and after baptized Ioh. 3. 5 speaks of regeneration by the spirit compared in that place to water as elswhere to fire for its property in purifying And admit it speak of the ordinance of baptism yet must it follow regeneration as a means of confirmation As therefore Christians are not made by the ordinance of baptism so much lesse are Churches This I haue elswhere proved against them by many firm Arguments to which seeing they neither giue answer nor shew thereof though this be a main matter in question between them and us what should I say more to them These they may answer if they be able as I am sure they are not nor I think will ever goe about it Onely I here add this one thing If members and Churches be made by Baptism I demand when I. M. alone baptiseth one of his converts alone what Church or member of what Church is here made And if one alone may receiv or make members of the Church why not also cast them out and excommunicate them without the Churches presence or privity Such is the confused course of these men Here they cite sundry Scriptures but proving onely that which we willingly grant viz. that men and women converted from Heathenism and Iudaism to the faith of Christ and so to be added to the Church and being before unbaptised were to be baptized But how proues this that they were made either Churches or Christians by Baptism When any of the Heathens became Iews that is embraced the Iewish Religion and separated themselvs from the other Idolaters of the land to the Law of God and came to put their trust under the wings of the God Israel and were to be circumcised did their Circumcision make them such Or did it not onely declare and confirm that state of grace in and unto which God had called them Neither yet could the things forementioned be performed by their infants and yet were they made partakers of Circumcision with them ADVERSARIES BVT minde here a futher matter They say The Church at Ierusalem was the first Church of Christ and by faith and Baptism made a Church and in the next words that the twelue were so made also DEFENCE IF the Church at Ierusalem were the first Church of Christ as in a sense it may be so called I would know how the Baptism of Christ before that time and of Iohns before Christs having also joyned with them faith in the baptized made Churches Were any made before the first Or what and which were the Churches which they so made and gathered Both the one and other living and dying members of the Iewish Church I add considering how it is said of Iohn that Ierusalem and all Iudea and the region round about Iordan were baptized of him confessing their sinnes and of Christ that he made and baptized moe Disciples then Iohn it is very evident that thousands afterwards made members of the Churches in Ierusalem Iudea Samaria and Galilee were baptized long before by Iohn and Christ and were made members of the Church in our sense long after their Baptism Here then we see Baptism administred and yet no Church made and again Churches made and yet many the members thereof not then but long before baptized We grant as they say that Rome is that Aegipt Sodom and Babylon in mysterie mentioned in the Revelation but deny which they adjoyn as being both untrue and uncharitable that all in that Church are in Gods account as the worst pagans c. God hath his people considered in their persons in Babylon unto whom he saith Come out of her my people c. being held captiue there by her craft and cruelty Neither is Babylon called an habitation of Divels for that the devill possesseth men but to shew its desolation after the day of the fall thereof the Evangelist in that speech alluding to the forms of speech used by the Prophets before against Babylon Civill in regard of her utter ruin and desolation shortly to follow Neither is the Baptism in Rome a Babylonish or Aegyptian washing as they calumniate no more then the doctrine of Baptism in the name of the Trinity is a Babylonish doctrine but it is as a vessell of the Lords house though prophaned there Much lesse can that vitupery agree to the Church of England where the faith is sound for justification and salvation and effectuall for obtaining the same in those that truely professe it The Circumcision of Gods people though too much infected with their sinns in Aegipt and Babylon were noâ— Aegyptian and Babylonish no more is the Baptism in Aegypt and Babylon spirituall specially in regard of Gods people there as not a few also shew themselvs to be by comming out thence at the Lords call though some more slowly then other as of old they did out of Babylon Civill as Esra and Nehemiah testifie That the everlasting Gospell commands beleevers to be baptized to wit if unbaptized before we grant but that men become an habitation of God by his spirit and water is as if they said water dwels in men as the spirit of God doth It is hard to say whether Papists bread or these mens water be made the greater Idoll Neither doe we in retaining the Baptism received in Rome take a corner stone out of Babylon either for foundation or wall but bring thence a vessell of the Lords house there captived with the Lords people I know not but that the very circumcision of the Shechimites might haue been retained if any of the males had survived and