AN ANSVVER To Mr. Tombes his Scepticall Examination OF INFANTS-BAPTISME Wherein Baptisme is declared to ingraft us into Christ before any preparation And the Covenant of the Gospel to Abraham and the Gentiles is proved to be the same extended to the Gentiles children as well as to Abrahams Together with the Reason why Baptize children is not so plainly set down in the Gospel as Circumcise children in the Law and yet the Gospel more plain then the Law By William Hussey Minister of Chislehurst in Kent HEBREWES 8.5 6. Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle For see saith he that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry by how much also he is the Mediator of a better covenant which was established upon better promises LONDON Printed for Iohn Saywell and are to be sold at his shop at the Sign of the Starre in Little Brittain 1646. TO THE READER Courteous Reader I Having read and seen the Labours of divers learned men that have undertaken the handling of this point and seeing that this Doctrine of Anabaptists doth much spread notwithstanding all the industry that hath been used by men of singular parts and piety I did wonder that such a growing evill should spread and prevail with men that did pretend so much to prety and finding that they cryed up the authority of the Scripture as of men that did plead for baptisme of children had nothing to countenance their doctrine but humane authority and set up mens inventions contrary to the Scriptures when I saw that these Anâ—â—â—ptists did so earnestly plead for the authority of Scriptures and declare themselves so devoted to the rule of Gods Word I had compassion on the affections of these men willingly granting that that was indeed the rule we ought all to be guided by I did as unpartially sift how truly and faithfully they had dealt in the applying themselves to this sacred rule I perceived that they did rather steal away the heats of men with the shew only of pretended respect unto the Scriptures then that they did with dâ—sing aged spirits search into the sense and meaning of the Holy Ghost as men desirous to be lead by the authority of God I heard men cry up Scripture Scripture nothing would prevail with them but Scripture I resolved to concurre with them in this that the Scripture and only Scripture ought to be our ride in these supernaturall things of Gods worship and if I could have found that they had argued rightly out of Scripture I should have most willingly joyned with them but examining the sincerity of their dealing herein I saw them carried on with a spirit of pride imagining that because children had been baptized and that those men which had maintained childrens baptisme had maintained other errors therefore in the disaffection that they bear unto former times they were resolved to wrap up baptisme of children among other things and throw out it also together with those things that were indeed spurious and humane out of the worship of God they could not endure mans inventions in Gods worship and therein their zeal was good if their knowledge had been answerable but here I saw much pride vailed under the cloak of piety men carrying on their opinions with opposition and clamour of multitudes rather then with sobriety and diligent enquiry into the state of the question But whilest I saw this humour wandering in the lower region of the unlearned I did not so much wonder though I were much moved for their sakes because their souls were as pretious to me as other mens yet when I heard that it soared aloft among the learned I thought it then high time to bestir my self to search into the ground and reason why they also with others might be deceived in that point wherein I took some pains to search into the cause and have for the publike good given some small account thereof and here I will turn sceptique with Mr. Tombes and examine whether our books have stated up the question of Anabaptists high enough and have sufficiently cleered those Scriptures that are cited in the controversies For my part I conceive that the main reason that hath so much prevailed with the multitude is because the ceremony of circumcision being put down and that being required of the Iews so as that every circumstance of time qualification of the person is expresse he must be a male in the family of some believer and no such plainnesse is used in the matter of the Sacrameut of baptisme for want whereof ignorant persons have proclaimed the baptisme of Infants will-worship because it is not said in plain terms ye shall baptize children this may be an excuse to men at first sight and consideration but upon neerer enquiry let it be considered whether the different manner of the phrase between the Gospel and the Law hath not put the difference The service of the Law was in shadows and types therefore the externall rise was plain they had not any ground at all from reason no not grounded upon the Word for the use of them the authority of God did fall upon the rise it self immediatly without any other explication but that it was the confirmation and seal of the Covenant made with Abraham and his seed whereby they were made partakers of the blessing in Christ the seed of Abraham Now the Gospel doth declare the promise to Abraham more plainly and our ingrafting into Christ by baptisme more distinctly according to the nature of the sacrament and in a more rationall way entitling us to the promise requiring the Ministers of the Gospel to baptize all nations males and females without any limitation of yeers or sex whereby the proffer of grace is made to all nations the seal of this proffer is baptisme whereby we are ingrafted into Christ the promised seed the promise of the Gospel is plainly declared to be the promise made to Abraham enlarged not in it self but by vertue of more ample dispensation the promise to Abraham was not only to Abraham and his seed but to all nations of the earth though by providence before Christ kept within the nation of the lewes The ignorance or not attendance on this different manner of administration have caused men sorigorously to require such expresse direction in point of administration of the sacrament of baptisme and by this means brought themselves into such difficulty that if they should stand to their principles they could not sinde out any way to administer the sacrament of baptisme at all unto any person whatsoever for want of more plaine and particular direction And thus while they go about to insist upon the Letter and require the regulation of the Ordinance of Christ to their own fancy they make the Gospel more obscure then the Law contrary
