to Baptize the Child I have known a man of eighty years of age that took God the Son to be the sun in the firmament If before I had understood him this man had professed to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and presented his child to baptism with this profession and I had no ground before to suspect his error or to examine him about his faith it had been my duty to baptize his child For though in the intended sense of the speaker here was not so much as the Profession of an Historical faith much less of a saving faith yet I know not his heart and the common use of those words as to another signification than he intended and therefore I was Innocent in being deceived 2. I meddle not here with the claim that is laid upon the account of the Ancestors Adopters or undertakers that profess saving faith but only with the claim laid on the account of Parents or any others that profess not saving faith 3. When I assert the unlawfulness I do not intend thereby to assert the Nullity of all such baptism when performed though unlawfully For though it may be Null or vain as to the special uses and benefits yet it followeth not that therefore it is Null as to the true form and being of the Externall Ordinance nor that this is to be re-iterated And with these explications I affirm that Ministers may not Baptize the children of those that Profess not saving faith upon the Profession of any other faith that comes short of it And here you must remember that our question supposeth the determination of the controversie whether the same faith that is necessary in the aged themselves if they were to be baptized be necessary to their childrens baptism on their account For it seems strange to me that any should imagine that a lower belief in the Parent will help his child to a Title than that which is necessary to his own baptism But if any will insist on such a conceit because we will not now make more controversies then that in hand let such all along suppose our dispute to be about the aged themselves whether we might baptize the aged upon the Profession of any faith short of saving And I thus prove the contrary Argum. 1. If we must not baptize any who profess not true Repentance then must we not baptize any that profess not saving faith But the Antecedent is true speaking of the Adult Concerning whom as the more noble subject we shall carry on the Argumentation for brevity still implying the lâ—ke necessity of their professing saving faith for their childrens baptism as for their own therefore c. The Consequence of the Major I prove thus 1. True repentance and saving faith are inseparable therefore if one be of necessity so is the other and the profession of true Repentance cannot be separated from the profession of saving faith therefore if one be necessary so is the other Some learned Divines take repentance and faith to be all one some take repentance to be part of faith but all take it to be as inseparable from it It were easie by describing the requisite Professions of both to shew that they are so interwoven that no man can profess the one wâ—thout the other but I think it is needless because few will deny it By Repentance here I mean that true Evangelical Repentance which is a special grace of God accompanying salvation and not any common preparatory Repentance The Antecedent is easily proved from Scripture and I know not whether any Protestant deny it many Papists indeed distinguish of Repentance and Faith and say that it is only a profession of a preparatory Repentance and sides informis a faith without love that is necessarily to be expected from them before Baptism But I prove the contrary 1. That Repentance 2. And such as is proper to the effectually called is necessary to be professed by all that we may Baptize I will joyn the proof of both together Argum. 1. If John Baptist required the Profession of true Repentance in men before he would baptize them then so must we But John did so therefore the Consequence is clear 1. For either Johns Baptism and Christs were the same as most of our Divines against the Papists do maintain though Zanchy and some few more follow the Judgement of the ancient Doctors in this or as Calvin Institut saith the difference seems to be but this that John baptized them into the Messiah to come and the Apostles into the name of the Messiah already come 2. Or if the difference be greater we may argue à fortiori If Johns Baptism required a Profession of Repentance then much more Christs for certainly Christ required not less then John nor did he take the impenitent into his Kingdom whom John excluded The Antecedent I prove 1. From Mark 1 34. He preached 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And doubtless that Repentance which is in Remissionem peccatorum is true special Repentance One of our Divines and many of the Papists have found out another evasion that is that John did engage them to repent but not requiring a Profession or Repentance as foregoing baptism But 1. this is against the whole current of expositors ancient and modern and 2. against the plain scope of the text The words in Mat. 3.6 are They were baptized of him in Jordan confessing their sins This confession was with yea before their baptism and this Confession was the Profession of the Repentance that John required Maldonate on the text having first railed at Calvin and slandered him as turning baptism into preaching as if he had expounded Johns baptizing not of water-baptism but preaching when he only shews that both should go together doth tell the Protestants that they cannot prove by this text that confession went before baptism because it is named after but that he might not seem utterly impudent he confesseth that the thing is true and that it is the sense of the text and that this he confesseth because he must rather be a faithfull expositor then a subtile adversary And if any should say that it 's only confession that 's required which is no certain sign of true Repentance I answer when John saith If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins he took that confession to be a sign of true Repentance And our Expositors and the Ancients before them agree that it was such a confession as was conjunct with a detestation and renouncing of the sin And it is expounded by that of Acts 19.18 as Grotius noteth to have a special detestation of the sin accompaneing it where to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it may sufficy that the baptism to which this Confession was required is the baptisme of Repentance But it is objected that in the 11. vers of Mat. 3. it is said by Iohn I Baptize you
Scripture either of Precept or example where any person in baptism or the Lords Supper doth engage or is required to engage to begin to believe with a saving faith or to believe with a faith which at the present he hath not Shew but one word of Scripture to prove this if you can if you cannot I may conclude that therefore we must not require that which we have no Scripture ground to require 2. This Engagement to believe savingly is either for a remote distant time or for the next instant â—ut no unbeliever as to that faith is called to promise in Baptism such a saving faith either at a distant time or the next instant therefore not at all 1. Not at a distant time For first that were to resolve to serve the Devil and be an unbeliever till that time 2. And no man is sure to live any longer time 2. Not at the next instant For first that instant cometh as soon as the word of Promise is out of his mouth even before Baptism and therefore by that Rule he must believe savingly before 2. We may as well stay one minute or instant to see whether he will perform his Promise as to baptize him upon that bare Promise of believing the next minute 3. It is a ridiculous unreasonable conceit that any man should say I believe not savingly yet but within a minute of an hour I will and that this should be required in baptism and the Lords Supper 3. God makes it not the condition or qualification of them that are to be admitted to Baptism or the Lords Supper that they should Promise to do that which they have no Moral Power to do I mean such as the seed or habit of Grace containeth as to the act But the unregenerate have no Moral Power to believe with a saving faith Ergo c. The Major is proved thus 1. To promise to believe savingly is to Profess that they are truly willing to believe savingly but no wicked men are truly willing so to believe therefore they are not called to promise it for that were to be called to profess an untruth and so to lye Unless as they are called to be really willing and promise both and that is but to be sincerely faithful and to promise to continue so 2. It is not found any where in Scripture that I know of that God doth call any wicked man to promise to be a godly man or true believer before he is so but only commandeth him to be so And if God never call such men to such a promise at all then is it not the condition or qualification of persons to be admitted to the Sacraments We still speak of the aged The Minor is proved from many Scriptures and is the common Doctrine of all Antipelagians at least We are dead in trespasses and sins and must we baptize and give the Lords Supper to such dead men upon a Promise that they will be alive Out of Christ we can do nothing Without faith it is impossible to please God It is God that giveth to will and to do of his good pleasure And no wicked man can tell whether God will give him the grace of saving faith therefore he cannot promise to have it But I shall speak more to this under the last Argument Argum. 