Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	name_n	new_a	testament_n	2,500	5	7.9117	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89563	A defence of infant-baptism: in answer to two treatises, and an appendix to them concerning it; lately published by Mr. Jo. Tombes. Wherein that controversie is fully discussed, the ancient and generally received use of it from the apostles dayes, untill the Anabaptists sprung up in Germany, manifested. The arguments for it from the holy Scriptures maintained, and the objections against it answered. / By Steven Marshall B.D. minister of the Gospell, at Finchingfield in Essex.	Marshall, Stephen, 1594?-1655.	1646 (1646)	Wing M751; Thomason E332_5; ESTC R200739	211,040	270

further Reformation is to begin with this your darling the casting out this point of Infant-Baptisme a point which you conceive to bee a mother corruption which carries in her wombe most of those abuses in discipline and manners and some of the errors in doctrine which defile the reformed Churches without which all after Cathechizing Censures separaton Church-Covenant c. are altogether insufficient to supply the want of it Secondly that Baptisme therefore hath not that influence into the comfort and obligations of Consciences as it had of old And thirdly that the Assemblies not beginning with this point is one great cause why Gods blessing doth no more accompany them whilst they waste much time about things inconsiderable in comparison of this and either hastily passe over or exclude from examination this which deserves most to bee examined Ah Sir How deare and lovely are our owne children in our eyes did ever any before you conceive so many and great evills to follow upon the baptizing the children of beleevers that such Monsters should be bred in the wombe of it or conceive that the removing of this would bee the healing of all I verily thinke should another have spoke such things of farre greater points you would have called them dictates Chimaraes bold assertions and what not Whether your Examen of my Sermon and your twelve Arguments in your exercitation will prove it to bee a corruption of Christs institution whether the reasons for Paedo-Baptisme be far fetched whether there be a cleare institution of Christ against it as here you affirme wee shall have leisure God willing to examine in their due place but for the present suppose mee to grant your postul●tum that it is an applying of an institution to a wrong subject yet I would faine learne of you how all these odious consequences will bee made good how these abuses in doctrine discipline and manners which you mention would be taken away if Paedo-Baptisme were removed nay would not the selfe same things still bee found as grounds or occasions of the same differences while some professe they would baptize any whether Turkes or Heathens who onely would make a profession of their faith in Jesus Christ and then admit them to all other Ordinances and not have them Excommunicated è sacris but onely a private consortio though their lives should prove scandalous and I am misinformed by good friends who know and love you very well if your selfe incline not this way others would take the same course before Baptisme which now they doe before admitting men to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and would proceed to excommunication à Sacris as well as privately withdraw from such as prove scandalous and obstinate yea and take themselves bound to separate from mixt communions with them as much as they doe now notwithstanding their admission by Baptisme in your way And in this various manner of admitting men to Baptisme and dealing with men in other censures every Church or Eldership proceeding according to the largenesse or strictnesse of their owne principles I can see nothing but that the same abuses in discipline and manners which are now found among Christian people the same controversies about such as should be admitted to the Lords Supper the same divisions and separations would be sound in the Church which now alas take too much place amongst us This I say supposing your Postulatum were a truth But on the contrary supposing it not to be a truth what a Deformation instead of a Reformation should wee bring in in casting the children of Beleevers out of the visible Church reputing them no better then Turkes and Indians and especially doing it upon such grounds as are pleaded by you and others which even alter the state of the Covenant of grace As for your second I know not what influence of comfort or obligation upon conscience Baptisme had of old which is not now to bee found among them who are truely baptized who injoy not onely the putting away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ And lastly for what you speake of the Assembly I impute it to your prejudice and extreame doting upon your owne opinion that