seed of Abraham i) Gal. 3.7 9 14 29. and that they are blessed with faithfull Abraham and that the blessing of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles and consequently that the covenant whereof Mr. C. spake and not Church-fellowship made with Abraham and the Faithfull under the Gospel is the same for substance being an everlasting covenant Gen. 17.19 Though differing in manner of dispensation by circumcision in the room whereof Bapâ—isme succeeds Col. 2.11.12 It is evident that the same covenant made with Abraham continues to us Christians as is plain also in that wee Gentiles are planted into the true Olive k) Rom. 11.17 from whence the Jews were broken off which is more largely proved in that Book you pretend to answer 3. For proving that they and their children were admitted into Church-fellowship Do you not know that there are 13 Arguments in that Book which you have not answered onely you speak a little to one which how miserably it is done will appear I hope in its proper place In the mean time the truth is M. C. hath done something to which you answer nothing upon the matter CHAP. VII Of Nationall Churches SECT 1. H. H. You Mr. C. seem to prove l) Font uncovered p. 2. a National Church in that the Lord said to Abraham Gen. 22.18 In his seed all Nations should be blessed I answer He doth not say that all of all Nations shal be blessed nor that all of any Nation shal be blessed I am perswaded you think in your conscience some in this Nation are not blessed Reply 1. That Book wherein Mr. C. declares his judgment briefly and you answer largely saith Though wee boast not of Nationall Churches nor is there any necessity that the mention of Nationall Churches should come into this dispute yet we are not ashamed of the name of a Nationall Church But seeing you urge it on us as odious we desire to consider So that Mr. Hag. you might have kept you to the main business and spared your pains about this by-businesse also but that you had a mind to digresse and quarrell 2. You have no cause to think nor doth the holy Scripture say that ALL of ALL Churches or ALL of ANY one particular Church on earth are blessed For cursed hypocrites are ordinarily in the most refined Churches yet that hinders not but all particular Churches may be called Churches and blessed For 3. The Nation of the Jews was confessedly a National Church that whole Nation as being in covenant with God was a blessed Nation Deut. 23.29 Psal 33.12 and 89.15 And yet every particular person in that Nation was not blessed Deut. 27.15 to the end and 28.15 to the end and chap. 29.19.20 These and other Scriptures shew plainly that as the Jewish Nationall Church was a blessed Nation so every blessed Nation is a Nationall Church at least in so considerable a part as may give it such a denomination and though many particular persons therein may be far from blessednesse yet this hinders not such from the name of a blessed Nation and of a people in covenant and that at the Nation of the Jews was blessed first in Abraham's seed So all the Nations of the earth should in some sense bee blessed by being at last brought into the Covenant and Church-state through the same seed of Abraham You need not therefore make your appeal to Master C. conscience 4. I wonder at your opinion in the close of this Section which you apply viz. A penitent Thief c. and Murderer c. may not justly be put to death because he is the Temple of the Holy Ghost c The penitent Thief was blessed you acknowledge him in a saving condition pag. 25. as he acknowledgeth m) In 22.4 he suffers justly and as I think you dare not deny that he was the Temple of the Holy Ghost yea I wonder more that you dare call the execution of such an offender a destruction of the Temple of God not without horrible abuse of Scripture But you began to lispe in the language of Tho. Muntzer s) Sleid. com l. 10. your predecessor against the Christian Magistracy whatsoever you said seemingly to the contrary p. 31.32 SECT 2. H. H. pag. 27. You bring this Scripture Psal 22.27.28 I answer when that day shall come and that Prophecie be fulfilled we will grant it is fulfilled but for the present All Nations do not serve him neither do all in this Nation worship him Peter's words are true n) Acts 10 34. But there are many in this Nation that do not fear God nor work righteousness Therefore no Nationall Church Reply 1. Though I question the fulfilling of your promise for many Prophecies may be fulfilled which you either do not or will not acknowledg and you may take some fulfilled which are not yet your concession is enough that a National Church in the time of the Gospel is no such absurd or strange thing as you and som would make it 2. Albeit this Prophecy is not fulfilled yet it may be in the fulfilling For though all Nations are not brought to a Church-state yet some may be for present and others by degrees successively in Gods due time 3. It is neither proved by you nor indeed can be easily that ALL i. e. the generality in this Nation do not worship God for worship may be taken here in a large sense yet if granted it wil not thence follow that this is no Nationall Church sith even when the Israelites were a Nationall Church they might and did doubtlesse fall short of the true worship of God as much and more then the people of England 4. Your ground whence you infer that we are no Nationall Church is very unsound viz because ALL do not fear God c. Hereby you must not only deny the Jewish Church to have been a Nationall Church but also the primitive Churches and all other particular Churches whether Congregationall or otherwise called to be Churches For in all visible Churches a great part are Hypocrites without the fear of God c. SECT 3. H. H. You say Isa 49.23 Kings shall be thy nursing Fathers c. I answer That it shall be so I deny not but prove you that it is so As for Englands Kings and Queens it 's well known how they would have nursed the Church if they had but had their minds c. Reply 1. It cannot be denied without ingratitude that England hath been blessed with pious Princes who have nursed the Church in this Nation Was not King Edward the sixth a nursing Father and Queen Elisabeth a nursing Mother for instance deny it if you can 2. Your inference is as weak as the former It 's well known how Saul Ahaziah Athaliah Mannasses c. would have nursed the Church if they had but had their minds as you phrase it Therefore the Jews could have no Nationall Church 3. For our siding with Cavaleers c.
determined by a known rule in Scripture Therefore no just cause of contentions because it is according to the will of Christ as I have proved by those Scriptures in the foregoing Argument 2. Nay your practice is a thing for which there is no known Rule in all the Word of God Thus I have thrown your Argument on your owne head and you are fallen into the same pit you digged for others c. Reply 1. Tâ—â— same Reply might serve here But me thinks you shouâ—â— blush to say that the Scriptures so often mentioned by you prove what you would have them I have seen a Dog mumbling and gnawing a bone and then licking in his owne slabber as if it had been marrow from the bone bear with the comparison so you tosse and tumble the Holy Scriptures and then take in if not give out your own fancy in stead of the word of God nay let the Reader observe that M. Haggar hath not brought one Scripture to prove his doctrines and let him doe it if he can and I will be his Proselyte viz. that children of Christians are not to be baptized till they be of age upon their own profession for that is the Question and me thinks they that cry cut for Scripture from the one side should bring Scripture g) Et hanc veniaâ—â— petimus dabimusque vicissim when urged by the other side 2. It is observable that M. Baxter hath spent almost two pages proving by impregnable reasons what contention among christians what tyrany and Lordlyness among Ministers this practice would introduce all which M. Haggar passeth by Is this to answer a book If this Argument had been false you might have denyed it if weak overthrown it your silence speakes neither and thus you have given up the cause in the open field and left Anabaptisme to shift for it selfe and the reader to believe that for all that 's said it is an Incendiary both in Church and state 3. Is this M. Baxter's own Argument As much as the wooden dagger in the signe is George of Horse-back's own Sword to say no more of your unlict Lump of Logick your Minor should have been But the baptizing of little babes before they come to years of discretion will necessarily fill the Church with perpetuall contentions This you had not the face I hope you are grown somewhat modest to affirm If you had the experience of a thousand yeares would have confuted you and if you can instance what breach it ever made what fire it ever kindled 4. It is false which you say There is no known rule for Infant-baptism in all the word of God The Affirmative is sufficiently proved by Scripture but you will not see and you have not yet proved the negative by any express Scripture must the world believe it because you say it did you in your travells run your head upon the Popes Chair of Infallibility 5. It seems you are of a somewhat quarelsom disposition for let the premises be what they will you are resolved to contend against Infant-baptism and that PERPETUALLY This shewes your spleen but as little of your reason as of your Logick 6. Fie for shame Yet more boasting and so little acting How you have thrown M. Baxter's Argument on his own head let the wise judg had it lighted on his head without an helmet it would not have hurt him you have been so far from retorting that you have not rightly repeated his Argument and is M. Baxter in a pit If there be water there you may hope he is dipt but do you take heed of the pit wherein there is no water and from whence there is no Redemption As for your folly charged on him I will say nothing but this both he and we are willing to be counted fools h) 1. Cor. 4.10 for Christ's sake whilst you are wise in your own conceit SECT 7. H. H. p. 90. and 91. M. Baxter's fifth Argument is this Because this Doctrine viz. That those onely should be baptised that are directly made disciples by the preaching of men sent according to the text Mat. 28.19 20. would turne baptism for the most part out of the Churches of the Saints Answer 1. It seems M. Baxter's judgment is that they that preach and Baptise according to that Commandement are those which turn Baptisme out of the Church yet he shewes not one Scripture for the baptizing of any but such as were made disciples by preaching I confesse such a doctrine doth not almost but altogether turn M. Baxter's Baptism out of the Church for we have no such custome nor the Churches of God as to baptize Infants Reply I am at a stand even to admiration that M. Baxter having warned i) Chap. 11. p. 132. that this argument is against the Ground of your practice you say nothing in answer to his premises This silence in you gives the conquest to him for if you had had any thing to have said you would now have spoken such an imminent danger impending over Anabaptisme 2. It is a reproach to say it seems it is M. Baxter's judgment c. you can raile better then reason and you have as good as confessed that it 's your fancy and not M. Baxter's judgment in saying IT SEEMS To whom Onely to you and your party whose eyes it is to be feared the God of this world hath blinded But if it do seem so k) Malta videntâ—â— quae non sunt must it needs be so poor proof Doth the bell alwaies tink as M. Haggar doth think 3. It 's certain M. Baxter doth not find fault with the command but with your comment not with the precept but with your practice in vindicating that Scripture l) Mat. 28.19.20 from your corrupt glosse whence M. Baxter infers and that truly that this would near turn the ordinances of Baptism out of the Churches of the Saints For though in a Church constitured some few in comparison may be and are converted by Ministeriall teaching yet most receive the beginings of grace by godly education as M. B. proves largely m) p. 133 from Scripture experience to which you answer not a word so that these not being discpled by Ministeriall teaching are not to be baptized according to the sense you would put upon the Text. Neither is in enough to say they have faith and so may be baptized for the words speak of working faith according to your Gloss by ministeriall teaching And if this doctrine be true it were best for parents not to teach their children betimes as they are n) Deut. 6.7 Prov. 22.6 Eph. 6.4 commanded a sad and most contradictory principle that the carefullest parent should he the cruellest foe and whiles he seekes to bring his children into Heaven you should bolt them out of the Church on earth 4. In condemning M. Baxter for not shewing one Scripture c. You broach two errours at once First That the discipling of any
k) Mat. 28 20. I am with you alway even to the end of the world I pray you what is it to preach the Gospel but to open and hold forth the Covenant the Covenant I say made with Abraham whereof this was one branch I am thy God and of thy seed Compare Gen. 12.3 and 17.17 with Gal. 3.8 13 14. Now that the Infants of Covenanters are within the Covenant aswell as grown persons is clear to him that will not shut his eies If not It shall be made clear by the assistance of the Lord in this ensuing reply to avoid Tautologies 3. Consider also as what they were to do so to whom every creature all nations now that Infants should be none of the creatures or nations is unsuitable to reason and religion specially considering that they were included as speciall subjects when the Church was in so small a plot of ground and Christ doth not exclude them by any restriction or exception which had been needfull and seasonable if they were to be excluded SECT 2. 2. Observ H. H. The end was that they might beleeve it Reply 1. These words are not expresly set down in the places cited viz. Matt. and Mark They are drawn but by consequence 2. Neither do they hold forth the end of preaching so much as the event But thirdly whether end or event if your meaning be that they might believe it for their seed and houshold As Acts 16.31 Believe on the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved and thine house You and I are agreed in this SECT 3. 3. Observ H. H. That those which did believe the Gospell should be baptized into his name Reply 1. If you understand it of Infidells converted to the faith not excluding their children we believe it and accordingly practice as well as you for the Scriptures alleaged by you prove that where the Gospell is first preached whether to Jews oâ— Gentiles Turks or Pagans who perhaps never heard of Christ before they must first be instructed and embrace the Gospell before they be baptized as Abraham was before he was circumcised but this hinders not their children from baptisme no more then Abrahams children from circumcision nor infants not believing from salvation for you say (l) Foundat p. 61 infants are saved without actuall faith though the Text alleaged by you saith (m) Mark 16.16 he that believeth not shall be damned 2. If you mean as your practice speaks that such who have been baptized once for so you grant p. 24. Be baptized again as we are and have received the Lords Supper often and therefore owned as Church members should bee baptized by you I say this doctrine and practice hath no sooting on the Texts alleaged by you either by clear consequence from or expresseness of those Scriptures as hereafter shall be more fully evinced SECTION 4. Fourth Observ H. H. That those baptized believers were after to be taught to observe all other things whatsoever Christ had commanded his Apostles to teach them Reply 1. After to be taught If you mean a good while after It s our practice to teach infants after baptism assoon as they are capable (n) Gen. 18 19. As Abraham taught his children a good while after circumcision but if you mean it presently after Baptisme and so continually to their lives end I grant it of grown persons such baptized believers in the same or like juncture of Circumstances Secondly yet I do not find expresse mention made that the Eunuch was instructed by Philip after he was baptized by Philip but rather the contrary for it s said (o) Act 8 39. And when they were come up out of the water the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip that the Eunuch saw him no more Or that Ananias instructed Saul after Baptism though its said (p) Act. 9.18 19. Then was Saul certain dayes with the disciples at Damasâ—us or that Saul now Paul instructed the Jailour (q) Act. 16.33 34. after Baptism You may by this time perceive that your observation stood in need of being bounded with some caution 3. You do not tell us by whom they are to be taught afterward surely you left the door open for a private gifted brother SECTION 5. H. H. Observ Fifth To this practice viz. to a people thus walk ing according to this rule hearing his sayings and doing them The Lord Christ hath promised his presence saying Loe I am with you always to the end of the world but the end of the world is not yet Therefore Christ is still with those baptized believers which do thus walk Reply 1. In the Texts of Matt. and Mark cited by you there is no expresse mention made of these words viz. To this practice or to a people thus walking according to this rule c. They are your dictates and fancies 2. If by the worlds end is meant the particular age wherein the Apostles lived as some of late hold then it will not follow that Christ is still with those baptized believers which do thus walk Now though I professe ingeniously that I disclaim that sense as false and impertinent not only because of the termes in this promise used alwaies r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather all days and succession of times but also because your phraise s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end of the world is understood by the same Evangelist of Christs second coming and that three severall times t) Mat. 13.39 40 49. yet you might have foreseen and prevented such an exception which quite takes away the edg of the argument and have answered the seekers as they are called whose glosse this is and who are for the most part branches that came out of your Church 3. Though I deny not the spirituall presence of Christ among all true believers as is clear by other Scriptures yet these words in Matth. 28.19 I am with you c. appertain principally if not onely to the Apostles and their successors u) Vobiscum evo nec vobiscum tantum sâ—d et vobis mortu is cum vestris succâ—ssor bus Par. in Loc. for to them our Saviour spake ver 18. with 16. They are bidden to go ver 19. Go yee and are commanded to disciple all Nations in the same verse teach ye *) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or disciple ye all Nations and ver 19. Whatsoever I have commanded you and then presently And lo I am with you So that this promise of Christs special spirituall presence is made to Ministers rather then to the people to Teachers rather then to them who are taught to Baptizers rather then to the Baptized 4. You do not distinguish between the corporall and spirituall presence of Christ as hath been hinted by me but say largely and generally Christ hath promised his presence c. Hence the Argument for Christs corporall presence seems to be as strong for the Ubiquitaries as yours is for the Anabaptists and may
himself the Son of God i. e. he affirmed and declared himself And look as Baptism is said to save 1 Pet. 3.21 not that it constitutes our salvation but signifies and sealâ— it so in Baptism we may be said to be made members of Christ i. e. our membership is signified c. thereby and not constituted 3. It doth not follow that if Children are made members of Christ c. then they were not before no more then this e) Acts 2.36 God made Christ Lord after his Resurrection therefore he was not so before or that a man is in marriage made such a womans husband therefore he was not so before though precontracted SECT 3. H. H. Now if you disown the Common-praier-book and that Catechism you may disown your Baptism which you had by it and be baptized again as we are Reply 1. I thank you for this Let the Reader or any rational man judge whether you do not here grant that we were once baptized Now it is a received truth that Baptism is but once to be administred to one and the same person as the Jews were but once Circumcised and we are born but once Now baptism is a sign of our new-birth e) Tit. 3 5. That place f) Acts 19.5 which onely seems to favour you doth not befriend you for it 's not said They were Re-baptized or baptized Again Nay it 's clear those words are the words of Paul not of Luke penning that story as appears by the g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see Bâ—za in loc and so excellently Cham. t. 4. l. 5. c. 13. n. 44. particles in the 4. and 5. verses shewing plainly that they who were baptized of John were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus or else Johns Baptism and Christs differ which is Popery 2. I appeal to any man whether you may not nay must own the name Anabaptist which so oft in your book you seem to disown For you ingeniously acknowledge that you are baptized again And so much doth the word Anabaptist signifie Thus out of your own mouth you are condemned Do not then condemne them for nick naming you who call you and the men of your perswasion ANABAPTISTS 3. We have no reason to disown our Baptism because of some imaginary nay real corruptions in the Administration no more then the Jews were to renounce their Circumcision because of such corruptions which indeed do not nullifie the Ordinance Shall a Decree in Chancery be rejected because the present Officer is rotten and corrupt Is a Writ or Patent naught and void because signed and sealed by naughty men Was Circumcision ever the worse because Jacobs sons had abused it to over-reach h) Gen. 34. the Shechemites No more is our Baptism on the former supposal SECT 4. H. H. pag. 24. 2. I suppose you will not be so absurd as to own any unbaptized person for a Church-member that hath an opportunity to be baptized neither do I think any of you will have communion with any such in the Lord's Supper or other Ordinances Reply 1. That we will not hold communion with such persons in the Lord's Supper you think right but in that you add or in other Ordinances you think amiss For may we not hold communion with such in hearing the Word preached I trow yes i) 1 Cor. 14.24 25. the Apostle seems to hold it out and I do not find that the Corinthians gave over hearing or preaching because of the presence of an Infidel Now hearing the Word is an Ordinance without doubt and an act of communion also in some sense k) Rhâ—tâ—â—f of Presbyr c. 9. p. 269 c. 2. You sufficiently answer your self For if those that cannot be baptized through want of opportunity though they earnestly desire it and have right as your Answer implies ought to be taken for Church-members notwithstanding the want of Baptism as in the case of the penitent Thief then surely Baptism doth not constitute Churches and Church-members The effect cannot be where the cause is wanting 3. It 's very true profane sleighters and proud rejecters of Baptism are justly reputed no Church-members not because Baptism constitutes Church-members but because obstinate sleighting and rejecting the Sign and Seal of Church-membership is a sleighting and rejecting the thing signified and sealed e. g. The rejecting of Circumcision when it might be had l) Gen 17.14 was a breaking of the Covenant though Circumcision did not constitute the Covenant SECT 5. H. H. 3. No people in Scripture since the Resurrection and Ascention of Christ were ever called a Church of Christ without Baptism Prove it if you can c. Reply 1. What say you to Acts 7.38 A Church in the Wilderness where Stephen calls the Israelites in the Wilderness a Church which was after Christ's Resurrection and Ascention though I confess the people themselvs were long before Christ's Incarnation But to put it out of doubt were not those people the Church of Christ with whom Barnabas and Saul assembled themselvs m) Acts 11.26 in Antioch Yes sure for the Church you say consists of Disciples and it 's said the Disciples were called Christians first in Antioch There is a Church of Christ without Baptism for there is no express mention made of Baptism there as was noted before Nay are not the seven Candlesticks called by Christ the seven n) Rev. 1 20. c. 2. c. 3. Churches and by your self acknowledged to be Churches pag. 28. and yet there is not one word of their Baptism in those two Chapters mentioned 2. What though we read not in Scripture of a people call'd a Church after Christ's Ascention without working of miracles Will it follow therefore that Churches are constituted by working of miracles And that it is no true Church that wants miracles Many things may be in a Church and that according to the will of Christ that yet do not constitute a Church We read not of any Churches in Scripture without afflictions persecutions and temptations in some kind or other yet afflictions persecutions and temptations do not constitute Churches and Church-members Armies appear not in the field without their Colours yet Colours do not constitute an Army Markets and Fairs are not kept by a people except perhaps some Quakers without their cloaths on them yet cloaths or putting them on do not constitute Markets and Fairs 3. That place cited by you o) Act. 2.41 47. doth not expresly speak of Addition by Baptism it only shews the number not your manner of your being added to the Church SECT 6. H. H. 4. Your self saith that faith and interest in Christ constitute a Christian very well then But why do you baptize such as cannot believe in Christ nor yet make out their interest in the Covenant of grace They then that do not cannot do so as Infants are not constituted Christians What they are to God is nothing to