the Iewes in reference to the promise it is plaine that the promise in reference to Baptisme is the same that it was in reference to circumcision now it is true he further teacheth the inner power and effect of the Covenant which was the turning men away from their iniquity this is the doctrine both of circumcision and baptisme that neither circumcision which is outward in the flesh is circumcision Rom. 2.28 neither is that baptisme which is outward but that is circumcision which is of the heart whose praise is not of men but of God Thus baptisme must be taught it must be taught as from God it must bee administred as by men therefore saith Mr. Tombes the promise is not made but on conditions of calling and faith which may be confirmed abundantly Rom. 4.13 14 16. let the proofe be examined St. Paul doth handle the promise made to Abraham in reference to the fruit and effect of it and so to entitle the Gentiles to the comfort and fruit of the promise forasmuch as the promise did alwayes beare that sense that never any of Abrahams posterity had any benefit from the promise unlesse they were beleevers and that benefit the Gentiles alwayes had if proselites and now in a more free way and this was ground to the Romans to seeke for justification by faith because that was alwayes the sence and meaning of the Covenant made with Abraham but this was the use that the faithfull ought to make of the Covenant Abraham was justified by faith as we are Abraham was not justified by circumcision nor we by baptisme circumcision was administred in facie Ecclesiae according to the appointment of God men had nothing to doe to examin faith the praise of that was not of men but of God it is confessed that Abraham did circumcise without any judgement of faith yet had as much need of faith for benefit by the Covenant as we his justification and salvation the same with ours by faith in Christ Gal. 3.9 They which be of faith are blessed with faithfull Abraham ye see Abraham himselfe had his blessing by faith God preached the Gospell to Abraham the seed of Abraham had the benefit of the covenant by faith whereby it plainly appears that circumcision was not given by the estimation of faith though it had its effect by faith but every male of Abraham must be circumcised and that because of the promise the conditions of faith and repentance were not new conditions put on us which Abraham and his posterity had not though they are more plainly preached to us then to Abraham God was the judge of faith in Abrahams time and is so now but the promise of the land of Canaan stood upon conditions of obedience the effect of faith notwithstanding circumcision but saith Mr. Tombes the promise was not belonging to them simply as Jews but as called the promise did belong to all men quatenus called but it belonged to Jews though not quatenus ipsum yet it doth belong to Jews to be foederati 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every Jew had an interest to the promise though not quatenus a Jew because Gentiles also had this right per accidens as called but it was accidentall to the Gentiles some were called and some were not all Iews before Christ were called but note that called is to be distinguished into outward calling and inward or effectuall calling by an outward calling All the Iews were called by an effectuall only the elect were called whether Iew or Gentile both these callings had their severall respects unto the promise and the seal of the promise The outward call had a right to the Oracles Rom. 3.1 the means of faith and accordingly many had faith by that means though some did not believe that doth not make the faith of God of none effect the promise of God signified by the word faith in that place is effectuall though some do not believe though it be without effect to them that believe not yet it is effectuall to them that believe and though he doth not believe yet the Holy Ghost maketh circumcision an inseparable accident to a Iew shewing that the advantage of the Iew and the profit of circumcision were the same and the chief priviledge is that unto them were committed the Oracles of God Now this outward call had the promise of God being their God and the God of their seed and accordingly had the seal given to them and their seed this is plain in case of the Iews they had circumcision and the Oracles and the promise but all these are ineffectuall without faith Heb. 4.1 2. Let us therefore fear lest a promise being left us of entring into his rest any one of us come short of it For unto us was the Gospel preached as well as unto them but the Word preached did not profit them not being mixed with faith in them that heard it You see many have the promise left them that may come short of it they may have the Word without profit the promise of God circumcision without effect all for want of faith all these externall have an externall dependance one upon another those that were born in a believing family had an externall promise left them had cirumcision had the word though they might come short of the effect of all for want of faith yet the externall administration must go by this outward rule the promise in this place is understood in this sense of outward promise that belongeth to you and your children you are called already and that is implied in the opposition to these words afar off such as are afar off is opposed to them that are nigh Now they that are nigh need no calling but they that are afarre off them we call so that it is plain calling is in reference to them that are afar off and then the sense of the words is as plain the promise belongeth to you and your children therefore be baptized and the promise likewise belongeth to them that are afarre off not yet called as many of them as the Lord shall call and this appears in that the Apostle speaks unto these Iews exhorts them to amend their lives and be baptized for the promise belongeth to them so that the Proposition is immediatly true they shall be baptized because the promise did belong to them calling of them that are afarre off is not at all immediately referred to baptisme but to the promise and therefore cannot by any means be a limitation of such persons unto whom the promise did belong to make fit for baptisme as if there were some persons unto whom the promise did belong that were not called and some called those that are called might be baptized but unto whom the promise doth belong and are not called they may not be baptized but this is to alter the form and sense of the Apostles words though they might have a truth in them yet they are not the words of the
grace not given to reprobates if they die in infancy which though he can and will without baptisme yet this is sufficient incouragement for a Christian parent to put his son to school to Christ if Christ can teach him this were a vain thing to think for any ignorant parent to refuse to put his son to school because he understandeth not Latine or Greek himself it is sufficient that the Master understandeth and knoweth how to teach And certainly words could not have been invented that could have required the Ministers to baptize all the world Infants and all willing or unwilling so that any would see they might be taught and submit to the precepts and discipline of Christ then to expresse it by the word Nation and Disciple and this was plain to them that understood what it was for a nation to be in covenant with God whereof there was but one pattern at that time and so it doth appear the Apostles did understand it as a plain thing in that though often they took occasion to speak of baptisme yet never did explain this point concerning childrens baptisme as thinking it plain enough in the pattern what might justly raise a scruple concerning the baptizing of women seeing they were not circumcised that is declared in plain terms both men and women were baptized Baptisme is in room of circumcision as in answering Mr. Tombes his arguments I hope to make appear For the further understanding of this word Disciple I shall endeavour to set forth the full latitude of the word the formall reason of a Disciple is in relatione ad Preceptorem the foundation of which relation is a covenant between the Master and the scholler whereby the Master is ingaged to deliver precepts and the scholler is bound to hear and undergo the penalties of his errors and contempts Now this covenant is either imposed as in case of a slave when a Lord doth lay any covenants upon his slave here the benefits of the covenant be mercies the punishments if lesse then the greatest or under any conditions avoidable are favors so Naash 1 Sam. 11.2 tendered a covenant to put out every one of the Israelites right eyes which if he had been able to have destroyed as he conceived he was had been a favour in this case one party maketh the