16. If there can be no example given in Scripture of any one that was baptized without the Profession of a saving faith nor any Precept for so doing then must not we baptize any without it But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent What is pretended this way we shall examine anon among the Objections In the mean time let us review the Scripture examples of Baptism which might afford us so many several Arguments but that I shall put them together for brevity 1. I have already shewed that John required the Profession of true Repentance and that his Baptism was for Remission of sin 2. When Christ layeth down in the Apostolical Commission the Nature and Order of his Apostles work it is first to make Disciples and then to Baptize them into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And as it is a making Dâ—sciples which is first expressed in Matthew so Mark expoundeth who these Disciples are as to the aged by puâ—ting Believing before Baptism and that we may know that it is Justifying faith that he meaneth he annexeth first Baptism and then the Promise of salvation Matth. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved This is not like some occasional Historical mention of Baptism but it s the very Commission of Christ to his Apostles for Preaching and Baptism and purposely expresseth their several works in their several places and Order Their first task is by teaching to make Disciples which are by Mark called Believers The second work is to Baptize them whereto is annexed the Promise of their Salvation The third work is to teach them all other things which are afterward to be learnt in the School of Christ. To contemn this Order is to renounce all Rules of Order For where can we expect to find it if not here I profess my conscience is fully satisfied from this Text that it is one sort of faith even saving that must go before Baptism and the Profession whereof the Minister must expect Of which see what is before cited out of Calvin and Piscator That it was saving faith that was required of the Jews and professed by them Acts 2.38 41 42. is shewed already and is plain in the Text. Acts 8. The Samaritans believed and had great joy and were baptized into the name of Jesus Christ ver 8 12. Whereby it appeareth that it was both the understanding and will that were changed and that it was not a meer Dogmatical faith and that they had the Profession of a saving faith even Simon himself we shall shew anon when we answer their objections Acts 8.37 The condition on which the Eunuch must be baptized was if he believe with all his heart which he Professed to do and that was the Evidence that Philip did expect Paul was baptized after true conversion Act. 9.18 The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles Acts 10.44 before they were baptized and they magnified God And this Holy Ghost was the like gift as was given to the Apostles who believed on the Lord Iesus and it was accompanied with Repentance unto life Act. 11.17 18. Acts 16.14.15 Lydia's heart was opened before she was baptized and she was one that the Apostles judged faithful to the Lord and offered to them the evidence of her faith Acts 16.30 31 33 34. The example of the Jaylor is very full to the resolution of the question in hand He first asketh what he should do to be saved The Apostle answereth him believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved and thy house so that it was a saving faith that here is mentioned He rejoyced and believed with all
the sense they are not agreed among themselves Some of them as is said would have Baptism only necessarily to admit Infants into the visible Church and place them under Government and ordinances and give them ex opere operato a certain preparatory grace Some of them will have it to imprint an indelible Character they know not what and to give them true Sanctification which they call justification by inherent grace Some of them affirm that as to Infant-Baptism the Council of Trent hath not defined whether it justifie or not and therefore it is not de fide And Accordingly some of them make true faith pre-requisite in the Parents and some of them make a certain congruous disposition Meritum de congruo to be pre-requisite but wherein that congruous Merit must consist they know not or are not yet agreed Commonly its thought to be in a fides informis or bare Assent Which Mr. Blake calls a dogmatical Faith conjunct with a reverent esteem of the Sacraments and a consent to become members of the Catholike Church and to be under their Government and use the Ordinances Or a consent in the Parent that the child do these And for the reformed Churches it is past all question by their constant practice that they require the Profession of a saving Christian Faith and take not up with any lower The Practice of the Church of England till the late change may be seen in the Common-prayer-Book wherein all that is forementioned is required The Judgement of the present Guides of our Churches as to the most is easie to be known by the Conclusions of the late Assembly at Westminster In the larger Catechism they say baptism is not to be administred to any that are out of the visible Church and so strangers to the Covenant of promise till they profess their Faith in Christ and obedience to him but Infants descending from Parents either both or but one of them professing faith in Christ obedience to him are in that respect within the covenant and to be baptized Here you may see whom they take to be of the visible Church and in that respect within the covenant 1. The words professing faith in Christ if they were alone do signifie a justifying faith profest For though to believe in Christ may sometime signifie a lower kind of Faith yet analogum per se positum stat pro famosiori significato 2. But that there may be no doubt of their meaning they add the necessity also of a profession of Obedience to Christ to shew that it is the working faith which must be profest And it is not only a Promise of Obedience for some distant futurity but the Profession of it which they make necessary And I conceive that he that professeth faith in Christ and obedience to him professeth that which will prove saving if he have but what he professeth The same they say in their confesâ—ion of Faith Cap 28. And again in the shorter Catechism Profession of Faith in Christ and obedience to him is the thing required In the Directory also they tell us that Baptism is a seal of the Covenant of Grace of our ingraffing into Christ and of our Vnion with him of remission of sin Regeneration Adoption and Eternal Life that the water in Baptism representeth and signifieth both the blood of Christ which taketh away all guilt of sin original and actual and the sanctifying vertue of the spirit of Christ against the dominion of sin and corruption of our sinful nature That baptizing or sprinkling and washing with water signifieth the cleansing from sin c. That the promise is made to believers and their seed c. And they mean no doubt the promise of the foresaid special mercies for even Mr. Blake himself doth once deny any promise of baptism to be made to the Infants that he pleadeth for And the promise of Justification Adoption c. is made to no believers but those that have justifying faith otherwise than as it is barely offered and so it is to Infidels also They add also in the same place that All who are bapâ—ized in the name of Christ do renounce and by their baptism are bound to fight against the Devil the World and the flesh All this is further manifest in our daily administration of Baptism I never heard any man baptize an Infant but upon the Parents or Susceptors or Offerers Profession of a justifying faith Nor do I believe that Mr. Blake himself doth baptize any otherwise though he dispute against this and for another Baptism The grounds of my conjecture are 1. Because I suppose he is loth to be so singular as to forsake the course of the Church in all ages And therefore I conjecture that he requireth them to profess that they believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost and that they renounce the world the Flesh and the Devil 2. Because he so often professeth that he taketh the baptized to be in covenant with God and that this covenant is by them entered in baptism he saith that he knoweth but of one Covenant and that is the covenant of saving grace and that they are presently obliged debetur quovis tempore and therefore it is not only for a distant futurity that they engage themselves And if this be so it is past doubt that they profess a saving faith For the Gospel hath two parts 1. the Narrative or Historie of Christs person and sufferings resurrection c. 2. and the offer of Christ and life to sinners Accordingly Faith hath two parts 1. the Assent to the History or to the truth of the Christian Doctrine and this Mr. Blake maintaineth to be necessary and 2. Consent to the offer And this is called the Receiving of Christ And this is our Internal covenanting which Mr. Blake confesseth necessary For the covenanting of the Heart is this very consent with a resolution for future duty and the covenanting of the mouth is the Expression or Profession of this Consent with a promise of the necessary consequent duty So that though Mr Blake do say pag. 171. that â—ustifying Faith is with him the thing promised and do thrust from him the imputation of such an egregious piece of affâ—cted non-sense as to say that justifying faith is a promise Yet it is not only all the sense that I have of the nature of justifying faith that iâ— is an Assent to the Truth of the Gospel with a consent to the offer or heart-promise to be Christs but it must also be his own sense though disaffected or else he must palpably contradict himself There being no other internal entering or accepting the Covenant or Offer of Grace but by that consent and heart promise 3. And I must also conjecture this because we even now found Mr. Blake denying that ever he denied the necessity of the Profession of a saving faith to baptism But if in my conjectures I be mistaken in Mr. Blakes practice I must say
