a Theam which Scripture whence onely they must fetch all their proofs saies just nothing of at all This makes the Disputers the Divines to come abroad a begging in print among the vulgar as you here do saying cover pass by bewayling the weakness of their Arguments their defects in disputing their presumption in entring the lists their non-preparation for the disputation because it s not the true Gospel they disputed for a very stripling may make a Gyant give back if he have hold on the hilt of his sword and the other thrust hard against the blade 't is hard for thee O Saul to kick against the pricks a learned lawyer may be at loss in a lame suit Asinus ad lyram may play his part better and make sweeter musick then the most accurate musitian that hath nothing to beat upon but a board it may well put any but the meer Sophister to his shifts to prove the moons made of green cheese and so 't will any save the meer self-seeker that is set to serve it out of a sight that he can serve himself of it and therefore is resolv'd to make any Argument serve turn even libet ergo licet rather then leave it to prove Infant-baptism much more Infant-rantism to be a good cause and yet the more 's the pitty this is the cause you have to make good and have been so bold as to stand up for which though your wishes are here that it may not suffer wrong through your defects yet mine are much rather that you may not suffer your selves to be wrong'd any more or to be wrong'd for ever through its defects for howbeit it flatters you into an opinion of its ability to be maintain'd by you by its appearing ability to maintain you yet you 'l find ith'end that by its fair flourishes it hath flusht you into more zeal then furnisht you with ability to maintain it when it shall have brought you to your choice of one of these two ex quibus minimum est eligengendum viz. either of Repentance from it and all other your Parochiall dead works tithes and other traditions that depend upon it upon a sight and acknowledgement that you have been mistaken about these as well as other Romish Remnants that you have seen cause through the Parliaments eyes to renounce since that long since Lutheran reformation which after longer standing out will be so much the harder Chapter for you Clergy men to run throw or else which is worse then nought of perseverance in your evil waies and dead works against light to prevent the other which last the Lord prevent from befalling any of you if it be his will Pre. Who would not have presumed to have entered the lists c. Post. It had been no presumption in you had you been true Ministers of Christ and the cause you stood up in Christs cause indeed for grant it to be presumption in Uzzah to meddle in the publique service of the Temple and in Uzzah to put forth his hand to uphold the Ark and consequently for so you argue not we for men to meddle so as to minister to the Gospel publiquely in your Churches that are not in holy orders yet it is none vos Apello for the Priests or ordained Ministers of Christ to stand up any where in defence of Christs truth where it s traduced but rather duty which in speciall they stand bound to in that therefore you accounting your selves Christs Ministers do grant it to be presumption in you to put forth so publiquely when you saw it tottering you do no less then give the cause you stood up in to be none of his as indeed it was not but your own and that was it only which made it presumption and very high presumption in you too in that you durst enter the lists against the Lord Iesus in in his own ordinance and that with such weak Arguments such flags as slam'd like swords but alas such as could not bear the brunt when it came to blows here how much less will they in that battel of the great day of God Almighty which is now marching space upon you 'T is true therefore as you here confess you have been presumptuous and presumption is one of the most desperate sins that can be against Christ yet for all that in his name and as an Embassador from him thoâ—…gh otherwise an unworthy and â—…ver a contemptible creature in your eyes as though himself did beseech you by me I am bold to beg of you that you would not despair but come in and be reconciled to him presuming no more to stand up against him with such weak weapons as before least he tear you in pieces fall upon you and grind you to powder but sit down and humble your selves that you have stood so long in the way of Sinners so that they could not come to Christ through your Blurres lay down your arms and yield your selves prisoners to him stoop to that golden Scepter he yet holds out unto you own him as your King Priest and Prophet list no more against him but list your selves under him for he is gracious and will yet recâ—…ive you and baptize you with his spirit if you turn at his reproof and repent and be baptized in water in his name for remission of sins Pro. 1. 23. Act. 2. 38. become little children in such a sense as you should be that you may be baptized and then be baptized in truth and in token for your memory hath lost your traditionary token sprinkling that hereafter you will not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified but manfully fight under his banner against sin the world and the devill and continue Christs faithful souldiers to your lives end How happy had it been for you if you had took quarter from Christ before this time for he would have given it and forgiven all your enmity against him in his truth but you are stiff-blades and your words have been stout against him you Clergy men are Lords you will not come neer but I beseech you become Lord beggars at the throne of grace as Brightman said truly the Bishopâ—… were for earthly honor at the thrones of Kings and Princes that you may have more of that grace and holiness to worship God with reverence according to his own will which God gives to all humble Suppliants then had you less learning and living then you have and more disgrace in this world then ever any Synods of you had reverence or Arch-Bishops grace or Popes holiness you would never find occasion to bewail your losses or repent of your change or reject the councel of God against your selves out of his mouth who is a serious Sollicitor botâ—… from God to you that you would be and to God for you that you may be in the acknowledgement of his truth no less then happy for ever Pre. Where there was so great expectation c. Post. There was great
