work of a grant or promise to confer these and not directly of a precept Secondly the duty of devoting and dedicating the child to God and entring it into the Covenant which confers the benefit and this is the work of a Law or Precept to constitute this duty I am past doubt that you doubt not of either of these For you cannot imagine that any Infant had the blessing without a grant or promise that 's impossible nor that any Parents lay under a duty without an obliging law for that is as impossible Taking it therefore for granted that you are resolved in both these and so yield that such a grant and precept there was there remains no question but whether it be repealed which I have long expected that you should prove For citing the particular Texts in which the ordination is contained though more may be said than is said yet I shall think it needless till I see the ordination contained in those Texts which I have already mentioned to you proved to be reversed Nor do I know that it is of so great use to stand to cite the particular Texts while you confess in general that such a promise and precept there is by vertue of which Infants were till Christs time duly members of Christs Church for Christs Church it was even his universal visible Church Still remember that I take the word law not strictly for a precept only but largely as comprehending both promise and precept and I have already shewed you both and so have others So much of your endeavour as hath any tendency to the advancement of holiness I am willing to second you in viz. that at the age you desire people might solemnly profess their acceptance of Christ and their resolution to be his But I hope God will find me better work while I must stay here than to spend my time to prove that no Infants of believers are within Christs visible Church that is are no Infant Disciples Infant Christians Infant Church-members I know no glory it will bring to Christ nor comfort to man nor see I now any appearance of truth in it I bless the Lord for the benefits of the Baptismal Covenant that I enjoyed in infancy and that I was dedicated so soon to God and not left wholly in the Kingdom and power of the Devil They that despise this mercy or account it none or not worth the accepting may go without it and take that which they get by their ingratitude And I once hoped that much less than such an inundation of direful consequents as our eyes have seen would have done more for the bringing of you back to stop the doleful breach that you have made I am fain to spend my time now to endeavour the recovery of some of your Opinion who are lately turned Quakers or at least the preventing of others Apostasie which is indeed to prevent the emptying of your Churches Which I suppose will be a more acceptable work with you than again to write against rebaptizing or for Infant Baptism Sir I remain your imperfect brother knowing but in part yet loving the truth Rich. Baxter Mr. Tombes his second Letter Sir I confess Infants were by Gods fact of taking the whole people of the Jews for his people in that estate of the Jewish Paedagogy not by any promise or precept visible Church-members that is of the Congregation of Israel I do not confess that there was any Law or Ordinance determining it should be so but only a fact of God which is a transeunt thing and I think it were a foolish undertaking for me to prove the repeal of a fact Wherefore still I press you that you would shew me where that Law Ordinance Statute or Decree of God is that is repealable that is which may in congruous sence be either by a later act said to be repealed or else to be established as a law for ever This I never found in your books nor do I conceive that law is implied in any thing I grant and therefore I yet pray you to set me down the particular Text or Texts of Holy Scripture where that Law is Which need not hinder you from opposing the Quakers in which I have not and hope shall not be wanting of whom I think that you are misinformed that they are Anabaptists I think there are very few of them that were ever baptised and have good evidence that they have been formerly Seekers as you call them And I think you do unjustly impute the direful consequences you speak of to the denial of Infant Baptism and to the practice of adult Baptism and that as your self are deceived so you mislead others I yet expect your Texts knowing none in any of your Books that mention that law of Infants visible Church-membership which you assert either explicitly or implicitly and am Bewdly April 4. 1655. yours as is meet John Tombes Richard Baxters second Letter Sir If you will needs recall me to this ungrateful work let me request you to tell me fully exactly and plainly what transient fact you mean which you conceive without law or promise did make Church-members that so I may know where the competition lieth When I know your meaning I intend God willing to send you a speedy answer to your last April 16. 1655. Your fellow-servant Rich. Baxter Mr. Tombes his third Letter Sir The transeunt fact of God whereby Infants were visible Church-members was plainly exprest in my last to you to be the taking of the whole people of the Jews for his people which is the expression of Moses Deut. 4.34 Exod. 6.7 And by it I mean that which is expressed Levit. 