many Proselites which in David's and Solomon's days joyned themselves in the presence of private persons and the Judges of the great Synedron had aâ— care of them they drove them not away after they were Baptized out of any place neither took they them neer unto them until their after-fruits appeared Ob. 2. If none but the Regenerate or sincere Believers have Title to Baptism and the Lords Supper then none can seek or receive them till they have Assurance of their sincerity which would exclude abundance of upright Christians Answ. 1. God layeth his commands upon us conjunctly and our casting off one will not authorize us to cast off another Upright Christians are obliged both to judge themselves to be what they are and to receive the Seals of the Covenant And if they judge themselves not to be upright when they are or question their integrity as a thing to be doubted of this is their sin and cannot be done inculpably And this sin will not justifie them in forbearing the Sacraments For one sin will not excuse another The thing therefore that such are bound to is first to use right means to know themselves and then to judge of themselves as they are and then to seek and receive the Sacraments And if he say I have tried and yet I cannot discern or I fear I am unfound yet that will not free him from the blame of mis-judging nor from the obligation of judging more justly of himself 2. There is a true discerning of a man 's own faith and repentance which is far below a strict Assurance and he that truly discerneth that he repenteth and believeth hath a clear ground to profess it though he have much doubting and fear of the contrary The judgement of few or none is in aequilibrio but it swayeth and determineth either to judge that they are sincere or that they are not If it judge that they are not when they are their duty is to rectifie that judgement out of hand If they judge that they are sincere though they attain not a full Certainty they have reason to act according to that judgement Mans heart is a dark piece and much unacquainted with it self and if Mr Blake or any of his opinion will prove that a man must suspend all his Actions which are not guided by a certain assured judgement he will evacuate most of Gods service in the Church I doubt not but he will confess that it is only the penitent that should profess themselves penitent in that Condition and only they that truly desire Christ and Grace that should say they desire them and only they that have received saving grace that should give God thanks for it as a received benefit And yet if no one should confess sin with profession of penitence but they that have full assurance that they are truly penitent if no one should beg grace with profession that he desireth it till he have full assurance of the truth of those desires and if no one should give thanks to God for Redemption in the special sense and effectual Vocation and Conversion and Justification Adoption Reconciliation Sanctification c. but those that have a full assurance that they have received these I doubt God would have little Confession Prayer or Thanksgiving of this sort from his people Is it unlawfull to say Lord I believe as long as we have any Vnbelief to be removed When Peter knew not but that he might shortly deny Christ with cursing and swearing yet might he lawfully confess his belief in him A man may warrantably speak and profess the Truth which he is not fully certain of as long as he doth it bona fide and really meaneth what he speaketh and uttereth his very heart so far as he knoweth it 2. And as long as he is not negligent in his endeavors to know it but faithfully labors to be acquainted with it All such ordinary Professions do imply this limitation This is the truth so far as I know my own heart And if it were not lawful to go on this ground I must give up almost all my duties For I finde so great darkness in my own heart and strangeness to my self that it is few things that I say of my own heart which I can speak with such assurance as this When Christ commanded me Matth. 5.24 to Leave my gift before the Altar and go my way and first be reconciled to my Brother and then come and offer my gift as I am uncertain when my Brother's minde is reconciled to me so if I should never offer my gift till I had full assurance that my own minde is sincerely reconciled to him perhaps I might sometime be put upon a long forberance For many a one that can say I know nothing by my self is yet so conscious of the falsness of his heart that he is forced to add yet am I not thereby justified and I judge not my own self c. Christ hath told us that God will not forgive us unless we truly repent and believe and from our heart forgive one another If none may thank God for remitting their sins till they have undoubting assurance of all this God would have little thanks for forgiveness Then the scruples of those that reject singing Psalms would turn off almost all Who durst say or sing Psal 116.1 I love the Lord c. Psal. 119.10 with my whole heart have I sought thee c. Psal. 138.1 91. 111.1 I will praise thee O Lord with my whole heart c. unless so few as would make but small melody Many particulars might be instanced in to shew that this ground would evacuate most duties 3. As Mr. Blake is uncertain of every one of his hearers that seeketh Sacraments whether he have indeed a Dogmatical faith or not so I doubt he would Baptize but few Children in comparison of what he doth if none should seek it but those Parents which are undoubtingly certain that they do truly Believe with that Dogmatical faith 1. Certain I am upon much sad tryal that a great number of the Parishioners that have long been our constant hearers and have presented many Children to Baptism have not a Dogmatical faith it self as to the essentials of the Christian Religion For many tell me that they Believe not that the Son or the Holy Ghost is God or that any one hath suffered for us or made satisfaction for our sins and that they trust only in Gods mercy and their praying and amendment for Pardon 2. I meet with the most humble Godly learned and judicious men of my acquaintance who manifest more doubtfulness about the Dogmatical part or Assenting Act of their faith then any other or at least their doubt of the rest is most here grounded because they doubt of their truth in this And though they are comforted in this consideration that even Assent is imperfect in the Saints on earth and mixt with doubtings and that they lament their
by reading Dr Twiss and meditating of it and had in print so long ago professed these things whether this Learned man should after all this publish to the world that I am Amyraldus proselyte I speak but as to the truth of the report for as to the reputation of the thing I should think it a great benefit if I had the opportunity of sitting at the feet of so judicious a man as I perceive Amyraldus to be 10. Whether is Calovius a competent witness of the judgement of the Lutherans in general or a witness capable of dishonouring Amyraldus when he so unpeaceably and voluminously poureth out his fiery indignation against the moderate Lutherans themselves that are but willing of Peace under the name of Calixtians seeking to make them odious from the honorable name of Georgius Calixtus who went with them in that peaceable way 11. If it be David Blondell that he means when he saith of Daile's Book Obstetricante magno illìc Viro sed Armimianorum cultore and Blondell only prefaceth to it Whether any that hath read the Writings of Blondell and heard of his fame should believe this accusation or rather 12. Is it a certain Truth or a Calumny that is thus expressed of Dallaeus Certum est tamen hâc Apologiâ maluisse Arminianorum ordinibus inseri quà m sedem inter contrà -remonstrantes tenere And is it certain that Dr Molin knows the mind of Dallaeus better then he doth his own or is sooner then himself to be believed in the report of it 13. Whether the desire which he expresseth that Camero had been expelled and the words that he poureth forth against him do more dishonour Camero or himself And if that Article of Justification were sufficient ground of his condemnation and expulsion and consequently Olevian Scultetus Vrsinus Paraeus Piscator Alstedius Wendeline Gataker and abundance more should have tasted of the same sauce Whether these persecuting principles savour not of too high an esteem of their own judgements and tend not either to force an implicite faith in the Ministery or to depopulate the Church and break all in pieces And whether more credit is to be given to the judgement of this Learned man against Camero or to the general applause of the Learned Pious and Peaceable Divines of most Protestant Churches For instance such as B p Hall's who in his Peace-maker p. 49. saith of him that he was the Learnedst Divine be it spoken without envy that the Church of Scotland hath afforded in this last age 14. Whether this Learned man had not forgotten his former Triumph in the supposed unsuccessfulness of Amyralds Method and the paucity of his partakers or approvers when he wrote this in deep sorrow for the Churches of France Seriò ingemisco Patriae Ecclesiis in ea reformatis quod jam totos viginti annos Methodus Amyraldi impunè regna verit nemine intrà Galliam hiscere audente aut ullo vindice veritatis ibi exurgente do these words shew his desire of Peace or Contention in the Church 15. Whether it be truth that he saith that all the Divines of the Assembly at Westminster were against Amyraldus Method when Mr Vines hath often and openly owned Davenant's way of Universal Redemption and others yet living are known to be for it 16. Whether it be