covenant without mentioning the other but as patient therefore Gen. 15.18 God is said to make a covenant with Abraham and 17.9 God calleth the covenant his covenant God made the promise and conditions not Abraham but in Gen. 21.27 there when Abraham and Abimeleck did covenant the Text saith they both made a covenant Abraham his conditions and Abimeleck his If the word Disciple be taken in this sense then it is no more but tell all nations that I am that Prophet that was promised by Moses ' Deut. 18.18 19. and thus Peter Acts 3. and Stephen Acts 7. did make disciples repeating those words of Moses A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise to you like unto me him shall you heare and he that will not hear the voice of that Prophet shall dye the death and then these words make disciples doe signifie no more then tell all Nations that I am sent of my Father to teach them and they that will not heare shall dye the death Christ without any more adoe doth give Precepts and threaten death to all the world that refuse and so make disciples is no more but tell them they are disciples and under the Precepts of Christ but if any acceptance be required of the disciple the naturall father or father of the Country may covenant for their children as before Secondly a Disciple may be understood in reference to the end and that either actively for a man that is active or diligent to get learning he is said to be a Scholer or passively a man is said to be a Disciple or Scholer that is learned and this inchoativè vel ad certum aut designatum gradum vel perfectivè if this man that is to be baptised must be taught inchoativè it will serve turne to have learned one lesson in reference to that one lesson he is learned though he hath learned but an A the first letter of his Alphabet In the second sense men are assigned a certaine measure of learning as sufficient for one calling another measure for another calling what degree of knowledge men must attaine to before they be baptised no man yet hath declared and in so great a silence of Scripture were an arrogancie inexcusable for want whereof all that is said concerning a Disciple to bee made before baptized is without any regularity and certainty if it bee understood perfectivè then a man must never be baptised if not before he be made perfectly learned whereby it appeareth that we cannot be said to be made learned in disposition to Baptisme but as before made Schollers in relation to Christ our Master by Baptisme in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost being taught the precepts of Christ Mr. Tombes 127. p. falleth upon this as urged by some obscure person but saith it is so foolish that no man will say so but he that is out of his wit but hee in the meane time answereth it no better then by saying if this were true the Apostles needed to have done nothing else then to baptise them I thinke if ever a man were out of his wit it was here Christ saith make Disciples by baptising them and teaching them if he meane so need they only baptise them and not teach them or if they were made Schollers must they not be taught when they are schollers in what sense doth this man take scholler surely in such a sense that he need be taught no more if he must be a Disciple in such a sense before he bee baptised it were a bold adventure for any Minister to baptise any man or if hee did the party baptised must be taught no more if baptising would make Disciples the Apostles need doe no more this were a good excuse for not preaching Priests It is plaine Christ commands to baptise and teach what if a man do performe part of his duty is he discharged of the other part the command is in conjunctive tearms both must be performed But Mr. Tombes fell on that obiter and I have vindicated it for the true sense of the words which he so scornfully rejected but I further prove it What doe not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being active participles expresse the action of their verbes and is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end is not every action to an end yes certainly and to make Disciples is the end inrolling them by Baptisme and after teaching them the meanes I desire that men may not be outfaced from principles and rules But I hasten to try the strength of Mr. Tombes his arguments He confuteth this practice that Infants borne of Beleevers are universally to be
more inner sense of the Holy Ghost doe point at the priviledges of Abrahams house in the outward face of the words so that it may bee doubted whether this Covenant made with Abraham may be called simply Evangelicall and this doubt is made the more just because Mr. Tombes and some of his company doe not call the Covenant on Mount Sinai simply Evangelicall what have you distinguished between mixed and pure Gospell Covenants on purpose to make the Covenant with Abraham mixt and is it now doubtfull and therefore doubtfull because Master Tombes and others doe call the Covenant on Mount Sinai mixt What if they miscall it What ground then of the doubt away with such groundlesse doubts for wee call that Covenant and all the Covenants that God made with man since the fall purely Evangelicall without any mixture at all and let Mr. Tombes or any of his company prove the contrary in the mean time let me intreat Mr. Tombes and all other that meddle with controversies to make no more distinctions nor limitations then lawes of division and limitation will allow For though at first they may win applause for their novelty yet after ages will see their vainity if any of them be taken up in a tract yet times will come that will find them out But all this while Mr. Tombs doth not tell us what part of the covenant was sealed by circumcision or whether circumcision did respect principally the domesticall part or civill or Evangelicall part or equally all nor shew any reason why the Gospel covenant will not admit any such mixture as he supposeth but I do not love to insult over a weak argument or strike an adversary when he is dead Secondly Mr. Tombes cometh to distinguish the seed of Abraham I will not trouble my self to repeat or take notice of what Mr. Tombes saith well but of such passages as he layeth down upon which he purposeth to raise something against childrens baptisme He indeavoureth to prove that the seed of believing Gentiles were not the seed of Abraham the reason is because Mr. Tombes doth not finde them so called a man may not heare himself or his neighbour called a man in many yeers nay suppose they were never so called were they therefore no men But it is most plain that the seed of believing Gentiles were the seed of Abraham for that is the knot of the question and God himself doth decide it All that were by Gods appointment to be circumcised were in some sense or other the seed of Abraham or otherwise there had been no need at all of calling the faithfull the seed of Abraham But because they are partakers of the benefit of the promise made to the seed of Abraham And this is made plain in the doctrine of S. Paul he handleth this promise to Abraham and his seed not as the words do import but as they carry the blessing of Abraham without reference to circumcision or uncircumcision shewing that circumcision was annexed to the promise but for a time was but accidentall to the promise and might be taken away the promise remaining This the Apostle doth most artificially prove according to rules of art For Rom. 4.10 his purpose was to prove that now they were not to retain circumcision Christ being come and baptisme being set in the place and room of it and that notwithstanding the promise made to Abraham did remain now that he might prove that he sheweth that circumcision was not a proper