embraced the truth of religion which yet was far from being lawfully administred Lastly though all were true which they say for anabaptizing in the generall yet were their particular practise not justified thereby nor our exception cleared being against their manner and the same singular from all other of their Sect in all places of baptizing by persons uncalled thereunto either by God immediately or mediately by the Church â—â— or otherwise then by their own particular and personall motion To their objection arising from the supposed proportion between Baptism and the Ministery and to their Demand Why I cast away my Popish Priesthood and retain my Popish washing for my Christianity as they please to speak I haue answered elsewhere at large neither haue they been able to this day or now are to say against mine answer any thing at all either true or colourable and yet neither haue they the humility to suffer themselvs to be taught better nor the modesty to hold their tongues in the matter but doe irksomely demand a new the things of old answered For the present I will onely note these three differences First it is absurdly said that a man is made a Christian by his Baptism as he is made a Minister by his outward calling He that is not a Christian before he be baptized becomes not one thereby But by the outward
is not unprobable touching the generall beginnings of the Gentiles sacrifices so considering them in their particulars their own words will judge them guilty of grosse errour in instancing them as they doe The question is of Gods offering of the means of salvation to all even to the very Heathens before Christs coming in the flesh Their proofe for the affirmatiue is the sacrifices which the Gentiles had which yet they grant to haue been remembrances and acknowledgments of a false Christ. And are remembrances of a false Christ means of salvation Is there any other name under heaven by which men are saved then by the name of the true Christ Iesus the Son of God crucified by the Iews and raised again by God from the dead If the remembrances of a false Christ be means of salvation then is salvation had by a false Christ. The Apostle maketh the sacrifices of the Gentiles means of fellowship with devils these men make them means of fellowship with God The Apostle teacheth that they cannot stand with the remembrances of Christs body and bloud the cup of the Lord and the Lords Table these men make them the same in effect and remembrances of Christ. The Apostle means of provoking the Lord to anger and so of condemnation they means of pacifying God and of saving men Else where these men in their hote zeal will haue all even the most zealous Ministers in the Church of England preach and pray and doe all other things by none other spirit but the spirit of the man of sin and that all the effects of their so preaching and praying is but the false enlightning and heat of a false spirit And yet here in their hote charity towards the heathen they will haue their sacrifices in which they offer to devils and not to God yea those in which they sacrificed their sonns and daughters unto them and that as histories mention by the devils speciall direction in his Oracles these they will haue means of salvation by which God cals his guests to the marriage of his Sonne and as a good Phisit on offers to heal the fick of sin Thus tâ—ansforming God into the devill the true Christ into a false the Gospell into heynous Idolatry and the means of salvation into the high way and most effectual cause of utter pâ—â—dâ—tion To concludâ— this point If in Religion that which is false be none which elsewhere they make the ground of their rebaptizing how had or haue the Heathens any means of salvation which haue only the means of knowing and acknowledging a false Christ For the time since Christs coming in the flesh their first pâ—oof is Luk. 3. 6 All flesh shall see the salvation of our God But I demand of what sight of Christ Iohn here speaketh Not of bodily without doubt neither availed it them if he did Of spirituall then But so to see is to enjoy as Ioh. 3. 35 Psal. 69. 49 99. 15 1 Ioh. 3. 6. Neither doth the bare offering suffice to giue sight of Christ and of salvation by him except there be withall an opening of their eyes to whom he is offered so as they discern and acknowledge him and his salvation in the means so offering him to wit the Gospell But to let passe them that never heard of Christ how many are there that understand not the Gospell preached to them yea to whom it is meer foolishnes And how doe these see the salvation of God in Christ The meaning then of the words is that the Gentiles indefinitely as well as the Iews and in greater number then they should beleev in Christ to salvation By all Nations is meant as we haue formerly shewed not every particular Nation without exception much lesse every particular person but commonly the Gentiles with the Iews The Sun and Moon teaching God was as well before as since Christ but never taught Christ the Mediator but onely God the Creator and governour of the world Neither is the Gospell which is not known but by supernaturall revelation of the spirit so common as the Law which is naturall and written by creation in the heart of every man Neither should it be a