20.24.26 when God said I have severed you from other people that you should be mine The same thing is expressed 1 Kings 8.53 Isai 43.1 This I term fact as conceiving it most comprehensive of the many particular acts in many generations whereby he did accomplish it Following herein Stephen Acts 7.2 and Nehem. 9.7 I conceive it began when he called Abraham out of Vr Gen. 12.1 to which succeeded in their times the enlarging of his family removing of Lot Ishmael the sons of Keturah Esau distinction by Circumcision the birth of Isaac Jacob his leading to Padan Aram increase there removal to Canaan to Aegypt placing preserving there and chiefly the bringing of them thence to which principally the Scripture refers this fact Exod. 19.4 Levit. 11.45 Nehem. 1.10 Hos 11.1 the bringing them into the bond of the Covenant at Mount Sinai giving them laws settling their Priesthood tabernacle army government inheritance By which fact the Infants of the Israelites were visible Church-members as being part of the Congregation of Israel and in like manner though not with equal right for they might be sold away were the bought servants or captives whether Infants or of age though their Parents were professed Idolaters And this I said was without promise or precept meaning such promise or precept as you
by a Legal right to it antecedent to their being such visible Church-members which they or any for them might claim as due Nor was it capable of being duly and rightfully received or usurped For it was nothing but a state of appearing to be part of that people who were in appearance from things sensible Gods people and this they had by Gods fact of making them to be a part of that people visibly viz. his forming them and bringing them into the world and placing them Reply More mystery still 1. Was there no antecedent Law or Covenant of God giving a jus societatis a Right of membership to Abrahams seed as soon as they had a being initially and commanding them to be devoted to God in Covenant and Circumcised that they by investiture might have a plenary Right Was there no such thing O but this gave them not a right to it before they had it Is the poor Church to be thus abused and holy things thus played with They could not be members before they had a being nor could lay claim to it But could not Gods Law Grant or Instrumental Covenant be made before they were born And could it not be the Instrument of conveying right to them as soon as they were born that is as soon as they were subjects capable And is not the cause in order of nature though not of time before the effect Cannot the Law of the Land be the fundamental cause of the Right of Infants to Honours and Estates though till they are in being they are not capable subjects Is not the Action ut agentis naturally antecedent to it as in patiente Is it only Gods transeunt fact of making them men and these men and placing them in England which maketh Infants to be members of the English Nobility or Gentry or Citizens or members of this Kingdom No but it is the Laws that do morally give the Jus dignitatis vel societatis though their action be not terminated in any subject till it exist For every man born in England is not born a Lord or Esquire or Citizen no nor a free subject unless the Law say it shall be so If Foreigners or Rebels should have children here and the Law were that they shall be Aliens they would be no members of the Kingdom If Mr. T. or Mr. D's children have nothing but Generation and being born in England to shew for their Inheritance their Title will not hold 2. And might not right have been falsly pleadded or usurped by a counterfeit Jew Or the children of such Or the children of Apostates who yet were born of Abrahams seed and in that Land Whatsoever they were that Nehemiah used severely I am sure Achans children and the Infants of the Cities that were to be consumed for Idolatry lost their right to life and Church-membership at once by their Parents sin And God might if he had pleased have continued the Life of Apostates children without continuing their Church-right Or Apostates might and no doubt multitudes did escape the justice of the Law through the fault of Magistrates or people and yet have no true Legal Right to Church-membership for themselves or Infants born after For he that hath lost his right to life hath lost his right or may do to the priviledges and benefits of it He addeth yet I grant they had a right in it that is that they had it by Gods donation Reply And was it not a Moral Donation then if it gave Right You will be forced thus to confute your self Mr. T. It seems to me not true that the nature of the benefit of Infants visible membership consisteth in a right to further benefits Reply Yet he giveth not a word to tell us why he thinketh so If we are at this pass about Relations and Right in general no marvail if Infant Baptism go for Antichristian Doth not the Relative state of a Citizen or of the member of any priviledged society consist in his state of Right to the Benefits Priviledges and Communion of the Society and an obligation to the duties of a member to the end he may have the benefits and the Society the benefit of his membership