much against Circumcision in Abrahams time and after as it is now against the baptizing of Infants i. e. nothing at all Thus whatsoever is not of faith is sin and without faith it 's impossible to please God but the Infants among the Jews had no faith though faith is the condition of the Covenant of Grace ever since it was set on foot For alas they are your own words b they can professe no Faith c. Therefore the Circumcision of Infants among the Jews was sin If this Conclusion be absurd and blasphemous confesse the other not a jot the better For to use your own words again doth not the word Whatsoever include all matters c Then Circumcision sure as much as Baptism SECT 11. H. H. This your president of the Thief on the Cross will not at all help you except in the like condition Then I confess a multitude of such penitent ones might be reckoned to be in a saving condition though not baptized But neither you nor I are in that streight as yet Therefore it will be no plea for us but if either of us be unbaptized we have time and liberty enough to consider and turn Psal 119.59 60. Reply 1. Here you again yield the cause viz. Baptism doth not constitute a Church-member c. for out of the Church there is no salvation r) 1 Pet. 3.20 with Eph. â— 23 26. Otherwise to use your own expression pag. 29. Secret things belong to God I hope now you will not flinch 2. Your supposal that neither you nor Mr. Cook are in the streight the poor Thief was in is nothing to the purpose Though you intimate that Mr. Cook and his brethren may be and I believe it if you had your will as those Joh. 16.2 for you that unchurch us would make no bones to kill us 3. You say If either of us be unbaptized A needless If. For you granted p. 24. That we were once baptized and you make no question but you have been baptized twice for failing at least you do not think your self unbaptized 4. It 's a miserable begging of the question that baptizing after your mode is the testimony and commandment of the Lord unlesse as hath been said in the like case 5. There is not one word of Baptism in Psal 119. ver 59 60. How pitifully do you pervert and misapply this Scripture also And I may say They who have made haste to be Re-baptized have made more haste then good speed SECT 12. H. H. pag. 26. You tell us that the Church of England was constituted in or anon after the Apostles daies and by the Ministry of the Word were converted from Heathenism to Christianity and then persons of years were baptized upon profession of Faith and Repentance I Answer What then what is your Church now the better for that which was done 1600 years ago if you walk not in the same footsteps which they did then I can prove as well the Church of Rome d) Rom. 1.7 was then a constituted Church according to the order of the Gospel But doth that make the Pope and his Crew now to be a true Church If they be why do you separate from them but they are not neither are you c. Reply 1. I accept of your grant That the Church of England was constituted in or near the Apostles dates and acknowledge we are not now the better for it if we had razed the Foundation relapsed to Heathenism and had been called e) Hos 1.6 7. Loruhamah and Lo ammi But seeing God since the plantation of the Gospel in this Nation hath raised up som faithful witnesses reserved some sincere Professors of his truth and still the Fundamentals of Christian Religion have been owned and Antichrists yoke cast off It cannot without great injury but be acknowledged that the first constitution of the Church in this Land is much to us who desire and indeavour to be built and to build on that Foundation Eph. 2.20 The Church of the Jewes was the better for God's constituting their Church in Abrahams family if we may believe their f) 2 Chron. 20 7. Neh. 9. vers 7 8. plea and though they did degenerate yet the Foundation was never razed nor the first constitution abolished 2. On the former account we are better without question for outward priviledges and possibility of salvation as the Jews were Rom. 3.1.2 with Chap. 9 4.5 or as the poor cripple g) John 5.5 that did lye at the Pool oâ— Bethesda for cure 3. If by our not walking in the footsteps of those who were first constituted a Church in this Nation you mean that wee do not first repent and then bee Baptized You might as wel charge the Jews who circumcised their children on the eighth day for not walking in Abraham's steps and therefore not a jot the better that their Church was first constituted in him for he was circumcised at h) Gen. 17.26 99 years old Nay it seems you charge us for not taking care that all the children in this Nation may live in ignorance and Idolatry that so being by the Gospel converted they may be baptized after their example For they cannot be converted from Heathenism as they were and so be baptized after their example exactly unlesse they live in Heathenisme as they did If this be your meaning and charge I pray Lord lay not this sin to your charge 4. That Scripture doth not prove what you assert unlesse by a far-fetcht and strained consequence And as the word Constituted is not there so neither those words ACCORDING to the ORDER of the GOSPEL there or elsewhere in any one place of Scripture You are wise above what is written though I deny not but the Church of Rome was once a rightly constituted Church 5. Seeing you declare your self so great a friend to the Church of Rome as equalling us with them and also pronounce us no Church and so excommunicate us with your brute Thunderbolt as if you were another Pope and dis-regard the counsell and admonition of the Church so censured and nullified by you I leave you to the judgement of him who is Lord and King Husband and Patron of his Church wishing you if you bee not past hope of profiting by Scripture to weigh what is written Jude 8. to the 17 verse SECT 13. H. H. You say that they and their children were then admitted into the Covenant and Church as Abraham and his family were by circumcision I answer that it still remains for you to prove that they and their children were admitted into Church-fellowship I deny it prove it if you can or else you have done nothing c. Reply 1. As you say of the Sacrament pag. 14. So wee do not read in your sense of the word Church-fellowship in all the holy Scriptures Therefore how should we prove that children were admitted into Church-fellowship But 2 That all the Faithfull are the children or
holds forth Leaving therefore secret things to the Lord I further will clear it that Infants while Infants even of Heathens so dying are not saved by Christ as being justified by him c. 1. Whatsoever is to be believed by us is contained in the Scriptures This you cannot deny but that Infants ever of Heathens are in state of justification and salvation is not contained in the Scriptures no not in Rom. 5.18 as is shewed before Therefore 2. Remission of sins and justification are peculiar to those m who are in Covenant But Infants of Heathenâ— while such are not in Covenant as all parties agree Therefore Or thus All justified persons are in Covenant Infants of Heathens are not in Covenant Therefore not justified 3. To contract my self Because Esau while an Infant was not justified though the child of godly parents as you said p. 57. much less the Infants of Heathens whil'st such 4. Then it would be a work of mercy to cut their throats and send them to heaven which is absurd at least you will judge Must Herod be a Saviour of Infants Did he them a good turn or no 5. They are without Regeneration as having neither word spirit sign promise or covenant of Regeneration hence said to be without 7. Baptism doth not belong to them as you and we agree which is the sign and seal of justification Therefore not justification by Christ's blood which is at least a part of the thing signified More might be added but I forbear onely I wish you to consider seriously how one absurdity draws on many more whil'st some are resolved to maintain their fancies What a monstruous thing is it that all the children of Heathens shall be partakers of the kingdom of heaven in glory and yet to deny to Infants of Christians the signe and seal of admission into the kingdom of heaven on earth or to them faith if the free gift come on them to justification of life I cannot find in Scripture specially in this Chapter Rom. 5.1.16 Such justification without faith SECT 4. H. H. same p. and 62. Secondly that God hath one way to save men and women and another to save Infants is evident Rev. 2.7 11 17 29. and chap. 3.6 13. because the Spirit often calls to such who have ears to hear but wee never find him calling to Infants to hear obey commandments c. Thirdly Life and salvation is promised to them that believe in Christ Joh. 3.15 16. with Heb. 5.9 but salvation is not promised to Infants on these terms Fourthly Death and damnation is threatned 2 Thes 1.7 8 9. to those that know not God and obey not the Gospel but they cannot know God for they know not the right hand from the left c. Fifthly The ordinary means of salvation is the preaching of the Gospel Rom. 1.16 1 Cor. 1.21 Thus is their great invincible objection or rather cavill answered clearly and plainly by the Scripture of truth Reply 1. It is in none of these Scriptures expresly said that God hath one way to save men and women and another way to save little children you are wise above what is written Must we trust you or seek wisedom at your mouth as you say in your p. 53. qu. 5. Secondly neither do you prove it clearly and evidently but by pitifull consequences May not I say to you as he in another case Therefore thou art inexcusable oh man whosoever thou art that judgest for wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self c. 3. They rather prove the damnation then the salvation of Infants for you say they cannot hear believe know obey confess to salvation 4. Is there not another contradiction for hare you say we never find little babes bidden to hear the Commandements And yet you say p. 52. the sons of men are commanded to hear Christ I hope some little babes are the sons of men 5. Sure you live by ill neighbours you do oft commend your self but you are strongly and strangely infatuated to believe that you have both proved what you undertooke and clearly plainly answered this invincible objection c. as you scornfully cal it when any rational man fearing God may see that you have done neither SECT 5. H. H. And the truth is they may as well debar little babes from food because it is said in Scripture He that will not work let him not eat as to debar them from salvation because they are not Church-members c. Reply 1. You debar them from Baptism because they cannot believe why not also from salvation hereafter on that Scripture Mark 16.16 as from food here on this 2 Thes 3.10 2. Infants Church-membership shall be spoken to in answer to your twelve Arguments But it 's your grosse mistake that they are no Church-members because they cannot perform the work of a Church-member The same may be said of the Jews Infants yet they were circumcised and were Church-members Nay we find them joyned in Church-Ordinances as prayer fasting c. 2 Chron. 20.16 Joel 2 16. 3. That God will give them salvation without observing Church-Ordinancer overthrows your 12 following Arguments with the last which a probable one you say p. 72. CHAP. XIII Whether Infants of Believing Parents are Church-members SECT 1. H. H. p. 63. 2ly Infants are not Church-members neither can Church membership do them any good but rather the contrary Argument 1. from Joh. 15.2 c. Reply 1. Instâ—ad of answering our Arguments for Infant Church membership which yet you undertook you tuâ—n opponent and dispute after your manner against their Church-membership But let any Logician read this your first Argument and he will easily see how monstrouâ— and mishapen it is without any true form To make the best of it it 's this If every branch that is in Christ must bring forth fruit or else be cut off then Infants cannot be branches in Christ for they cannot bring forth fruit neither shall they be cut off But the former is true therefore the latter and by consequent are no Church-members 1. You prove what you have undertaken by Consequences May they not be rejected by us as ours are by you saying p. 47. We weigh them not 2. If you must have that liberty which you deny to us you have here as many Consequences as M. Baxter had which in the aforesaid p. you find fault with As 1. If Infants be Church-members they must be branches in Christ 2. If branches they must be fruitful 3. If fruitful they must abide in Christ c. 4. If not they must be cast into the fire which is absurd Review I pray Rom. 2.1 Wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thy self for thou that judgest do'st the same things 3. Your Argument proves as strongly or more against all Infants interest in Christ and so salvation by him contrary to your own judgment p. 61. or more confidently and clearly for the damnation of Infants according to that He that believeth
not shall be damned Mark 16.16 which yet you understand onely of persons of understanding c. as 2 Thes 3.10 pag. 62. your answer there answers this here 4. Your Consequence is denied with your Reason for though Infants whiles such cannot brin forth visible fruit yet they may have some invisible fruit as to man but not to God by virtue of their Regeneration in which estate if they die God is glorified in their salvation 5. The Similitude you bring clears the truth For as the tender branches of a Vine are not presently cut off though for the present they bring forth no fruit so neither little children the tender branches of the Church but some time is allowed to grow till the season of fruitfulness comes and not till then are they to be judged by men worthy to be cut off If God cut off some in their infancy he may do as he please gathering his Elect who if they lived to years would certainly have brought forth visible fruit into heavenly glory and so glorifying his mercy and leaving the vessels of wrath to their dead condition and glorifying his Justice on them 6. Christ doth not here * Joh. 15.2.7 speak of or to Infants who cannot you say understand hear or speak neither can they pray but to his Apostles who were not Infants as you truly say p. 64. as appears from the 3. verse to the 22. but specially he sheweth who are the branches expresly verse 5. Yee are the Branches 7. It is too narrow for you to expound words by commandements for promises and threatnings were to abide in the Disciples I trow as well as commandements verse 7. 8. The absurdity you talk of follows unavoidably upon your own premisses you may look on it as a brat of your own begetting SECT 2. H. H. Second Argument from Acts 8.1 4. There was a great persecution against the Church which was as Jerusalem and they were all scattered c. except the Apostles c. And they that were scattered went every where c. Reply This Argument as propounded by you is almost as mishapen as the former therefore for brevity sake I past by diverse things there spoken onely 1. Your Argument concludes as if there were no Infants at all in the Church at Jerusalem which is very improbable x) Acts 2.4 considering the many thousands which were converted 2. As it is not said All they that were scattered abroad did preach but they that were scattered ver 4 so the word Every where is not in the original though our English translation so reads neither doth the text say And as you do But Therefore 3. By the Church is not meant the community or society of the faithful but only the Church guides or Church-officers 1. Because it 's said verse 3. Saul made havock of the Church And 2ly because express mention is made y) Acts 11.22 of the Church in Jerusalem notwithstanding that storm of persecution 3ly Because it 's said verse 1. Except the Apostles Now the Particle translated here Except and elâ— where z) Mark 12.32 Joh. 8.10 Acts 15.18 But with the Genitive case is Exceptive of the like kind And indeed to what purpose should the Aposties stay at Jerusa lem amongst Wolvs if all their flock were fled must they officiate and preach to the walls Their staying then at Jerusalem would have been perillous to themselvs and useless to others if all the Church simply had been scattered having none to preach to or over-see 4ly Because that phrase a Preaching the Word is in the original no wher 's used but of such as were in office 5ly Because of the instance given verse 5. Then Philip c. not Philip the Apostle he was excepted verse 1 but he that was numbred among the Deacons Acts 6 5. and expresly called an Evangelist Acts 21.8 6ly Because Women should preach also for women were scattered as well as men To this last you answer anon by prevention In the mean time I must tell you that by the Church is meant Church-officers as it 's certain your consequence is very lame therefore SECT 3. H. H. p. 64. Though the Ministers in our daies would have neither women nor men preach but themselvs yet women did prophecie 1 Cor. 11.4 5. Acts 21.9 2.17 18. with 1 Cor. 14.3 Therefore women may preach provided they be gifted and do not usurp authority over the men 1 Tim. 2.12 Reply 1. It 's well you will own us at last for Ministers whom all this while and after too you scornfully call Priests I commend you for it 2. You do meerly calumniate us for we would have none preach in publick ordinarily and constantly but such who are ordained c by the laying on of the hands of the Presbyterie e) 1 Tim. 4.14 with 5.22 Tit. 1.5 in a regular way 3. By Prophecying in 1 Cor. 11.4 5. is meant singing in and with the publick Assembly as in 1 Sam. 10.5 and they shall prophecie their instruments argue what kind of prophecie this was viz. praising God with spiritual songs but specially thrice in 1 Chron. 25.1 2 3. where prophecying is expounded by giving thanks and praising the Lord. Now what a poor Argument is this Women did then sing therefore they may now preach 4. By Prophecying in Acts 21.9 is meant the fore-telling of things to come e) Numb 22.28 30. with 2 Pet. 2.16 Jude ver 11. by the extraordinary work of the Spirit as d) 2 Chron. 34 22. Huldah the Prophetess It is not warrantable or prudential to make an ordinary rule of an extraordinary act E. gr Because Balaam's Ass did speak must we expect that other Asses should speak too The same is to be understood of Acts 2 17 18. which prophecy of Joel is said then to be fulfilled ver 16. 5. What an absurd ridiculous gloss do you make on 1 Tim. 2.12 To speak in in a Church-assembly by way of teaching and instructing others is plainly held forth as an act of superiority which did not belong to Women because that sex was to be in subjection ver 11. And if a woman might teach with your proviso how is or should she be in silence which words you slily left out verse 12 Nay in that very chapter which you bring for the meaning of the word Prophecying if you had lookt further you might have found Let your women keep silence in the Churches for it is not permitted to them to speak c. 1 Cor. 14.34 Again if they preach why not baptize too He that is half-blind may see how cunningly you would bring in Popery But it may be you have been so wonted to Curtain-lectures that in a manner you have been cudgeled into this belief that Women may preach So that all may see the objection is sorrily answered by you SECT 4. H. H. Third Argument from 1 Cor. 1 2 10 12. Infants cannot understand nor speak c. Therefore no Church members
