^ ut ve-? raciter credant , Cr diligent i cur a cuftodiant fonfefftonemfuar/i, Plane dixirnus ; (^uia quam^ '' <yis vlli necdum loqui voffwnt ^ pro ilUs c^ con^

(4op)

^tentur & loqumtur e^ui tos de Uvacro fomk fufcifiunt, Ncc mmertto: dignHm efl ut qni aliof rum peccatis obnoxii fnnty altorum etiam confef^ fiojje, per mimfieriam haptifnjatu^ remiffionem criginalium ferctpiant peccatornm, ~\ That is [ But feeing little ones that have not yet the life ofreafon^ <aHrJot receive thffe things^it is meet that vphen they €ome to age of tinderfi an ding they be taught both the Sacraments of faith and the my fiery ofconfeffion^that they may truly believe^ and by dtltgznt care may keep their cofjffffion : And notandefervedly: It ts meet (^or worthy ) that they who are obnoxiopu to {or byjothers ftns, by others confeffion alfo jhohld by the my fiery of B^tpttfm^ receive the pardon of original fins, \

^. 5. Yet it's true that this fame Author doth oft call for confeffion from the adult, and per-fwade men not to truft to meer outward baptizing, as may befeen on i Cor.gSoX. 30. &c.^uih^ could reconcile ihisto Infant-Baptifm, though Mr, D, cannot. See him further fol, 85. c, in Math.iS^ andfol.85.in I Pffi3.(^foi,84.<^fol.i9.in//rf.6o.

<<. 6. II. As to Pet. Cluniacenfts (another Abbot near the fame time , and contemporary with Bernard) he is the moft plaufible of all Mr. DJs witnefTes , as againft two men, Pet. Bmisj and Htnry : But, i, Fol. r. Epiil, i. he writcth Twenty years after Peters (owing his dodlrine. 2. And though Henry lived in his time, yet fol. 2. he faith, [_ Sed cjnia earn ita fentire vel pr<£dicare , nondiim miht plene fdes f^Eia efl J dtjjcro rcfponfionem quoufqae cr horum

qUA

ly«^ dicmtur indHbitatam habeant certttudinem 3 that is, ( having called Henry the heir of Peters vpickednefs , who rather changed than mended his Devi HijlJ doEixine ) '' But becaufe I have not *'yet teftimony fully credible ('or am not furc ) '** that he fo thinketh, and preacheth, I delay *'my anfwer till 1 can have undoubted cer-^ *' taij^ty of the things reported ]. By which" it is plain that he knew neither of them , but went by that fame, which commonly then ilandered them.

^. 7. 3. And in his firft Propofal fol. 7, ( of Hojfmeifters Edit* ) he reciteth the words fuppofed to be theirs , in which they deny as much the Salvation as the Bapttfm of all, Jn-^ fants* Ex his domini verbis Mar, 16, aperte tnonftrant , nullum nifi credidertt , (^ haftiz.a<» tus fuerit , hoc eft , nifi Q^rifiianam fidem ha-huerit ^ baptifmum perceperit , pojfe falvari: ^am non alterum horum , (ed utrumque pariter falvat : Vnde Infantes^ licet a vobii baptiz^en^ tur , quia tamen credere , ohfiante atate^ non fojfunt , nequaqnam falvantur, 1 So that it is the falvation of any Infants that they principally here deny • accounting Baptifm needful to ialvation.

^, 8. "And fol. 8. He addeth their next *' charge that fama vUl^avit , fame reported , *^ that they wholly believed not Chrift^Prophets^or "Apoflles, the Old or New Teftamenr. Sed quia fallaci rumor urn monftro non facile affenfum frabere debco ( waxime cum quidam vos totum

di»

C4")

iivitium CAnortem ahjectffe afprrrent, alii ^«^-dam ex iffo vos Jiffcefiffe contentiAnt ) cuipare vos de incertis nolo\: Where he fully confefTeth that he knew them not^ but went by famey and that he fufpeSied himfelf this fame to be falfe , calling it a Monfler , and proving it contrary to it felfy and proFefling that he ought not to believe it : But yet left it fhould betrue, hegoeth on ro .prove the truth of the Scriptures, as he doth Infants falvation and Baptifm.

^. 9. Now I leave it to the Reader,among many uncertainties, which of thefe he will believe moft probable : i. That alJ the parties were flande-red : 2. Or that Peter and Henry were flan-dered by occafion of the mixed Manich^es^ or by the vulgar lying levity or Popi/h malice. 3. Or whether Peter and Henry were guilty as fomc now, though the reft were not. 4. Or whether they and the Albigenfes and Walden-fcsy really denyed all Infants falvation and Baptifm ( their very pretended words being cited.) 5. Or whether they were (landered as to Infant-falvation, and not as to their Baptifm. 6. Or whether all this rofe not from their denying the falvation of the children of all the wicked, as ex opere operato^ by the Baptifm of the Prieft, and their rcfuiing to bring their own children to be Baptized by fuch Priefts, and their telling 'the wicked at age , that their Infant-Baptifm would not fave them. Believe which of thefe you -find moft caufe.