proved from the cited words of their Confession c. 8. § 5. that such was their judgement when they express no such thing And I have spoken with an eminent Divine yet living that was of the Assembly who assured me that they purposely avoided determining that Controversie and some of them profest themselves for the middle way of Universal Redemption 17. Is there one man in Oxford or Cambridge besides himself that believes his next words pari obelo confodiunt hanc Methodum quotquot sunt bodie Doctores Professores Oxoniae Cantabrigiae except on supposition that the foregoing words be untrue which pari relateth to 18. Is it probable that Dr Twiss was an enemy to that doctrine of Redemption which he hath so often asserted viz That Christ dyed for all men so far as to purchase them pardon and salvation on condition they would repent and believe and for the Elect so far further as to procure them faith and repentance it self which he hath oft in many Writings as to Mr Cranford's charge concerning his severe accusation of Dallaeus and judging his very heart to be guilty of such dissimulation as that he wrote not seriously but contrary to what he thought and that nothing could be more illiterate I shall not put the question whether it be probable that these words could pass from such a man because he is alive to vindicate himself if the report be false or to own it if true 19. Do all the contemptuous expressions of a Dissenter so much dishonour the judgement of Dallaeus as this Dissenters own praise of his former Writings doth honour it when he saith of him A quo nihil hactenus prodii◠quod non esset judicii acerrimi eruditionis reconditissimae dostrinae sanctissimae aut candidissimum pectus non referret in quo nulla suspicio malignitatis insideret multò minùs eâ aetate seriâ serâ erupturae cùm lenit albescens animos capillus This is enough to make a stranger conjecture that the man is not grown either such a fool as to err so grosly as is pretended or such a knave as to write in the matters of God against his own judgement And indeed he that will prove himself a wiser a much wiser man in these matters then Dallaeus Blondel Amyrald c. must bring another kind of evidence for the honor of his Wisdom then Dr Molin's Preface or Paraenesis is 20. Is it not an indignity to the dead which the living should hear with a pious indignation for this Learned man to feign that B p Vsher thought so contemptuously of Amyraldus Method Whatever he might say of him in any other respect it s well known that he owned the substance of his doctrine of Redemption The high praises therefore which Dr Molin doth give to this reverend Bishop do dishonour his own judgement that makes the Bishops doctrine so contemptible and gross The like dealing I understand some Arminian Divines I am loath to name them have used against this reverend man One of them of great note hath given out that he heard him preach for universal Redemption and afterwards spoke to him and found him owning it therefore he was an Arminian and I hear a Northamptonshire Arminian hath so published him in print O the unfaithfulness of men seeming pious The good Bishop must be what every one will say of him Though one feigneth him to be of one extream and the other of the other extream when alas his judgement hath been commonly known in the world about this 30 years to be neither for the one nor the other but for the middle way Do you call for proof If
other and they ever lye under all this Obligation You next instance in Prayer and conclude that As for Prayer there is no more ground or colour to make it a converting Ordinance than the Supper c. Repl. 1. A man that hath but common desires may be perswaded to ask for what he so desires Though he have no Promise of Acceptance you do not find him threatned with judgement for such a Prayer so it be not groslâ— hypocritical or wicked as he is for unworthy receiving the Supper without a discerning the Lords Body 2. When we exhort any man to pray for Christs pardon the Spirit c. we therein exhort him to desire them for desire is the soul of Prayer and the chief part of its essence Now the first of these desires which we exhort them to is conversion it self even that they would turn to God by a change of their wills and express them in Prayer 3. I can shew you where the wicked are commanded to seek the Lord that is by Prayer to express their returning hearts which implyeth their returning it self but you cannot shew where ever they are commanded to communicate with the Church in the Sacrament but in this order first to be converted and repent and so baptized and so communicate or if Baptized already to be Penitents first and Communicants next But if you would have all exhorted to the Lords Supper for conversion whom we are bound to exhort to Prayer for conversion you would do that which I confess I dare not do The 11. Argument was that Ordinance which is Eucharistical and consolatory supposeth such as partake of it to have part and portion in that thing for which thanks is given c. but c. To this it s answered that the assumption might as well have bin of the Word and Prayer which are Eucharistical and Consolatory Repl. 1. To hear a Sermon is not to give thanks 2. The Application of the Word must be according to mens various states An unregenerate man may take this for consolation If I be converted and repent and believe I shall be saved A true believer may apply it to another measure of consolation because I am a believer this Promise is mine that is secureth me of the benefit Now if the Impenitent and unbeliever shall do the later he sins such another sin as if he received the Sacrament which is an Ordinance Instituted for personal assumption and application of the general Promise 2. As for Prayer 1. To petition is not to give thanks 2. And for Thanksgiving it self an Impenitent man may not give thanks for true saving faith Repentance part in Christ and hope of Glory though he may for the mercy that he hath because he may not lye Now in the Lords Supper we must give thanks for our part in Christ and pardon and life through him or at least for the present Gift of Christ to us which we consent to accept It s added This Ordinance is not wholly Eucharistical c. It is for humbling as well as for comforting Repl. But if the other use be common to it with other Ordinances and here Inseparable from the Eucharistical then other Ordinances may be used to that end but this may not by him that may not do both because if he receive the Sacrament he signally Professeth both The substance of the twelfth Argument with its answer is spoke to before where Mr. Blake saith that The unregenerate may so far be suitably worthy for this work that he may know himself called to it and that it would be his sin to hold back from it and he may hopefully expect a blessing in it I reply 1. That he is called to it remotely that is first to repent and believe and to communicate we yield and that it is every mans sin that keeps off that is that comes not in this order But that he may lawfully come before this Repentance you never proved nor shall do I think 2. I would you could shew us on what ground he may hopefully expect a blessing in it True hope goeth not beyond the promise but the unregenerate have no promise unless the Arminians be in the right of a blessing on any Ordinance much less on that which they cannot prove that they may use till they are converted Yet Hope in a larger sense they may have where they can prove that God hath set them a work though they have no promise But that 's not here The 13th Argument is That Ordinance which was instituted for Communion of Saints is intended only for Saints c. It s answered by distinguishing of Sants as such by calling and separation for God or regeneration and that the Lords supper is the priviledge of the Church as visible Repl. Its one thing to ask Who may demand it and come there and another to ask To whom may we give it We may give it to all professedly separated for God None may ask or take it but those that are heartily separated to God But your Professor of a lower faith is neither of these and therefore may neither seek it nor may we give it him if he do seek it Whoever professeth himself separated for God doth profess saving sanctification which consisteth therein Self and Earth is highest in all the unregenerate therefore they are not separated heartily to God The 14th Argument was If Baptism it self to the adult is not regenerating or converting then not the Lords supper but c. This Argument Mr. Blake hath no more to say to but that this seemeth to suppose an opinion of Conversion by the very work done which he disclaimeth But here is no such supposition at all intimated and he should have dealt with it as he found it and not so have bawkt it especially when Mr. Gilaspie had so explained and confirmed it And because Mr. Blake thought best to silence Mr. Gilaspie's proof of his Assumption and I think it worthy the Readers observation at least that he may see how far Mr. Blake is from truth in his affirmations of the singularity of my opinion I shal here transcribe them Aaron 's Rod blossoming pag. 514.515 The assumption that baptism it self is not a Regenerating Ordinance I prove thus 1. Because we read of no persons of age baptized by the Apostles except such as did profess faith in Christ gladly received the Word and in whom some begun work of the Spirit of Grace did appear I say not that it really was in all but somewhat of it did appear in all 2. If the baptism of those who are of age be a regerating Ordinance then you suppose the person to be baptized to be an unregenerate person even as when a Minister first preacheth the Gospel to Pagans he cannot but suppose them to be unregenerate But I believe no Conscientious Minister N. B. would adventure to Baptize one who hath manifest and Infallible signs of unregeneration Sure we cannot