charged with those actual sins or else not be owned Church-members Nay it 's plain they were Church-members Deut. 29.10 12 13. Now these converted Ephesians were incorporated into the same body and partakers of the same privileges for themselvs and their children Eph. 2.19.20 Rom. 11.17 5. As Jews and Gentiles of ripe yeaâ—â— in regard of original sin and the fruits thereof needed Christ the Covenant of Grace and Church-membership to save them from the dominion and damnation of sin so Infants who a e under original sin as you acknowledg and which is all sin radically virtually eminently no less need Christ the Covenant of Grace and Church-membership being the onely revealed way of communicating Christ and his merits to save sinners from the wrath of God dominion of sin and eternal damnation SECT 12. H. H. pag. 69. My ninth Argument is from 1 Thes 5. ver 2 4 5. Reply To make the best of your Argument it 's thus All Church-members are children of the Light and know that the day of the Lord cometh as a Thief c. But Infants are not children of the light nor know c. 1. The same Answer might here serve sith the Fallacie is the same But 2. If a man should argue that John baptized Infants because it 's said Mat. 3.5 6. All Judea and all the Regions round about and Infants may be said to go out too though carried in their parents arms Exod. 10.9 10 24. 12.37 went out and were baptized of him you would not well resent it for it would spoil your cause and yet the conclusion follows more clearly then yours 3. If some Infants be not children of the light and of the day they are children of darkness and of the right The Scripture knows not a third state but it may be to carry on your design for Popery you can tell us of a Limbus Infantum 4. The Apostle doth not say that the Saints unto whom he wrote at Thessalonica did all know perfectly that the Lord 's coming should be as a Thief in the night there it no universal particle in the second verse neither doth he mean that they â—â—â—â—e ALL the children of the Light as if there had been none in the world besides those grown Christians in that Church ver 5. speaks of another matter least of all doth the Apostle say or imply here or elswhere That all Church-members know perfectly c. ver 2. This you prove not all SECT 12. H. H. Tenth Argument from 1 Thes 2.11 If Paul did exhort and charge every one of the Church to do these things then there were no Infants for they are not capable of exhortation consolation c. ver 11. Therefore Reply This I confess hath some form of a Syllogism viz. Hypothetical though for brevity it might have been Categorical to which I say 1. The Major is granted if it be understood of immediate present exhortation to every particular member of that Church without exception But then your assumption or Minor is denied though you think it guarded with Scripture for it is not said we exhorted every particular Church-member but you i. e. to those grown Christians to whom he immediately wrote And though it be directed to the Church 1 Thes 1.1 yet it 's not said every particular Church-member was bound to read hear understand and obey this Epistle so soon as it came It was enough that it was directed to the principal members which oft have the denomination of the whole by whom it might be as there was occasion communicated to others The Apostle calls this Church for all whom hee gives thanks 1 Thes 1. ver 1 2 3 4. Brethren will it follow therefore that Women among them who are not brethren are not Church-members 2. Doth not the same Apostle say If ANY would not work neither should they eat yet you are so pitiful that you will not deny food to little Babes pag 62. me-thinks you should be as pitiful not to deny to them Church-membership though they cannot perform all the acts of a Church-member no more then the Circumcised Infants of the Jews could 3. Yet again to your Major though the Apostle did not speak or write directly or immediately to Infants yet mediately and indirectly he did in speaking and writing to their parents who were to lay hold on the promises c. for themselvs and their children and being instructed in their duties were to teach their children when capable Gen. 18.19 Deut. 6.7 2 Tim. 3.15 Ephes 6.4 If in this sense Paul's teaching be taken as there is no just reason to the contrary then the consequence is so far from being true that the opposite conclusion must needs be true SECT 13. H. H. p. 70. Eleventh Argument from Heb. 6.11 12. Wee desire every one of you to shew the same diligence c. Little children cannot Therefore no sâ—ch Babes were Church-members in the Church of the Hebrews Reply 1. I do not remember that in this Epistle there is express mention made of the Church of the Hebrews Will you be guilty of that fault which you charge often on your Adversaries viz. Of adding to the Word Take heed 2. This Argument is like the former and therefore the same answer might serve This Exhortation was directly and immediately given to persons of years yet remotely to the children of the faithful who were bound to bring them up when grown as Abraham and the Israelites did theirs Gen. 18. Deut. 6. Psal 78. of Abraham I say for of his chiefly the Author speaks ver 12 13 c. 3. By this Arguing it might be proved that none of their Infants were Hebrews thus Every one of the Hebrews is desired to shew the same diligence to c. But none of the Infants were desired Therefore Or Because a Master of a family writes that every one in the family should be diligent and faithful in their places shall any conclude that his little children are no members of that family 4. There is a like universal charge given to all Israel Deut. 29.10 11 12 18 19 20. yet because little ones could not understand c. must they be concluded or excluded rather out of the Covenant No there is express mention made of their being taken into Covenant SECT 14. H. H. p. 70 71. My 12th and last Argument from Phil. 4. ver 21 22. the summe is this All the Saints at Rome whence this Epistle came sent salutations to the Saints at Philippi but no Infants at Rome did salute nor any Infants at Philippi could receive salutations Therefore no infants at either place are Church-members The Major proved by this Scripture the Minor by rason and common sense Reply 1. If you believe the Subscription of this Epistle to be Canonical Scripture for you confidently avouch this Epistle came from Rome you smell again strongly of the Popish cask Beza saith in one copie it is thus It is finished without any other addition But no
more of this 2. If you mean there were no Infants at all in Rome or Philippi a man had need of the faith of an Anabaptist to believe you or it I'ts said All Jerusalem was troubled with Herod Matth. 2. ver 3. Infants could not bee troubled with him Therefore there was no Infant in Jerusalem This reasoning is as good as yours i. e. stark naught But if you mean as it seems that no little children could understand speak c. who saith so 3. It 's cold comfort to believing parents that their Infants are not Saints in Christ then sure they are little Heathens but is not this contradictory to the same Apostle who calls indefinitely children even of one believing parent 1 Cor. 7.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sancti sunt So Beza and the Old Latine g Saints so is the word in the originall and are any saved by Christ but Saints you hold all we some Infants dying in their Infancy are saved by Christ 4. Paul here undertakes nothing less then the dashing Infants-believers out of the number of Saints or Church-members The universal particles ALL and EVERY one must be restrained as was said to the scope and subject matter e.gr. All the Saints salute i. e. All that were with him at the writing of this Epistle as appears by this very Scripture which you bring Phil. 4.21 22. All the brethren salute you And so salute EVERY Saint i. e. That is capable of such salutations So that your major is not proved by this Scripture at all SECT 15. H. H. p. 71. If children are not concerned in these salutations then they are not visible Saints in Christ nor visible members of his body the Church c. For the text saith plainly Phil. 4.21 Salute EVERY Saint Reply 1. As to that they are Saints in Christ I have spoken to even now 2. The Scripture no where mentions visible Saints or visible members Must we be still troubled with your unwritten traditions 3. If you might as well conclude that Infants are no creatures for to shoot in your bow the Text saith plainly Mar. 16.15 Preach the Gospel to EVERY creature and that birds and beasts and plants c. are not creatures For the text saith plainly Col. 1.23 The Gâ—spel was preached to EVERY creature which is under heaven or that the Jews Infants were not câ—iâ—dren of Israel For the text saith plainly Numb 36.8 EVERY one of the children of Israel shall keep himself SECT 16. H. H. p. 71 72. There are many probable Arguments remaining but the answers to them take much with those that set their Faith in other mens wisedoms and not in the power and wisedom of the Word of God 1 Cor. 2 4 5. But I shall omitt them Because these twelve are undenyable c. Onely I will give you one probable Argument out of Mat. 18. 15 16 17. Reply 1. You said your 12 and last Argument p. 70. How is that your last if many or but one more bee in your budget or were they demonstrative and these probable what probable after demonstratives or were all the former at best but probable not to me but to you whose faith is built on more probabilities 2. If it might be made manifest then it seems it i. e. your Tenent is not yet made manifest to the impaâ—â—â—ll Reader 3. If you know many seeming Answers would bee made to them how could you imagine none would be made to these 12. 4. I know not who those are you rave upon except perhaps your poor deluded Proselytes who pin their faith on your sleeve and take hand over head all for Gospel which you say Onely this I know you abuse Scripture again For the words are â— Cor. 3.5 That your faith should not stand in the wisedom of men but in the power of God Will you bee still at your old Trade of ADDING Take heed of the plagues you threaten others with 5. You may now find by experience the vanity of your confidence there Aâ—guments of yours are not onely deny-able and damnable also bear with the word but truly denyed and justly damned too 6. For Mat. 18. You have SIN instead of trespass which though perhaps all one yet you should not chop and change at pleasure aâ— you have left AS For you say to thee an Heathen whose son are you now p. 42. And for the three Arguments you draw from this text there is more in the conclusion then in the premisses which heretofore hath been a great fault in Argumentation And in the end you seem to grant that the word WHOLE Church is not in the text why then did you put it into your third particular but that you had a mind to cozen your Reader Indeed by the Church here is to be understood the Church-guides as before out of Act. 8.1 as appears by the eight and ninth verses Whatsoever ye shall bind c. Whatsoever ye shall loose c. If two of you shall agree So that it is as clear as the Sun that the Church here is the Assembly of the Ministers and Elders of the Church And then your threefold cord is as easie broken as that was by Samson 7. To conclude in generall for these Arguments which are thirteen to the dozen let the Reader observe There is not one word of Church-member or Church-member-ship in any one of the Scriptures cited Yet Mr. Hag. would bear us in hand that he holds nothing but what is expressed in the Scriptures Where is your written word for your belief in this very point under debate 2. Because you import that you put but little confidence in your probable Arguments I had thought to have left them as I find them but least you and yours should crow I have given some brief Animadversions and would let you understand that it were very easie to find our without vanity be it spoken many dozens of Arguments in Moses and the Prophets that might conclude as probably against the Church-membership of the Old Testament-Infants as any you have or can bring against childrens Church-membership in the New And as easie to bring multitudes of Argumemts out of the New Testament that might as probably conclude against the salvation of any Infants so dying as any you bring against the Church-membership or Covenant-state of Christians Infants Though you profess your perswasion of the salvation of ALL Infants so dying yet by your way of Arguing ALL Infants should not only be cast out of the Church but out of salvation too CHAP. XIV Of the Disciple-ship of INFANTS SECT 1. H. H. p. 73. I proceed to prove in opposition to M. Baxter and M. Cooks Arguments that Infants are not cannot be Christ's Disciples My first Argument is from Mat. 28.19 Teach all Nations c. The plain English of which M. Baxter himself confesseth to be Make Disciples c. From whence I argue thus If those Disciples which Christ commanded the Apostles to baptize must be first
found so much strength that after you had cast a squib you run away like a coward â—ut for all that he hath reached you such a back-blow which you cannot claw off SECT 3. H. H. p. 88. Nay to give him his Argument again Infant Baptism is utterly inconsistent with the obedience to Christ's rule First because there is neither precept nor practise for it as he grants Secondly because by their Rantizing or sprinkling of babes they make the command of Christ of none effect Mat. 7.7 8 9. and Mat. 15.8 9. Thus they bind two sins together and in the one they shall not go unpunished Reply 1. If giving be granting you do well to give it him 2. The first reason of your retortion is but the Cuckoes song M. Baxter hath been so far from granting it that he hath abundantly shewed you both precept and example but you are so wilfully blind that you cannot see wood for trees 3. Your Third is both a meer Calumniation and a miserable begging the Question Infant-Baptism is neither a Tradition in your sense nor a making of Christ's Command of none effect in our sense as hath been shewed But I may not nauseate the Reader with vain repetitions as you do 4. If we shall go unpunished in the one I believe in the other too SECT 4. H. H. Whereas M. Baxter would make us offendors for nothing i. e. for not baptizing children in their Non-age I Answer First he can never make it a sin till he shew us what Command we have broken c. Secondly There is both precept and practice for baptizing men and women when they believe Mar. 16.16 Act. 8.12 and 10.48 Reply 1. Then it seems a swarving from an example in Scripture is no sin What if women should never Break Bread or receiv the Lords Supper is it not a sin since there is no expresse command for it and no example but by consequence Your Scriptures shall be spoke to anon if not heretofore 2. It hath been proved that you utterly mistake those Commands and examples for baptizing men and women at years of discretion unless you will make the parties parallel i. e. meer Heathens newly converted c. But I must not fall into the same crime with you of idle and senselesse Repetitions onlâ— let the Reader observ That I have orderly digested this page of yours which you had confusedly set down for the building of your Tower of Babel SECT 5. H. H. p. 89. His Third Argument is because the practise of baptizing children of Christians at age goes upon meer uncertainties hath no Scripture rule to guide it Therefore it 's not according to the will of Christ Answer Though this is the same in substance with the two former yet First our practise is guided by Scripture rule from the Command of Christ and examples of the Apostles Mark 16.16 Acts 2.41 and 8.12 37. Naâ— say 〈◊〉 your practise of Baptizing little babes goes upon meer uncertainties having no Scripture-rule to guide it c. Reply 1. I had thought to have said nothing to your charge on M. Baxter's chopping one Argument into so many pieces to multiply words Therefore I did not transcribe them yet I shall say this It seems you had surfeited of the other two Arguments And now your stomack turnes at the naming of this If you had no mind to multiply words you might have spared this Cavilling Preface Crums of truth are too precious to be lost and therefore since you will not understand the Loaves which have satisfied some Thousands Mr. B. did well to put his fragments into the basket d) part i. c. â— p. 150. by sending the Reader back to what went before 2. Though the Texts alledged by you have been Replyed to yet here your answer is both wide and weak If you mean of a Church to be constituted that 's nothing to the purpose Mr. Baxter's assertion is still true though that be granted and so your answer is wide If of a Church constituted and if you understand christians children at age then your instances out of those Scriptures prove no such thing because they were not the children of Christian parents and so your answer is weak 3. As your answer is impertinent so your return of M. Baxter's Argument is insufficient To deal roundly I deny your Minor viz. There is Scripture rule for Baptizing babes notwithstanding your impudent denying it as may be easily discerned by any who seriously and impartially peruse Mr. Baxter's Book or this Reply neither do you bring any Scriptures to prove your Minor but only this I SAY What arrogancy is this in you to obtrude an opinion on the world upon your bare word Could you perswade me that Pythagoras was a Dipper and that his soul had transmigrated into your body I would allow the Haggarens as well as the Pythagoreans an IPSE DIXIT he hath said it and that 's enough Do you think to carry your cause against the evidence of Scripture practice of Antiquity consent of Fathers continued custom of the Churches strength of reason upon such a pitifull proof as this is I SAY How long is it since your confidence hath amounted to an Infallibility I therefore must make bold your premisses being thus routed to alter your conclusion Infant Baptisme is according to the mind of Christ notwithstanding Mr. Haggars I SAY 4. Because I would not have Mr. B. to be in your debt for the return of his Argument I return you an Argument from one of your Scriptures e) Mar. 16.16 cited and from your own principles For although you are not so rigid to damne Infants and exclude them from Heaven yet you excommunicate them out of the Church cast them out of the Covenant c. Here I argue They who may be saved without actuall Faith may be Baptized without actuall faith But Infants specially of believing parents may be saved without actuall faith therefore they may be Baptized without actuall faith The Minor you grant The Major I prove thus If faith be as necessary to salvation as it is to Baptisme then they that may be saved without faith may be Baptised without Faith But the former is true Therefore the latter The consequence of the Major is evident from the words of the text f) Mark 16.16 where the same stresse is laid upon faith to salvation as to Baptisme And the Minor cannot be denied unlesse you will have admission to Baptism on Earth more difficult then to blessedness in Heaven and make it an harder matter to be Baptized then to be Saved I leave you to unty not to cut this knot SECT 6. H. H p. 89. 90. His sourth Argument is Because the practice of Baptizing Christians Children at age necessarily fills the Church with perpetuall contentions as being about a matter that cannot be determined by any known rule Answer But the Baptizing of men and women when they believe is a matter that can be and is
speak in the same language as you do 5. We have here your grosse monoply of Christs spirituall presence as if it belonged only to you and to such as are baptized after your mode No marvail for one of your silly Proselytes x) N. G. preached or rather prated lately in private saying Christ is with us here and not yonder pointing to a Chappell near adjoyning but this is a trick of the old Donatists your predecessors who confined as is commonly known the Church of Christ within a corner of Africa abusing that Scripture as you do many Where thou makest thy stock to rest at noon y) Cant. 1.7 the Latine hath it inâ—meridie therefore forsooth they couching in the south it must be with them 6. I wonder you passe by some observations as wise as some of the 5. viz. 1. It 's the duty of every Minister to preach to every man in the world 2. No unbeliever whether baptized or unbaptized can be saved 3. it follows hereupon that Infants who cannot actually believe shall be damned For in Mark z) ch 16.15 16. believing and being baptized are as nearly connexed to salvation as in Matt. * ch 28 19 20. baptizing is to teaching and in order of phrase Faith and Baptisme are as closely joyned together and it is as absolutely expressed He that believeth not shall be damned If I should say from all which I collect these three observations I think I should gather that which the Holy Ghost never scattered SECT 6. H. H. Thus have I shewed the order of the words as they were spoken by the Lord himself Reply Sir by your shewing the order of Christs words and your shaping some observations from them you do more then intimate that Teaching must go before baptizing for if we may believe you the Gospell must bee first preached then believed and then and not till then Baptism administred I confesse Christ mentioneth teaching as our English Bibles have it in the first place and baptizing after a) J. G. Catabaptism p. 167. but this is not to instruct them to teach in the first place and then to baptize them after but only in the first place to instruct them to teach and in the second to baptize 2. Order of things iâ—not alwayes or commonly so exactly exprest in Scripture by the position of the words Therefore from Christs mentioning teaching in the first place and baptizing in the second it cannot be proved that persons must always be first taught before they bee baptized no more then Christ b) Mar. 115. putting repenting before believing proves that Repentance precedes faith or c) Rom. 10.9 naming confession with the mouth before beliefe of the heart proves that confession must go before faith as to salvation beside the second person is mentioned d) 2 Cor. 13.14 before the first and the third person e) Rev. 1.4 5 before the second and I find Daniel f) Ezech. 14.14 named before Job who was notwithstanding a long time after him with many more instances which might be given but perhaps we shall more fully speak to this in it's proper place 3. Though I am of his mind g) Nec admodum refert utrum discipulatus baptismum vel baptismus discipulatum antecedat ne quis hîc more Anabaptistarum vanè sit scrupulosus Muscul in Jo. 4.19 that it is not greatly materiall whether discipling go before baptizing or baptizing before discipling yet let it be granted that this Scripture compared with others hold out that some are to be taught before they are baptized as before p. 4. yet it will not help your cause one jot unlesse there be a concurrence of the like or the same circumstances For a difference is to be made between the constituting of a Church and a Church constituted Some things may be done in in the former which are not requisite to be done in the latter CHAP. III. Concerning Examples SECT I. H. H. same page If it can be proved by ANY word of God that any baptized little babes that cannot speak or understand then I confess they that practise it may be born with and they which cry it down as Antichristian superstition and mans Tradition may be too blame Reply 1. Practise it Cry it down I pray you whither is that Relative IT twice for failing repeated to be referr'd to the Word of God I think you meant not that yet they that practice it are not onely to be born with but to be commended also Or to little Babes That 's both incongruous and non-sensical If to Infants baptisme or the practice of baptizing little babes why did you not say so for there is no such substantive in your expression to which this word It is to be referred You that take upon you to be the great Censurer of other mens writings should have been more exact in your own 2. Infant-Baptism ever since it hath been opposed hath been sufficiently proved by the Word of God many writings of the Paedobaptists remaining yet unanswered as Mr. Baxters Mr. Cooks c. the tythe of whose arguments you have not so much as lightly touched though you make a flourish of an answer to them 3. Have patience a while and it will be proved that those little children mentioned in the Gospel * were baptized I hope that is the word If so h) Mat. 19.13 Mark 10.33 you are too blame and we to be born with SECT 2. H. H. pag. 4. Mat. 3.5 6. with Mar. 1.3 4 5. Of John Baptist Where we read first of the voice of one crying in the wilderness To prepare the way of the Lord and to make his paths straight 2. That John baptized in that wilderness and whom he baptized is evident in the following words And he preacht the Baptisme of repentance for the remission of sins and there went out to him all the land of Judea and they of Jerusalem and were all baptized of him in â—ordan confessing their sins c. Reply You mis-cite the words of Mark by adding to them and diminishing from them i) Contrary to Deut. 4.2 1. By adding to â—hem in saying To prepare and to make Whereas the text hath it k) Mar. 1.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prepare ye the way of the Lord and make ye his paths straight Which words tel us what the people were to do not what John Baptist did 2. By diminishing from them in some respect For the text runs clearly thus l) Ver. 4. John did baptize in the not that wilderness and preach before which you have cast a mist least your Reader should discern that sometimes Baptism precedes Preaching and indeed if there be any strength in arguing from order it will follow viz. That Baptism goes before preaching for it 's said expresly John did baptize and preach Take heed lest those m) Pag. 40. dreadful thunderbolts you shoot against others light on your own pate SECT 3.