you thinke this Point most worthy of their examination and to your misinformation to speake no worse that they waste much time about things inconsiderable in comparison or that they exclude this from Examination or seeke to stop it from any Tryall or that they hastily passe it over This is a very bold charge which you give upon the Assembly in the face of the world What evidence have you for this unlesse your Compassionate Samaritan bee Authentick with you The Apostle commands Timothy not to receive an accusation against an Elder unlesse it bee under two or three witnesses But for one man to cast thus much filth in the face of an Assembly of Ministers is very high and savours little of that modesty or meeknesse to which you did sometimes pretend How farre the blessing of God who hath not hitherto altogether left us notwithstanding our unworthines doth and will accompany the endeavours of the Assembly it is fit to leave to himselfe who gives increase to Pauls planting and Apollo's watering according to his good pleasure But as for their shutting out the due examination of this Point you are wholly mistaken though they have returned no answer to your paper It is true as I told you in the beginning that wee are shut up by Ordinance of Parliament from answering any private mens Papers or Bookes without leave from the Houses but I dare speake it in the name of the whole Assembly that they would bee glad you were admitted to dispute all your grounds among them In your next Paragraph which containes a comparison betweeve the evidences held out in the New Testament for the Religious observation of the Lords day and this of Infant-Baptisme you first make your selfe merry with my expressions that all who reject the baptizing of Infants because there is not an expresse Institution or Command in the New-Testament doe and must upon the same grounds reject the observation of the Lords-day But I am no whit ashamed of those words They doe and they must upon the same Principles if they be true to their Principles reject the one as well as the other And though I want the skill which some others have to plead for the Lord-day yet I suppose you shall find I have skill enough to make this good That there is no more expresse Institution or Command in the New-Testament for the Lords day then there is for Infant-Baptisme And whereas you alledge that some of the reformed Churches reject the Lords day and yet entertaine Infant-Baptisme and thence inferre that these two must not necessari'y stand and fall bee received and rejected together I answer Those Churches which doe so conceive that there is an institution for the

are you in love with your own Babe and come out into the field so bravingly and gaint-like to tread down all who stand against your way I have with the Lords assistance undertaken your pompous Treatise and as farre as my impaired health and other services would permit indeavoured to bring your Examen to the tryall with as much brevity and clearenesse as I could possibly and I hope also with so much evidence of truth that there shall be no need of a Colledge to make any further answer unto you Wherein I shall not as you have done carpe at every phrase or expression nor digresse into impertinent Discourses thereby to swell up a volume nor amuse the Reader with multitudes of Quotations of Latine and Greek Authors and then turn them into English nor frame as many senses of an expression as is possible and then confute them and so fight with men of straw of mine own fitting up nor spend a whole sheet of Paper together in confuting what was never intended by my Adversary as the Reader shall clearly perceive you have deal● with me but plainly grapple with you and insist onely upon what properly belongs to the cause in hand But first give me leave to observe your destructive Artifice It is the Socinians way to elude all Texts of Scripture which are urged against them if they have been differently expounded by Learned and Godly men ancient or modern to question all conclusions infer'd by consequence from Scripture to deride the testimonies of any of the Ancients by discovering the nakednesse error and oversight of those Reverend men and by making themselves merry by turning the Orations Epistles or allusions of the Fathers into Syllogismes and by inserting of Ergo now and then to make all their Rhetoricall passages seem ridiculous I appeal to the judicious Reader whether this plot be not carried through your Examen Exercitation Especially I observe your maine faculty to lye in framing specious answers to Arguments brought to prove any thing Your great Argument in your Exercitation is if I can answer all Arguments for baptizing Infants then c. And then you form the Argument into severall shapes and seek to clude them and herein I confesse you are dextrous The rest of the Arguments wherein you doe assert or goe directly to