fault if God offered not Christ to all as they most absurdly insinuate He ows not the offering of him to any more then the giving of him for any All is of mercy and therfore no fault but justice onely where no such offer is Where they affirm afterwards and truely that some to whom Christ is offered put him away quite as Iews and Turks I demand how then they keep and practise any remembrances of him or make any acknowledging of him which even now they affirmed every man in the world to doe Or if the fathers put him quite away how can the children haue or make any remembrance or acknowledgment of him having no new offer of him Can that which is quite put away be still continued That Christ might haue been manifested to every particular person whatsoever to wit if God had so pleased is true but both besides the question which is not what God might haue done or doth but what hee hath done or doth and also against themselvs for to say God might haue done a thing is to insinuate that he hath not done it In adding that if the means of salvation haue not been offered to every particular soule of reason and understanding the Scriptures are not true they are like themselvs but the Scriptures are true and their glosse upon them false God is true and all men lyars even such as tell a lye for God as they doe whom God will reproov therefore The two last kinds of their proofs are strange and either brought by them in cunning to deceiv the undiscerning Reader with the truth in it selfe but nothing to the maâ—n purpose yea plain against it or in weaknesse and want of judgment in themselvs to discern what makes for them and what against them Let us consider the particulars They professe and promise proof that Christ hath been offered in mercy to every particular man to whom the Law either written in mens hearts or in tables of stone hath come for reconciliation But in steed hereof as Balaam blessed when he meant to curse they both affirm and prov the plain contrary and that God hath not vouchsafed this mercy to many but in just judgment hath kept it from them Sundry true grounds they here lay down and prove to which we willingly assent as first that God by creating the heaven and earth and by their teachings sends men to seek out the worke-master This we grant and that the Heathens should by this light not of Christ to salvation of which our question is but of Gods power and Godhead haue grâ—ped after God and the further revelation of hâ—s will as he that lying in a dungeon sees some little glimpse of light and groaps aftâ—r it by the wall
debts except withall I be bound to pay them so neither is it Gods fault that men remain and periâ—h in that impenitency out of which they neither will nor can come without Gods speciall gift of repentance except it be Gods bounden duty as these men seem to make it to bestow that grace upon them The two places Esa. 5. 1. 2. 3 c. and Math 11. 21. 22 we will a little more particularly examine In the former where God saith he could doe no more to his vineyard then he had done he speaks onely of outward means as the text makes it plain I fenced it c. I would ask these men whether there be not requisite that the naturall vineyard may bring forth fruit something besides the fencing gathering out of the stones and the rest there mentioned It cannot be denyed that except besides and above all these God give the encrease by an inward blessing all planting watering and outward dressing whatsoever is nothing so is it in the spirituall vineyard much more though planted by Paul himself yea by Christ himself in the outward ministery And where God saith He expected sweet grapes but it brought forth wild v 4. we must not imagine as our adversaries seem to doe that God is deceaved in his expectation as men often are but onely that the Israelites did not perform that which God required and they ought Touching the repentance of Tyre Sidon First I would know how they prove that Christ speaks of other then legall repentance such as Ahab manifested in sack-cloth which was not from a godly sorrow for sin but from a servile fear of punishment Secondly eyther this repentance should haue been wrought by those mighty works alone or by them with other helps Mighty works alone cannot work faith repentance which must come by hearing instructions of the word which they serve to confirm unto men If Christ speak of his mighty works as means though not sufficient of themselvs yet availeable with other requisite helps he excludes not the spirits work but includes it But in truth the meaning of Christ seems to be no more but to reprove the obstinacy of Corazin in a form of speach like unto that Luk. 19. 40. If these should hold their tongue the stones would imediately cry out And as it were a vain thing hence to dispute about the speaking of stones so is it to gather any thing thence of the Tyrians repentance The meaning of the Lord here is not to commend the Tyrians at all but to upbraid the Chorazites and to shew their hardnes of heart to be greater then the others The like form of speach we haue to the like purpose Ezech 3. 