love not bitterly to retort 3. The rest who are Orthodox say no more then what you say that that your Adversaries generally confesse viz. There is no command nor Example literally Syllabically in express terms for Infant-baptism which is no advantage to your cause nor disadvantage to ours no more then there is for womens receiving the Lords Supper Family prayer c. before spoken to 4. You have dealt with some of their writings as Sathan did with the Scripture leaving out b) Mal. 4.6 with Psal 91.11 that which makes against you as he did what might make against him e. gr Calvin bringing in that objection that it s no where found that any one Infant was baptized by the hand of the Apostles answers c) Calv. Inst. l 4. c. 16. sect 8. That though the Evangelists do not expresly mention it yet infants are not excluded where mention is made of baptizing whole Families Acts 16.15.32 33. Ergo. Who but a mad man would conclude that they were not baptized If such Arguments were valid women in like manner should be debarred from the Lords Supper to which we do not READ that they were admitted in the time of the Apostles yet considering the scope and nature of those Ordinances it is evident that as women are to receive the Lords Supper So Infants aswell as grown persons are to bee baptized Eo itaque privari nequeant quin Dei Authoris voluntati fraus manifesta fiat i. e. They therefore cannot bee deprived of it but MANIFEST FRAVD or affront is made to the will of God the Authour Now M. Haggar do you and your party make a wise use of this Testimony you cannot but know that Calvin in the chap. fore-cited and elsewhere d) Inst Advers Anabap. Articl 1. proveth Infant Baptism from many Scripture grounds Again though Beza saith as you cite him yet a little after e) Beza in Mat. 3.11 he gives the reason why he translates not in water buâ— with water as we do and Luk. 3.16 with out the Preposition In least any should think there is some force in thiâ— particle as they do who are perswaded children are not rightly baptized except they be altogether dipt in the wâ—ter Where the Reader may observe that though John did baptize such as did confesse their sins c. Yet that makes nothing against Infant-Baptism And again more plainly f) Beza in mar â— 4 in Mark. though the place be not named by you where he saith seeing the Sacraments are seals Doctrine or instruction is to go before sealing He ads which you have left out There is no reason that the Anabaptists should catch at this against Infant-baptism for John had to do with grown persons and even then when Infants are baptized the word is not severed from the sign in the Church of God The Reader by this taste may guesse how M. Haggar hath dealt with the rest whom for brevity sake I passe by ex ungua Leonem So that now setting aside those that were challenged of Mr. Haggars Grand-Jury of 22 there are not left so many as will make a petty Jury of 12. unlesse you allow some of them to have three votes a piece as Luther and Bucer and some four as Zuinglius which is not reasonable SECT 15. H. H. pag. 17. Thus much out of those teachers own writings which observe and use childrens baptism from whence the Reader may take notice of the unsoundnesse of your principles and what little ground 1. There is for it in the word of God as they themsâ—lvs confesse 2. Therefore what great cause have we to search the Scriptures for better information let the sober minded judg Reply 1. I verily believe you never read the writings of those Teachers 2. I observe you mince the matter here and dare not call them g) as p. 15. our Poets but those Teachers c. 3. The Judicious Reader cannot infer from thence the unsoundnesse of your principles by any reasonable reasoning 4. A little before yea often you said we have no ground in the word of God for infant-baptism you now grant we have a little you begin to yield a little ground well done M. Haggar SECT 16. H. H. pag. 18. Moreover I shall further prove out of their own writings that infant-baptism is a ceremony and Ordinance of man brought into the Church by Teachers after the Apostles times and instituted and commanded by Councills Popes and Emperours Reply 1. Calvin in the place alleaged by you h) Calv. inst l. 4. c. 16. sect 8. saith that whereas the Anabaptists spread it among the simple vulgar that Infant-baptism was not known or practiced till very many years after Christs Resurrection in that i) Foedissimè◠mentiuntur they lye most filthily for there is not one antient writer that doth not for CERTAIN refer the originall of it to the Apostles times Sure your evidence must be clear to overthrow the confident Testimony of this pious and learned man and to prove it was brought into the Church after the Apostles times 2. You empanell here another Jury of 21. I desire again for brevity sake that the Reader would peruse them in your book I shall take if you will not allow the liberty in challenging as before First Erasmus is again challenged on the former account Though his words are They are not to be condemned that doubt whether the baptism of Infants were ordained by the Apostles which words evidently imply that it was their weaknesse to doubt and that it seems hee had other thoughts of those who did not only doubt of it but did refuse and oppose it 2. Are you not ashamed to call Pope Gregory the fourth Ecchius Cassander c. Our own Poets as p. 20 If this be not Poetical licentiousness I know not what is Nay from that Pope c. to conclude it is a Tradition of the Fathers according to our own confession 3. You begin with Origen k Hom 8. in Levit. who calleth baptism of children a ceremony and tradition of the Church It 's your unhappinesse to stumble in the threshold you had perhaps a mind to favour your dear Mother the Church of Rome For you might as well prove out of her 1. The obscurity of the Scriptures 2. The Canonicalness of the History of Susanna 3. Auricular confession 4. Purgatory c. Certainly l vide censuram quorundam Scriptorum veterum à Rob. Coco p. 71. m Pâ—oinde Homilias illas non esse magnae Authoritatis Bellarm de verb. Dei l. 4. c. 11. those Homilies are bastard writings And undoubtedly there is more ingenuity in your dear brother Bellarmine then in you who denies them to bee Cyrills as some were of opinion and dares not affirm them to be Origens but leavs it with a Nescio cujus m who every where destroyes the letter and frames out of his head mysticall senses and so concludes wherefore those Homilies are of no great
whom you bring in the right order according to the Centuries wherein they lived 3. You repeat one and the self same Author twice and make a needlesse distinction to increase the number of your Jurers as Cassander p. 18. numb 7 10. 4. You set them together by the ears and make them contradict one another as is obvious to any judicious eie that will compare v) Pag. 18 19. your Origen Cassander and Cyprian together Thus with a flourish of humane learning you would blear the eies of the world but especially your silly Proselites If you are guilty of dissembling your learning it may be well suspected that you are a Wolf in a Sheeps skin and the rather because you say p. 39. We know you are Scholars SECT 17. Hen. Hag. p. 20. Thus out of the mouths of your own Poets you have it and by them confessed That baptizing of babes is will-worship c. Reply 1. I will forbear to say to you as you to Mr. Hall p. 10. A wretched lie But I dare say that not any one of the aforesaid Authors do so much as mention will-worship This is your own absurd and ridiculous inference * Page 19. you rack the holy Scriptures as Jer. 2.12 13. p. 8. no marvel therefore mens writings 2. You said p. 19. That it is Will-worship and Idolatrie appeareth by their own confessions as followeth But as no mention is made of will-worship much lesse of Idolatrie least of all that we confesse it For shame give over lying and if you love your soul think seriously of that Scripture which is brought by you p. 2. All liars shall have their part in that Lake which burns with fire and brimstone which is the second death Rev. 21.8 3. Lay aside those that are challenged neither have you here a sufficient number to make a Jury unlesse on the former account if there be yet they are not agreed upon the Verdict SECT 18. H. H. Thus having discovered the foundation of the Font and having shewen whence and when and by whom Infant-Baptism came I leave it to the view of all Onely for better satisfaction the book is suddenly to be reprinted and is intituled as followeth A very plain and well-grounded Treatise concerning Baptism c. Reply 1. How many untruths are here tackt together You have neither shewed whence nor when nor by whom Infant-baptisme came in 2. You have discovered your own vanity folly want of ingenuity peity and learning to the view of all 3. Were we with Child you would make us long after your Treatise else you would not give such timely advertisement of it unlesse it were to spare the labour in a Diurnal But either it is stifled in the womb or will come forth with sharp teeth as x) Speeds History of Great Brit. p. 882. Richard the third was born for it is now four years since you hinted the sudden reprinting of it by whom to be sold where and what title But for my part I have neither seen nor heard the printing of it much lesse the Reprinting CHAP. VI. Of Constituting Churches and Church-members SECT 1. H. H. p. 23. In this our stating the Question you say diverse things must be animadverted that we deceive not our selves and others through darkning the truth by words without knowledg For we deny that Churches are constituted by baptizing or sprinkling of Infants I Answer It 's to be observed that Mr. Cook can say nothing nor give any answer in the least to our Writing as we wrote them and therefore he cunningly saith That in stating the Question many things must be animadverted or changed in the mind and then he states the Question according to his own mind c. Reply 1. I desire the Reader to peruse the Narrative of Mr. Hag. p. 21 22. concerning an offer of reasoning with some Ministers at Stafford about Baptizing which Narrative is too long to transcribe But this I say it may be justly suspected to be untrue because of Mr. Haggar's misrepresenting Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook in other particulars as hereafter shall be made evident And whereas he saith not without abuse of Scripture y) Psal 53.5 They were in great fear where no fear was as appears by Mr. Cooks Epistle Truly no such thing pppeareth to my best observation but rather the contrary as appeareth by his eighth Reason z) See Mr. Cooks Epistle before his Font Uncovered which together with the other seven you might have done well to have answered if you could 2 Do not abuse Mr. Cook and triumph before the victory It 's rather to be observed that you can say nothing to Mr. Cooks Answer in three particulars at the least there mentioned or else you would not have passed them by in silence 3. All orderly reasoning requires the right stating of the Question at first yet our Writings are fully answered though as you wrote them they needed clearing For I am perswaded you know not what is meant by Constituting Churches which you stick to as if it were done by Baptism And if you were put to define or describe Constitution perhaps you would give us as wise an account thereof as you do of the word Animadverted which you interpret changed in mind whereas the word signifies considered by serious turning the mind to a thing e. gr a) Haggai 1.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consider your waies i. e. Set your hearts on or turn your minds to You may then be as grosly mistaken in the word Constituted as you are in the word Animadverted and argue for a word the meaning whereof you know not It had been well therefore if you had cleared your own meaning if you could seeing you are so offended with that book which endeavours to clear the state of the question SECT 2. H. H. same pag. First if you deny the Churches are constituted by baptizing you differ from the rest of your brethren and forefathers who generally with one consent till within these ten or twelve years did conclude that children were made members of Christ c. in Baptism witnesse the old Catechism then they were not so before Reply 1. Since you have not proved that our brethren and forefathers said That Baptism did Constitute a Church or give it its being and form which is the usual and proper signification of the word you have not shewed any difference between Mr. Cook and them 2. Though we are not bound to own every expression in those Writings which for the main are sound yet that phrase of being made a member of Christ may admit a good Construction according to that good rule b) Bains help to true happinesse Things are said to be or made when they are declared manifested and acknowledged so to be e. gr c) Joh. 1.12 with 1 Joh. 3.1 To be the sons of God is expounded to be called the sons of God And the Jews charged Christ d) Joh. 19.7 that he made
Nations and in compassing the Camp of the Saints will not bee after the full glorifying of the Saints in the highest heavens 2. If these things are too hard for Mr. C. to understand though a Scholar are they easie to you why then do you hold the Light under a Bushel But he that hath but half an eye may see the impertinency of the Scriptures a) Luk. 20.21 with 1 Cor. 2.8 9 10. alledged by you SECT 7. H. H. You say from Rev. 21.24 that the Nations of them that are saved That walk in the light of the New Jerusalem I answer That 's granted but that New Jerusalem is not yet here below for drunkards and wicked persons to walk by but Paul saith b) Gal. 4.26 that it 's above and is free and is the Mother of all the Saints Reply 1. To what purpose do you mention drunkards c. when Mr. C. according to the text Rev. 21.24 expresly mentions them that are saved 2. Paul doth not say expresly neither do you undertake to prove that this New Jerusalem in the Revelation is the Mother of all the Saints That 's your glosse and not the Apostles words But whether by this New Jerusalem is meant the Church Triumphant in heaven which is improbable because it 's said c) Rev. 21.2 to descend from heaven and expresly The Kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it which you cunningly left out or 2. The Church of truly sanctified ones on earth which are hid in the visible Church as the Wheat in the chaffe or 3. of a Future glorious Church on earth at the Jews conversion Iâ— holds forth that National Churches are nâ—t to be accounted absurd to those who are acquainted with the Scriptures For they that are saved are Churches or members of Churches but Nations are saved Therefore Churches or members of Churches 3. The Apostle saith not the Mother of all the Saints as you cite him but of us all as you truly cite it p 56. I believe you have a mind to canonize all the Anabaptists for Saints and I doubt not but there are some reall Saints among them but if there be not drunkards and wicked persons members of your Church you are foully belied Such surely are of Agar SECT 8. H. H p. 29. Lastly you say If a company of believers in one house have been called a Church Domestical then a multitude of believers in a Nation maâ— be called a National Church I answer That 's granted if they be all believers as you said at first but little babes are not believers c. Râ—ply 1. Sir review your Answers from p. 27. to this 29. and you grant seven times at â—east what Mr. C. proves viz. a Nationall Church in a Gospel-time which was the end of citeing the forenamed Scriptures d) See Font uncovered p. 2 to shew that there is no cause of being ashamed of the Title of a National Church nor of your accounting it odious and absurd Now blessing on you I hope you and Mr. C. will shake hands and be friends But yet 2. You curtell Mr. C. Arguments and Scriptures That immediately precedent and this present citation of the words of that Book witness specially this last where you have not only left out ten parts for one very material to clear the consequence but so cited here and there a word as to make it speak little better then non-sense which I refer to the judgment of those that will read the Book and mark how you have abused both it and him 3. If there were some babes in those housholds which could not actually believe and some adult too who did not professedly much lesse sincerely believe the like must be granted concerning National Churches viz. Though every particular person therein doth not actually believe or professe Faith yet the major or better part may give the Denomination e. g. The Infancy of some the wickedness of others hindred not but the Jews might be warrantably called a Nationall Church 4. Though you quite and clean mistake Mr. C. who by the by proves a National Church and here meddles not with Infants yet if little babes be no believers not so much as virtually c. as Mr. C. saith how e) Mar. 16.16 shall ye escape damnation CHAP. VIII Of Affirming a Negative and teaching the Law SECT 1. H. H. You say in your 6 p. we affirm a Negative viz. that the Baptism or sprinkling of Infants is not the Baptism of Christ c. And here you follow us on to purpose and tell us we are such as the Apostle speaks of f) 1 Tim. 1.5.6.7 understanding not what they say nor whereof they affirm Here you think you hit us home I must confesse now you have catched us out of our own element and in your own for we know you are Scholars and have learned to contend about words to no profit c. Reply 1. There is no cause of making this din of being pursued to purpose c. For in that Book there are very few lines spâ—nâ— about this your absurdity But you have bestowed almost two pages in pleading for it with more absurdities Nay this is not the only ground as you untruly relate of your charge there but one among those verall grosse mistakes which may give just cause to judge that you are such as the Apostle saith know not what they say nor whereof they affirm 2. What vanity and audaciousness did you then discover in urging for disputes when you confesse the terms of Art which are needfull to be known in all regular dispuâ—ings are things out of your element To dispute without Legick and to reason in points of learning without Scholarship is as wise as to undertake to judge of colours without sight and light or to challenge to run a race without leggs SECT 2. H. H. Seeing we erred in saying we affirm a Negative we will either confess our errour or shew you a president which may justifie our practice Paul saith g) Kom 3.12 There is none that doth good no not one Here Paul affirmeth a Negative for there is an Affirmative c. Reply 1. It had been far better for you ingeniously to have confessed your error or to have passed it by in silence as you have done many more materiall things in Mr. Br. and Mr. C. Books for you are like to a beast in a Quagmire the more you stir the deeper you sink What intollerable impudency is this instead or confessing your error and resolving to keep within your own element to go about to justifie your self of fathering your folly on the Scripture 2. In that proposition of the Apostle the negative particle is in the h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 originall set before the Verb so that according to your interpretation it would be rather a denying of an Affirmative then affirming a Negative They that understand know that where the predicate is affirmed