prove alasse how inconsequent are they as will appeare when they come to bee examined The like course you take in your Examen laying out abundance of strength in the anosc●uasticall part waving and eluding the dint of an argument by distinctions and severall senses and finding some men of note to construe a Text otherwayes and the like So that the Reader may see what you doe not like but he may stay long enough before you bring satisfying arguments to settle him in that which you would have when you have startled him in what you would not have But this kind of disputing never edifies the Church what one book was ever written by any of our Divines even in the great point of Justification or Faith which some learned and subtle Papist hath not been able to cloud and slur in such a way of answering Well however I proceed to your Examen And I begin with your Prologue wherein you declare the occasion and end of this your writing the sum whereof you make to bee this First you sent as you say Nine Arguments drawne up in Latine to a Committee appointed as you were informed to give satisfaction about points of Paedobaptisme afterward Three Arguments more with a supplement of some other things in writing which were delivered to Mr. Tuckney and by him joyned to the other Papers your intent being either to give or receive satisfaction in this great point but to this day much contrary to your expectactation you have had no returne from the Committee Secondly you are more provoked by some passages in a Sermon of Mr. Vines Thirdly and by a comparison in my Sermon between Hazaels cruelty to the Infants of the Israelites and the principles of the Anabaptists Fourthly you finde mee too vehement in maintaining of this point of which you and others see no ground Fifthly yea Mr. Dan. Rogers confesses himselfe unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for it Sixthly that Mr. Ball cuts the sinewes of the Argument drawn from Circumcision Seventhly that Musculus at length found 1 Cor. 7. 14. impertinent to prove this point Eighthly to conclude upon your best search you are confirmed that it is an Innovation maintained by dangerous principles a thing not to bee acquitted from Will-worship that it hath occasioned many errors in Doctrine corruptions in Discipline and manners unnecessary and vaine disputes and almost quite changed the Ordinance of Baptisme c. This is the sum of your Introduction to which because it is but a pompous dumb shew I shall returne a very briefe answer First for your Latine businesse sent to the Committee I thought you had not been ignorant that the worke of Committees is but to prepare matter for the Assembly but neither Committees nor Assembly have power to answer any thing sent from any except from the honorable Houses without leave from the Parliament And if you please now to take notice of it you will no longer wonder why the Committee hath made no return to your private Paper this I thinke is sufficient to remove your first stumbling block onely I am further to tell you from Mr. Tuckney that hee desires you to get better evidence for what you relate concerning him for the truth is he neither mediately nor immediately received any Papers from you nor joyned your 3 last Arguments to your 9 first Secondly your offence at a passage in Mr. Vines his Sermon shall bee considered in the place where you againe repeate it and aggravate it to the utmost Part 2. Sect. 6. Thirdly as to your exaggerating my allusion to Hazaels practice I answer I compared not their intentions with his but the fruit of their principles casting all beleevers Children as much out of the Covenant of Grace as they do the Children of Turks and Pagans and therein you your self joyn with them Now whether such a comparison might not be used without any further Apologie I leave the unprejudiced Reader to judge Fourthly whether my proofs for this Doctrine are weak uncertaine far-fetch't shall God willing appeare to them who wil impartially read and compare your book and mine together Fifthly as for what you suggest from my Reverend and Learned Friend Mr. Dan. Rogers although enough might be taken out of his words in that book to declare his own meaning I rather chuse to set it downe in the very words which he wrote to me in a Letter bearing date the 29 of January last past in way of answer to a Letter which I wrote to him wherein I requested of him to know what in his name I should answer to this passage of your book his words are these If I were to