passion to Abraham and his seed flowing from the promise as the cause and therefore may be separated from the promise circumcision belonging rather to the ceremoniall administration then the essence of the promise rather to the externall part of the worship then the efficacy and vertue of the promise and this he proveth First because the promise was of force to Abraham through faith before circumcision and therefore prior tempore before in time to circumcision which it could not have been if it had flowed from the promise as the cause For though the immediate cause be before its effect in nature yet not in time man is not rationalis before risibilis and therefore as the promise was before circumcision so it may continue after Object But the promise was made to Abrahams seed which we are not To this I answer the promise was made to one seed not many which is Christ as Calvin and Beza explain it not of the person of Christ but believers in Christ implying that though there were a distinction between Jews and Gentiles yet by faith in Christ they were all one and the argument in Gal. 3.28 doth cleerly shew this neither Jew nor Greek bond nor free all one in Christ Jesus Abraham had but one blessed seed to whom the promise was made which is Christ saith the Text vers 16. But I have proved the promise was not made to Christ in person as the seed of Abraham but the seed of Abraham is reckoned in Christ and the word Christ is taken for the mysticall body of Christ his Church of the elect which in reference to the promise are but one seed whether Jew or Gentile so are the blessings and sufferings of the Church reckoned the sufferings of Christ So that this seed of Abraham in reference to the promise was never understood of Abrahams seed according to the flesh but by faith And here note that this is not an univocall division as if the members did not coincidere or that some were the seed of Abraham according to the flesh and none of them his seed by faith and others by faith his seed that were none of them his seed in the flesh nay but this distinction is in reference to the promise as distinct from circumcision all those were not of the seed according to promise that were the seed of Abraham according to the flesh no not of Isaac but the believers these are the seed of Abraham according to promise Gal. 3.29 If ye be Christs them are ye Abrahams seed and heirs according to promise else not And this is not to distinguish Jews from Gentiles but believing Jews from infidels and to draw the whole vertue of the promise on Believers so the promise is belonging to Abraham through faith and the seed of Abraham as the word seed is understood in the promise and in the estimation of God is the Believer only so that the seed of Abraham by faith and the seed unto whom the promise of God to Abraham did belong are the same the seed of Abraham and the Believer whether Jew or Gentile whether before or after Christ are all one in the estimation of God So that the seed of Abraham that were blessed were believers only not all the seed of Abraham nay nor all the seed of Isaac but in Isaac that is in Christ that was the seed of Isaac all that were in Isaac that is in Christ of whom Isaac was a type that is believers only not all the
while what Mr. Tombes hath here assigned as differences in forme and sanction are differences in matter not in forme or sanction promises the things granted in the covenant belong to the matter of the covenant not to either forme or sanction things promised whether Evangelicall or Politicall past present or to come belong only to the matter of the covenant and do not vary the reason of their sealing which maketh the collection of Mr. Tombes seem to me very strange and so much the more because it hath the testimony among other things of a learned collection But lest I might be answered that this was affirmed but barely I shall desire that all learned men would consider what be formall differences of covenants and what maketh the differences of sanctions The formall differences of a covenant may be considered either different iâ— formis verborum that is when the same thing is granted in different formes of words as when Christ is promised under the seed of the woman and the seed of Abraham Secondly covenants are said to differ formally if one covenant be absolute the other conditionall one free the other upon valuable consideration the one upon a condition already performed the other upon a remaining condition of service or rent the one voluntary on both parties the other voluntary on the one part only and on the other imposed These or such like are formall differences in the nature of a covenant as for formality of words difference in them will not make an absolute covenant conditionall or the like And consider I pray you what formall differencee is there in the covenant with Abraham and the Evangelicall covenant in Mr. Tombes his own sense was not the covenant with Abraham and the Evangelicall promise upon the same condition in Christ through faith were not both in Christ upon the same valuable consideration in our selves equally free Do not we all stand bound to faith and obedience under both covenants as you distinguish them Did not God equally impose on us all the means of our salvation Where then is the formall difference in these covenants you talk of unlesse you mean verbis formalibus which make no difference in law or equity Your difference you talk of is but in matter which I have formerly proved to be but imaginarie but grant there had been a formall difference in the covenant what had that been to the difference of the seal that signeth only ex instituto by the command of God conditionall absolute free or imposed under covenant performed or to be performed all sealed with the same seal unlesse the institution put a difference But now let us consider what difference there is in the sanction Sanctions are the ratifications and confirmations of a covenant upon which the verity and bounds of the covenant are established are â—n oath secondly a seal thirdly a reward fourthly punishment fifthly earnest and perhaps some other that my memory and skill will not reach to but for all these they are the same to both covenants for the oath that he swore to Abraham Gen. 22.16 is performed in Christ the substance of the Evangelicall promise in your sense and Zacharias Luke 1.72 73. doth challenge that sanction as â—elonging to him and tellâ—th us plainly that if Christ had not come to deliver us from the hands of our enemies God had not performed his oath to Abraham Now if you look back to that oath ye shall see that God promised in Abraham to blesse all the nations of the earth which was not performed nay not to my one nation besides the Jews not so much as by way of prosser untill Christ came under the notion of a nation but worship was restrained to Jerusalem ordinances to the Jews therefore Christ gave his first commission unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel but after his commission was to all nations and therefore Saint Paul Rom. 2.10 entitles the Jews to honour glory and peace first and also to the Gentiles And in Hâ—â— 6.18 raiseth comfort after Christ from the oath made to Abraham and from thence I can gather however it will sound in Mr. Tombes his cares that the covenant made with Abraham did remain after Christ or else the consolation is but by way of analogie For what comfort can we have from the sanction if the covenant be void unlesse by way of analogie with which kind of argument Mr. Tombes is much troubled when he raiseth them against himself though many of his own arguments be nothing but analogies Besides our Saviour doth use the same sanction to the Gospel-covenant in Mr. Tombes