and may for the future also for you leave the substance of his book unanswered CHAP. IX Of Mr BAXTER'S Ten Positions SECT 1. H. H. pag. 31. You say pag. 3. It hath pleased the Holy Ghost to speak of some things in the Scripture more fully and of others more sparingly and where God spake more sparingly the thing must needs be more difficult and yet truth still Answ But he never speaks of Infant baptism in all the Scripture neither fully nor sparingly Then none of his truth nor ever was Reply 1. If you could or would speak properly you would or should have said Either fully or sparingly but as you express your self you grant that Infant-Baptism is spoken of in Scripture one way or other For two Negatives in our language make an Affirmative but I will not insist on this 2. Whether the Scripture speaks of Infant-baptism I hope it appears already in part to the impartial Reader and afterwards will be further cleared 3. The Scripture speaks neither fully nor sparingly of baptismal boots baptismal breeches and other shifting garments used by your party therefore by your arguing your Mode of Baptizing is none of God's truth nor ever was SECT 2. H. H. You instance in 4 particulars but that which is pertinent to the matter in hand is your fourth viz. The New Testament speaks more sparingly of that which is more fully discovered in the Old What need the same thing be done twice except men should question the authority of the Old How silent is the New Testament concerning a Christian Magistracy which made the Anabaptists of old deny it where find you in the New Testament a Christian that exercised the place of a King or Parlament man or Justice of the Peace or the like And so of an oath before a Magistrate of War and of the Sabbath how sparing is the New Testament and why because enough is said of them in the Old To all which I answer you have spoken many words to no purpose c. Reply 1. How pittifully you contradict your self the meanest may see by comparing together the beginning and close of this Section For you said Mr. Bazters fourth Instance is pertinent to the matter in hand and here in the end you say he hath spoken to no purpose How can it be pertinent and yet to no PURPOSE 2. Why are not the other pertinent and to purpose because you could not answer pertinently and to purpose For in Mr. Baxters 1 Case he saith p) Plain Scripture proof for Infant-Baptism p. 3. the word is not spoken to Infants therefore it speaks more sparingly of them yet for the comfort of godly Parents God hath much more fully revealed his mind concerning their children then of wicked and open enemies In the first that Infant-baptism is not so great a point as many make it except by the dangerous consequences ensuing therefore more sparingly mentioned In the second Infant-baptism was not controverted then as some other points yet Scripture is sufficient to direct us for the determination of this too if we have wisedom to apply generall rules to particular cases and have senses exercised to discern the Scope of the Spirit Your silence to all which wee will take for consent SECT 3. H. H. Where as you say That which is spoken on in the Old Testament need not to be spoken of again I Ansâ—er Infant-baptism is no where spoken of neither in the Old nor New Testament therefore you ought not for shame to speak of it Reply 1. This Answer of yours might have been spared if you had read Mr. Baxter a little further q) Pag. 4. The main question is At what age members are to be admitted into the Church Now this is as fully determined in the Old Testament as most things in the Bible and therefore what need any more 2. It 's horrible audaciousnesse for you to say Infant-baptism is no where spoken of in the Old or New Testament If you mean in so many syllables it 's granted already If you mean not so much as by good consequence we say so it 's spoken of as womens receiving the Lord's Supper giving thanks at meals praier in and with our Family c. and therefore you ought not for shame speak against iâ— SECT 4. H. H. p. Ibid. As for your saying Where find we a Christian Magistrate in the New Testament I Answer Surely you have forgotten the Deputy Acts 13.12 and the Eunuch Acts 8.27 37 38. and what say you to Erastus the Chamberlain of the City Rom. 16.2 3. and likewise those Saints of Cesar's houshold Phil. 4.22 Reply 1. Answer hath been made to your two former instances r) see chap. 5. sect 9. which may satisfie any judicious Reader I wonder at this vain repetition of yours unlesse it should be to make up the number of your sheets I know not the caus 2. In your p. 13. You think you have found a Lord Deputy and a Lord Treasurer and you would fain find here a Lord Chamberlain too Would you set up these Officers again if you were to model and mould the State a new But to give you your due you do not dare not affirm Erastus to be a Lord Chamberlain or a Christian Magistrate onely you speak very gingerly What say you to Erastus c. Therefore I say 3. I find mention made of Erastus in Rom. 16 23. not 2.3 where in the Greek Å¿) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he is called a Steward Now that a Steward of any Town or City is or hath been called usually and properly a Magistrate is more then I know or perhaps you can tell Onely this I must tell you you might as well call Gaius a Christian Magistrate of whom in the same verse honorable mention is made viz. that he was Paul's Hoste and of the Church and then he that lately or heretofore in these parts have entertained Mr. Haggar and his Church must be a Christian Magistrate too 4. I dare not say that the Christians in Rome specially they that belong to the Emperors family call'd Saints of Cesars houshold Phil. 4.22 were Christian Magistrates If so speak out and prove it if you can 5. You wrong Mr. Baxter in charging him to say Where find we a Christian Magistrate in the Nâ—w Testament Indeed he saith How silent is the New Testament concerning a Christian Magistracy but presently after within three lines explains himself How sparing is the New Test c. And you that take upon you to find so many Christian Magistrates in the New Testament cannot find one Christian there that exercised the place of a King or Parlament man or Justice of the Peace c. and so his Quest for all your fair flourish is quite left unanswered by you SECT 5. H. H. p. 32. For an Oath did you never read in the New Testam Heb 6.16 And for War did you never read Luk. 3.15 Act. 10.1 For subjection to Magistrates 1 Pet.
expresly written in the Word of God Therefore womenâ— receiving the Lord's Supper family-prayer morning and evening c. are not of God but of Satan You have now brought your Pigs to a fair market But if by the word WRITTEN you mean Consequentially written Then your Minor is false For Infant-baptism is so written in the Word of God i. e. Consequentially as hath been abundantly k) Sâ—e M Marshallâ— Defence p. 209 c. shewed out of Mat. 28.19 Acts 2.38 39. c. Where there are Consequentiall commands for Infant-baptism As by your own confession p. 12. Family-prayer c. is written in 1 Tim. 2.8 c. So that hence I conculde Infant-baptism is written in the Word of God and therefore of God and not of Satan as you blasphemously speak and write SECT 14. H. H. In your 5 Position you tell the people that if any have taken up this pâ—nion and have not read and studied Mr. Cobbet and Mr. Church and other chief Books and been able to confute them they have but discovered a seared conscience which either dare venture on sin without fear or else do count error no sin To all which I answer How now Mr. B. are you grown to this height what must not men obey what they find written in the holy Scripture till they have asked M. Cobbet and M. Churches counsel I pray you where learned you this Divinity at Rome I thought all this while the holy Scriptures had been able to make us wise to salvation but it seems they are not If you say True but we must be beholding to M. Cobbet and M. Church Reply 1. The greatest part of M. B. 5 Position you pass by in silence as being it seems unable to answer it and the piece you catch at you curtail also as the intelligent Reader may quickly observe 2. What you seem to answer to is in a Magisteriall Prelatical and scornfull way e. g. How now M. B are you grown to this height what must not men obey c. till they have asked M. Cobbets and M. Churches counsell I pray where learned you this Divinity at Rome I am very sorry that you are grown to that height as to fit in the seat of the scornfull l) Psal 1.1 3. The Scriptures I acknowledge is able to make us wise to salvation and yet we may and must read other Books for all that m) 1 Tim 4.14 with Eccl. 12.12 give attendance to reading I believe you speak this out of the height of your bitternesse and malice against all humane learning which shall be defended in its place 4. What a poor and pitifull reason do you give Mr. Cobbets and Mr. Churches Books must not be read because the Scripture is able to make us wise to salvation n) Foundation p. 15. to 21. Why then did M. Haggar read if he hath read those Books mentioned in pag. 15. which make up three whole leaves Are not the Scriptures able to make M. Haggar wise to salvation without them Nay why have you printed this Book of yours if not to be read and yet for all that the Scripture is able to make us wise to salvation through Faith in Christ SECT 15. H. H. p. 36 But I pray how did men before M. Cobbets and M. Church's Bâ—oks were writen and how do those â—ow who cannot come by their Books or never heard of them If it be as you say you may do well to send some men up and down the Country to sell them But I believe this is but one of your scare-Crows with which you use to affright silly souls that set their Faith in your wisedom and not in the power of God but your folly is a making manifest and light and freedom is breaking forth to them which you have kept in darkness and bondage Reply 1. Pehaps you might as well ask how did men before the Scriptures were written But 2. You speak in the language of ignorant superstitious Popish and prophane persons what are become of our Ancestors c How did our Forefathers before there were so much preaching c The same plaister may be applied to both sores viz. They stand and fall to their Master Where much is given much is required that little measure of light might be saving to them which will not be to us But M. Baxter tells you p. 6. If any of you have taken up this opinion without reading M. Cobbets c. and being able to confute them at least to himself which words you have left out you have discovered a seared conscience c. To which you answer not a word 3. Your scoffing scorning and censuring are unworthy of any reply only it seems as yet you have not made M. B. folly manifest for you say His folly is a making manifest and I am confident that that light and freedom you talk of will be found in the event darkness and Thraldome 4. Consider in your cold blood whether you do not keep your Proselytes in darknesse and bondage by keeping them from the publick Ministry By the light whereof your errors are discovered under the odious terms of Antichristian c. one of your Scare-Crows with which you use to affright silly souls And by keeping them to your Ministry or to some private gifted-brother as he is called what is this but to be kept in bondage or set in the stocks SECT 16. H. H. same p In your sixth Position you say you will discover a most frequent cause of mens falling into errors viz. All men in the beginning do receive many truths upon weak and fals grounds and so hold them a while till they are beaten out of their old Arguments and then presently they suspect the cause it self and you are perswaded that it is Mr. Tomb's case Answ As for Mr. Tombs he is of age and able to answer for himself I never knew any receive Infant-baptism upon any ground at all weak or strong neither can they being uncapable of understanding what they do Therefore you may well say they are or may be quickly beaten off it again c. Reply 1. What you say of M. Tombs I may more truly say of M. Baxter he is of age and able to answer for himself If that be true of which I make no question which is said of M. Baxter o) J. G. Catabap A man as fit and able as any I know to make straight a crooked age 2. M. Baxter doth not say as you represent him but you being deceived would deceive the simple partly by leaving out the word ALMOST For he saith Almost all men do receive many truths on weak and false grounds and partly by not distinguishing between the receiving of Infant-baptism and the doctrine of Infant-baptism The Jewish Infants received Circumcision even when and while they could not receive the doctrine of it Your reason therefore concludes as strongly against Circumcision then as against Infant-baptisme now SECT 17. H. H. same
liberty to swerve from these primitive practices c. 4. The custome of the Churches in baptizing Infantâ— is of that weight with the Paedobaptists that you must bâ—ing more convincing Arguments then you have yet done to take them off from that custom As for the manner of Baptizing Mr. Cradock to whom Mr. Baxter referrs you tells you * Gospel-liberty p. 2â— 4. I hat Christ hath not made Baptism such an Ordinance as that in all Climates and Countries-and Regions they must go over head and ears in a River c. SECT 22. H. H. You say that you can prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles as there be many sufficient Histories extant inform us and that the deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery upon Popish or Heretical grounds Answ Oh Sir have I now sound you out Truly seeing I have I must not conceal your wickedness least I become guilty with you of the blood of souls And therefore I do by this declare to all men that you are both a Deceiver and a Blasphemer The which charge I now come to prove Reply 1. Nay stay a while and consider what you say or do you triumph before the victory If you have but now found out Mr. Baxter It teems you have missed of him all this while 2. Though I have found you out before yet I must not conceal your weakness wickedness and audaciousness least I communicate with you in â—our sin and here I do declare to all men hereby that Henry Haggar is both an Imposter and a Blasphemer the which charge I come now to prove but first let us see how you prove the charge SECT 23. H. H. p. 3.38 1. It 's evident you are a Deceiver in that you have intituled your Book Plain Scripture proof for Infant 's Church-membership and Baptism when indeed there is no such thing in all the Bible but you confess that your proof is from some histories extant which you judge sufficient c. Reply 1. You notoriously abuse Mr. Baxter he doth not say that proof for Infant-baptism from Histories are sufficient in his judgment u) see Mr. Baxt. Position 9. p. 7. but in opposition to Mr. T. pretences among the simple he saith he shall easily prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles daies as there is any sufficient history extant to inform us And if this proves Mr. Baxter to be a deceiver then blessed v) see the foregoing Chap. 5. sect 14. Inst 3.4 c. 16. s 8. Calvin is one and many other burning and shining lights in the Churches of Christ But your charge is indeed from an Eldern-gun and is no Musket-shot it makes a noise but God be thanked hurts not 2. Besides the humane testimonies for Infant-baptism in matter of fact M. Baxter brings abundance of plain Scriptures to prove it De jure And if you see them not it is because you are wilfully blind and obstinate It 's an easie matter for you with impudence to say there is no such thing but it's hard for you to disprove those Texts of Scripture alledged by him Therefore you have cunningly waved all saving two or three in comparison 3. Your Proposition implied is false viz. He that intitles his Book so and yet brings antient histories to prove the usage of Infant-baptism as high as the Apostles daies is a Deceiver you will never set this crooked legg straight while the world stands 4. To set the Saddle as they say on the right horse and to prove you a Deceiver I thus argue He that intiâ—uleth his Book Plain Scripture-proof for the baptizing of men and women when they believe in Rivers and Fountains as a Standing Ordinance in the Church of Christ is a Deceiver But H. H. so intituseth his Book therefore H H. is a Deceiver Theâ—e is no doubt of the Minor and the Major is as clear because those words viz. A Standing Ordinance are no where written in the Scripture of truth and with Mr. Haggar express and plain Scripture proof are all one SECT 24. H. H. 2. You are a Blasphemer for you say deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery Answ But Sir do you not know that our glorious Lord Jesus Christ deferred his baptism till he was thirty years of age Luke 3.21 22 23. And yet he was the child of believing Parents I think you dare not deny Reply 1. If this example be binding none ought to be baptized till they are thirty years old which I perswade myself is against your judgment and practice 2. Luke saith not that Christ deferr'd his Baptism till he was thirty years of age This is your inference not his Assertion He doth not say Christ was thirty years of age before or when he was baptized much less tha the Deferr'd his Baptism till then but thus * Luke 2.23 Jesus himself began to be About thirty years of age c. 3. Christ was not till then baptized partly to answer the Types x) Numb 4.3 35 39 43 47. and chiefly to receive that Testimony from Heaven in the midst of such a great confluence of people that came to John to be baptized which is hinted by Mat. 3.5 6 13 Then and held forth by Luke c. 3.21 22. Therefore this was not properly a deferring * see Diodat on 2 Pet. 3 9. unless perhaps in the judgment of the Flesh as Hab. 2. vers 3.2 Pet. 3.9 SECT 25. H. H. p. ibid. Again doth not the Commission of Christ defer Baptism till believing Mark 16.15 16. and Philip also Acts 8 36 37. shewing by these words plainly that if he did not believe it was to be deferred c. Reply 1. In Mark and in the Acts cited there is not one word of deferring till believing you manifest your own folly and delude poor souls c. 2. You are now for Consequences when you think they will serve your turn Mr. Baxter hath brought more plain Scripture-proof for Infant Church-membership and Baptism then you have done for deferring Baptism 3. I am mistaken if you are not guilty of a plain contradictions For in your pag. 26. in your exhortation you do more then implie that Baptisme is not to be deferred saying Let us not delay the time with a woful misapplication of Scripture y) â—sal 119.60 but here in this page Baptism is to be deferred as you plead 4. The rest of this page contains nothing but an idle Repetition or abominable Censuring with horrible abuse of Scripture and therefore shall have no other answer but what is made already SECT 26. H. H. pag. 39. The summe of which is that Rev 19.20 and 13.16 17. are most properly applied to you the sign of the Cross being a mark of the Beast on the childs forehead when it was baptized or rather rantized Here is a looking-glass for you but the Gospel is our looking-glass Acts
of your Dilemma are run into your side get them out if you can SECT 8. H. H. Pag. ibid. Sixth Argument from 1 Cor. 10 16 17. with cap. 11.28 Reply 1. This is the same Argument with the former and may receive the same answer yet it seems what you cannot make out in weight you will in number But put it into form and so the vanity of it is easily discovered For if thus They that partake of that Bread can examine themselvs but infants cannot therefore they partake not of that Bread We grant this Aâ—gament if it will do you any good it hurts not us Or thus All Church-members are to examine themselvs Infants cannot Then we deny the Major and that truly prove it if you can This makes not against us but against you if you hold that Infants may partake of that we do not 2. This Particle ALL must be restrained to the subject matter in hand as in this very chapter ver 23. And I pray you whom doth the Apostle reprove and instruct but such as can understand judge speak c. None of these debar Infants from Church-membership SECT 9. H. H. p. 67. If any object we may as well exclude Women as children I Answer It discovers but a wicked cavilling spirit for that women did partake of it I have proved and that they are members of the body â—prove it by Gal. 3.27 Acts 8.12 1 Cor. 11.4 5 11. Acts 9.36 Rom. 16.1 2 Joh. ver 13. Now if women are members of the body then they did partake 1 Cor. 10.17 2. For the word Woman in the Text it 's all one with Gen. 5.1 2. and here thâ— word Man includes both sexes as the Greck and Latine word shew Reply 1. You take the shadows of mountains for men who are they that discover such a spirit I dare say neither Mr. Baxter nor Mr. Cook who deny not but women did partake of the Lord's Supper but upon a better account then you give for what a pitiful arguing is this Women did partake of it because it is the communion of the body and women are members of the body of Christ which is the Church Eph. 1.22 23. as though that body in 1 Cor. 10. verse 16. were the same with this in the Ephes 2. You spend your time and labour in vain in proving what is not denied yet when you have done you prove it but by consequence and that far fetcht As there is no express word for Womens receiving of the Lord's Supper so your proof from 1 Corinth chap. 11. verse 4 5.11 that they are members of the body is far-fetcht and stretcht too 3. How doth the word Man include the Woman in verse 28 When it 's said Thou r) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Himself and Him which are of the Masculine gender Yea the word Man is so far from including the Woman that it signifies very often the man onely As the Centurion said I am a Man under authority Mat. 8. ver 9. and Christ said What went you out to see A man clothed c. i. e. John Baptist Mat. 11. ver 8. and the Evangelist saith There was a Man which had his hand withered Mat. 10. ver 12. and Joh. 1. ver 6. There was a Man sent of God c. 3.1 A Man of the Pharisees c. 4. If you are no Scholar you amuse your Reader with stollen stuff in citing so many Authors antient and modern from your pag 15 to 21. If you are you grosly dissemble avoid this absurdity if you can SECT 10. H. H. p. 68. Seventh Argument from 1 Cor. 12.25 26. Church members should have care one of another But Infants cannot Therefore no visible members If they be they are to be dealt with and reproved for not having that care Reply 1 Any Fresh-man in Logick can espie four terms in this your sophistical Argument 2. It 's neither said in nor by this or any other Scripture that all Church-members are able or bound at all times actually to take care one of another but only bound hereto when they have ability and call The best of them being fast asleep or deadly sick or suddenly in a swound c. are not in a capacity to take that care till they are awake or well or come to themselvs as we say So Infants as soon as they come to the use of reason c. they are bound actually to be careful of and serviceable to the Church 3. Comparisons illustrate but do not prove or if they do they must not be stretched too far least blood be drawn instead of milk The care here is not proper but Metaphorical viz. the exercise of the members offices and operations for the common good of the body though they cannot actually intend it Now when you can perswade us that the hand and feet c. of an Infant are no natural members of the natural body because the exercise of reason is wanting to direct the members in their actings you shall perswade us that Infants of the Church are no members of the mystical body SECT 11. H. H. same page My eighth Argument is from Eph. 2. ver 23. where Paul speaking to the Church of Ephesus saith That they all had their conversation c. But Infants had not could not have such a conversation all that they are charged with is but Original sin therefore no Infants were Church-members amongst them Reply 1. I grant the Church of Ephesus because it 's expresly so called elswhere Rev. 2.1 but here is no express mention made of Paul's writing or speaking to the Church of Ephesus in Eph. 2.23 it should be ver 2 3. which is either your or the Printer's fault though the word Church is seven times used in this Epistle 2. In charity I passed by in a manner the But in your pag. 60. because it might be the Printer's mistake but meeting with it here so solemnly I must conclude you smell too much of the Popish cask making a But of Original sin and so extenuating mincing that Quagmire of corruption that hell of the heart as some understand Jam. 3.6 which the Saints of God have aggravated and lamented with tears of blood I fear you are a stranger in experience to the woful depravation of man's corrupted nature and the baseness and badness of your own heart though here unawares you answer your own seventh Qu. pag. 53 54. 3. Your Major again is justly denied neither doth that Scripture you bring prove it For the Apostle saith that he himself and the adult Ephesians to whom he immediately directs his Epistle before their conversion his from Pharisaïsm theirs from Heathenism both from a state of nature and sinful life were wicked livers yet here is nothing said that all Church-members are or have been actually gross sinners 4. The Jews were oft charged with their fore past wickedness Deut. 9. and Jer. 5.3 4 5 30 31. yet it follows not that their children must be