Infant-Baptisme hath been perpetually observed in the Christian Church for there is no ancient Doctor that doth not acknowledge that Infant-Baptisme was constantly administred by the Apostles 4. That notwithstanding all this evidence I have brought from Antiquity yet I build as little upon Antiquitie as any other man I acknowledge what learned Rivet saith to be very true that Tradition is in most points uncertaine and therefore he that will build sure must build upon the Scripture Proinde necessario veniendum erat ad argumenta ex Scripturis quae si rem non evincant frustra traditionem advocabimus Animadv in Annot. Grotii in Cassandrum Art 9. Pag. 71. And I would have you and every Reader to remember that I doe not build my faith upon humane Traditions in this Argument nor did the ancients build upon humane traditions in this thing the very Pelagians themselves acknowledge it upon this ground Parvulos baptizandos esse concedunt saith Augustine of the Pelagians qui contra authoritatem universae Ecclesiae procul-dubio per Dominum et Apostolos traditam venire non possunt lib. 1. de peccat merit et Remiss cap. 26. Nay they were forced to their owne prejudice to acknowledge that Infants were baptized secundum regulam universalis Ecclesiae Evangelii sententiam lib. cont Caelest Pelag Now that which was pressed from the scope of the Gospell was not pressed as a Tradition and that which was acknowledged by the Pelagians to be the practise of the universall Church according to the rule of the Gospell was not built upon tradition I will therefore close up my testimonies produced out of the ancient writers with that savoury passage of learned Calvin in his Instructions against the Anabaptists Caeterum minime peto ut in eo probando nos Antiquit●s ●●llo modo juvet c. I doe not desire saith hee to borrow any helpe from Antiquity for the proofe of this point any whit farther then the judgement of the Ancients shall be found to bee grounded on the Word of God for I know full well that as the custome of men doth not give authority to the Sacraments so the use of the Sacrament cannot hee said to be right and regular because regulated by custome PART II. HAving made good the practise of Antiquity for the Baptizing of Infants I follow you in that which you are pleased to make the second part of my Sermon which you call prejudices against Antipaedo-baptists from their noveltie and miscarriages Where first you blame me for seeking by prefacing and setting downe a briefe touch of the Anabaptists carriage in Germany to create prejudice in my Auditors To which I answer that I yet never learned that a briefe setting downe the Originall History and State of a Controversie or the weight and consequence of it thereby the more to ingage the Readers attention was against any Rule or Law of Art either divine or humane but in case it were a fault Quis tulerit Gracchos You who begin your booke with telling how nine moneths since you sent thus many Arguments in Latine drawne up in a Scholastique way c. and never yet received any Answer and in the end of your booke intimated that though you allowed me but a moneth yet I have kept your booke a whole yeere unanswered and throughout your whole Treatise strive to make an ostentation of reading and put abundance of scoffes and jeeres upon them who are of a contrary mind to you and seeke to loade the opinion you write against as if it carried all kind of mischiefes in the wombe of it All which things you know well enough are apt to take the people but have no weight with them who use onely to weigh Proofe with Proofe and Argument with Argument you I say of all other should pardon such a peccadillo and might very well have passed over what either my selfe or Dr. Featlies Frontispice or Mr. Edwards his expressions might seeme to bee lyable to of exception in this kind In your second Section you blame mee for two things first that I gave you no more light out of Augustine to know who they were that questioned Paedo-Baptisme in his dayes you have searched and cannot finde any the Pelagians you acknowledge opposed it not the custome was so universall and esteemed so sacred that they durst not oppose it All the further light I shall now give in a matter of no greater consequence is that if you cannot finde any in Augustines dayes who questioned it I am contented you shall beleeve there were none Secondly you blame me for making such a leape from Augustines time to Baltazzar Pacommitanus as if be were the first who opposed it where as you alledge many who opposed it 400. yeeres before his time To which I answer I sayd not hee was the first whose judgement was against it but the first that made an head against it or a division or Schisme in the Church about it It is possible men may hold a private opinion differing from the received doctrine and yet never make a rent or divide the Church into factions about it But let us examine your instances you alledge the famous Berengarius as one 2. The Albingenses 3. Out of Bernard you mention another namelesse Sect. 4. Petrus Cluniacensis charges the same upon the Petro-Brusians To all which I answer first in generall That these instances of yours having occasioned mee to make a more dilligent search into the doctrine and practise of those