<. 10.111.

f, 10. Ill- As ioT Bernard J r. Though ci boly man, yet his conceit that Papal unity was ceceiTary, and that the DlfiTenters caufe dconfufion, tranfparted him with fuch prejudice againft them, as we have now againft the vikftScds. 2» He was acquainted with Clmiacenfis and might believe him. 3. He took things ontruft as he did. 4* He chargeth even the lecret hereticks that he writes againft, as holding it unlawful tofwear, and yet lawful to forfwear, rather than reveal their cafe : Scrm, 65. 5. And that in fccret ihey are reported to commit filthy wickednefs, not to be named. 6. That he heareth that fome of them rejed Pauls writings , and; the Old Teftament. 7. That they lived fcandaloujQy with Women : and he talketh as if it were impofii-ble for men and women to dwell together, and yettobechaft. .8. Yet fheweth that he moft uncharitably fufpeded them, faying, [ Sifidemin-terrogeSy mhiL(^m'iftianim ^ (i convey fat ionem^ ni" hil trrefrehenfthilius ^ d' ^^^ loquitur^ fa^is prs^ bat : y'ldeas hominem in teflimonium fuiz fidei frequent are Ecclefiam , honor are prefhyteros^ of-ferre munm funm^ confejjhnem facere ^ facra^ mentis communiicare ( and did they deny Infant-Paftifm then f ) Q^id fdelim ? Jam quod advi-tarn morefque jpe^at^ neminem concuttt^ neminem circumvemt^ neminem fupergreditur , pallent ora jeJHniis , panem non comedtt etiofpu ^ operator znanibtii quibm vitam fuftemat : Vbi jam Vul-* pes ^3 And what's the proof againft them, [^z-

C4I3)

fitarum demolitio teftatur vitlpem : AMistes r»-ItClps <viriSy o- viri difmi[[is uxortb^j ad iftss fe ^onferunt : clerici & facerdotes popnlis Ec^ clefiifque relicts intonfi ^ barbati a.pud ecs, xtp-de t extorts & t ex trices flerumque ijiv^nti funt. Anrton gravis demo lit io iftaf Anmn opera vulpi-urn h^c f ] And ihe way he appoints for tlidr purgation is to put women out of their houfes. 9. Serm. 66» he chargcth them for being agairtfi AdurriagCj yea that they taol^filthmefi to be only in hanjing Wives, 10. And with forbidding to Marry^ they joyned ahflaining froo meats : and fo holding devilifh dodrine : Bm that feme allowed Marriage only to Virgias, but not fecond Marriages : That they abhorred Milk yt and all that was made of it, and ali ttuc was procreated by generation, and that (de w^ fania Manichdi,) That they held thcmfelves oa-ly to be the Church , and derided them that Baptized Infants 1 ( yet he himfelf writes lai-gr-ly £p. ad Hug, de SanBo ytBorey for the fai-vation of perfons that have faith, and die unba-ptized through neceflity ., allcdging Ambrofey Anflttij Cyprian ^ And concludeth Infants favel by others faith, as they were guilty by others fin. J II. In Epijt, ad Hildefonfmn he faitli, o^ Henry by name, that he was an Apoftatc, that made a trade of preaching, to live by in ne-cedity, and what money he could get of fimple people and women more than found him food, he fpem in playing at dice, or other more iihhy ufes t that after his daies applaufe by the people he was

found

found at night with whores : that he ihi^s left every where fuch a ftink behind him, that he could come but once to a place, naming many Cities,

Now let the Reader judge if Bernard be to be believed what a man this wa5 ; If not, what his teftiraony is worth*

AS I am writing this, the Hawkers are crying under my window, lAv, Baxters Jr^ guments ft)r Believers y &c. The men that cite Authors at this rate, cite me againft my felf, with the like confidence : Becaufe I have prov^-cd in my Treat, of Confirmation^ the neceflity of perfonal Profefiion in the Adult : And Jhe that will think that fuch dealing as this doth need an anfwer , and that if the Adult muft make an intelligent profeffion. Infants muft not be Baptized, let him be ignorant •, for I ha^c not time to fa-tisfiehim,

^i

T I N I S.

Infant Baptifm Aftertcd and Vindicated by Scripture and Antiquity, in Anfwer to Mn Henry VaiiVers^ with a full detcAion of his Mifre-prefentation of Divers Councils and Authors both Ancient and <Mo-dern, &c. ^yO. Wills: Sold by>. ^bin/on at the Gdden Lyon in St. i^a/^rs Church-yard.