made so Then they were not so born if they had they should not have need to bee made so Again If make Disciples All Nations and teach all Nations be all one as M. Baxter affirms then it is clear that Disciples are made by preaching the Word But Infants that understand not earthly things if we tell them can much less understand the things of the kingdom of heaven declared by the preaching of the Gospell Therefore Reply 1. You still forget the work you had undertaken which was to answer but instead of answering the Arguments brought to prove Infants-Disciple-ship you take the opponents place and say you will prove that they are not cannot be Disciples 2. Your Argument here is like that earth Gen. 1.2 without Form and voyd confused Chaos without head or foot in no mood or figure as Logicians know and therefore I have transcribed it at large only paring away some superfluous words that all may see what a Babel you have built 3. Admit your first conclusion were granted as nothing touching us which should be thus Therefore not born so if you understand the Apostles making Disciples of adult Heathens onely But your reason is false and foolish For not onely he that is a Disciple already need to be made still a better Disciple or Scholar But also somtimes to bee made and to bee born is all one Christ himself was made King Psal 2.6 I have set or as the word is annointed my King and yet hee was born King Mat. 2.2 Where is he that is born King Say the wise men It matters not how they came to know it whether from the Prophecy of Balaam or some other of Daniel c. or from the Revelation of the Angel which appeared to them as to the Shepherds saying There is born to you this day a Saviour Luk. 2.11 which is the Christ or the annointed Lord i. e. Prince or King The same in another phrase with this here in Mat. 1. with an Emphasis on THE i. e. the expected King or Messias Onely it 's clear that Christ in God's wise and eternal decree was made a King and yet born a King And to put it out of doubt Christ is said to be made of a woman Gal. 4.4 with Mat. 1.16 What is that but to be born of a woman 4. As for the Apostles making Disciples by teaching c. Whereof Infants are uncapable there is not the same reason of a Church to be constituted and of a Church already constituted taken into Covenant The former was the subject about which principally the Apostles were imployed the latter of ordinary Pastors and Ministers Though these Heathens and their children were not Disciples nor in Covenant by any birth priviledge when the Apostles were first to preach the Gospel out of the Pale of Judea they and theirs were under the power of the Devil born and brought up in his school of Infidelity and Idolatry But when they were converted and constituted a Church the children of such thus called were born by virtue of God's Covenant apprehended by faith Maâ— 10.14 1 Cor. 7.14 Acts 2.39 Subjects of Christ's Kingdom and holy and so consequently Disciples and Scholars in the school of Christ as is proved at large in M. Baxters and M. Cooks Books which you pretend to answer but indeed answer nothing to the greatest and most materiall part therein 5. As for teaching It is outward or inward immediate or remote formall or virtuall Infants while such though not ordinarily capable of outward immediate formall teaching by men yet may be said truly to be taught remotely and virtually in the teaching of their parents who are ingaged by admission into covenant and further instruction to hand over these saving truths to their children who are for the present dedicated to Christ as his Disciples to be trained up in his School Gen. 17.7 8.9 and 18 19. as Isaac and other children in Abraham's Family were consecrated to God to be taught by Abraham in the doctrine of the Covenant which order holds now in the time of the Gospel 2 Tim. 3.15 Ephes 6.4 And as for the inward teaching of Christ and his Spirit who can doubt but believers Infants whil'st such are capable of it though God's â—â—eer power and the passive capacity could be no ground of our perswasion or expectation that it should be so yet they being taken into the School of Christ kingdom of God and under the influence of the Spirit are within the compass of those promises Deut. 30.6 Isa 54.23 Jer 31.33 34. Mat. 11 25 Howsoever it least become you of all others to deny or doubt that Christ by his Spirit can illuminate Infants when you hold unqâ—estionably That by virtue of Christ's death they even the Infants of Heathens are justified and saved by virtue of Christ 〈◊〉 death p. 60.61 Surely Christ is made wisedom and sanctification to them to whom he is made justification and redemption 1 Cor. 1.30 SECT 2. H. H. Here M. Baxter and I must have discourse before we part for he tells us of diverse ways to make Disciples besides teaching them which in plain terms is to say There are diverse ways to make Scholars besides or without teaching of them which to me is a paradox Reply 1. M. Baxters distinction of a Disciple compleat and incompleat largely and strictly taken c. pag. 14. which you wisely take no notice of because you cannot answer cuts in sunder the sinews of your Argument and so makes your arguing of none effect 2. He saith p 23. There are more ways of teaching then by PREACHING in a Pulpit as mothers teach by action as well as by voyce For Gideon with briars and thorns TAUGHT the men of Succoth Judg. 8.16 And Solomon tells us a naughty person a wicked man that TEACHETH with his fingers Prov. 6.13 as you have done by writing this poisonous Pamphlet of yours All preaching I confesse is teaching but all teaching is not preaching A School-Master cannot bee said to preach to his Scholars in the School when yet he teacheth them their Lessons 3. It is a Paradox to you that there are more ways then one of making Scholars then by preaching as M. Baxter saith so were Christ's Aporisms Paradoxes to flesh and blood Mat. 5.3 to 12. as the doctrine of Christ and the Resurrection were to the Epicureans and Stoicks and yet Orthodox to sound judgments Acts 17. verse 18 19. I had thought here to have proceeded to your second Argument and to have left the Vindication of M. Baxter to himself who intends to deal with you and the rest of your Gang as I am credibly informed but because you would construe this as a meer evasion I shall by the help of the Lord go on Though I may say as truly of him as you do of M. T. p. 36. He is of age and able to answer for himself yea and more truly too For you p. 95. contradict his judgment for baptizing in warm water
about the subject of Baptism manner of Administration c. Reply 1. We are agreed as to the first It were well if in the main we could hit it too 2. Those differences in the Church of Corinth and between the Apostles will not justifie yours unless they were of the same kind howsoever they might be impediments to Faith and practice for a time and to some 3. You are too lavish to say wee differ about Cross Altar Font c. since these things are laid aside your Argument out of Jerem. 2.13 where you took the broken Cisterns for Fonts may make us quite out of conceit with them You might have forborn the Rails if you had not loved them dearly and loth to part with them and the Scotch-Directory as you scornfully call it but your tongue and Ink must be of a colour If Reformation be so far advanced as that the shooing-horns of Popery be cast out of door I wish you and your Proselytes in your universal Redemption Original sin Free-will Falling away from Grace do not bring in Popery at the window SECT 17. H. H. p. 96. Mr. Baxter denies Dipping of Believers to be the custom of the Church in the primitive times and he is not ashamed to give the Scripture the Lie before all men saying It 's not proved by any And why It may be because our Translators have not put the word Baptize into English and called it Dipping Reply 1. You are too full of your tongue Before you had charged Mr. Baxter for giving the Scripture the Lie you should have proved it But this is an usual scrap of your passionate Logick 2. Your sore back makes you kick at every one that comes near even at our Translators who yet according to the customary use of the Word and sense of the place have truly and rightly translated it For in reference to common actions it cannot signifie a total plungeing over head and ears therefore well Englished Wash Mark 7 4. Luke 11.38 Heb. 9.10 and in reference to the Sacramental action the Holy Ghost doth never use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Dipping but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore well rendred Baptizing which is become English by use as well as Hallelujah and Amen c. 3. Mr. Cook o) Font uncâ—vered p. 4 5. would have you prove it if you can that the word Baptize imports Dipping either from the proper signification of the Word or from the nature of the Ordinance or from Apostolical practice c. All which with his reasons you have clearly past by 4. Suppose which is not yet granted that the word at first did signifie Dipping not exclusively to all other yet it 's ordinary in Scripture to have words used in their Derivative not Primitive acceptation E. gr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its prime signification is taken for an Opinion or Sect Acts 26.5 yet the context elswhere puts this meaning on it Heresies Gal. 5.20 So there is a word that signifies Catechizing properly but used of any kind of Teaching and so translated twice Gal. 6.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Taught teacheth Thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Messenger but custome an Angel Fashion put an estimate on cloaths as custome doth a sense on words or as waters lose the taste of the Fountain from whence they flow and retain that of the Mineral through which they pass Thus Mr. B. is clear from a Lie and the Translators from a fault but take notice Mr. Haggar confesseth the Translators to bee on our side 5. It is strange that is answering the Qu. why is it not proved You say It may be because our Translators have not put the word Baptize into English and called it Dipping To delude your Reader you bring your dream and conjecture It may be whereas Mr. Baxter allegeth expresly other certain Reasons which shall be defended anon SECT 18. H. H. But Mr. Baxter confesseth p. 135. the word signifieth to wash as well as to Dipp and so in the Catechism Water wherein the person Baptized is Dipped Therefore 1. They can no more blame us for Dipping then we may them for Washing 2. How are they to be blamed that do neither but onely sprinkle a few drops of water on the face of a child and so delude the people 3. Then it must be Washing by Dipping or wetting all over for who can wash a thing that is not wet Reply 1. Mr. Baxter hath granted more then he needed For the word signifies generally no more then Washing r See Mr Leighs Critica sacra as the learned shew out of many Authors 2. We do not blame you simply for Dipping but for making it Essential to the Ordinance No Dipping no Baptizing is your crie Jesus Christ hath no where limited Baptizing to the mode and externality of Dipping And the Catechism which you cite saith expresly the party is baptized by Dipping or Sprinkling which disjunction you have left out 3. Though I may safely say with Mr. Blake and Mr. Baxter that I never saw a child sprinkled ours being rather a powring of water then sprinkling yet it 's false that you say sprinkling is not washing and therefore our people are deluded and a third part of the Nation unbaptized The Israelites were baptized in the Cloud 1 Cor. 10 ver 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not that they were dipt in it but because it dropt on them There sprinkling is baptizing If sprinkling you say be neither dipping nor washing then we have deluded the people all this while c. But I assume sprinkling is washing as is proved Then by your own arguing we have not deluded the people as being still unbaptized but rather you delude the people by your silly sophistry and bearing them in hand that baptizing signifies onely dipping 4. Your third Inference is as weak being without Scripture and reason 1. You bring no Scripture to prove the word baptizing signifies a washing by dipping but onely It must needs be which is not a sufficient much lesse a Scripture proof Thus your great weapon Necessity is soon blunted But I will give you a Scripture or two that holds forth a Washing but not by Dipping or as you say wetting all over It 's said Mark 7.4 When they come from the market except they wash the word is they baptize Mark 7.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they eat not Can any rational man imagine the Pharisees when they came from the market plunged themselvs over head and ears No it 's clear they washed but their hands from ver 2. yea in this verse mention is made of washing of cups pots and tables or beds which is not usually by dipping but sprinkling or powring water 2. Your inference is with some reason but a silly one For who can wash a thing that is not wet It stuck in your teeth you durst not speak out All over as immediately before For you can wash off a spot from the face of
Mark 5.3 5. but how came they dead the Magistrate you say prisoned banished and hanged them I easily believe that they who were hanged were dead but that the prisoned or banished were so unlesse civilly dead in Law or spiritually dead in sin is beyond my faith And me thinks though the imprisoned could not write yet the banished might have the liberty of pen and ink Thus whilst you would scape the Bears skin you get into the Foxes by misciting Mr. B. 2. As you have manifested your folly so you discover a piece of daring pride in challenging those three worthies to answer you Goliah-like done But Sir you must not take it unkindly if I tell you and so I do your book is not worth the answering by such worthy Champions Nor had it been by me had not some of your brood with a braving importunity forced this from me Of all which and more I have given an account in the Epistle to the Reader 3. It had been more meet in my judgment â—hat you should first have answered Calvin now he is dead laid in grave and past answering for himself so you might have cryed quittance with him SECT 39. H. H. p. 107. You say Calvin in his letter shews two sorts of Anabaptists one boasted of Scripture and pleaded it with great confidence Answ 1. If they so boasted they boasted of that which is good 2 Cor. 11.10 Psal 44.8 and if you would boast of them more then you do it would be better for you 2. Doth it displease you to hear men plead Scripture for what they hold are you such enemies to hold holy Scripture Take heed least white you boast your selvs to be wise without or above them you become foools 1 Cor. 3.19.20 21. If those two things be the worst that Calvin and you can say of those Anabaptists I shall not be ashamed to own them for Christians before all men Reply 1. If boasting be taken in the right sence I agree with you the more you and I boast of Scripture the better it is for you and me Though those Scriptures you brought to prove this be impertinent 2. It doth not displease Calvin or Mr. Baxter that men boast of and plead Scripture but that they shamefully abuse it to the maintenance of their cursed errours as if God had provided armes for Sathan gathering that which the Holy Ghost never scattered and wracking it to speak that he never intended And if you have a love to the truth as it is in Jesus I think you will be displeased to see spiders gather poyson from such flowers and brats draw blood in stead of milk from those sacred breasts which is Calvins c. meaning when he says they boast of Scripture Christ liked the Law but not the Pharisees Leaven We commend the Text but not the Anabaptists Comment And therefore while you wonder at them take heed you be not of those Act. 13.41 3. Your civill caveat which is as a flower in a dunghil I thank you for it I like not truth the worse from whomsoever it coms f) Si caecus mòstravet iter tamen aspice Horat. I will embrace good counsell ever from an enemy for those 1000 you talk of I have replyed to 4. In the conclusion though you have thrust us out at the window yet you have unawares let us into the Church at the door for if we plead Scripture more truly then the Anabaptist for what we hold you need not to be ashamed to own us for Christians before all men But 5. Will Mr. H. indeed own all for Christians that plead Scripture his words can bear no other construction then not only Hereticks but Satan himself may come in for a room among Christians Did not Satan plead s) Mat. 4 6. Et sient caput tunc capiti nunc quoque memhrâ— membris c. com c. 51. Scripture to Christ Mat. 4.6 And as impertinently as you have done as hath been shewed and have not his first born children I mean Hereticks both pleaded and boasted of Scriptures Now let any Heretick have but his book and by your doctrine he wil never be condemned Is this boasting and pleading Scripture good Certainly you are too lavish now when you cut the Devill and his Imps a piece of the childrens bread Thus you stand upon such a guard your self as defends and patronizes the worst of men and the vilest opinions of those worst of men Why may not any who plead Scripture with confidence be as good Christians as Anabaptists are or boast themselvs to bee SECT 40. H. H. As for your other sort you talk of that are above Scripture that confound all things c. I and all that own the Scriptures do deny and defie them and their ways and you do wickedly to call them Anabaptists whom Calv. calls Libertines as you confesse p. 141. Reply 1. I believe all that own the Scripure as they should do deny and defie them and their ways But I doubt whether you do as you say for then you deny and defie Anabaptism for that is their way still though they fly higher then yet you have done But as many in word defie the Devill and spit at the mention of his name yet own him in life So I fear you do with those Anabaptists 2. To pass by the overflowings of your gall against M. B. the meanest may see you would fain creep out at any hole Calvin calls them Libertines Therefore M. B. doth wickedly in calling them Anabaptists like this Protestants are of two sorts either Lutherans or Calvinists Therefore he that calls the Calvinists Protestants doth wickedly therein Or if I should say there are two sorts of Christians viz. Protestants and Anabaptists is it maliciously done to say Anabaptists are Christians upon the supposall SECT 41. H. H. p. 108. You say pag. 142. No man can shew you one man of the Anabaptists that is not tainted with some of these foresaid wickednesses Answ If any of us should say wee were never lyars wee should be still lyars Rom. 3.10 to 16. This is the condition of all men before faith and repentance Luk. 13.2 3 4. again 1 Cor. 6.9.10 11. And I dare not say but such as have been gross sinners may on their conversion be brought into the Anabaptists Churches c. Reply 1. I will not quarrell with you about the first part of this your rambling Answer It s to be acknowledge with shame and sorrow we are vile by nature 2. Surely you have the Art of breathing on your Converts with Knipperdoling u) Sleid com 〈◊〉 â—0 bidding them to receive the holy Ghost If those of the Anabaptists Church though grosse sinners when of our Church are now Saints which is nothing else but a blasphemous crack or vain brag a Paradox to me and shall be believed when you prove your Dipping an Ordinance of Christ and your Baptizing exepere operato the Laver of regeneration for the