middletimes between the Fathers and the beginning of Reformation in L●●bers time I dare confidently think that you will have an hard taske to prove out of any impartiall Authors that there were any company of men before the Anabaptists in Germany who rejected the baptizing of Infants out of the confession of their faith possibly some private man might doe it but I shall desire you to shew that any company or Sect if you will so call them have ever denied the lawfulnesse of baptizing of Infants produce if you can any of their confessions alledge any Acts of any Councells where this doctrine was charged upon any and condemned in that Councell you know the generalitie of the visible Christian world was in those dayes divided into the followers of the Beast and the small number of those who followed the Lambe who bare witnesse to the truth of the Gospel in the times of that Antichristian Apostasie these were called by severall names Berengarians Waldenses poore men of Lyons Albingenses Catharists Petr-Brusians and severall other names as may bee seene in Bishop Vshers book of the Succession and State of the Christian Churches Now all grant that the Church of Rome even in those dayes owned the baptizing of Infants and so did all those persecuted Companies or Churches of the Christians for any thing I can find to the contrary Severall Catalogues of their confessions and opinions I finde in severall Authors and more

that such Infants may bee elected though they are not regenerated for if there be any thing lesse then regeneration promised sure there can be no comfortable likelihood of the election of a child gathered from a promise of any thing which leaves a child in an unregenerate estate But I much admire that speech of yours where you feare you should incur blasphemy by challenging a promise which God doth not keepe because many of the children of beleevers prove wicked I beseech you tell me was it not so among Abrahams posteritie and yet you grant Abraham had a peculiar promise which wee have not might not they without blasphemy plead that promise notwithstanding that promise I will he the God of thee and thy seed was not made good to every one of them for it is most cleare by the Apostles discourse in the ninth and eleventh Chapters to the Romans that God was not the God of thousands of Abrahams seed either in respect of saving grace or outward priviledges for he cast off the Jewes from being his people and suffered them not to enjoy so much as outward priviledges but made choice of the Gentiles in their stead and yet I hope you will not say that God broke his Covenant with those that had the seale of the Covenant in their flesh and yet were rejected not onely from saving grace but from outward priviledges Next let us see how you avoid being goared by the three hornes of my Syllogisme I said all being left in the same condition 1. All must be saved Or 2. all must bee damned Or 3. God saves some of the Infants of the Turkes and some of the Infants of beleevers pro beneplacito After some discourse of the two first of these you deny the consequence It follows not say you God may save some and those some may bee the Infants of beleevers and none of the Infants of Turks and Indians It 's true a man that will may venture to say so and if another will he may venture to say That those some are the Infants of Pagans and not of Christians and hee that should say so hath as good warrant for this as you have for the other according to your principle But what 's this to the question before us I said This opinion leaves them all in the like condition One having no more reference to a promise then another Now if you will avoid being goared by any of these three hornes you should have shewed that according to your opinion there is some promise for some of the Infants of beleevers though there be none for the Infants of Pagans But in stead of shewing how your doctrine and opinion leaves them you tell me what God may possibly doe in his secret Counsell which is altogether unknowne to us But I perceive your selfe suspected this answer would not endure the tryall and therefore you quarrell at that expression of mine That if any of the Infants of such as live and die Pagans be saved by Christ then salvation by Christ is earryed out of the Church whereof God hath made no promise Against this you except 1. That salvation is not carryed out of the invisible Church though some Infants of Pagans should bee saved by Christ I answer it 's true and I adde That if any man shall say the Devils should be saved by Christ even that Opinion would not carry salvation out of the invisible Church But Sir we are enquiring after the salvation of them to whom a promise of salvation is made Now when you can prove that God hath made a promise that he will gather a number or hath a number whose names are written in the Lambs book although their Parents