nothing of mine that can be so plausibly objected to me as a Contradiction to the present assertion as these last words but yet there is no just ground for that objection if I be rightly understood These words are plainly bent against their opinion that make Election or saving Grace to be the Title to Sacraments which the Church must judge of and that not by the Profession of the Claimer but as distrusting his word upon other evidences of Grace as discoveries of the time and manner of Conversion or the practise of those Duties wherein a stricter profession is manifested or the like The men that I oppose hold these Assertions 1. We must give the Sacrament to none but the godly in sincerity 2. We must not believe a mans Verbal Profession though not contradicted 3. But we must require the visible proofs of his godliness 4. At least such as make it probable to us that he is godly To these men I answer 1. That it is false that we must give the Sacraments to none but the truly godly though its true that none else should require them 2. That we must give them to those that profess saving faith though they have it not For it is the Foundation of all humane Converse that we give credit to mens words when we have no just cause to dis-credit them especially in matters out of our reach and within theirs such as are the secrets of their own hearts We must therefore take their Profession unless it be contradicted by such palpable Evidences as Nullifieth it or maketh it invalid 3. That we have no other grounds to proceed on but this and that on their grounds they must profane Gods Ordinance every time they mistake in the judgement of Charity and apply it to ungodly men But not so on ours who must apply it to Professors And therefore they have no warrant to make any further scrutiny into the sincerity of a mans grace as sine qua non to their administration of the Sacrament seeing that a Verbal profession not evidently contradicted and invalidated by words or life is the means of discovery by which we must be satisfied But yet I never dreamed that we must not require profession it self of saving faith and that as a probable sign of the thing professed but that we must look after another kind of faith And if Mr. Blake will not take up with bare profession of his dogmatical faith he will oft profane the Ordinance too For he knoweth not when it is in sincerity in any man And we know by their Ignorance that multitudes are without it He addeth my Confession That the Ignorance of this point hindered me long from administring the Lords Supper But he tels not what point it was Not that the ungodly might lawfully and rightfully claim it nor that I might lawfully give it to the professedly ungodly or to any that profess not saving faith it was no such point But that the Sacrament sealed not as from God that This or that man is a Believer or that he is actually pardoned but only sealeth the conditional promise with such application to the person as is first to be made by his own Receiving and therefore if there be an error and falshood it is committed only by himself and the Minister is not guilty nor the Ordinance wholly in vain And what 's this to the advantage of Mr. Blake's Cause Yet he addeth And I confess as ingeniously that if he can work me to this opinion I am resolved for present to baptize no Infant as being unable to know the Parents faith to justification Answ. 1. But if you be brought to my opinion this Resolution will be changed 2. Are you resolved never to baptize more on the grounds that the Church of Christ hath alwayes baptized on 3. I here propound to you and the world the Reasons of my opinion And then I shall leave to the judgement of wiser men then my self whether your rejection of this opinion be a greater disgrace to it or to you 4. What if you cannot know the Parents justifying faith Will it follow that you may not know a Profession of it 5. You would do the world a curtesie to tell them by what means you are more certain of the sincerity of a Dogmatical Faith than we can be of a Justifying Faith Or will you upon consideration resolve yet never to baptize any more not administer the Lords Supper because you can never be certain that your Receivers have a Dogmatical Faith The next place where I am cited against my self is pag. 150. because I speak of Saints that shall not be saved Answ. And so I do still But yet I still say that Analogum per se positum stat pro famosiore significato And therefore the words Saints Believers c. must ordinarily be understood of such as are justified where there is no limitation or special reason to the contrary The next place where I observe my self cited against my self is p. 158. Because I maintain that it is an Error in Mr. Tombes to say That the Covenant whereof baptism is the Seal is only the the absolute covenant made only to the Elect Therefore Mr. Blake infers And if men in the state of nature be in that covenant that baptism sealeth viz. the conditional Covenant then men in the state of nature and short of justifying faith have right to baptism To which I reply 1. I have shewed you at large how far men unsanctified are or are not in covenant with God and in what sense they have or have not right to baptism And yet must we still use the undistinguished terms as if I simply denyed without distinction Yea before you confess that you tell it abroad in your discourse that I say none have right to baptism but they that have saving faith and that you can hardly gain credit to your words The way to gain credit were to speak truer and specially in your discourse of other men behind their backs A Right by any promise or mortal grant from God to them I denied but I affirmed Hypocrites to be the rightfull objects of the Ministers Act or that we may lawfully give it them and that thus far they have such an improper right And yet still you would make me believe that I simply deny them right 2. Your Consequence here is wholly groundless It is one thing to say as I do That the conditional covenant is made to the non-Elect And another thing to say as you term it that they are in the covenant For that word is very ambiguous If your consequence be good from my Assertion then you may as well prove that Turks Jews and Heathen may have the Sacraments given them For I affirm that the conditional Covenant is made to them 3. The thing that I maintain against Mr. Tombes is that the Sacrament sealeth not only the absolute Promise to the Elect but the conditional Promise and
this in two sorts 1. To true Believers who perform the condition God sealeth effectually obliging himself Actually and confirming their faith 2. The same conditional promise he sealeth to intruding Hypocrites but not so as to oblige himself to them but conditionally still as the promise it self doth Because the conditional promise giveth not actual right or enduceth not on the Promiser an actual obligation till the condition be performed which is with true believers and no others I desire both Mr. Tombes and you to know my meaning when I so plainly express it before you trouble your selves and others in contradicting it Another supposed Contradiction is pag. 159. recited He argued That faith on which Simon Magus was baptized is that which admitteth to Baptism But Simons faith fell short of saving and justifying To this Mr. Blake saâ—th I give a sudden answer viz. concedo totum sed de sideratur conclusio And he adds He is certainly much to seek both in syllogism and common reason that could not infer and could not know that I left the Reader to infer that therefore A Faith that is short of justifying entitles to baptism and so I have the whole in question yielded and that which was once said would make foul work in the Church if granted To this I reply 1. I shall not presume to say that you are much to seek either in Syllogism or common reason â—ut I think it meet to say that I pity the world and especially hasty inconsiderate Readers that must be troubled and abused by their writtings that understand not what they speak to I pray peruse your Arment again and see whether any more will follow than this Therefore a faith short of saving or justifying admitteth to baptism And this I granted taking Simons faith to be an assent conjunct with a profession of saving faith as most Interpreters do that I have seen expounding he believed by be professed to believe and had some convâ—ction But was the word entitled in your Argument And might I not well say desideratur conclusio The question which you would have concluded was that which now you conclude It entitleth to Baptism And then there is more in your Conclusion than in your Premisses Admitting is not Entitling I granted you oft before that we may Admit an Hypocrite yea a stark Infidel if professing true faith he require the Sacrament But I denyed that in strict or proper sense they had Title to it or might demand it I may justly and necessarily give if required what another unjustly requireth yet upon this gross oversight of my obvious sense Mr. Blake goes away as with a full concession of his Cause And no doubt in some mens eyes hath carried it His two Arguments against me from my own words p. 166. I have answered before The next touch of this nature I find pag. 167. Profession being a good step in the way to sincerity which a man would think Mr. Baxter would not dislike who so far speaks the mind of Christ towards men that if they will come but only to a visible Profession he will not deny them admittance there because they intend to go no further but will let them come as near as they will Repl. And so I confidently say still And what 's this to your Cause at all The next that I observe are cited pag. 184. and 186. In the latter 188. he