his sense even the covenant which he made with the believers in the new Testament he doth confirm by an oath John 5.24 Verily he that hearth my Word and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life as likewise John 6.47 So that it is plain this sanction of an oath was the same unto Abraham and under the Gospel Secondly the sanction of the seal is to both the same for the difference of the seal doth not make the difference in the sanction for the confirmation is the same whether the seal be a Lion or a Lamb If a Prince should change his seâ—â— from his portrayture to his arms which he may do if the Law forbid not or by act of Parliament if it do yet the sanction would be the same circumcision and baptisme though different seals not different sanctions Thirdly for the rewards they are the same hell and heaven are the same for that temporall blessing and mixture of covenant I have already spoken to which I refer my Reader But grant that there had been severall sanctions in reference to reward and punishment what had that been to the difference of the reason why circumcision and baptisme should seal the Evangelicall covenant seeing they are both but one sanction namely seals but the change of the seal doth not change that sanction Thus you see how weakly this conclusion will follow from the premises and likewise how false it is in it self they are both seals and the reasen of being such is the same namely divine institution But for the second conclusion he draweth out of the same premises is that baptisme and circumcision are not to be administred after the same manner did any man ever say that baptisme and circumcision should be adminstred after the same manner that were a strange and unpossible thing to imagine His third question whether federate and to be signed are convertible termes and why many were circumcised to whom no promise in the covenant made with Abraham did belong as Ishmael the same may be said of Esau And why are these the only instances I will grant Mr. Tombes more then he desireth that half they that were circumcised were such unto whom no part of the covenant do belong was Abraham able to know that Ishmael was a reprobate when he circumcised him circumcision was administred by the appointment of God and
but being commanded to baptize all Nations and told that it should stand us in the same stead that circumcision in reference to such principles as concerne us most and did equally concerne the Iewes in the same respects and telling us now the particular priviledge of the Iewes should cease and the ordinances should freely be communicated to all Nations never speaketh one word of the particular qualification of the person of them that are to be baptized he leaveth that to be understood ex natura rei under the Gospell God dealeth with the Church as fathers with their children when they come of years tell them the ground and reason of things leaving circumstances which necessity will drive them upon unto their own discretion whereas when they are children the father directeth them to the sensitive part not acquainting them with the reason but supplieth the defect of the infant with the particular direction of the fact to be done having a care that he take not more upon him then he is able to beare but when he becommeth a man if he should still continue in such simplicity as insist upon the same rule and take no notice of any reasonable instruction nor by comparing his strength with infancie judge nothing of his owne power but still looke for the same direction as he had when he was a childe when the father chooseth rather to instruct him by reason then by sense he could not escape the just censure of a foole God our Father telleth us that baptisme doth circumcise the heart sealeth faith as circumcision did Go baptize all Nations this is enough for a man when he is told the nature of baptisme by comparison with circumcision and shewed the difference in case of women and appropriation to the Jewes to direct them by a rationall proportion with what God did direct his Church in infancie ye shall circumcise no more but ye shall baptize that shall have the same operation upon the heart and you shall not restraine my worship to Jerusalem as of old but goe to all Nations If any shall further object But what say you to Infants I say nothing but that baptisme in respect of my worship and the operation it hath upon the heart is the same with circumcision and you know what direction I gave to my Church when shee was in infancie concerning circumcision you are capable of as much purity of heart as they were then that is all I say you are now of yeares whilst you were children I taught your sense now I teach your understanding as for argument from analogie though it doth come farre short of an argument from precept yet it is equall with an argument from example for indeed all that can be drawne from an example is by analogie and among analogies those are more certain that are drawne from a precept then those that are drawne barely from an example without any shadow of a precept when the analogie is made by God and we are led to the thing signified by Gods-owne direction and told that circumcision of the heart is the same under baptisme as under circumcision of the flesh how dare we say that infancie maketh men uncapable of circumcision of the heart when God sometime did declare that that should be no obstacle to the administration of the signe seeing we are trusted with administration of the signe not with the judgement of the heart but as for that rabblement of analogies which he talketh of out of Durands Irrationale they are things of no analogie with this I further say that it is not the proportion of the signe with the thing signified that maketh a Sacrament but institution I hope no man will affirme that baptisme wanteth institution and as for the person if you will have him adultus I make no question you shall runne upon a greater necessity of will-worship then by administring of it to Infants as I hope upon further occasion to make appeare Your third argument is out of the verge of your owne method as not being drawne from any place of Scripture and therefore I omit that and come to your fourth Argument from the Acts 2.38 39. He frameth the Argument well if the Proposition wanted not forme it should be they to whom the promise belongeth are to be baptized but Infants of beleevers are they to whom the promise belongeth therefore Infants of beleevers are to be baptized Mr. Tombes before he can make any answer to the argument hee must fit his answer that is he must misquote and misapply two or three places of Scripture to the intent his Reader may conceive that the promise that was there meant was not the promise made to Abraham but the promise of sending Jesus Christ others say sending the Holy Ghost all is one if Christ had not been sent the Holy Ghost had not beene sent and the sending Christ was the promise made to Abraham as I have proved before out of Luke 1.73 But Mr. Tombes quoteth some places of Scriptures as if a man in them should finde so plaine a difference from the promise made to Abraham and there spoken of by St. Peter as must needs give full satisfaction to all that doubt of that but let us view those places Acts 3.25 Yee are the children of the Prophets and of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers saying unto Abraham And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth bee blessed that is plaine enough of the promise to Abraham Act. 13.32 33. And we declare unto you glad tydings how that the promise that was made unto the Fathers God hath fulfilled the same unto us Rom. 15.8 9. Now I say that Jesus Christ was the Minister of circumcision for the truth of God to confirme the promises made unto the Fathers read and judge and judge what Mr. Tombes hath gotten by these places to prove any difference from this promise here spoken of and the promise made to Abraham But said Mr. Tombes the promise was made to them he spoke to and their children to them that are afar off whether they be Gentiles who are said to be afarre off Eph. 2.17 or Iews in future ages as Beza is doubtfull indeed Beza doth argue that Peter did not then know the call of the Gentiles or if he had it is not likely that he would have told the Iewes of it it might be Peter did not at that time know the Nationall calling of the Gentiles that was afterward made knowne to him for then he could not properly have said of them that they were afarre off in respect of the Iewes but Peter was not ignorant that as many of the Gentiles as the Lord should call had right to the promise and this was in no age offensive to the Iewes they alwayes knew that one law was to the homeborne and the stranger that sojourneth among them Exod. 12 48 that is when and after they were called they were put into the same condition with