never knew Jesus Christ nor themselves ever live to bee instructed you may then perswade your Reader to beleeve that even some of the Infants of Pagans dying in their Infancy belong to the invisible Church and till then you must give him leave to beleeve that this answer is brought in as a shift onely to serve your present need Secondly you answer That men may bee saved out of the communion of the visible Church and you instance Abraham called out of Chaldea Job in the Land of Vz Rahab in Jericho and you say Hee that called these may save some amongst Turkes and Indians out of the visible Church I answer I hope in your next you will a little better explaine your meaning The Reader will certainly take this to bee your meaning that as Abraham Job and Rahab were saved out of the communion of th● visible Church in their dayes so some among the Turkes and Indians may bee saved out of the communion of the visible Church in our dayes But surely this is not your meaning you doe not beleeve that Abraham Job and Rahab were out of the communion of the visible Church though possibly the manner of their calling might bee extraordinary as afterwards St. Pauls was Nor doe you beleeve that the Eunuch when he was returned into Ethiopia was out of the Communion of the visible Church though his habitation at least for a● while was not among Christians but Infidels I am perswaded that you thinke all visible beleevers to bee within the Communion of the visible Church though possibly they may be hindered from being actuall Members of any particular Church I will not so much as imagine that you mentioned these three examples as a Blinde to deceive your uncautelous Reader and therefore I only desire you in your next to let us know your meaning plainely and discover to us this mystery how men may bee called to fellowship with Jesus Christ and yet have no communion with the visible Church of Christ The rest of this Section wherein you enquire what those promises are which are are made to the seed of beleevers I shall God willing give you an account of them in the next part of the Sermon whither now you call me onely I cannot but take notice of your confident brag in the close of this Section how manfully you have entred my out-workes and thereby incourage your selfe to scale my walls You indeed entred and set up your flag but I hope it appeares to the indifferent Reader that you are in no great probabilitie of getting any great spoile unlesse my walls prove weaker then the outworke which as yet are farre from being taken by you PART III. NOw wee come to that wherein I rightly placed the strength of my cause the evidence which the Scripture gives for Infant-Baptisme which before I proceed in the examination of I briefly propound to the Readers consideration that you have this advantage to make your worke have a specious probabilitie in that the question is concerning Infants concerning whom there is much silence in the Scripture and should any man argue against the justification of Infants by the Theologicall doctrine that is to bee found cleare in the Scripture how specious a plea might he make especially if his

author ●f spirituall Circumcision The Circumcision of the flesh was the Sacrament of it to them and now that is abolished we have baptisme to seale the same thing Let us see what your exceptions are against it First you acknowledge with me the Apostles scope is to shew that wee are compleat in Christ and therefore needed not Circumcision And you adde his scope was not to teach them that we have another ordinance in stead of Circumcision I reply it is very true he teaches them wee are compleat in Christ and need not Circumcision but it is as true that he further enlarges this comfort by shewing them that we have a visible seale of this compleatnesse in Christ and so it is more evident wee have no need of Circumcision Secondly say you Aretius in his Commentary sayes That the thing it selfe is asserted to the Saints without an outward symbole which yet the adversaries incessantly urged and for which Aretius his helpe you conclude it is utterly against the Apostles whole argument to say that they needed not Circumcision b●cause they had another ordinance in the room of it But Sir why do you thus frequently abuse your readers with the names of Learned men inserting some one sentence of theirs into your book and thereby insinuating to your Reader that they are of your Opinion in the point wherein you cite them I assure you it concernes your Conscience as well as your Cause to be thus often taken tardy The Learned Aretius in that very place where you cite him acknowledges indeed That we are compleat in Christ without an externall symbol● and that he is a perfect organ of our salvation you needed to have cited no man for this we all concurre with you in it the onely thing controverted is whether the Apostle intend also in this