reciteth a passage of mine in the Saints Rest where I say that the meer sober-professing to repent and believe in Christ is a sufficient Evidence of their Interest to Church-membership coram Ecclesiâ and admittance thereto by Baptism Upon which Mr. Blake assumeth What have I spoke more than here is said and did I ever speak with more and higher Confidence I say that a faith which is short of justifying gives title to Baptism And he saith such gives sufficient Interest to Church-membership and consequently admittance to Baptism Repl. I must needs say that it is to be lamented that Passion or Inconsiderateness should carry you to such evident untruths Did ever I say that such a faith gives evidence Did I there once mention such a faith Did I not expresly say A sober Professing to repent and believe in Christ. And did you not set these words before your Readers eyes And yet will you in the next words perswade him that I talk of a faith short of justifying Did you think men would take no heed what they read It is the Profession of true faith and Repentance that I spake of and not your faith that is short of it which came not into my thoughts This dealing is not like to edifie though with some it may be effectual to mislead Yet upon this abuse you ground a triumph adding So that if my doctrine herein be loose the Reader will hardly find his to be fast and it hears not well to play fast and loose It was loose ground that these words were built on Pag. 184. Another Confutation of my self is thus expressed I desire Mr. Baxter to tell us how he hath mended the matter and provided for the honor and lustre of the Christian Name or made up at all the gap of which he speaks He sayes the Church is bound to baptize as largely as I say men have Right to Baptism Repl. Dear Brother it is not well that your pages should contain so many such untruths I would we had never medled with controversie if it cannot be managed without such guilt You say that a Dogmatical faith entitles to Baptism I say we ought not to Baptize men without the Profession of a saving faith Is this the same with yours or as large Is it all one to baptize them that will profess that they are willing to have Christ as he is offered in the Gospel and them that will profess no such willingness at all Why do you expect that your Readers should believe your so frequent and evident mis-reports Your next words also are untrue that I refuse none that you receive if you did practise according to your doctrine and that where you say they have Right I say we are bound to baptize them without Right A double untruth First It is not the same persons that we speak of Secondly I distinguished of Right and told you that if you will call that Right to another which results from the command to me to baptize him if he demand it such Right he hath You next add How will this make Christianity look with any better face how much will Worcester-shire Congregations where this is received exceed other Congregations where unanimously it is denyed Repl. Divers of your flings at the Worcester-shire Congregations might have been spared without the least dishonor to your prudence justice charity or piety If you have a mind to be the Accuser of any Churches of Christ you should descend to particulars and deal with such people and in such cases that you know and not print untruths of such
yet have their Disciples a form of Godliness And doubtless Reprobates concerning the faith if so known are not to be numbred with Christians Those from whom we are to be separated here and hereafter are stiled oft The Vngodly Psal. 1. And as in some places the distinction is between Believers and Vnbelievers so in others between the righteous and wicked or ungodly 1 Pet. 4.17 18. where all these are descriptions of the same men ungodly and sinners such as are not of the house of God men that know not God And it was the world of the Vngodly that God brought the Flood upon and to be an example to those that after should live ungodly was Sodom and Gomorrah destroyed 1 Pet. 2.5 6. And John tell us that in this the children of God are known from the children of the Devil he that doth wickedness is not of God Note well the description of these Jude 4. On one side they pretended to be Christians for they are said to be crept in among them to turn the Grace of God into lasciviousness they were spots in their Feasts clouds without water carried about of winds without fruit twice dead vers 12. It is apparent then that they were Baptized ones Yet the Apostle excludeth them from the very number of Christians calling them twice dead plucked up by the roots men that denyed the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ ver 4.12 And the Desciption of them is that they are ungodly Hereticks that taught and practised ungodliness as you may see ver 8 9 10 11 12 13 17 18. walking after their own ungodly lusts sensual having not the spirit of whom Enoch prophesied saying Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousand of his Saints to execute Judgement on all and to convince all that are ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed And the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who imprison the truth in unrighteousness Rom. 1.18 If Rom. 1 2. speak of Baptized persons turned Hereticks as some Expositors judge then they are put in as vile a character and as distant from Christians as Heathens are It is the world as distinct from the Church that lie in wickedness 1 Jo. 5.19 Psal. 50.16 To the wicked saith God What hast thou to do to declare my statutes or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy mouth seeing thou hatest Instruction and castest my word behind thee The Sacrifice of the wicked is an Abomination to the Lord Prov. 21.27 so then must his false promising in Baptism So Prov. 15.8 9.26 whatever they may say with their mouths for God and Christ and the Faith yet The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart that there is no fear of God bâ—fore his eâ—s Ps. 36.1 And David could see by the life of the fool that he saith in his heart There is no God even when they do evil and not good and hate the people of God and call not upon God Psa. 14. See Mal. 3.18 Church censures are as Tertul. speaks praejudiciuÌ„ futuri judicii and therefore must go on the grounds of Gods judgment which is to sever the wicked from the just Mat. 13.49 and that according to works not meer words as was said before Eccl. 3.17 Prov. 15.29 We are not to gather those into the Church whom we know to be far from God and he putteth away but such are wicked Psal. 119.119 Thou puttest away all the wicked of the earth like dross 155. ver Salvation is far from the wicked They are estranged from the womb Psal 58.3 Acts 3.23 every soul that wil not hear that prophet shal be destroyed froÌ„ among the people All these passages with multitudes more shew that the name of a Christian unworthily usurped maketh not a notorious ungodly man to be in any capacity of a better esteem with God or the Church or any good men therein than are openly professed Infidels especially that want the means which they enjoy For all this pretence of theirs can give us no probability of any more then a superficial Assent less then that of the Devils and this is but knowing their Masters will which prepareth these Rebels to be beaten with many stripes And should that which makes them the greater sinners give them right of admittance into the Church It is Agustines Argument lib de fide oper 3. The case is yet more clear that such are excommunicated ipso jure when we consider that it is far more usual for Gods Law to serve without a sentence then mans most of the matters of our lives are there determined to our hand and we must obey the Law whether there be any judgement of man to intervene or not God hath not left so much to the judicial Decision of man as humane Laws do It is a great doubt whether there be any power properly Decisive-judicial in the Church-Guides or not but doubtless it is more limitedly and imperfectly Decisive than is the power of Judges in the matters of the Commonwealth So that if all the Rulers in the Church should forbear to Censure Notorious Apostates Hereticks Ungodly ones yea if they all command us to hold communion with them because they call themselves Christians we are nevertheless bound to disobey them and to avoid such as to Religious communion For else we should obey man against God who hath directed many of these precepts to all Christians and not only to the Governours of the Church If the Guides will suffer the woman Jezabel to teach and seduce and the Nicolaitans to abide among them whom for their filthiness God did hate it is the peoples duty for all that to avoid them if they will be Guiltless Yea Cyprian tels the people that it belongs to them to forsake and to reject an unworthy Minister that is by others set over them or doth intrude I conclude therefore that as all Christians must beyond dispute use an open Infidel as such though it belong not to the Church to judge them that are without because the Law here serves turn without a judgement the case being past controversie so also a Notorious ungodly man though pretending to Christianity and entertained by the Church is to be avoided by every good Christian as being ipso jure excommunicated by God Most of the Objections that I have heard against this are from men that not understanding this phrase of Excommunication ipso jure through their unacquaintedness with Law-terms have supposed that we meant no more but de jure or that they merited Excommuication or it was their due But ipso jure means ex vi solius Legis sine sententia Judicis Its common for Legislators in several Cases either where Judges or other Officers are needless or cannot be had or may not be staid for to enable the subject to do execution without any more judgement And so we are bound to avoid such Notorious