6. And if so be there were in these Tyrians this pronenes to repentance if they had enjoyed the means which the others did but they wanted withall that God so desires the repentance salvation of all how came it to passe that God did not afford those helps unto them that were so prone and willing to have used them aright It seems the former case is now altered and that men might say to God that they would but he would not ADVERSARIES THeir invincible Argument servs onely to bewray their incurable disease in heaping together many Scriptures to prove that which no man doubts of namely that the works wrought in us by God are attributed to us also as the cleansing of our hearts c wherein yet they mingle with Gods truth their own errours and that in particular in affirming that God takes it to himself as a proper title to justify a sinner and yet that Dasaith he justified his heart DEFENCE FIrst if it be proper to God to justifie a sinner how is it common to David with him Secondly They slaunder David in making him say he justified his heart Could David forgiue the sin of his heart which God doth in justifying a sinner David Psal. 73. speaks of sanctification not of justification They ignorantly apply the Scriptures Psal. 108. 12. Psal. 118. 13. to Gods working grace in men being meant onely of his working deliverance for them They vainly and deceitfully affirm from Acts. 7. 51. 13. 46. that man may resist the grace of God wrought by his word and spirit The places speak not of any grace wrought by either of them The former speaks onely of resisting the spirit as the Authour of the word in the Prophets and others The latter of resisting the word of God not working but offering grace onely Besides they notably abuse those Scriptures cited in making them plainly to shew that man hath free choise to wit alike to work with God or against God in the work of his grace It is true that men whether receiving or refusing grace doe it freely and without compulsion but the latter freely of themselvs being left of God to themselvs the former freely by Gods speciall grace and spirit giving them and effectually drawing them to Christ. I say more effectually though not violently then any one creature can by violence draw another Oh that any made partakers of this free grace of Gods spirit dwelling in them should deny the powerfull work of it to establish their own freewill After Scriptures they come to experience And first they erre in thinking that liberty and necessity of sinning in wicked men cannot stand together It is certain that the more wicked either man or devill is he sinneth both the more freely and the more necessarily Their similitude of a mans drinking poyson is against themselvs so far as it is pertinent I would know of them how the drinking of poyson by any is unavoydable If they say because hee knows it not to be in his drink therin they grant that sins of ignorance are done unavoydably and yet not by compulsion as they conclude Secondly who would think that any after the profession of the knowledg and obedience of the Gospell which these men haue made so many yeares both in the Church of England and else where should so far apostate therefrom to Popery and Phaâ—isaism as to think it as easie a thing for a man yea though never so wicked to keep himselfe from all sin as from drinking of poyson which he knew to be in his cup For he that knows it not cannot avoyd it How grievously erre they in affirming that all men are able to keep the Law to wit without the least fayling all their life long in thought word or deed For this they plead in this whole Section that except it be possible for every man thus to keep the Law neither his conscience can accuse him nor God justly punish him for breaking it Neither doe the Calvinists hold as they barbarously speak unjustly slander that men commit evill by force of Gods providence or are decreed to doe evill or compelled to sin by power But they beleev as the Scriptures teach that all men
disciples Phillip and the rest had a calling extraordinarie These Adversaries neither haue the former nor challenge the latter And indeed by this defence so oft renewed by them they make it evident to all the world that they neither consider of their own practise seriously nor of mine exceptions Of the difference between teaching and baptising I shall speak in the fourth Rule as I haue also formerly both in this Treatise and else-where at large cleered their exception about ordination which they cunningly dissemble Here I onely demand of them whether one man alone without either presence or preceding election of the Church may ordain a Pastor as is their manner of baptizing And for me doe they not know in their consciences that I was ordained publiquely upon the solemn calling of the Church in which I serue both in respect of the Ordainers and Ordained Whilst then they account me wilfully blinde in putting difference between my Church ordination their Baptism they shew themselvs witlesly blinde in making them alike To my proof from Math. 3 that Christ in comming to Iohn to be baptized of him fulfilled all righteousnesse c. they answer That this is still done when any disciple c Wherein first they make both Iohn and Christ disciples of Christ Secondly if Christ had herein considered Iohn as an ordinarie disciple onely what needed he to haue come from one countrey to another even from Galilee to Iordan in Iudea to haue been baptized of him Why might he not as well haue used some ordinary disciple neer at hand Christ therefore in being baptized by Iohn fulfilled all righteousnesse in consecrating unto us Baptism as Circumcision to the fathers in his own person who of God is made unto us righteousnesse and that by Iohns ministery who had a most solemn and singular calling thereunto Lastly it is not likely which they take for certain that Iohn in these words I had need to be baptized of thee meant not to wit at all of the baptism with water considering that the quest on between our Lord and him was about that Baptism and none other The words therefore insinuate that some special state and calling is required in the Baptizer aboue these mens common disciple-ship Heer first in answering Ioh. 1. 