and not a jot lesse then this is said by your self in that very objection of yours I am now answering to for of Iohn 1. 12. as many as received him to them gave he power these words plainly intimate say you that some of them i. e. the Jews whom its said he came to did not receive Christ and for my part I grant they do so signifie in that place but why or how doth it appear that they must needs signifie there that but some of the Jews received him It appeareth not by any usuall or constant sense of the words as mazy as as if they alwayes sounded forth but some and never all of such or such subjects as are spoken of but it appeareth say you by the words immediately foregoing in which verily you say right for the words foregoing do plainly shew what the sense of these words As many as is in this Scripture for forasmuch as it s said plainly above that he came to his own and his own received him not i. e. for the generality of them rejected him therefore it s undeniably evident that here the words as many as received him do intimate that some did not receceive him but if you should take these words as many as received him abstract from what 's said above viz. that his own for the most part did not receive him then they were not necessarily to be so understood neither could they simply of themselves intimate so much and as these words as many as considered abstractively from the context or speeches adjacent are not of themselves termes so necessarily exclusive of some as they are conclusive of some so considered in a right reference to the rest of the words preceding and succeeding among which they have their place they will be found sometimes conclusive of no lesse then all those persons or things there spoken of e. g. if I were speaking of the whole company of men in the great ship or Royal Soveraign as Paul does to the whole Church at Galatia and say you are all in a pretty safe condition for as many of you have been admitted into that strong ship cannot likely be sunk does not the word as many of you signifie all the men he speaks to even the whole company of them that are in the ship and not some of them onely so and no otherwise is it to be understood in these two Scriptures viz. Rom. 6. 2. Gal. 3. 27. where you would needs have these words viz. as many of us and as many of you as were as have been baptized into Christ necessarily to intimate no more but that onely some of the believing Romans and some of the Galatians were baptized and to be conclusive of some in each of these two churches and exclusive of the rest even of them as being not baptized whereas there is nothing in the world more plain then this that these words Rom. 6. as many of us Gal. 3. as many of you as have been baptized c. if considered with that due relation they bear and stand in to the words foregoing or following do intimate to us that the whole Church of the Romans that were to reckon on themselves as dead to sin and bound to live to it no longer and that certainly was no lesse then the whole were baptized and that all the Churches in Galatia or all the believers among the Galatians were baptized Yea if the scope of the Apostle Paul in both the places be observed we shall find that he makes this no other then an argument and uses it as a certain medium or motive whereby to perswade the Romans that they were all to dy to sin and now to live to it no longer and to prove the Galatians even all of them to be visibly to us at least the sons of God by faith in Christ because they were all of them baptized into Christ and thereby had visibly put him on First take notice that the businesse he would perswade the whole Church at Rome to and prove to be the duty of them all is this that they should now dy to sin have no more to do with sin and live to God now how does he prove that and go about to perswade them to it which is his businesse throwout that whole chapter Rom. 6. no otherway as I find but by imminding them of it that by their being buried with Christ in baptism this not only was signifyed to them but also became the duty of them all and that so strictly that howbeit before not so obliged yet from thenceforth they must crucify the old man and utterly abolish the body of sin and live to righteousnesse what shall we saith he for so his sense is continue in sin i. e. we that are dead to it and have been all baptized into Christ in token of it God forbid know ye not that every one that 's baptized into Christ is baptized into his death yea therfore t is that we i. e. all we still himself and the whole Church to whom he writes are buryed with Christ in baptism into death c. to shew that as Christ dyed and rose again so we also should walk in newnesse of life for if we i. e. all we have been planted together i. e. in baptism the lively resemblance of it in to the likenesse of his death we shall be also in the likenesse of his resurrection c and so he goes on moving them all now to lead a new life and to be servants to righteousnesse by the consideration of the great engagements to Godward that lay upon them all since such time as they were baptized and forasmuch as you say they had all obeyed from the heart the form of doctrine delivered unto them you therein contradict your self and confesse no lesse then we assert viz. that they were all baptized for that form of doctrine that was at first delivered to them was the form of doctrine spoken of Heb. 6. 1 2. even the six first principles of the oracles of God of the doctrine of Christ which as they are here called a form of doctrine so there are called the foundation or ABC of a Christian and of the Church as also Eph. 2. 20. the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles i. e. the first doctrine of Christ on which they built the Church of which baptism is there said to be a part yea and that very phrase of Paul Rom. 6. 17. viz. ye were the servants of sin but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered to you is no other then a further prosecution and inculcation of the former argument upon the whole Church of the Romans still and is as much as if the had said ye were once i. e. before your baptism the Servants of sin and then nothing but sin could be expected from you but now the case is otherwise you have all obeyed the form of doctrine delivered i. e. have professed your