and duty A conjunction of Right 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and obligation constituteth all such Relations But what shall we be agreed in that are ignorant and differ here Next Mr. T. denieth the consequence For a man may have a benefit without right Reply 1. And yet just now Church-membership in Israel was a thing that none could usurp or have without right 2. But I said no man can have a benefit from God against his will or without it And therefore if God give such a thing as Church-membership which consisteth in a Right to further benefits he that hath it by Gods gift hath it rightfully Natural effects as a prey to a thief may be said to be given of God improperly by Physical disposal to him that hath no right But right it self cannot be given to him that hath no right nor any thing else Relative or Natural by Gods Moral or Covenant donation He conceiveth it to be very erroneous that visible Church-membership is given out of distributive Justice for as Regeneration so also visible membership are of bounty by God as Soveraign Lord not of distributive Justice by God as Judge 2. That all that any man hath of God he hath of debt contrary to Rom. 4.4 3. That visible Church-membership is conceived as a thing offered and to be duly and rightfully received Reply If Mr. T. and I shall tire the Printer and wast Paper and trouble the world with telling them how many errors each of us hold it will be an unsavory task and I doubt it would be a much shorter work for one of us which ever it is to enumerate the useful truths we hold What I hold be it right or wrong I will tell the Reader as to this matter I hold that Gods Kingdom is to be considered in its Constitution and Administration The first hath 1. The efficient 2. The Constitutive 3. The final Causes And in the large sense it containeth 1. Subjects only by obligation such as Rebels are 2. Subjects by consent or voluntary The Efficient cause of the former is only Gods 1. Making them men and Redeemed men quoad precium and commanding their subjection or consent To the effecting of the second is besides these required their Actual Consent Parents consenting for their Infants without which they are but Rebels and have no right to the benefits of the Society God being a King de jure before his Government is Consented to maketh a Law to man to command them to consent and be his voluntary subjects To those that consent as the condition he promiseth the interest and blessings of his Covenant viz. Christ and Life and threatneth the privation of those benefits and sorer punishment to refusing rebels He is Lawgiver and will be Judge of Non-consenters called Vnbelievers and
some do yet reason is reason Can we think that when Christ was seen after his resurrection of more than 500 Brethren at once that only 120 of them were Christians And can we think that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea and many more were not timerous faint-hearted Christians It 's like that the text meaneth that this 120 was the number of those bold confirmed Christians who so quickly after Christs death appeared in open profession and conjunction with the Apostles and had opportunity to assemble at that time and place The next is Act. 2.1 They were all with one accord in one place Answ This needeth no other answer than as before The other texts Act. 2.41 44. 4.4 23 24. 5.11 13 14. 6.1 2 7. 8.1 15.22 1 Cor. 14.23 need no other answer His exposition would sometimes exclude women and sometimes many of the men Doth he believe no man or woman was a member of the Church Act. 15.22 who did not send men of their own company Nor any man or woman a member of the Church at Jerusalem that did not being scattered go about Preaching Act. 8.1 c. 1 Cor. 14. it is said You may all prophesie and yet women are forbidden Mr. T. 4. They were no part of the Christian Church visible to whom the things ascribed to the whole Church did not agree But the things ascribed to the whole Christian Church visible did not agree to Infants Ergo Answ This is fully answered already It is most usual to ascribe that to a Church or other Society which is done only by the most considerable part As I said before when rational Consent Contract Intention are ascribed to a Kingdom which is constituted by the consent of King and Subjects and yet Infants are members who consent not save by their Parents The Church meeteth to choose a Pastor when yet the women meet not The Church admonisheth a faulty member when every woman doth not admonish him Our Churches meet all to hear when Children meet not whom we take for members These are not satisfactory allegations being contrary to common use of words and to many texts of Scripture Mr. T. The Minor is proved Matth. 16.18 On this Rock will I build my Church viz. by Preaching Answ When Preaching converted the Parents they devoted themselves to God and all that were in their trust and power and that Preaching brought in by consequence the Infants that did not hear I prove it 1. Christ commandeth the discipling of Nations and baptizing them that is as much as in the Preacher lieth But Infants are part of those Nations Therefore he commandeth the discipling and baptizing of Infants as much as in the Preacher lay which could be done but by the success of preaching on the Parents 2. The Kingdoms of the world are made the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Christ But Infants are members of all those Kingdoms But this is done at large elsewhere Mr. T. 1 Cor. 1.2 called to be Saints Act. 2.41 47. 