Text nor signifie what is there said Amendment of life hath not relation to baptisme but to that sin they stood guilty of and that they were convict that they had crucified the Lord of glory the immediate argument that he useth to perswade them to baptisme is that the promise belongeth to them it is no argument at all why they should be baptized because the promise belonged to their children nor because the promise belonged to them that are afarre off but because it belonged to them that only was ground why the Apostle should perswade to be baptized what is further added is to note the amplitude of the promise to raise up their faith to lay hold on the promise of so bountifull a God that extendeth his promises so largely not to them only but to their children nor stayeth his bounty there but reacheth it out also to them that are not called to wit such of them as he shall call you and your children sensu determinate them them that are afarre off sensu indeterminate but if all had been limited by as many as the Lord shall call S. Peter had drawn an universall conclusion out of particular premises For if that part of the verse alledged out of which the Apostle doth inferre this conclusion or inference be limited then the proposition is particular as thus If the sense of the words be the promise belongeth to as many of you as the Lord shall call then it is no more but the promise belongeth to some of you a few of you therefore be baptized every one had been a very irrationall argument nay if you restrain promise to its strict sense for promise with effect to the effectually called then it can belong to a very few of them therefore every one of you be baptized were very strange The promise therefore must be understood in such a sense as it was when applied to Abrahams seed according to the flesh as the faith of God in his promise is not of none effect though some do not believe the promise must be understood by us as left for all though all attain not to it and this not in reference to universall grace but universall dispensation of means by us men and herein God did go before us by his owne direction in the infancy of his Church leaving us to walk by the same rule when we have a more ample dispensation of the means of grace committed to us God did command all Abrahams seed to be circumcised and all circumcised to eat the Passeover though they were taught alwayes they should not possesse the land of Canaan unlesse they obeyed the voice of the Lord Deut. 28. and 29. Chapters and all along Moses and the Prophets preach the blessing to the beleever and though under the forme of works not the covenant of works it was faith that God looked as in Heb. 11. all the workes of the Patriachs are ascribed to faith and Abrahams obedience is commended by his faith and he and they justified by faith and not by workes faith grounded on the same truth of God and the same Christ God useth the same liberty of his will Rom. 9.15 in the dispensation of his grace 13. An instance out of the old Testament in Esau and Jacob will serve as well as in Peter and Judas the grace of God did no more nor lesse depend on Sacraments then now God did not account any man circumcised but a beleever no more doth he now baptized Moses and the Prophets did teach faith and obedience so do the Apostles and that notwithstanding the promise yet the unbeleever and murmurer shall not enter into the land of Canaan thus went the doctrine thus the estimation of God in all ages the dispensation of Word and Sacraments to the Iewes and them that were afarre off as many as the Lord shall call under the Law but now to all Nations all are now called God doth command all men every where to repent in the sence of these words all the world have an outward calling St. Peter doth argue with the Jewes to perswade them to Baptisme à notioribus they knew right well the bounds and extent of the promise it was no new thing to them that the Gentiles called should be accounted among these to whom the promise did belong nor that baptisme did legally wash away sinne nor that sinners must repent but that the promise should be sealed by baptisme that only was new as for that Peter did teach repentance with baptisme both together as saith Mr. Tombs that is not the question repentance and faith ought to be taught at all times as being such things as God doth only look on most seasonably at all times to all men Luke 13.3 Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish but out of this place it doth no way follow that repentance must goe before or is required as a preparation to baptisme verse 38. is an answer to this question what shall we doe we that have crucified the Lord of glory if to this generall question what shall we doe Peter had failed to instruct them to repent he had been wanting to his duty but presently to argue from the promise to move them to baptisme and baptise them presently will scarce stand with any Anabaptisticall discipline you would hardly have any great company of Catechumen's if you follow the example of the Apostle which you so much stand upon nay the keeping men of years many yeares under the discipline of Catechumen's directly contrary to the Apostles example But of preparation to baptisme we shall have further occasion to consider in other arguments Mr. Tombes telleth us that the promise doth not belong to all Infants of beleevers which is the minor universally taken he hath formerly told us of women and believers before Abraham I have formerly given satisfaction to those exceptions but the promise is to be understood three wayes as before may appear Either first in estimation of God or secondly in dispensation of the inward grace of the Sacraments and effectuall operation of the means or thirdly in the outward dispensation of the means of grace The two former are distributed according to the election of grace to the believer only but the last under the Law to Abraham and his seed and in Abrahams seed which is Christ to all the families of the earth But now in a more explicit and plain way to all the nations of the earth and that not only in pâ—tentia but by particular dispensation and providence unto many nations in actu exercito actually many nations have the Word and Sacraments and God grant more may have But it seemeth he granteth the promise doth belong to some of the Infants of believers but which they are he cannot tell and therefore will baptize none The way of God was to Abraham that because he could not distinguish he should circumcise all God commandeth baptisme to be administred to all nations it will not serve our