confess our perjury till then you might have forborn this Calumny an unlawfull oath is voyd ipso facto it being a sin to make it it must needs be a greater to keep it It had been better for Herod to have broken then to have kept his Oath No Oath is the bond of iniquity And it 's false that our orders are renounced except by such as you are it 's maintained as a reall truth that Bishops did Ordain not as Bishops but as preaching Presbyters and though we have renounced Episcopacy yet not our Orders we see no need 3. For sedition the witnesses you produce for you are neither eye-witnesse nor ear-witnesse can prove you an accuser of the brethren Rev. 12.10 We do not use to shoot wild-fire from our Pulpits The Anabaptists are the sons of Bichri that blow the trumpet of Sedition How many seditious Pamphlets have of late been printed by them against the Lord Protector and present Government Is not their way of thriving by setting Church and State on a flame as if Salamander-like they delight to live In the fire their proper element What an Incendiary was John of Leyden This miserably divided Church can sadly witness what stirs they have made 4. For Idleness I wonder you are not ashamed to call us idle is there no calling but mechanicall no labour but Digging threshing c. Did the Apostle mean a trade when he said he laboured more abundantly then they all 1 Cor. 15.10 Or doth he mean carting and plowing or any handy-craft or civill imployment when he saith specially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine 1 Tim. 5.17 All are not idle that work not with their hands and if it be because the Ministerâ— live by Tithes of which anon by this Argument all the Priests of the Old Law must be Idle Drones SECT 45. H. H. p. same That the Anabaptists deserted their wives is a lye among the rest If you know any such why do you not prosecute them according to Law as you do your own Church-members But your tongues are no slanders and that I hope all men will shortly see Reply 1. It seems you cannot choose but breath out incivilities it becomes not you to give M. B. the lye but under favour it is no lye I will not instance again in John of Leyden If you have deserted her who was your wife then the charge is no lye if she be your wife still then you have more then one 2. If as you say our tongues are no slanders then their testimony as to this is truth and no lye Indeed our tongues do not slander you but your principles and practises justly accuse you And if you dare not act according to your principles the Law of the Nation curbing you yet we know not how soon you may be that in act which you are in judgment when you please A Lyon is a Lyon though in chains SECT 46. H. H. p. 111. Are not all the whores and thievs c. that are hang'd at every Assizes of your Church Did not you baptize them into it in their Infancy do you not give to the condemned the Sacrament on Sunday and one Church-member hang up another on Munday morning and yet are you so audacious as to say the Churches of the Anabaptists cannot be of God because they have corrupt members among them May I not say with Christ Mat. 7.3 4 5 Reply 1. I care not to throw a proverb on you They who are born to be hang'd will never be drown'd Some of you who have escaped the one when they have been dipped have met with the other at the Gallows h) See John Goodwiâ— catabâ—pt Admon to the sheep 〈◊〉 All then that are hanged are not of our Church And it 's observable that at the time of his execution for murther he confessed that from the time of his dipping he sensibly found God departing from him 2. Suppose all were of our Church Church-membership doth not exemt from civill government and therefore if some in our Churches fall into murder robbery whoredom c. why should they not be punished Indeed it is an Anabaptisticall i) Dr. â—â—atly p. 29 in Dippers dipt principle that malefactors should not be put to death and your words imply so much p. 27. But me thinks you should rather for this commend our Justice then condemn our Religion and Church your Arguing proves as much against the Religion and Church of the Jews when they were a Nation in Covenant with God 3. It 's false that they are baptized into our Church in their Infancy unless as our Church is a member of the visible Church into which properly they were baptized But suppose they were baptized into our Church in their InfaÌ„cy that is no such fault if they do not walk answerably to that solemn engagemeÌ„t the crime is theirs not that they were baptized Now to use your own Argument oft in your Book where there is no Law there is no transgression now there is not one syllable of a Law forbidding Infant-Baptism Therefore Infant Baptism is no sin 4. Let those who Administer the Sacrament to the condemned stand up and plead for it I know no such practice though I think it 's justifiable The penitent Thief might nay you say would have been baptized and why may not any other penitent malefactor receive the other Sacrament why should we reject them whom God hath received 5. We are not audacious in saying as you charge us but we are bold to say that it is not dis-proved by you that there is not one Anabaptist but is guilty of som of the fore-mentioned wickednesses you are therefore too bold in using or rather abusing the words of the Lord Christ for the beams remain in your eyes c. Matth. 7. ver 3 4 5. SECT 47. H. H. p. 111. to 117. To pass by the people le ts come to their Teachers for which end I refer you to a Book printed by Order of Parlament and Intituled The first Century of Scandalous and Malignant Priests c. among whom twelve are particularly named But I say with the Apostle in another case I have but acted a fools part in laying open their nakedness but M. Baxter and M. Hall have compelled mee accusing us of things which they cannot prove as Ananias and Tertullus did with Paul Act. 24. ver 1 2 3 4 5 6. with 13. Reply 1. All this and more is granted that there were more vile Ministers the shame of the Gospell then are named in that Book what doth this make against us Though Elies Sons were wicked yet the Israelites were the Children of God and if they were sequestred and according to your phrase cast out might they not upon their hearty repentance testified by som signall evidence be received again as well as your M. Dennis page 111 And if they be yet alive and have seen your Book there may be some hopes of their Reformation for
God hath opened the mouth of the Ass to reprehend the madness of these Prophets 2. When we accuse the Anabaptists our Bill is against ALL we say and that truly there is not a man of them that is not guilty of some of those fore-mentioned crimes Now though you have face enough yet you dare not say all the Ministers or all the people of the Church of England were guilty of some of those wickednesses the voyces of a few are not the qualifications of all m) Tantum in propriis essentialibus à particulari ad universale valet consequentia 3. You say you have playd the fools part I think so too it had been pity such a Comedy should have been Acted without you and so unawares you have given us thirteen to the dozen 4. Did the tongues and pens of M. Baxter and M. Hall flye at more uncertainties then yours Are not the writings of Calvin Bullinger c. as true as the first Century of Scandalous Ministers c. and is not M. B. as faithfull a reporter as M. Haggar SECT 48. H. H. p. 117. to 120. Now let the impartiall Reader consider whether this generation of men are not those spoken of 2 Tim. 3.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. Jer. 23.14 15 16 17. Ezek. 22.26 27 28. Mich. 3.12 Phil. 3.18 19. 2 Pet. 2.9 to 19. So that I may say with Jeremiah 5. ver 30 31. Reply 1. To all this I will say only thus much The Lord will cut out the proud tongue and the monthes of Lyars shall be stopped I shall spread all before the Lord as Hezekiah did Rashake's letter and the Lord be Judge between us Withall know Sir that you must one day answer for this * Jude 15. and for abusing Scripture to the venting of your own wrath bitterness and malice for which end the Scriptures were never written That such Scriptures may be used out of a holy zeal against the known enemies of God his Church against false teachers I deny not but it 's not fit you should vomit up your gall in them this is but to put Satans brats in God's childrens cloaths and to raise up the Devill in Samuel's mantle Yet 2. You say p. 117. we are false accusers for we accuse you and are in fault our selves A wise reason If reduced into form They that accuse the Anabaptists and are in fault themselvs are false accusers But we accuse you c. 1. Your Major is notoriously false Those Scribes and Pharisees accused the woman taken in Adultery in the very act yet they were not false accusers of her though they were in fault in themselves Joh. 8.3 to 12. The penitent thief accused the other thief for railing on Christ and yet he was no false accuser of him though as deep in robbery as the other 3. You say also the Lord hath promised they shal proceed no further c. 2 Tim. 3.9 It 's to be considered whether it be not a threatning rather then a promise we have only your bare word for this last which I cannot credit for it 's said their folly shall bee made manifest as theirs also was i. e. Jannes and Jambres now that was a judgment executed and is not this then a judgment threatned 4. Other Fopperies mentioned in the close of this answer are but repititions to a loathing I 'le say no more SECT 49. H. H. p. 120. Thus having made an end with M. Baxter I shall conclude with M. Cook 's last end of his Font uncovered p. 46. where he seems to answer this Objection Reply And have you done with M. Baxter Truly then you have done your work but by halves What do you say to his tryall q) c. 15. p. 152. to 160. of the strength of your cause by antiquity what not a word to all this what 's become of your old way of disputing never an Odium to cast upon him no clawing Apostrophe to the Reader or people never a mist to cast before mens eyes that they may not see the truth Cannot you tell M. Baxter hee lyes and all that he writes are but lyes why are you thus cowardly without any noise to quit the field Is not this to acknowledge you are conquered But you are about to encounter with M. Cook again Let 's see how you charge here if any whit better then before CHAP. XVI SECT 1. H. H. p. 121. He saith The truth oft lyes deep and will not easily be sound out As it is more pretious then Gold and Silver so it requires more diligent search Gold mines are not obvious to every eye much skill and labour are requisite to find them out and bring the Gold to light Answ Sir I am afraid that this is your Gold that you have deceived so many poor souls withall which you have taken great pains to dig out of the mountains of antient Fathers the mines of mens inventions you may well compare your work to Digging for Isa 29.15 c. Reply 1. That you might be thought it seems to have fully answered that little Book Though you never spake to the substance of it as you have nibbled at some few words in the beginning so now you take notice of some few words in the close of that Book But whereas you say you are afraid I tell you the wicked fear where none pursues and Hypocrites pretend to fear the sins of others when they intend most to hide and dissemble their own 2. It appears indeed you were afraid of somthing when you keep at such distance from the body of that little book which you pretend to encounter only making a few slieghty velitations first at the van and then at the rear and presently run away not daring to come near the main body which stands still in it's full strength and sees you running away only giving some bragging and rayling words as you look behind you which any coward may do 3. If you did discern any counterfeit Gold there why did you not discover it by the touch-stone of the Word to bee so 4. What occasion you have to complain of Ancient Fathers c. I know not for they were not urged in that book But what was there asserted was confirmed by Scripture Though we blesse God for any help we have from ancient or modern writers and their inventions For the finding out of the truth and understanding the Scriptures you that stand not in need of the help of others may scorn them if you please being sufficient of your self 5. You may perceive now your perversenesse in abusing Scripture r) Diodat on Isa 26.15 for they carried on their design secretly with in themselvs never informing themselvs of the wil of God nor commending their said designs to him in prayer for a blessing Malice it self cannot charge M. C. thus Nay rather he is like those who have digged deep to find hid treasures and to expose them to open view which all
Humane Learning is an excellent gift of God and needs not my patronage being able to plead for it self against all the friends of ignorance and the works and workers of darkness yet I shall speak something of it in this place according to my promise and others expectance As I desire to bless God for the gifts which he hath richly bestowed on many of his servants and to bewail my own defect therein So I know God the Author of it hath and will execute severe vengeance as on the abusers so on the contemners of it But tell me 1. Doth not wise Solomon though he acknowledged wisedom i. e. humane learning in natural moral and political things in comparison of the fear of God to be but vanity and vexation of spirit Eccl. 1.17 18. 12.13 yet tells us That wisdom excells folly as far as light excells darkness Eccl. 2.12 13.14 Was not Moses learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians Acts 7 22. which sure was humane learning * Just Mart. Râ—sp ad Qu. 25. viz. in Geometrie Astronomy Astrologie c. which out of your profound ignorance or profane scornfulness you are pleased to term Whimsies pag. 35. Was not Daniel and his Companions skilful in all the Wisdom which was famous in the Court of Babylon Dan. 1.4 5 6. Was not Paul brought up at the feet of Gamaliel Acts 22.3 and endowed with all the improvements of humane learning which those times could afford What should I say of Isaiah e) Isa 50.4 The Lord hath given me the tongue of the learned Luke Apollos c. who had eminent acquired endowments which all were made serviceable to God in the work to which they were called And whatsoever some others of the Prophets and Apostles wanted in acquired endowments was supplied by infused in that they were enabled to speak with tongue without study Acts 2. 2 Cor. c. 14. What would you have separated from Moses's Church or Daniel's or the rest because they stood so much in humane learning If you say that though they used humane learning they did not ground their religion on it no more can you say and prove truly of us We ground our Religion on the Scripture but make use of humane learning to know the meaning of the Scripture knowing it is a means sanctified of God for that purpose as of humane eies to read it humane reason to understand it desiring the Lord to sanctifie this humane ability but not casting away eies ears reason or learning If you say we abuse humane learning so did not the Apostles and Prophets Be it so But will you reject good things for the abuse then must you cast away eies ears reason meat drink apparel If you will separate from societies where good things are abused you must separate from all societies and your selves too 2ly Hath not God's providence made special use of the Exactness of the Hebrew Scribes Scholars and Rabbins for the preservation of the Scriptures of the Old Testament even in the least points and tittles Yea how could the Scripture of the Old and New Testament have been conveighed to us without Humane Learning unless wee must have had continual miracles Was not humane learning both amongst the Heathen and the Jews the means of the first Translation of the Old Testament to the spreading abroad of Divine Truth amongst the Nations and to make way for their call to the Gospel And hath not this been the blessed means which God hath used for communicating the knowledge of the whole Scripture to you and many thousands more who must for ever have been ignorant of them if they had continued sealed and locked up which they must for ever have been had not the Key of Humane Learning opened this Treasure to us Oh monstrous ingratitude to spurn at so happy an instrument of conveighing the knowledge of God and of the Scriptures to us 3ly Do you not know that the times of greatest ignorance and decaies or neglects of Humane Learning in the Church were the times of greatest Superstition Idolatry and Deformation when the Prince of Darkness uncontroulably ruled by his substitute Antichrist who was in those times especially as great an enemy to humane learning as you your selvs loth to be at the pains to get it himself and disdaining that any under him should bee more knowing then himself Under whom that illiterate herd of Monks and Friers bore the greatest sway and the blind led the blind into the pit Mat. 15.14 And if here and there a learned man was found in those times their humane learning was counted a sufficient ground to charge them with Heresie or some other hainous offence And can you be ignorant that the grand design of Antichrist is to keep the people in ignorance and illiterateness concerning the Scriptures that they may neither be able to understand them in their original languages which indeed were a work of greater learning then ordinary capacities and the generality of the people can attain to nor yet so much as have them translated into known languages which cannot be without much humane learning at least of some choice men least the light of the Scripture shining forth to the people by means of humane learning the abominableness of their Darkeness should be discovered 4ly Know you not that the breaking forth of Humane Learning about 200 years ago was a preparative and introduction to the breaking forth of the Gospel from under the Cloud and restauration of Religion Doubtless the Spirit of God stirred up those generous spirits impatient of the torpid ignorance which by the cunning of Antichrist and his instruments had over-spread the world with indefatigable industrie to recover learning out of the rubbish in which it had laien buried a long time So that in a while the knowledge of the Greek Hebrew and Chaldee tongues in which the Scriptures were first written and of the Syriack and Arabick into which there were most famous and antient Translations and other Arts and Sciences by which the Writings of the Learned might be better understood were speedily brought to a wonderful splendor and perfection And then presently after these dawnings of Humane Learning Christ the Sun of Righteousness arose in the sincere preaching of the Gospel and expelled the darkness of ignorance and superstition out of many Nations in great measure 5. How is it possible that the Scriptures confessedly the rule of true Religion should be understood by us English-men or any other Christians without the help of humane Learning unless by immediate inspiration and the miraculous gift of speaking with and interpreting of strange tongues and other sudden Revelations which were peculiar to the Prophets and Apostles and those primitive times which none of you as I know pretend to and which to expect now were high presumption if not tempting of God The Original Languages of the Scripture cannot ordinarily be understood without Grammar Learning there is much Oratory in