19. 25 for their own credite they disgrace the Priests and Levits as blind and ignorant Pharisees for demanding of Iohn by what authority he baptized But considering both their places and Iohns practise in bringing a new ordinance of Religion into the Church they did nothing herein not well sorting with their office Secondly their answer that Iohn proovs his authority to baptize by proving his authority to preach from Esaias the Prophet Esa. 40. 3 shews how short their wits are in gageing the depth of the Scriptures He doth not proue his authority to baptize by a common authority or liberty to teach which any of Israel gifted might use but he justifies his whole ministery in all the parts of it by his speciall calling as the harbinger and fore-runner of Christ plainly foretold by Esay and Malachy Doe they think that the Prophets words The voyce of one crying in the wildernes appertained to every Israelite that could teach as they ascribe power to baptize to each of their teaching disciples Or might Iohn without a special calling haue instituted and brought into the Church as he did a new ordinance Yea I would know which of Iohns disciples ever offered to baptize Of whom yet it cannot be doubted but divers were able to teach As Cowards most vilifie in words where in deed they dare doe least so doe these men account this proof most vain against which they haue nothing to bring saving an equivocation in the word Ordinances and a cunning course in leaving out that which I alledg from Rom. 12. 3 which would discover the fallacie The different nature of baptism and teaching meerly by a personall gift is evident A man becomes a Prophet and able to teach by the gifts of the Spirit knowledge and utterance But I would know by what gift of the Spirit any becoms a Baptizer or able to baptize 2 Besides the Scriptures 1 Pet. 1. 12 the light of nature and generall law of loue shews that he who knows any thing profitable for another should in his place upon occasion declare it to him so as teaching by him that hath abilitie hath its plain foundation in nature But so is not Baptism by the light of nature but meerly ordained and instituted of God by supernaturall revelation in which respect I call it an ordinance And this consideration alone if there were nothing else wil with reasonable men oversway all their presumptions Actions of religion are some of them performed immediately from a personall gift and grace of the spirit in the heart as preaching or prophesying and prayer out of a speciall state or office others by no speciall gift of the spirit at all but by authoritie conferred upon some speciall person as the ministration of Sacraments censures ordination the like lastly some others by both as pastoral preaching prayer c the gift ministring abilitie and the office charge to use the gift for feeding of the flock committed to the officer In answering my fift Proof the alledg things partly imperâ—â—nâ—nt and partly unreasonable Of the former sort is their discourse about the Eunâ—â—chs being a member of Christ and his remaining in any particular Church Whereas they should haue answered directly whether by his faith and baptism hee had been made a member of any particular Church or not But they seeing what would follow upon a direct answer haue rather chosen an indirect evasion Of like hue is that which they add of Israels renewed covenant conceiving Israel as a true Church which we meddle not with in this businesse Absurd it is in it selfe and a slandering of our practise which they affirm of one casting out another where there are but two of a Church Which of us ever so held or practized One man or woman either may upon just ground separate from a whole Church may he or she therfore excommunicate a whole Church Or hath I. M. excommunicated the whole Church of England Separation where lawfull onely shews the liberty which every Christian hath to keep himselfe pure from the sins of others Excommunication imports a judiciarie power and state of authority to execute a solemn censure and punishment which appertains onely to the Church gathered together in Christs name which one cannot be Two may joyn together and so receiving one another mutually may become a Church or may upon just occasion part a sunder and so dissolv but cannot receiv in to speak properly or cast out one another by solemn ordinance this imports authority the former liberty onely But thus it becomes the new builders of Babylon to use brick for stone and lime for well tempered morter Their answer to my