5.14 They that were added to the Church did hear and believe c. Answ I will not weary the Reader with repeating the same answers to the like things Mr. T. 5. They who are not reckoned Christs Disciples were not visible Church-members But Infants are no where reckoned as Christs Disciples ergo Answ 1. What is said before to the other Texts answereth all these The Actions of adult Disciples only were in mention 2. Infants are called Disciples Acts 15. as I have elsewhere proved on whose neck the yoak of Circumcision was laid And in Matth. 28.19 when Nations are to be discipled 3. Mr. T. himself confesseth that Christ was habitually and by designation a Prophet in Infancy and that so may Infants be Disciples Mr. T. 6. If in the distribution of the members of the Church then Infants are not comprehended then Infants were not visible Church-members But c. Answ 1. Here he instanceth in 1. The sex Men and Women 2. Jews and Gentiles 3. Circumcision and uncircumcision mentioned but not Infants But if Infants be of neither sex male nor female nor of Jews or Gentiles nor circumcision nor uncircumcision I plead not for them 2. If those Texts cited by you mention not Infants others do as I have elsewhere proved Our children are called Holy and a blessed seed and received by Christ and of such is the Kingdom of God c. And you confess it of Christ himself in his Infancie and yet now forget it or contradict your self Mr. T. 2. I argue from the common received definitions of the visible Church Acts 19. of the Church of England A congregation of faithful men c. Answ And so Kingdoms and all Societies that Infants are members of are accordingly defined as is aforesaid You cannot deny it And was not the Church before Christs incarnation a society of faithful men when yet you confess that Infants were visible parts of is Mr. T. 3. I argue They are no visible members of the Christian Church to whom no note whereby a visible Christian Church or Church-membership is discernable doth agree But c. ergo Answ When a man thinks only what to say for his cause and never thinks what can be said against it his judgement is of little value 1. All that agreeth to Infants which was requisite to a visible Infant member before Christs coming And do you not confess that they were members then among the Jews 2. Did nothing in Christ himself in Infancy agree with visible membership Yes the open Revelations of God as to a visible person You confess before as much as I need 3. The essentiating qualification of a Church-member is Covenant-consent such as God according to the sense of his offered Covenant will accept as such But Infants have this Covenant-consent seeing they consent by their Parents who are entrusted to do it for them as if they were parts of themselves As the Jews Infants did Mutual consent of God and themselves by their Parents is it that maketh them members I have oft wondered to read in orthodox Divines that the Word purely preached Sacraments and Discipline are the marks of the true Church No doubt but Heart-consent to the Baptismal Covenant of Grace maketh a sincere member of the true Church which the Infant doth by the Parent and professed consent to the same Covenant maketh a visible member which regularly must be by Baptism for investiture But a true Church may long by persecution be hindred from publick assemblies Preaching Sacraments and Discipline And may have much corruption in all these Mr. T. maketh this mutual consent as two distinct pretended Notes denying either of them to be true marks Answ Neither the Princes consent alone nor the Subjects alone maketh a Common-wealth Neither the Husbands consent alone or the Wives maketh a marriage but both conjunct So here Mutual consent maketh a Church-member But so that Gods Consent is the Donative efficient cause and mans
to Write or teach him Musick Arithmetick Geometry Latine Greek or Hebrew Logick or Grammar or any Art though but such as Labourers get their daily bread by XXXI Ib. That it is a sin for those in Italy or any Kingdom that can have no other to let a Popish Priest teach their Children the Creed Lords Prayer and Ten-Commandments which all Christians are agreed in but it 's better that they never learned a word of the Bible or Christian-Faith than learn it of such a Priest so sinfully did Bishop Usher make the motion to the Priests in Ireland that Protestants and they might joyn in teaching the barbarous people the Creed and common principles of Religion XXXII Ib. That it is a sin to hear a Popish Priest read Gods word or any good book though it were a Protestants or one of the Ancient Fathers or to hear him speak the truest Doctrine though in a Country where it can no other way be heard or learned XXXIII Ib. That in such a Country where there is no other it is a sin to joyn with one of them in any Prayer how good soever though craving a blessing on our meat or in a Family or elsewhere even in the Lords Prayer XXXIV Ib. That it is