〈◊〉 madidus that cannot be understood of the moisture of temperature which in some sense is given to young persons till they cease to grow till a naturall drith falleth upon their bones that hindereth their further augmentation but that moisture is such as is on children new borne what Mr. Goodwin saith of it I have not seen But Mr. Tombes saith that it is doubtfull whether our Saviour saith of them is the Kingdome of heaven because the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of such not of them It is plaine our Saviour urgeth the relation they had to the Kingdome of heaven to move his disciples to suffer them to come to him now it could not have been any reason why these should be admitted into the presence of Christ because others had relation to the Kingdome of God but the truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath a further emphasis for the words are not urged to shew a reason why the children should come to Christ but why the disciples should suffer them and therefore Christ doth represent these children to his disciples not under such a character as they did appear to him by his omniscience but such as they were able to judge of and therefore he saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if he should say well ye have forbidden children to come unto me but it was out of ignorance now I tell you if any such as these are shall come hereafter forbid them not for of such is the Kingdome of heaven The precept is given to the Disciples in terminis intelligibilibus in words and in a sense that may be understood by them as if Christ should have said To many of these little ones the Kindome of heaven doth not belong but you are excused for that insomuch as the Kingdome of heaven doth belong to such you are not able to discerne the difference and therefore it cannot 〈◊〉 said to your charge that you did suffer any wilfully to enter into the Kingdome of God that the Kingdome of God did not belong unto But the Apostles might have answered nay Sir but we can discerne these unfit for the Kingdome of heaven they have not actuall faith and repentance and therefore we may not admit them into the Kingdome of heaven to this our Saviours answer is plaine the Kingdome of heaven doth belong to such as these therefore suffer them to come to me Now for the further manifestation of the sense of these words the Kingdome of God is understood either of the Kingdome of grace or the Kingdome of glory belonging to the elect only or of the Kingdome of the visible Church where men walke under the meanes of grace 2. The comming unto Christ may be understood of comming to Christ motu locali or comming to him by faith as he sitteth in his Kingdome of grace and glory or last of all comming to him as he sitteth in the Kingdome of the visible Church Christ hath a residence in the Kingdom of glory and in the Kingdom of grace Now no man can come to Christ as he sitteth in the state of grace or glory but by faith agreed on by all parties but Christ likewise sitteth in the Kingdome of his visible Church and teacheth them as the Prophet promised by Moses and there inviteth all nations to the use of the meanes and commandeth his Ministers to baptize all nations and suffer little children not those onely that Christ blessed and gave especiall testimony unto but those that were but like unto them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they must be permitted to come to Christ Now the question is whether this comming to Christ is understood only of corporall comming to Christ or any or in which of those respects this comming to Christ is here understood though I dare not deny a corporall comming to Christ is there intimated yet this is not all that is meant in the direction Suffer little children to come to me for the bare comming to Christs person could not have beene inferred from this assertion for to them belongeth the Kingdome of God I sit in the kingdome of the visible Church to dispence ordinances to all the world which I doe by my Ministers A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up to you like me saith Moses and him shall you heare according to which promise I sit alwayes in the visible Church teaching the minde of God as I thus sit ready to teach Suffer little children to come to me for to such belogeth the visible Church if thus you understand the Kingdome of God and the belonging of Infants thereto to signifie their interest to the visible Church then come to me signifieth no more in the direction then suffer them to bee received into the visible Church which is no more then suffer them to be baptized or hereafter when ye shall have commission to baptize all Nations baptize them Neither will Mr. Tombes his distinction serve turne that those whose is the Kingdome of heaven may be baptized when it appears that the kingdome of heaven belongeth to them the text is not of these but such that is of such as have no difference from these as far as you can judge in reference to the Kingdome of God these are to be permitted to come to me Now whereas Mr. Tombes saith such that is such in meeknesse that is a liberty not to be allowed in interpreting of Scripture to assigne or rather restraine the likenesse to humility whereas our Saviour applieth the likenesse only in this that they were little children it was not similitudo qualitatum but subjecti ob omnes qualitates for a subject cannot be said to be like another if any notable disparity can be found it is true if a quality be assigned wherein they doe agree that one quality is enough to make them alike though they differ in all other things but for a man barely to say such as he is fit for this or that employment he that is fit must be such with respect to his skill fidelity and all other conditions requisite for that employment Now if any thing were named wherein they were like it was in that they were little children now that which they were a like fit for was the Kingdome of God and if any children can be fit for the Kingdome of God what unfitnesse can be found in one more then another by any mortall man therefore Christ saith Suffer all children to come to me for they are all alike fit for the Kingdome of God the visible Church and the invisible too for ought you know neither doe I know that the unfitnes of the Infidells childe is in the childe but in the parent that will not bring it nor covenant for it that it shall be a disciple of Christ nor undertake to bring it up in the doctrine of the Gospell nor is that man that is an Infidell himselfe fide dignus to be beleeved in
said Be baptized and wash away thy sinne but wash thy sinne first and then be baptized Act. 15.9 St. Peter sheweth that faith doth purifie the heart Now it is true faith doth receive the Word and Sacraments and maketh one and the other effectuall but both Word and Sacrament doe propose Christ the Word to the eare Sacrament to other senses Baptisme doth represent the bloud of Christ washing and sense doth looke on the washing of water and faith on the promise annexed Now as the word is proposed to the eare so water is tendred and the body washed with water whence faith doth collect the purgation of the soul from the testimony of God water is no more the immediate object of faith then the word it is the authority of God in the word that is the object of faith as likewise the bloud of Christ in baptisme they that beleeve and they that beleeve not heare the word and it is no prophanation of the word to preach it to an Infidell neither is it any prophanation of baptisme to baptize an Infidell yet it is hard to make him heare patiently that in no measure doth beleeve unlesse miracles or in defect of them some assistance of the Civill Magistrate doe concurre so that