liberty to out-stand or anticipate the eighth day at your pleasure hence the birth day is as warrantable with you as the eight yea in case of imminent danger of death in which case circumcision might not alter ti 's a learned question among some Infant-sprinklers whether the mid-wife may not sprinkle it before it s born i. e. while is hangs yet between the womb and the world but too soon is too soon in all conscience and again when it fits better with your plum-cake occasions the tenth twelfth or eight and twentyth day must be as acceptable to God as the eighth yea when it seems good to the wisdom of the Church i. e. the Clergy it may be deferred for no less than two or three hundred daies together witness the old Rubrik which saith that in old time baptism was not ministered but at two times in the year viz. at Easter and Whitsontide but that custome being grown out of use for many considerations I know not any but the Clergies good will and pleasure cannot now well be restored Thus you ride people to and fro as you list and run manie miles from your own rules as well as Christs for if Circumcision be your Rule for the time of Baptisms administration keep punctually to the particular time of the eighth day as well as to the generall time of Infancy or else you may tell me the eighth day is a circumstance not to be regarded whilst I tell you'tis such a substance that Moses was like to be slain for overslipping it yet by your favour Sirs and by the same reason that you take an inch I 'le take an ell yea if you can acceptably go a fingers bredth besides the rule of Circumcision I may go an hundred furlongs and by the same Authoritie that you delay the Dispensation beyond the eighth to the tenth twelft or the hundreth day I may delay it unless belief withall the heart do ingage to it before to the ten thousandth day or more nor can you question me why do you thus Secondly whereas for my undertaking to rectifie you in your gross misapprehension and reduce you from the misconstruction I saw you make of my speech which leaves you without excuse in this rude recording you record me as recalling what I said I protest against that as another of your sigments which you had need both to recant and repent of there was but one thing recalled all that day that I know of viz. that Iohn Baptist spake so soon as he came out of the womb that being rashly uttered by one in a Black coat was indeed as readily recalled as for my self what I said then I was so far from recalling that I 'le give you the advantage of saying the same over again hear therefore you deaf that you may understand bring me the children of three or four years old not instructed only for so the wickedst heathen may be but instructed to conversion and profession of faith not verbal onely for a Parret may be taught to prate but real as may seem at least and to desire baptism In Christs name yea more bring me the Infants of three or four daies old thus truly discipled and blame me for ever if I be not as forward to baptize them as your selves are to rantize them undiscipled This is the sense I then spake in the Lord knows my heart to whom I appeal ultimately to judge between us I have spoken it thus over again you have now my mind more fully among you mistake it not but take it dexterously and make your best on 't Report Next you relate and that most fictitiously that I having asserted circumcision to be a seal of the righteousness of faith to Abraham only and not to his posterity and being urged to shew any Scripture that did import a change in the signification and told that such a change must needs intimate that the same covenant was not made with Abrahams seed that was made with himself I was so foundered that though you ingaged to become Anabaptists if I did it yet I answered nothing that carried any sense or reason to the purpose Reply This I say is another of your your sigments for first to let pass the Sophisticall terms you used whilst you askt how or wher Circumcision ceased to be a seal of the righteousness of faith even to Abrahams posterity as if I had granted that Circumcision was once a seal of the righteousness of faith even to Abrahams posterity as well as himself and then was changed ceased left off to be so wheras I told you then that though 't was so to Abraham himself yet it never was so to them at all do also tel you now that when a man saies of a thing that it never was so it is but an illiterate kind of quere to ask him again when it ceased to be so Secondly confessing that I then affirmed and also still affirming the same viz. that Circumcision was a seal of the righteousness of faith to Abraham only and not to his posteritie I profess thirdly before the world appealing to your own consciences to witness that as it is most plain in the Scripture so I then made a most plain discoverie of it from the Scripture that there were other ends uses and significations of Circumcision to Abrahams own person though in some respects there were also the same then those for which it was dispensed to his seed and that notwithstanding many things which were promised to Abraham were promised to all his seed together with him yet there were somethings also promised to Abraham in the Covenant of Circumcision which his seed had no promise of at all as namely First That he should be the Father of all Believers This I am most certain I then instanc'd in and according to your then demand cleared by Scripture even that very Scripture which was then quoted by your selves Rom. 4. 11. and repeating the whole verse whereof you for your own ends mentioned but a part I told you t was evident even thence that Abraham had one preheminence and priviledge that none of his posteritie had ever after him which he obtained of God by his preheminence in believing viz. the Fatherhood of the faithful of which eminent faith of his which was imputed to him for righteousness as well as of that eminent prerogative the Fatherhood of the faithful which God gave him upon that great faith Circumcision was given him as a seal in such a sence as t was never given to his seed a Seal I said for it was a sign only but no seal to his posteritie to honor the greatness not to strengthen the weakness of his faith i. e. to confirm him that was so great a believer even beyond hope in that honorable title which God put upon him therfore I told you it runs thus viz. he received the sign circumcision i. e. circumcision which in its ordinary use was a sign a