to Execute without Judgement and yet this is no denial of the Authority of a Judge So much to the matter of this Argument And now in Sum to the Argument as in Form 1. I deny the first Consequence if it speak of the Nullity of the External Baptism and not only of the Effect and of Gods Engagement to them 2. And consequently I deny the two later Consequences 3. Yea if our Parents Infant-Baptism were null it followeth not that so is their childrens which they had on their account For our Parents might get a Personal Right in Christ and the Covenant after their Baptism before they presented us in Baptism though themselves had not been Baptized 4. And I believe it will be no easie matter to prove that our Parents any or many at least were notoriously ungodly at our birth 5. Lastly if all this satisfie not but any man will yet needs believe that it is an unavoidable consequence of our Doctrine that The Baptism of the Infants of Notoriously Ungodly Parents is null though I am not of hâ—s minde yet I think it is a less dangerous opinion and less improbable then theirs whom we now oppose I know no such great ill effects it would have if a man that mistakingly did suppose his Baptism Null to satisfie his Conscience were baptized again without denying the baptism of Infants or any unpeaceable disturbing of the Church in the management thereof I confess I never had any Damning or Excommunicating thoughts in my mind against Cyprian Firmilian and the rest of the African Bishops and Churches who rebaptized those that were baptized by Hereticks and in Council determined it necessary and were so zealous for it And though while I captivated my judgement to a Party and to admired Persons I embraced the new Exposition of Acts 19. which Beza thankfully professeth to have received from Marúixius who as some say was the first Inventer of it yet I must confess that both before I knew what other men held and since I better know who expound it otherwise and on what grounds I can no longer think that is the meaning of the Text especially when I impartially peruse the words themselves Calvin did not think that the 5th versâ— was Paul's words of John's Hearers but Luke's words of Paul's Hearers and had no way to avoid the Exposition which admitted their rebaptizing but by supposing that Paul did not Baptize them again with Water but with the Holy Ghost only and that of that the fifth verse is meant I never read that John Baptist did Baptize in the name of the Lord Jesus expresly and denominatively but only as Paul here speaks that they should believe on him that should come after whom Paul here Expositorily denominateth the Lord Jesus And the words When they heard this seem to me plainly to refer to Paul's saying as the thing which they heard Also the Connexion of the fifth verse to the sixth shews it For else there is no reason given of Pauls proceeding to that Imposition of Hands nor any satisfaction to the doubt at which he stuck or which he propounded And I confess if I must be swayed by men I had rather think well of the judgment of the Fathers and Church of all Ages who for ought I find do all that have wrote of it with one consent place a greater difference then we do between John's Baptism and Christs and did expound this Text so as to assert that these 12 Disciples were baptized again by Paul or on his Preaching And for that great and unanswerable Argument wherewith Beza and others do seek to maintain the necessity of their sense I confess it rather perswades me to the contrary For whereas they imagine it intolerable for us to conclude or think that Christ was not Baptized with Christian Baptism which himself did institute or command I must needs say I think it much more probable that he was not seeing the Christ an Baptism is Essentially a Covenanting and Sealing of our Covenant with God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as our Creator Redeemer and Sanctifier and appointed to be Gods Seal of his washing away our sins by Christs blood all which I know Christ was not capable of And I suppose it more credible that Christ himself should be the Instituter of such an Evangelical Ordinance than John and that he came to fulfill all Legal Righteousness rather than that Evangelical Righteousness which consisteth in obeying himself by doing those things which he hath appointed to redeemed sinners as such for their recovery But of this let every man judge as he is illuminated If I err my danger and deserved reproach I think is no greater than the Ancient Fathers and the Church for so many hundred years that were of the same mind Even they that were nearer to that Age when these matters of Fact were done But for our case its apparent there 's no need of Re-baptizing for there is no Nullity I have done with the Argument but yet there is one Question more that may not be passed over though but on the by and that is Whether the Baptism of all those persons be not Null and they to be Re-baptized who were baptized by such as were Notoriously or Secretly unordained men and no true Ministers To which I only say in brief No 1. If they were not known to be no Ministers it was no fault of ours we waited in Gods appointed way for his Ordinances and therefore though they were sins to them they are valid blessings to us that were not guilty 2. If they were Notoriously no Ministers though it might be our Parents sin that we were presented to such for Baptism yet it is not Null For in these Relations these Instruments are not Essential to the Relation nor to the Ordinance at all Though I would be loth as the Fathers and Papists did to allow a Lay person yea a woman saith Tertullian to baptize in case of Necessity yet should I not be very hasty to Re-baptize such supposinig that they had all the substance of the Ordinance as being baptized into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Argu. 10. Whoever ought in Duty to dedicate his Child to God in the holy Covenant ought also to Baptize him But all notorious ungodly men ought so to dedicate their children to God Ergo c. Answ. I grant the Conclusion It is every mans duty on earth that hears the Gospel to be baptized and give up his children if he have any to Christ in Baptism that is to believe and consent to the Covenant of Grace and so to be baptized But it followeth not that it is their Duty to be Externally Baptized without Faith and such Consent 2. Note also that this Argument as well proves that all the Children of persecuting Heathens should be baptized as ungodly pretended Christians For it is their Duty too Object But when they present their Children they do their Duty though but part
agree Though I must say that it is so usual for men to love those of their own opinions that I marvailed to finde a man with such high indignation endeavouring to prove himself of his Opponents minde and that we should agree more passionately then we seemed to differ As I little thought that Dr. Twisse had been of the same minde with my self and others in this point But Mr. Iessop hath peaceably and temperately proved it and I therein rejoyce so I less thought that Dr. Owen had been of the same minde but he hath hotly and haughtily proved it and therein also I rejoyce As long as we come neerer and error goeth away with the disgrace we may the better bear the displeasure of the Reconciled As for the great pains he hath taken about my Person for the cause found him not work enough to prove from my writings that I am so hypocritically proud I know not well what return to make him that will be acceptable Should I as faithfully admonish him it would seem but a recrimination and its like he hath those that are nearer him that do it who need not take their ground from fame and whose words may meet with less indignation Should I tell him that a Minister is not to be prodigal of his reputation because it is not his own and that a man that is voluminously slandered and that is Calumniated by the off-spring which such Reverend men as he hath midwived into the world may possibly open his mouth against the Calumniator and clear his innocency and the truth without a predominant degree of pride I should probably incurr the censure of being yet more proud by denying any thing that is charged upon me though it were that Heresie it self which his parallel doth seem to his Readers to accuse me of If I should tell him that I do unfeignedly confess the truth of his accusation and that I was aware of Pride and Hypocrisie in my heart before he told me of them and that the subduing of them is the business of my desires and care it s ten to one but I shall be proud in seeming so humble as to confess my pride and that these as he speaks are but good words to cover it But yet confess it I must and will how proud soever I be in the confession One evidence of it which I have heard from the apprehension of others viz. because I gave him not his due Titles of honour is no whit cogent with me that know the case and I think my justification is unanswerable viz. that when my papers were written he was not Doctor though he was when they came out of the press Whether it be not harder measure that I have met with at his hand I desire you to judge by two or three particulars 1. Though I did purposely again and again profess that I reckoned not all to be Antinomians that held only some one or few of their opinions that are not the worst and in particular not all that held the very same opinion against which I argued with him and withall entitle him The most sober and learned man that I know of that writes that way even for that opinion yet doth he think meet to publish to the world that I enroll him into the Troop of Antinomians when he is unable to produce a syllable of