place to shew that our baptism succeeds in the room and use of Circumcision and doth not Aretius concurre in this let himself speak Observetur ●tiam successio Baptismi in locum Circumcisionis quando aperte hunc vocat Circumcisionem Christi Hee plainly tells us that the Apostle calls Baptisme the Circumcision of Christ But since you have put me upon Aretius I shall make bold to inform the Reader that the same Aretius in his Problemes after the History of Valentine Gentilis hath an intire Discourse to prove that Baptisme succeeds Circumcision and brings this second of the Col. there also as a maine evidence and cites many notable testimonies out of the Fathers both Greek and Latine for the confirmation of it Accepimus non illam secundum carnem circumcisionem sed spiritualem quam Enoch similes custodierunt no● tamen per baptismum accepimus Circumcisio figura erat exuviarum quae per baptismum deponuntur Abraham ubi Deo erediderat circumcisionem accepit pro nota ejus regenerationis quae per baptismum conficitur Illic fuit circumcisio carnalis quae inservit tempori ad magnam circumcisionem h. e. Bapt. qui circumcidit nos a peccatis obsignat nos D●o Duravit circumcisio tempore inserviens donec major circumcisio accessit h. e. lavacrum regenerationis Affi●mat Christum in ecclesia sua dedisse pro circumcisione carnis Baptismum Baptismi circumcisionis ejusdem est natura All these the Reader shall finde in Aretius whom you bring in as if he concurred with you most of these testimonies are before also alledged by me Thirdly but you goe on and say That in truth it would evacuate the Apostles argument used both here and Hebr. 9. 11. 9-13 who still proves the abolition of the ceremonies of the Law because we are compleat in Christ not in some new ordinances added in stead of them for if there bee need of other Ordinances besides Christ in stead of the old then Christ himself hath not fulnesse enough and though our Ordinances may bee said to imitate theirs yet Christ onely succeeds them I answer it is very true that whoever should plead that we have any of our compleatness in any outward Ordinances would evacuate the Apostles Argument But Sir is there no distinction to be made betwixt our compl●atnesse in Christ and Ordinances which by his own appointment helpe us to apply this compleatnesse doe the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper and other Christian Ordinances hinder or argue that all our compleatnesse in not in Christ I adde further that Christ onely succeeds all the Jewish ordinances as the body succeeds the shadow we plead not as the Papists doe that the Jewish Sacraments were types of ours they were types onely of Christ but yet ours succeed them to be like signes of the Covenant of grace and so the Apostle doth in this place Fourthly say you I deny not but there is an analogy betwixt baptisme and circumcision as there is also betwixt the Arke and Baptisme but we are not to conclude thence that Baptisme succeeds in the room and use of Noahs Arke c. for in the administration of an Ordinance we are not to bee ruled by bare analogie framed by our selves or delivered by the Spirit of God but by the institution of God I answer but when those analogies framed by the Spirit of God are agreeable to the use and end of Gods institution we are to bee ruled by them and the Apostle shews that 's our case here Fifthly say you The Apostle in this place rather resembles buriall to circumcision then baptisme and so makes the analogie between circumcision and Christs buriall and you bring in Chrysostome and Theophylact concurring with you I answer this I wonder at where is Circumcision compared to buriall and wherein I pray you lyes the analogie between them Besides whoever will look into this Text shall finde that this spirituall circumcision containes both our death to sin and rising again to newnesse of life by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ both which are here fully signified in our baptisme ver 11. 12. consepulti sum●● the analogy lyes plain between our buryall and baptisme And Chrysostome whom you cite saith plainly wee are spiritually circumcised but when and where and answers in Baptisme Sixthly say you Circumcision was not onely a priviledge to the Jews but it was also a buriben to them and it would be a bu●then not a priviledge to have an ordinance in the roome and use of it I answer Circumcision was a burthen as it was a painfull Sacrament and as it obliged them to that painfull costly and burthensome manner of the administration of the Covenant which was before Christs incarnation but it was no burden But a great priviledge as it was a seale of the Covenant And in this last respect onely is baptism substituted into his room and place In the close of this Section I like your farewell though you tell me I speake with more confidence then truth I said there had been no reason to