faith of any believing Gentiles onely I cannot therefore but stand amazed in my mind to consider how miserably Mr. Blake mistakes himself in taking that text from which to prove a present birth holinesse in the infants of believing Gentiles which if there were no other to compare it with doth sufficiently clear it of it self alone how much more if compared with those forecited out of Act. 10. Act. 11 that there is now no such holinesse and uncleannesse as was once between Iews by nature and such as were then called sinners of the Gentiles yea if that distinction of Iews by nature and sinners of the Gentiles spoken of Gal. 2. 15. were now in being remaining unabolished it would be so farre from establishing that indeed it would utterly overthrow what Mr. Blake pleads for from it and instead of advancing the naturall seed of believing Gentiles so high in holinesse as he would have them to be by birth debase them rather into a worse condition then I dare say any unbelieving Gentiles seed is in by birth as to such a kind of uncleanness as they once were denominated by in all the world specially if it be so as he himself saies p. 10. of his birth priviledge viz. That the seed of believing Gentiles are now under one of those two heads in the text For if that distinction be not now destroyed and all men by birth come under one of those two denominations now under which of them I trow will Mr. Blake rank the infants of believing Gentiles he will not render himself so ridiculous sure as to say they are Iewes by nature and therefore unless the distinction be totally taken away he must say they are by nature sinners of the Gentiles which in the sense of the Law is as if he should say Doggs unholy common and unclean and more then we our selves dare say of any now new-born infants under heaven as in contra-distinction to other If he say they are neither sinners of the Gentiles nor Iews by nature neither then either he must say they are some third thing which if he do Mr. Blake himself will contradict Mr. Blake in that for he asserts pag. 10. of his Birth priviledge that the seed of believing parents under the Gospel must be lookt upon under one member of this division in this text and that the Apostles distinction and distribution is so full and compleat that a third cannot be assigned or else he must grant that this distinction is now wholly ceased under the Gospel which because t is the giving up of his whole cause he will be very loath to do and therefore rather than do so then which yet if he well understood what is best for him he could not do a better thing of the two he choses to the utter contradiction of himself to rank them under a third head to assert them to be some third thing namely a sort of carnal holy seed of his own and the Clergies coining a Relative holy seed of their own consecrating a faederall holy seed of their own feigning a holy seed hatcht in their own heads which are neither fish nor flesh nor good red herring nor sinners of the Gentiles nor Iews by nature nor Iews besides nature neither i. e. by personal faith as all true Christians are but quartum quoddam a certain fourth thing called Christians from their mothers womb or ever they are so much as christen'd into the name or discipled into the nature and yet for all this a seed set forth in such a transcendent manner as if all other were in comparison of them by very descent p. 13. unclean sinners unholy dogs and filthy swine 'T were enough to make a wise man wonder to see how superlatively Mr. Blake magnifies this seed of believing Gentiles above the seed of all other men in the world even above the fleshly seed of Abraham Isaac and Iacob themselves who only at least mainly had the promise of this priviledge of transmitting a Covenant holiness to their issue and this but typically and for a time neither even till that seed should come i. e. Christ and believers in him to whom all and only the Gospel promises were made He calls them Children of God and Saints by very nature Little ones of Sion in reference to infants of Infidells which with him are little ones of Babylon and yet to go round again this Babilon in his own opinion is not the Infidells but Rome a Church of Christians in name at least as well as the Protestant nations and consequently to go round again in his own opinion such see pag. 26. as transmit a covenant-holiness into their seed so far as in his own sense to make them little ones of Sion as well as the other and yet for all this too to go round again though it be execration with him to hurt the little ones of Sion i. e. in his sense the infants of such as are not infidels but Christians in name yet to go round again it is an happy thing to dash the little ones of Babylon i. e. in his sense infants of Papists who yet are Christians nomine tenus and not infidels and consequently secundum se the Lords heritage and such as have Christs name upon them and such as for a Turk to persecute were to be guilty with Saul of persecuting the Lord Jesus p. 30. against the walls p. 29. which little ones of both Syon and Babylon he is yet much mistaken in when all is done in taking either of them for fleshly babes of what parents soever Syons little ones in the true spiritual or gospel sense being the Saints themselves onely and not their fleshly babes as such even the little ones Christ Paul Peter and Iohn speak of Mat. 10. 42. Gal. 4. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 2. 1 Iohn 2. 1. 12 13. And Babylons babes being no other then the C C Clergies adult disciples or A A Antichristian C C Christian creatures And to take notice a little more yet of Mr. Blakes high expressions of the birth holinesse birth happinesse birth mercy birth dignity of meer nominal Christians fleshly seed as they lie scattered up and down in p. 28. 30. 31. 32. 33. and other pages of his book he calls them a seed in relation to God as well as their parents and so indeed they may soon be if he mean of such meer outside Christians as he doth the inheritance of God the Saints and Servants of God a holy seed having a royall transcendency above all others as onely worthy the name of a people injoying the light nigh unto God a people of hope and expectation children that have blisse as if they were actually and inalterably already stated in it and possest of it and all other infants and people as inalterably designd and devoted universally to cursing and damnation as having no Gospel at all belonging to them no not that Gospel which is to be preached to every creature a seed