necessary to Salvation to believe that the Pope is Antichrist and so no man woman or child can be saved that believeth it not And so since Antichrist arose we have a new Article in our Creed Even for those that know not what the Pope is whether male or female flesh or fish XXXV Ib. That it is a sin to read any good book in the Church besides the Scripture any Chapter in the Apocrypha any Homily or Sermon though written by an Anabaptist and though we declare what it is and mention it for no other end but what it is written for as we cite Authors as witnesses And yet it is lawful for Mr. D. to publish many falsly in Print XXXVI Ib. That it is a sin to read a Prayer in the Church though it were the Prayer of Christ John 17. or of Moses or others in the Psalmes or any others XXXVII Ib. That if one pray Mr. Danvers to pray for him it is Idolatry or if the people or sick pray the Minister to pray for them or Children their Parents or if one should do so by an Angel that should appear to him or to a Saint or Angel unseen imagining that he were present this is not only Superstition and so sinful but also Idolatry which is giving Gods proper worship to a creature And consequently it is the proper worship of God only to pray him to pray for us to himself XXXVIII Ib. That it is a sin to bow the knee at the naming of Jesus though we renounce all in it that is superstitious and scandalous and bow equally at the name of God Jehovah Christ c. XXXIX Ib. That it is a sin to stand when the Gospel is read though we be never so weary of sitting and stand equally at the reading of all the rest of the Scripture or at Sermon without distinction so heynously did the Vniversal Church sin for many hundred years in their long standings and so sinful a thing it is to hear in a Church or Meeting-place that hath no seats unless we sit on the ground XL. Ib. That it is a sin to kneel while the Ten-Commandments are read though it be by women whose custom that posture is upon a boss through the rest of the daies exercise and though it be never so openly declared that we take them not for a prayer nor do it to any ill signification or intent XLI Iib. That he sinneth who doth not condemn the Universal Church of Christ for many hundred years of the greatest antiquity that we have any records of since the Apostles for their worshipping with their faces towards the East Though he should himself dislike that practice and never use it nor consent to have it used XLII Ib. That it is a sin to say that any children of any wicked men in the world have any guilt of any of their nearer Parents sins but only of Adams And consequently it must be held that God unjustly threatned and punished any such children for their Parents sin from the daies of Cain Cham Pharaoh Ishmael Esau Achan Gehezi till the daies of that Generation threatned Matth. 23. And also that no man receiveth any pravity from Adam neither because it must pass to him through his next Parents and be theirs and he receiveth none that is theirs And so all Nations are justified against all guilt of any Parents sin but Adam and warranted to deny to confess any such guilt or to be beholden to Christ or mercy for the pardon of it though David Daniel and Nehemiah did otherwise I say again either Mr. D. and his like do really hold the contraries of the assertions of mine which he thus notifieth as heynous errors or not If not he raileth against his Conscience in hypocrisie If yea then these propositions which I have named to you are the contraries to mine And it is so cursed a thing to add two and fourty New Commandments to the Law of God that I who think them to be no better do again and again desire him to give me the full proof of all these strange Commandments and tell me where they are written if I have overlookt them If this cannot be obtained I call to his imitators and my backbiters to let me know whether really they will own all these and give me leave to tell the World and the Ages to come that these were their Doctrines for the love of which they whispered or clamoured against me But here he stops and pittieth the Reader and referreth them to my Book it self And I will joyn with him and add that the Reader that will think that he knoweth what I hold or wrote by this and such like mens citations or reports and will not read the Book it self and all in it together that concerneth the questioned subject before he judge I take not my self bound to write more books to tell him what I wrote in the former nor do I think that I am otherwise obliged to rectifie his Error than by Prayer or Counsel endeavouring to bring him to some tenderness of Conscience fear of God and sobriety of mind But his strength lieth in frightful exclamations O was ever the like yet heard c. to palliate abominations and reconcile us to Idolatrous Popish names as Altar Priests Sacrifices c. and their baptism And yet he might have known that all these words are oft used by the ancienter sort of the holy Pastors of the Churches after the Apostles and I remember not that ever one Christian was against it or scrupled the use of them And I before shewed that they are used by the Holy-Ghost in Scripture whom I dare not accuse of Idolatrous names or reconciling us to them Whether all the