For this was but a Temporary injunction or prohibition thus for to comply with the Jews for the present for unity and amity sake For when the contention ceased wee know this Law was repealed The Apostle saying that there is nothing unclean of it self Rom. 14.14 And again whatsoever is sold in the Shambles that eat 1 Cor. 10.25 and every creature of God is good and nothing to bee refused if it be received with thanksgiving for by Fornication we are to understand part at least of the Sacrifice which the Harlots did offer to the gods for expiating their sin Such a custom it seems there was among them Deut. 23.18 Thou shalt not bring the hire of an whore into the house of the Lord and the Harlot said I have peace Offerings with me this day I have paid my vows And of the four particulars three of them are meats why not then Fornication for that properly taken must be perpetually abstained from it would rather follow that they were to abstain only from those four things mentioned Therefore not from paying Tythes 3. They are called necessary things x) Dr. Hammond * not to all Christians but to the Proselytes of the Jews or those converted Gentiles which lived at Jerusalem and Antioch This compliance therefore was then necessary to the making up of a Church of Jews and Gentiles which otherwise would not have associated 4. Whereas you call Tythes that intollerable burden and Antichristian you only again say it but you do not prove it They are only an intollerable burden to the enemies of Christ's Ministers As the Carriers pack to the galled back of his horse To others they are not a burden at all * See Phil. Trelcin Gent. proving that never any Ministry in the Church of God hath been or is maintained with less charge to the subject then the Ministers of the Church of England much lesse intolerable For it is the fittest maintenance for Christ's Ministers as appears by this that after all the serious consultations and deliberate debates concerning a change into some other settlement it 's concluded as of his sword y) 1 Sam. 21.9 none like it and z) M. Jer. Stephens preface 10 Sir H. Spelmans Treatise of Tythes the State would be a loser of many thousand pounds which are paid in Tenths First Fruits and Taxes which in reason must fail if Tythes fall And whereas you are pleased to call them Antichristian you who affirm must prove It 's storyed of one Lieutardus a) Sir H. Spolm de noa temerandis Eccles p. 20 21. who taught the payment of Tythes to be superfluous and idle and then growing desperate drowned himself And so gave us a badg of his doctrine The truth is Tythes are no more Antichristian now then Tenths and first Fruits are to the State and Churches are to us 5. Neither will you be ever able to prove that taking of Tythes doth deny Christ to be come in the flesh For Tythes as received by the Law or the Nation upon the generall account of a Gospel-Ministry are no appurtenance of the Leviticall Priest-hood nor are they any necessary appurtenance at all as being paid before there was any Leviticall Priest-hood as before yet thus the Prelates argued of late that the very name Sabbath much more the strict observation of it denies Christ to be come in the flesh and I might as well argue that your so frequently calling us Priests denies Christ come in the flesh but I spare you 6. To Heb. 7.12 I say that change may import not an abrogation but an Alteration i. e. a Translation b) So v. and Erasmus do render the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the sense would be that the Priesthood being translated from the Tribe of Levi to the Tribe of Judah of necessity there is a Translation also of the Law for paying Tythes but if you understand it of an abrogation or abolition It 's no advantage to you nor disadvantage to us For then the meaning is If the Leviticall Priesthood be abrogated then the Leviticall or Ceremoniall Law is abolished even that Commandement to take Tythes of the People for those words according to the Law refer to the people which were under the Mosaicall Law not to taking Tythes for that was sufficiently expressed in those words Have a Commandement and need not suddenly be repeated again The Lord gave those Tythes for a time to Levi so long as he served at the Tabernacle when Levi ceased to serve at the Altar Tythes ceased to be due to Levi but they ceased not to be due to the Lord. For as they were before the Law so they stand his for ever The Assignation of Tythes to Levi or that Lease being expired c) Heb. 7.8 they return to the Lord again and to speak properly There is nothing Ceremoniall in paying Tythes and if any Ceremony was affixed to them the Ceremony is abolished but the thing stands still As some Ceremonial signification was superadded to the fourth Commandement d) Ez. k. â—0 12.20 yet that Ceremony being abolished by Christ the fourth Commandement remains in full force and virtue as you seem to grant p. 13. 7. To your Qu. I have said somthing before e) Nostre hoâ—ie accipâ—unt Decimas vâ—â—ion quo jure non sane Ceremoniali Sed jure morali Par siquidem est ut 〈◊〉 irister à populo Alatur 1. Tim. 5.18 1 Cor. 9.14 proinde stipendia Ministâ—is sivèpersolvatur ex Agris sivè ex aedibus sive ex pecunia numerata sivè in DECIMIS nihil resert p. Mart. Lâ—c. Com. Class 4. c. 13. sâ— 1â— the Law of the Land is a sufficient ground if we had no more for us to take Tythes which Law is not yet proved to be contrary to the Law of God Nay it 's the will of Christ that Ministers should bee maintained in the generall and suppose there be no speciall or particular way of maintenance prescribed yet that will of Christ doth evince thâ— righteousness of any lawful way such as that by Tythes is which yet hath not been disproved Though we do not receive them as Priests Yet there is a Law to compell the people to pay Tythes to the Priests using the language of the time that then was as som of the Fathers cal the Lords Table an Altar and both we and they call the Lord's day Sunday when properly wee have neither Sunday nor Altar nor Priest SECT 4. H. H. p 125. 1. Ob. But Ministers of the Gospel must live of the Gospel Ans Then it seems you grant they must not live of the Law but Tythes are by the Law therefore they must not live by Tythes 2ly Why do you not then live of the Gospel be quiet take what people wil give you c Mat. 10 10 with Lu. 10.6 7. Reply 1. You trifle egregiously For if by the Law you mean the Ceremonial Law of Moses I told
M. Haggar no right to his house or horse c. unlesse he can produce an expresse place of Scripture where he hath fair evidences for the one and toll'd in the Fair for the other 2. You have been told that we have as good a right in the tenth part as the people have in their nine parts and if our people have liberty to seek redresse in case any shall wrong them in the nine parts or any part thereof then have we the same in case of the tenth 2. I discern your cunning craftinesse whereby you lye in wait to deceive what Scriptures we have brought justly against Antichrist you bring unjustly against us that your holy Father of Rome may not be so called This is your design Gallant service Sure his Holinesse will reward you with an hallowed sword or a Phoenix-feather as he hath done some other of his Champions As you cry against our carnal weapons p. 132. When your predecessors at Munster used those carnall weapons n) Sleid. com â—â—â—o A. D. 153â— you falsly father on us What is set down in H. H. two last leavs is but an idle repetition of the samethings or else Quakers and Billingsgate language and therefore I will not trouble my self or the Reader with any farther reply Only let him take notice thaâ— if all his four Reasons were granted they are no grounds for Separation from us For the strength if there be any of his Argument may be thus discerned That Church which is built on humane learning Infant-baptism Tythes and the Magistrates sword may be lawfully separated from but such is the Church of England c. Therefore I say the Major and Minor are both false and H. H. can never make them true while the world standeth I will give his Argument again if he will be beholding to me whosoever doth causelesly and unjustly separate from a Church is a Schismatick But Mr. Hag. c. do causelesly and unjustly Separate Therefore The Major is true by the unanimous consent of antient moderne Divines to say nothing of Scripture who describe Schisme by an unjust separation c. The Minor is proved because there is no Scripture to warrant a separation on all or any of those fore-mentioned grounds which H. H. calls four Pillars c. But enough of this which hath learnedly largely and Religiously been spoken to by others and left to the Candid Reader to consult and consider with Prayers to the Throne of grace that it may find favour in the hearts of Gods people and be crowned with his blessing FINIS Solides Honos Gloria Books Printed for Tho. Paâ—khurst at the three Crowns c. A Learned CoÌ„mentary or Expositiâ—n upon thâ— I Chapter of the second Epistle to the Corinthians by D. â—â—ch Sibbs published for the publick good by Tho. Manton Fol. The dead Saint speaking to Saints and Sinners living in severall Treatises viz. The fulness and greatest evill that is in sin on 2 Sam. 24.10 The love of Christ to his spouse on Cant. 4.9 Nature and Royalties of Faith on Joh. 1.15 The slowness of heart to believe on John 1.50 The cause figns and cure of Hâ—pocrisie with motives and helps to sincerity on Isa 58 2. The wonderfull workings of God for his Church â—nd his people on Exod. 15.11 Never before published by Samuel Bolton D. D. late Mr. of Christ Colledge in Cambr. Folio Four profitable Creatises very usefull for Christian practice viz. The Killing power of the Law The Spirituall Watch The New Birth Of the Sabbath By the Reverend William Fenner late Minister of Rochford in Essex Mr. John Cotton his practical Exposition on the First Epistle of John the second Edition corrected and inlarged A theatâ—e of flying Infects wherein especially the manner of right ordering the Bee is excellently described with discourses Historical and Physicall concerning them with a Second part of meditations and observations Theological and Moral in 3 Centuries upon the same subject by Samuel Purchas M. A. in 40. Catechizing God's Ordinance in sundry Sermons by Mr. Zachary Crofton Minister at Buttolphs Aldgate London the second Edition corrected and augmented The godly mans Arke in the day of his distresse discovered in Divers Sermons the first of which was preached at the Funeral of Mrs. Elisabeth Moore Whereunto is anexed Mrs. Elisabeth Moores Evidences for Heaven composed and collected by her in the time of her health for her comfort in the time of sickness By Ed. Calamy B. D. Pastor of the the Church at Aldermanbury Peoples Need of a living Pastor at the funerall of Mr. John Frost M. A. by Mr. Zach. Crofton The Gale of oportunity and the Beloved Disciple by Thomas Froysell in 80 The Wedding Ring sit for the Finger in a Sermon at a Wedding in Edmonton by William Seâ—ker Enchiridion Judicum or Jehosaphats Charge to his Judges Together with Catastrophe Magnatum or King David's Lamentation at Prince Abners Incineration By John Livesey Minister of the Gospel at Atherton The Journal or Diary of a thankfull Christian a Day-book of National and publick personal and private passages of Gods providence to help Christians to thankfulness and experience By John Beudle Minister of the Gospel at Barnstone in Essex large 8. Mr. Robinsons Christian Armor in large 8. Book of Emblems with Latine and English verses made upon Lights by Robert Farly small 8. A most Excellent Treatise concerning the way to seek Heavens Glory to flye Earths vanity to fear Hells horror with godly prayers and the Bell-mans summons 12. Johnsons Essayes expressed in sundry Exquisite Fancies Sion in the house of mourning because of Sin Suffering being an Exposition on the fifth Chapter of the Lamentations by D. S. Pastor of Vpingham in the County of Rutland Groans of the Spirit or a Trial of the truth of Praier A Handkercher for Parents Wet-eyes upon the death of their Children or Friends The one thing necessary by M. Thomas Watson Minister of Stephens Walbrook 8. A Plea for Alms delivered in a sermon at the ' Spital before a solemn Assembly of the City on Tuesday in Easter week April 13 1658. by M. Thomas Watson Minister of Stephens Walbrook 8. Moses unvailed or those figures which served unto the pattern and shadow of heavenly things pointing out the Messiah Christ Jesus briefly explained whereunto is added the Harmony of the Prophets breathing with one mouth the mystery of his coming and of that redemption which by his death he was to accomplish To confirm the Christian and convince the Jew very profitable and full of comfort By William Guild Minister of God's Word at King-Edward in Scotland ΤΑ ΔΙΑΦΕΡΟÎΤΑ or Divine characters in two parts acutely distinguishing the more secret and undiscerned differences between 1. The Hypocryte in his best dresse of seeming virtue and farmal duties And the true Christian in his reall graces and sincere obedience As also between the blackest weeds of daily infirmities of the truly godly eclipsing saving grace and the reigning sins of the unregenerate that pretend unto that godliness they never had By that late burning and shining Lamp M. Samuel Crook B. D. late Pastor of Wrington in Sommerset Folio There are going to the Press some new pieces of Mr. William Fenners late of Rochford in Essex never yet Printed preserved by a special Providence one of which is a Second part of his wilfull impenitency being five Sermons more that he preached upon the 18. of Ezekiel and the 32. ver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Saint's Worthiness and the world's worthlesness both opened and declarad in a Sermon preached at the funerall of that Eminently Religious and highly honoured Knight Sir Nathanael Barnardiston August 26. 1653. By Samuel Faireclough Pastor of the Congregation at Ketton 40. The Agreement and resolvtion of several Associated Ministers in the County of Cork for the Ornaining of Ministers The Sacred Ordinance of Ordination by Imposition of the hands of the Presbytery As it was lately held forth in a Sermon preached at the solemn Ordination of Ministers in the City of Norwich June 11 Anno 1656. By John Brinsley Minister of the Gospel at great Yarmouth 80. The Life and Death of M. Ignatius Jurdain one of the Aldermen of the City of Exeter who departed this life July 15 1640. The second Edition published inlarged by Ferdinan Nicolls Minister of the Gospel at Mary Arces Exon. The dangerous rule or a Sermon preached at Clonmel in the Province of Munster in Ireland upon Aug. 3. 1657. before the Reverend Judges for that Circuit By S. L. Master in Arts and lately fellow of C. C. C. in Oxon. The womans glory a Treatise first asserting the due honour of that Sexe By manifesting that Women are capable of the highest improvements The second Edition inlarged By Samuel Torshell Holy things for holy men or the Lawyers Plea non-suited c. In some Christian reproof and pity expressed towards M. Prynn's book Intituled The Lord's Supper briefly Vindicated by S. S. Minister of the Gospel Divine Principles or a Scripture Catechism c. Good Company being a collection of various serious pious Meditations usefull for instruction consolation confirmation By J. Melvin Minister of the Gospel at Vdimer in Sussex A Religious Treatise upon Simeon's song or instructions how to live holily and dye happily by T. Woodroffe B. D. Pastor at Kingsland in Hereforshire An Antidote against H. Hagger's poisonous Pamphlet Intituled The Foundation of the Font discovered or a reply wherein his audaciousness and sophistry in arguing against infant baptism Discipleship Church-membership is detected his cavils against M. C. M. B. and M. Hall are answered c. By A. Houghton Minister of the Gospel at Prees in Salop. 4. Five Sermons in 5 several ways of preaching the 1. in B A. way the 2. in B. H. way the 3. in Dr. M. M. C. way the 4. in the Presbyterian way the 5. in the Independent way of preaching by A. W. Minister of the Gospel The Reformation in which is reconciliation with God his people or a Catechism unveiling the Apostles Creed with Annotations in which Faith Ordinances and Government are professed as in the Primitive times in oppositon to all Errors and Heresies by W. K. Minister â—f the Gospel FINIS
Reply If your Argument run thus They that cannot speak c. are no Church-members But Infants cannot Therefore It consists all of Negatives and it is an undeniable Maxime in Logick From pure Negatives nothing is concluded Or if thus All Church-members can speak c. But Infants cannot c. Your Major Proposition is manifestly false Or thus when improved to the best The Saints at Corinth were such as prayed spake could say every one of them I am of Paul c. Infants cannot do any of these Therefore To this I say 1. It is not said that ALL which were Saints in Corinth did call on Christ's name but thus ver 2. Vnto the Church of God which is at Corinth to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be saints with all that in every place call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ c where the latter is distinguished from the former Neither must those words Every one be taken largely of all the members of that Church as if every one of the Corinthians should say I am of Paul and every one say I am of Apollo c. much less that all of them were schismatical as appears by the Apostle's thankfulness ver 4 5 6 7. and narrative ver 11. Some therefore did complain of those divisions and sought a redresse of them and so were not guilty of them The guilty therefore are exhorted to speak one thing what is this to Infants 2. These Saints when fast asleep cannot put forth any of those acts do they therefore cease to be Church-members Or it a Palfie or Lethargie that takes away the use of speech or understanding when not asleep had seized on any of them were they therefore no Church-members And why not children also who are called holy or saints 1 Cor. 7.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same word used who in time may be instructed in this and other Scriptures to take heed of Schism as 2 Tim. 3.15 Surely Christian parents are bound to instruct their children in the doctrine of the Scriptures no less then the Jewish were Ephes 6.4 Deut. 6 ver 7. 3. To shew to the meanest the palpable weakness of your Argument Every one that doth righteousness is born of God 1 Joh. 2.29 No Infant doth so Therefore no Infant is born of God SECT 5. H. H. p. 65. Fourth Argument from 1 Cor. 6.4 5. Infants cannot judg c. in such cases Therefore none such members in the Church at Corinth Reply 1. This Argument is false both for matter and form as before the meanest may see by this He that loveth not Christ is accursed 1 Cor. 16.22 But no Infant can love Christ Therefore accursed It 's a poor evasion to say the Apostle speaks of a man not an infant when the particle k) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any one c. is indefinite and the Scripture calls Cain an infant a man as hath been shewed Gen. 4 1. 2. The word rendered least esteemed is but one word l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which might be translated contemptible as 2 Cor. 10.10 or despised as Luk. 18.9 or set at naught Rom. 14.10 Now you your self in your cold blood may be judge whether the Corinthians Infants were contemptible despised or set at naught But if the word least were in the original as certainly it is not it cannot be understood of littleness in regard of stature but of state as ellwhere often Mat. 11.11 25.40 Luk. 9.48 1 Cor. 15 9. Ephes 3.8 c. 3. It 's plain that the Apostle speaks of such who are able to judge doth it therefore follow that Infants are no Church-members at all I trow not Suppose a man being confident of his cause opposed should say he would be judged by the meanest persons in the Town or Country are therefore Infants no persons in the Town or Country 4. Since the Apostle would have such differences composed by them that are least esteemed in the Church rather then judged by Infidel-magistâ—ates therefore I humbly conceive that by the Church is to be understood the ruling Church or Church-guides for such doubâ—less they had 1 Cor. 12.28 the title of the whole being given to the part and the word Church or Congregation is in the Old and New Testament taken for the Officers of the Congregation Exod. 12.3 21. Numb 35.12 Psal 82.1 Mat. 18.17 18 19. Acts 8.1 1 Cor. 5.4 SECT 6. H. H. Fifth Argument from 1 Cor. 10.16.17 with 11. ver 28 29. Reply If I understand your meaning for yet you have no Syllogistical form your Argument is this All Church-members did partake of the Lord's Supper But Infants did not Therefore 1. See the weakness of it as in this very glass e. gr 1 King 8.63 All Israel feasted with Solomon But the Jewish Infants did not Therefore they were none of Israel If this be sophistical or childish yours is no better 2. The Apostle doth not in this or any other place say that all Church-members did partake of the Lord's Supper or of Bread and Wine but speaking of himself and grown professors of Christianity he â—â—sswades Them who had been partakers of that one bread c. and so professedly incorporated into that mystical body of Christ the Church not to partake with Idolaters in Idol-Temples for that were to incorporate themselvs into the body of Idolaters So then when he saith we are all partakers of that one Bread he neither comprehends Infants in the word all nor excludes them from the number of Church-members SECT 7. H. H. p. 66. But if they be Church-members they are to partake of the Bread and Wine Either then they are no members or else they eat and drink damnation to themselvs not discerning the Lord's body Which absurdity let any man avoid it if they can Reply 1. To pass by your calumny concerning our discovery of abundance of ignorance and your misapplication of holy Scripture 1 Tim 1.7 which hath been sufficiently spoken to in your p. 30. you seem to go beyond the Erastians and Prelatical persons who would have no Church-member of age secluded from the Lord's Supper unless juridically excommunicated but you would have Infants also if Church-members admitted thereto 2. Your reasons do not prove it not the first for one and the same body is not to be understood in verses 16 17 as you your self if a man can make sense of your confused expression p. 65. intimate Nor the second for onely those did partake to whom the Apostle did speak as to wise â—â—en and to whom he appeals for judgment ver 15. They that did bless the Cup and break the Bread ver 16. Now you tell us that Infants cannot speak judge c. So our Infants eat not their own damnation because they partake not And they partake not not because they are not Church-members but because they cannot examine themselvs 1 Cor. 11.28 Thus the supposed absurdity is easily avoided and the hâ—rns