with Mr. Marshall yet lends him as little reason towards it as one can likely look for from so rational a man I shall immind them first that Vossius on the place quoted by Dr. Holmes in one and the same page with Iunius found no good ground to evade the bang Tertullian gives to infant baptism in such a fashion as to say he denies onely the baptism of infidels infants how far you will heed him I know not but he thinks his think thus viz. not that infants of the faithful are here denied by Tertullian but that nothing is denied by him but onely the necessity of these infants baptism when there 's no danger of death because t is said what necessity if there be no necessity defend you your selves if you will against that consenr by silence of Vossius to us in this that t is all infants to whom Tertullian would have baptism delaied for that affronts your poor put off and I le look to Vossius his own put off as well as I can that he shall not go clear away with it for my own part then allowing Vossius his own thought I take the like liberty to think otherwise and the boldnesse to assert the contrary viz. That Tertullian denies more then a necessity of infant baptism yea he denies any conveniency or lawfullnesse of the thing also especially in the testimony cited by Mr. Blackwood which the Dr. and Mr. Marshal durst not mention and clearly enough in those cited by themselvs for if it behoves them that are baptized to pray confesse sin c. which no infant can do then it behoves us not to baptize them and if it bring sureties into danger then t is not convenient nor expedient as well as not necessary and if it be more profitable to delay it to infants then we are so by duty bound to do what 's most profitable and edifying that to do otherwise is to do that which is unlawful moreover it being granted by Vossius that Tertullian denies but so much as the necessity of baptizing any infants I le prove thence a necessity not to baptize any for if there be not more or lesse a necessity of one kind or other viz. vel praecepti vel medii there 's a necessity at least of letting it alone for Christ commands no ordinance of his without need and with such indifferency as destroyes all necessity of obeying it and what way or point of worship was not ordained by himself is by command from him of such necessity to be declined that as he who preaches it though an Angell from heaven is to be held accursed so he that doth thereafter shall have no thank for his labor for in vain do they worship him that either teach or take for doctrines the traditions of men Secondly and further to prove it least Mr. Marshal and the Dr. should not grant Vossius that Tertullians denial is of the baptism of all infants even of believers as well as infidels I argue that more plainly First from the universallity of the expression of himself in his disswasion which extends to all manner of persons without exception for it may be thought he was somewhat soiled with that superstition which was rife in after ages viz. that baptism was best dispensed towards the end of a mans life that he might have a sign of the forgivnesse of all his sinnes at once whereupon Tertullian would not have unmarried persons baptized until temptation was over so far was as he from desiring such early dispensation of baptism as that to infants I say his perswasion to delay it extends to all manner of persons and therefore to the infants of believers as well as to other little ones Secondly his indefinit and indifferent expression of these little ones concerning which he speaks for saith he specially about little ones promiscuously including all excepting none as it had bin necessary for him to do if he would be understood to speak but of some and not of others for if Mr. Marshall should preach or write his opinion against the baptism of unbelievers children onely retaining to himself his present earnestnesse for the baptism of other little ones and deliver himself downrightly and indifinitely thus onely in way of dissawsion viz. I would not by any means have little one baptized I find no ground baptizare parvulos to baptize infants c. so running on and never distinguishing so as to say in that sermon or speech I mean onely infants of infidels I should not take him for so judicious a man as I yet hold him to be saving his holding so stiffly still for infant baptism Thirdly by the reason he gives why he would not have little ones baptized viz. least their sureties should be in hazzard of non-performance of their words by reason of their own death or their God childrens untowardnesse which danger may come as well by baptism of believers infants as of others As whose Sponsors whether fathers or mothers or God-fathers and God-mothers may die before they grow up or if they live be frustrated of their ends by the wickednesse of these children or god-children also Fourthly in that he speaks of such children of whom the Lord said forbid them not to come unto me which in the Priesthoods own sense at least are believers children yea and them onely by which clause according to you he may seem to speak of them onely rather then of infidels childrens onely whom you your selves forbid to be brought to Christ at all Fiftly in that he saies let them become Christians when they know Christ belike then if your sense be true some Infants may be warrantably enough made Christians before they know Christ but some infants again may not at any hand be made Christians till they know Christ which if it were Tertulliaus meaning as t is yours he might mean honestly in it as you do but t is too mean an opinion to keep touch with the word which never knew any way but one wherein disciples and Christians were made i. e. of profest faith repentance and baptism after they knew Christ by the preaching of the Gospel Sixtly in that he saies we should be more wary then to commit Divine substance to them to whom earthly substance is not committed now we know that earthly substance can be no more wisely committed to infants of believers in their non age then to infants of infidels Seventhly by one end why he would have them be capable to beg salvation first viz. that God may seem to give it to them that ask it which end is destroyed if baptism be dispensed to believers infants in infancy for they can no more ask it then the infants of unbelievers Eightly because he saies it behoves them indifinitely meaning all them that enter into baptism to pray and confesse sin c. which conditions are as exclusive of all infants as of some those of believers being no more capable to do that then