mine that hath such a signification I think this dealing is not fair 2. He untruly chargeth me with traducing him for maintaining and giving countenance to the Propositions which I mentioned pag. 189. on his pag. 9. and 3. and thereupon groundeth his tragical exclamations I mentioned him as the author of these particular words which I annexed to his name which I judged indeed unsound but will it thence follow that I fasten on him all the errors that I mention in the precedent or subsequent pages Having read my words inconsiderately he exclaims against supposed injuries which were caused by the mistakes of his own imagination and are not to be found in any of my expressions A stranger that reads his passionate scorns upon such occasions and had not read the words which did offend him would little think that so learned a man should make such a stir upon the pretence of a charge that was never brought against him but only against others a leaf before the mention of his name If he ask Why then did I there mention his name I answer As he defendeth that particular opinion which his words express and not as defending all that other men are charged with and I mentioned his because it is too like to theirs and they are encouraged by it as Mr. Eyres allegations may evince 3. When in the close of my confession pag. 462. I called so large a recital of other mens words a spending of much time to little purpose even to satisfie those that look too much at the names of men he feigneth me to speak this in reference to the matter and manner of the Book 4. His splendid fiction of the terrible conditions which I put upon my answerer and his insultings thereupon are only the effects of his inadvertency and mistakes pag. 45. as I shall shew anon Pag. 5. His pretended knowledge of me as if it were upon much acquaintance and experience doth argue much sagacity I think I have seen him as oft as he hath seen me and yet my knowledge of him is very small In his anatomizing of my pride pag. 6 he playes the after-game more plausibly than his Brethren played the fore-game They go before and partly by his help and publish abundance of Calumnies of me to the world telling them not only that I am a Papist but what books they were that made me a Papist and what Emissaries I have in all parts of the Land with much more of the like When my discovery of their abuse did frustrate much of their design this Learned man comes after them and at last will prove me proud for contradicting them forsooth for talking so much of my self As if one of the Doctors friends should accuse me of theft or murder at the Assize and when I have justified my innocency the Doctor should come after him and tell how much I had spoken for my self and prove me thereby to be proud and selfish The truth is I am conscious of so much of these sins and so far believe the odiousness and danger of them that I take such books as this Doctors for a great mercy as knowing that strong corruptions must have something that is strong to work the cure and a hard knot must have a sharp wedge a Shimei may be sent of God for good and how unrighteous soever the monitor may be I am abundantly beholden to God that doth permit it I had rather have a Messenger of Satan to buffet me than be exalted above measure I confess my pride needs sharper reprehensions than friends have ever used about me and therefore they are better
wonderful confidence If Mr. Blake will bring as good proof of any converted by it as we can that the eleven Apostles that the Church at Jerusalem Acts 2. and 4. and the rest of the Churches were strengthened by it he will make good that Assertion 3. What he saith of our not having precedents by name is nothing to the purpose If he can prove it of any named or unnamed specially of Societies it will suffice 4. He tels us that The examples of Conversion by the word perhaps well examined would prove short of such Conversion as is here intended The Conversion in Gospel-Narratives is to a Christian profession Repl. 1. This is too unkind dealing for any Preacher of the Gospel to use with that Word which converted him and hath brought in so many thousands to Christ and which he himself preacheth for the conversion of others I should offend the patience of the Reader to stand to confute this by proving that the Word hath been a means of true saving Conversion yea the ordinary means I refer Mr. Blake to what I have said before of the state of the Churches that Paul wrote to Was there not one sort of Ground that received the seed in depth of earth and brought forth fruit Was not Paul sent by preaching to open mens eies and turn them from the power of Satan to God Act. 26 v. 18. Doth not Paul in all his Epistles speak of the Saints as converted savingly by the word of the Gospel What heaps of clear Testimonies might we bring out of his Epistles How contrary is this new Doctrine to the Word and all the ancient Churches and all approved Protestants Judgements I would we had such Evidence of true Conversion now among our Professors as the multitude of Converts gave Act. 2. and 4. and as the Jaylor gave Act. 1.6 and the Eunuch Act. 8. and as Lydia and many other 2. But what if the Word had not truly converted them its somewhat to be brought to an outward Profession of true faith which the rest were that were then Church-members But the Profession of your faith of another species is not the Profession of a Christian Faith though you call it so If you will give me but as good proof of any one baptized person that was brought but to the Profession of this lower Faith as I will give you of multitudes that were brought to true saving Faith by the Word and more to the Profession of it I will say that you have done that which never man did before you I pray make tryal for the proof of some one Well! But the main strength of the Argument which you had to answer was concerning the Promise To which you say 1. When the adversary shall bring a Promise made to the Sacrament for spiritual strength it will happily be found of equal force to the giving of a new life Repl. You next say Implicite Promises may serve Shew but one such You say Every Promise made to the Word is made to the Sacrament Repl. Prove that and take all Though we have no Promise particularly of converting this or that man by the Word yet we have that it shall convert many in general Shew where is a word of Promise that the Sacraments shall convert any one Sure if Paul had but had such a Promise of converting men by Baptizing them as he had of converting them by Preaching Act. 26.17 18. and elswhere he would never have said I thank God that I baptized none of you but Crispus c. for I am not sent to baptize but to Preach the Gospel 2. We find where in that Sacrament men have Communion of the Blood of Christ and of his Body and are partakers of the one Bread and have communion with one another and are helped by it in calling to Remembrance Christ death in hope of that coming all which are undoubtedly strengthening 1 Cor. 10 16 17. 11.25 26. Act. 2 c. But you cannot shew where ever any was either united first to Christ or his mystical Body by the Lords Supper or where it was appointed to be used to any such end or where ever any generaral or Implicite Promise of such a thing is made The tenth Argument was from the expresse danger of unworthy receiving 1 Cor. 11.17 The summ of the answer is That This Argument would take off every Ordinance from the honor of Conversion Repl. But I conceive that the strength of the Argument or that which ought to be its strength is wholly overlookt which is not from the Necessity of a Preparation in general but of a special Preparation or Worthiness which is not so pre-requisite to the fruitful use of converting Ordinances There is a saying by the superfluity of naughtiness malice c. requisite before a man can in reason expect that the Word should convert him and yet it may convert thousands that are not so far prepared by doing that and the rest But the Worthiness of a Partaker of the Lords Supper must be more than this For 1. That which the Church is Judge of must be that the Receiver be a Church-member professing true Faith and not contradicting that Profession by a scandalous life 2. Himself is required to examine himself for more that is whether he be sincerely what he Professeth and Christ be in him or else he is a Reprobate and not to take the childrens bread 2 Cor. 13.5 and also that he have a Particular Preparation according to the nature of the Ordinance It s expresly Necessary 1. That he discern the Lords Body 2. That he do this in remembrance of Christs death and with a hope of his coming and 3. For communion with Christ and his Church and to be partakers of the one bread 4. And with a Heart to take Christ and Eat that is to feed on him by Faith when he takes the bread But all this cannot be done by the unregenerate nor is this prerequisite before a man come to the Word that it may convert him That Preparation which is pre-requisite in a meet receiver of the Lords Supper it was not instituted to effect unless as it may do it when God sees good in an unworthy or prohibited use But true Faith and Repentance are Preparations pre-requisite Ergo c. You cannot say that to the hearing of the Word as a means of conversion true faith and Repentance is so requisite The text you mention 1 Pet. 2.1.2 I say again speaks of the confirming and edifying use of the word and not of the converting use The converted must bring true saith to the Word if they will expect encrease of it but the unconverted must not needs bring true faith if they will be brought to believe by it 3. Yet remember that we say not that men ought to forbear coming that are unconverted but that they ought to come but how To believe and repent and so to come and to do it in this order and no