have declared my sense of it before so I testifie again is so clear against the standing of infants as members in the family of Abraham or Church of God now under the Gospel that he is as blind as a beetle that sees any thing in it tending to the proof of it for it seems plainly that the natural branches or seed of Abraham Isaac and Iacob themselves that stood the children of the Church before without faith upon the meer account of being their naturall branches cannot stand children of the Church now unlesse they be also spiritual branches as Abraham Isaac and Iacob were yea if being the fleshly seed of a believer could ingraft persons into the Gospel Church as it did of old into the Jewish Church without faith then the Jewes to this day being asmuch believing Abrahams natural seed as ever might by that birth stand Members as truly as any Gentile believers seed but they cannot yea the same persons that were members of that Church without faith were not admitted to passe from that Church to membership in this for want of faith but when very forraigners that had no relation to nor descent from Abraham became his children in the Gosspel sense and members of the Gospel Church by personal faith the very naturall seed of Abraham was cut off through unbelief so that the standing before was by a fleshly birth of Abraham of some believing proselited Gentile but the standing now in the Church is not by a birth natural of any parent no hot of Abraham himself unlesse there be faith in the persons themselves as Mr. Baxter believes not there is in any infants for to the confutation of the Ashford Pamphlet which pleads infant-faith Mr. Baxter p. 98. Makes the very essence of faith to lie in assenting to it that Christ is King and Saviour and consenting that he be so to us and whether infants do thus both assent and consent let Mr. Ba. be judge of it if he please Because of unbelief the natural seed were broken off thence Mr. Bax. argues that infants stand still in the Church but thence I argue they cannot stand because those that stand now stand by faith ver 20. i e. personal not parental thou standest saith Paul by faith i. e thy faith not thy Fathers for then we may as well say the just shall live by his fathers faith not by fleshly descent though of Abraham Isaac and Iacob themselves as of old they did and infants cannot stand by faith unlesse they had it and therefore not at all Mr. Baxter argues it was the Jewes own Olive tree or Church they were cut off from for unbelief Therefore infants stand in it still But theâ—…ce I argue that our infants cannot stand therein for if god spared not the Naturall Branches of Abraham but broke them off their own root their own father Abraham and his family so as to be counted no longer his children their own olive tree the church so as to abide no longer in it because they believed not the terms of standing church-members being now no fleshly descent but faith then much lesse will he admit any Gentiles that are not naturall branches of Abraham to be grafted into the good olive tree without faith and therefore no infants that believe not Mr Ba. tells us that some branches only were broken off therfore not infants It is true all were not broken off and why because some believed and so abode in the family others and those the most believe not when they should others and those all infants nor believed nor yet could and therefore could not abide nor have a visible being a visible membership a visible standing in that visible church the termes of standing in which is only and alone by faith Mr. Bax. argues that Israel shall again be grafted into their own olive tree and saved even the children with the parents and therefore infant-membership in the Gospel church is not repealed I answer it is true that if they abide not still in unbelief they shall be grafted into their own olive tree the visible Church and family of Abraham that is so many as shall believe onely this infants do not but whether they believe or believe not when the Redeemer i. e. Christ Jesus shall come all Israel shall be saved and be owned and made the most glorious people upon earth and enter into a flourishing state indeed but not in this way of baptism and membership Mr. Baxter speaks of who I perceive is not a little ignorant of this mystery as yet how long blindnesse shall happen unto Israel and in what manner their calling shall be of which I also have at this time as little list as leasure to inform him Mr. Ba. argues from the samenesse of the Olive tree the Jew was broken off from and the Gentile was grafâ—…ed into that therefore as infants stood members then so they must now I answer it is true there is some kind of indentity between the Jewish and the Gospel Church but not such as concludes an indentity of membership for infants they are the same ingenere visiblis Ecclesiae they agree in the common name of Church and visible Church elected and segregated from the world but there 's little else that I know of wherin they are the same they differ in circumstantials in their accidental forms in their officers ordinances customs constitutions subjects members that being constituted of one whole nation of people or fleshly seed of Abraham taken out from all other nations this of a spiritual seed of Abraham i. e. believers scaterred here and there taken out of any nation as they happen to be called almost every nation some the ceremony of inchurching Abrahams own much more any other mans meer fleshly seed being ceased Mr. Bax. peddles on a pace and brings a company of Scripures in proof of infants Church-membership and baptism which though he stile them as indeed his whole book Plain Scripture proofs for those two yet a man that is not minded to force the Scripture into the Service of his own fancy because it does not serve it freely may look till dooms day before he see in them any plain perspicuous proof of either one of these or of the other Christ saith he Mat. 23. 37 would have gathered Ierusalem oft as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings but they would not therefore sure he would not have put them or their infants out of the Church the strength of the consequence lies here saith he he would have gathered whole Ierusalem and that into the visible Gospel Church therefore infants also Now that Christ does not speak of whole Ierusalem here as he saith he does both men and infants the circumstances of the text do fully evince to us for he speaks of the same persons he speaks to and the same persons he complains of saying ye would not the same and no other are they to whom he speaks when he saies Oh
and that shall be a little examined First if they say saith he that the Kindome of Christ is not here meant Christs church they speak against the constant phrase of Scripture which calls Christs Kingdome his Church et conversim Christ is King and saviour of the same society what is Christs Kingdom but his church To which I answer Christs Kingdome is the whole world as well as his church And Secondly that he is King and Saviour of all men in some sense as well as of that same society And Thirdly that it is not against the constant phrase of Scripture to say by Christs Kingdome here is not meant his church for â—…hough it is true by his Kingdome is sometimes exprest his church et retro by his church is meant his Kingdome in a special and restrictive sense yet not constantly there being many places where the word Kingdome of Christ is taken in a larger sense as signifying not the church but the whole world O bad 21 the Kingdome i. e. Monarchy of the whole earth shall be the Lords i. e. Christs so Dan. 7. the Kingdome i. e. Dominion Monarchy and greatness of the Kingdome under the whole heaven is given to the son of man and the Saints yea his Kingdom is over all he shall rule the Nations govern and judge the whole world in righteousnesse Oh saith Mr. Ba. the Kingdome of Christ is more large and more speciall but here it cannot be meant of his kingdom in the larger sense nor as he ruleth common societies and things for so saith he the Kingdomes of this world were ever the Lords and his Christs and it could not be said that they are now become so To which I answer First that in granting what he here does that Christs kingdome is taken sometimes in a larger sense then for the church he contradicts himself above where he saies it is the constant phrase of Scripture to call Christs Kingdome his church and what is Christs kingdome but his church Secondly whereas he saies the Kingdomes of this world were ever the Lords and his Christs in the larger sense as taken for his Government and Rule I grant de jure Christ hath been Lord of the whole earth a long time but de facto he is not King so as actually to reign over the whole earth as ere long he shall do i. e. at his appearing 2 Tim. 4. 1. to this very day but in that indeed i. e. when he comes he shall be King Monarch over all the earth and rule with a rod of iron over the Nations and judge the world in righteousnesse together with his Saints who hath been judged in unrighteousnesse by the Nations and Rulers hitherto Zach. 14. Dan. 7. Act. 17. P. 2. Rev. 2. then he shall be in point of execution as before by commission and really and actually as now intentionally King of Kings and Lord of Lords Rev. 19. but till then as yet a little while and his Kingdome comes to his hand and the Kingdomes of the world do thus become his for the work of recovery of his right is now very hot in fieri and will not be long before it be in facto esse till then he hath been an underling and other Lords besides him have had dominion over him in his and also over the whole earth which is his and over the Kingdomes of this world which de jure are his but specially that servus servorum dominus dominorum the Pope and CCClergy that are the whore that hath reigned in three divisions over the earth between whom and Christ the great justle now is in all christendome whether he or they that by permission have had it so long from Christ who onely hath the commission for it shall be King of Kings and Lord of Lords hitherto Christ hath reigned in the world as Charles the second hath reigned in England and no otherwise i. e. hath reigned in the hearts of a few of his friends and followers But I perceive the Gospel or good news of the Kingdome of Christ coming which is to be preached more had more before the end is yet a riddle to Mr. Ba. and though I hope it will be if seeing he will see yet t is not yet given him to know the mystery and manner of Christs Kindome Thirdly whereas he saies that the Kingdom taken in the larger sense i. e. for the world cannot be meant here but the church onely by this phrase the Kingdomes of the Lord and his Christ I strongly assert that of all places in Scripture the word Kingdomes of Christ cannot here be construed for the church that the church cannot be meant in that phrase but the Kingdomes in the largest sense i. e. the whole world and directly oppositly to Mr. Ba. who saies it is the church I disprove his opinion thus First If by the kingdomes of Christ be meant the Church then it must be thus read viz. the Kingdomes of this world are become Christs Church but what an absurdity must that be specially with Mr. Bax. above all men who so strenuously contends that by the word Kingdoms of this world is meant not in part only but the whole kingdom for to hold that by that phrase the Kingdomes of this world is meant all the kingdomes upon the earth taken wholly and not Synechdochically for a part of those kingdomes onely and that by the kingdom of Christ the Church onely is to make the sense thus viz. the whole world is become Christs Church therefore it cannot be so but thus and so all the circumstances of the text do evince for it is spoken of Christs raign over all the world in the latter daies after the seventh Trumpet hath sounded and not over all his Church onely and of Christs taking to himself ver 17. that great Monarchy power kingdome or greatnesse and glory of his reign which before he permitted to be in the hands of the Dragon beast and whore so that they reigned over the whole earth and the saints too in rigour and unrighteousnesse Rev. 13. Rev. 17. ult I say it must be thus viz. the Kingdomes of this world the Kingdomes under the whole heaven the Monarchy of the whole Earth is now come into Christs own hands or the Government over all is now actually on his shoulders Besides what will Mr. Bax. gain more by his sense of that Scripture towards the proof of his infant-membership then I for the membership of heathen infants then for the Church membership of the whole world if I were minded to plead for it if the Kingdomes of this world wholly taken none excluded do become the Church of Christ then all men as well as infants must be Church-members on that account Besides he speaks as de futuro what shall be under the seventh Trumpet therefore if it were to be taken as Mr. Bax. imagines that the Kingdomes of this world infants as well as men are now become Christs Church then it would
and imposition of hands in order to their obtaining the spirit of promise some not having faith in the thing whether that baptism with the spirit Peter speaks of Act. 2. 39. and Iohn baptist Mat. 3. 11. doth belong to them or no though there promised to all that are and shall be repenting and believing baptized in water even as many as the Lord shall call whereupon the fourth principle of Christs doctrine will not down with them but when they come to that lesson in Christs A B C they must skip it and take forth and because it likes them not turn ore a new leaf to the doctrine of the supper and Church fellowship before they are prefecty past their primmer to all which confused pro and con congregations and mongrill kind of ministry and people that speak half in the language of Canaan and half of Ashdod I le here say no more but this viz. si eo quo caepistis pede perrexerit is c. proceeding as you begin and thriving to the hight of your principle throw the nations the body of Christendom which was once an uniform and more lately a triforme may in time become that which I judge also it must become for some small season before the end viz. a monstrous multiform and at last an omniform beast indeed But now as to the question whether these two for I must scarce speak of these severally but very succinctly and as it were together are of right and according to the mind and word of Christ to continue to the end in proof hereof viz. that they are I shall refer the Ranter and the rest if any other besides him do deny it but to two Scriptures which prove each of these respectively and remove some few more of such exceptions as are made against the present practise of both these two and the other two parts of Christs outward worship and service I have already spoke to and so put a period to this discourse The first is 1 Cor. 11. 26. for as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup ye shew or shew ye for the word may be read imperatively as well as indicatively the Lords death till he come in which words t is so clearly supposed that the ordinance of the supper is not according to Christs will to cease till the next appearing of Christ that it were to suppose a man to be void of sense and reason to undertake to make it more evident to him by framing any formall argument from the place The Second is Heb. 10. 25. not forsaking the assembling of our selves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another while it s called to day and so much the more by how much you see the day approaching where it is also most clear and undeniable that t is the mind of Christ that the Saints should keep together in one body in assemblies and fellowships one with another and that his sheep should not live in such a stragling state and conditon such single fellowship between God and themselves onely as is now pleaded for by many that fall off from following or frequenting any societies at all and forsake such truly constituted Churches as they were once added to which argues apparently that as we say of sheep when they keep not with the flock but are found squotting up and down here and there by themselves alone and aloof from their fellows that some ill disease and deadly distemper is growing upon them but that they should keep together in flocks every sheep following the footsteps of the flock which name of flock is that by which Christ often denominates his sheep as Luke 12. 32. Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 2. to shew that he expects to find them in flocks and fellowships at his coming Ranterist Till he come is no other then till his coming into men by his spirit or in such full measures and manifestations of his spirit into mens hearts that they may be able to live up with him in spirit so as no more to need such lower helps from outward administrations such carnal ordinances such visible representations of Christ to the bodily eyes such legal rites and meer bodily exercises as baptism and fellowship together in breaking of bread are These things were used indeed and ordained as milk for babes in that meer nonage and infancy of the Church when Christ was known as a child as it were but now we are to know Christ as a man grown in us risen up in us and to have fellowship with him more immediately and intimately in spirit and not in such external and meer fleshly formes we are to live higher then on such low weak empty elements and beggarly rudiments as these which were used and imposed for a time to resemble Christ to us from without but must be left when once Christ the substance that was set forth by those shadows is come into us Christ is now in the Saints the hope of glory Col. 1. 27. So Heb. 6. 1. 2. leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ let us go on to perfection not laying again c. you see we must mind higher matters leaving these which were as a dark glasse or shadowy dispensation through which the Church once did see Christ and knew him after the flesh but now face to face 1 Cor. 13. 12. and henceforth know we him so no more 2 Cor. 5. 16. when I was a child saies Paul I spake as a child and did as a child and thought as a child but when I became a man I put away childâ—…h things 1 Cor. 13. 11. every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousnesse for he is a babe but strong meat belongeth to them that are full of growth who have their senses exercised to discern between good and evil Heb. 5. 14. that which is perfect is now come and therefore what is imperfect and in part only as ordinances are must be done away and as for gathering of congregations peoples assembling together in the Church bodies to preach pray break bread to build up one anoin the faith search the Scripture c. t was a way of God for mens edification till Christ the morning star shined to which men did well to take heed as unto a light that shined in a dark place but now the day dawnes and the day starre arises in mens hearts yea the day breaks and the shadowes flie away and Christ comes as a swift Roe and young heart upon the mountains of Bether so that now we are to exercise our selves rather unto Godlinesse for all bodily exercises as baptism breaking bread and Church order c. profit little besides t was said there should be a falling away from all those forms of worship and the way of ordinances which was in the primitive times 2 Thess. 2. 3. and a treading down of the holy City and Temple Rev. 11. 1. 2. as to the form