baptisme is but an offering of the purgation by the bloud of Christ to the eye and the body as the word doth to the eare and may be tendered as the word to all Nations the power of the one and the other is by faith in Christ conveyed unto us in the sacrament of baptisme or the word baptisme cannot worke as baptisme till after administration whatsoever is said of it before is but the operation of the word the washing of water doth sacramentally strengthen our faith no duty of preparation charged on any no man ever reprehended for receiving baptisme unworthily though the Minister hath baptisme charged on him as part of his duty yet never any caution given to Ministers in generall or to Titus or Timothy to take heed that they baptize no unworthy persons nor any sinne or punishment charged on any Minister for baptizing any rashly or without due examination no precept concerning any difference but baptize and teach all Nations to the end that they may become the Disciples of Christ Now where no Law is there is no transgression where God doth not charge sinne how dare any mortall man say this or that is sinfull if any preparation be required let the Scripture bee shewed where that was taught where baptisme was deferred till any competent preparation were manifest what Scripture is directed to the catechumeni nay what one sentence of Scripture is applicable to them that is not applicable to Christians at all times as well after as before baptisme Baptisme is a religious rite which men are easily perswaded out of principles of nature to embrace as may be seen in all Idolatrous worships they have their religious rites which they are perswaded come from the appointment of their gods upon which ground they receive them Now that God did appoint baptisme is no abuse and so we must tender it to Nations by the appointment of Christ which though they receive but as an Infidell doth the word yet when faith commeth they make use of it Therefore the Apostles argue to move newnesse of life from baptisme already received So Romans 6.3.4 5. St. Paul argueth what use wee should make of our baptisme namely that wee should rise with Christ but though the most noble way of arguing be from causes and therefore in the Sacrament of the Lords supper where the worthy receiving of that doth depend on an antecedent cause there faith is said to obtaine the whole vertue of the worke Joh. 6.35 I am the bread he that commeth to me shall never hunger and he that beleeveth on me shall never thirst v. 47. He that beleeveth hath everlasting life 51. Hee that eateth of this bread shall live for ever Whereby he plainly saith That he that beleeveth eateth my flesh this bread which is my flesh sacramentally and made such to me by faith Never any such doctrine as this he that beleeveth is baptized because no doctrine is extant precedent to baptisme in reference to the Gentiles See all the Epistles to the Rom. Corinthians and the residue all are written to Churches already baptized Paul declared the whole counsell of God and yet not one word what should be the carriage of the Catechumeni or the Ministers towards them as if he should suppose none under the right of the Gospell that will not first bee baptized and received by the commandement of Christ so he that will teach any thing in St. Pauls Epistles they must teach them to the baptized to whom they are directed as for the Catechumeni nothing is written or directed either to them or concerning them As for those histories of the Acts the greater part were Jews in Covenant with God already unto whom Peter did indeed preach repentance in reference to that bloud that they were guilty of in killing the Lord of glory not as preparation to baptisme but repentance and baptisme are both exhorted unto as precedent to the gift of the Holy Ghost whereas if such preparation had been needfull to baptisme Peter should have stayed for the gift of the Holy Ghost to manifest their fitnesse or at least given them some directions by which they might manifest their fitnesse or shew their repentance and faith which he never did St. Luke doth indeed say They that gladly received the word were baptized but that they manifested it any way but by receiving baptisme gladly doth not appeare and this was ground enough for an Historian to say they gladly received the word wherein they were exhorted to be baptized when they were gladly baptized As for that story of Cornelius that was indeed a pure Gentile Though Peter had commission enough to have gone to him by the command of Christ Mat. 28.19 and to have baptized him and taught him the commands of Christ yet it is plaine Peter did not understand the Commission therefore God for Peters owne satisfaction and the satisfaction of them of the circumcision was pleased in all that story to goe before Peter in a miraculous way Peter was so farre from baptizing of Cornelius that he was hardly perswaded to goe to him or preach to him but as God did go before him by miracles which when they of the circumcision saw the text saith they were astonished And of this very story St. Peter Act. 15. and other places maketh use of to satisfie the Jewes touching the calling of the Gentiles but this was the mercy of God during the infancie of the Church to use such extraordinary meanes for the drawing off the Jewes from that ceremoniall distinction that God himselfe had put between Jewes and Gentiles but in the orderly administration God sent the Holy Ghost though by extraordinary manifestations yet in a seasonable time when first he had
is estimated by God limited and extended according to the good pleasure of God Isai 48.17 I am the Lord thy God that teacheth thee to profit Paul plants Apollo watereth it is God that giveth the successe and if it should stand in that sense as a preparation to baptisme in the commission it must contain a manifest falshood or prove undeniably universall grace if they shall teach with profit all nations and baptize them or at least an universall nationall acceptation of the Gospell teaching with profit can admit of no milder sense then that and if every person must be taught with profit before he be baptized then none ought to be baptized but the elect of God and it were a sin for any Minister to baptize any other but such as received profit by the word the word worketh to the hurt of the reprobate whatsoever shew of profit it may seem to have 3. Reason That doctrine that taketh away the distinction of the two Sacraments that is a false doctrine but Anabaptisme doth take away the distinction of the two Sacraments ergo the doctrine of the Anabaptists is a false doctrine That doctrine that requireth preparation to both Sacraments taketh away the difference of the Sacraments but Anabaptists require preparation to both Sacraments therefore Anabaptists take away the difference of the Sacraments The difference doth consist in this that the Sacrament of baptisme is preparative to the Lords Supper sacramentally giving that to us which we stand in need of to make us fit for the Lords Supper I say sacramentally not that God cannot or doth not take his owne time of calling sometime before we are partaker of either Sacrament sometimes after we have both Sacraments yea and after we have sinfully prophaned the Lords Supper but Sacraments have their proper use and signification and are as all other duties lyable to abuse Wee must behave our selves as men under the meanes we have our duties charged upon us of God whereof some are officiall some personall belonging to every mans person about the performance of all which we may sinne either by omission or misuse but all the good that we receive by word or sacraments is of God what we doe by way of office that lyeth charged on us by the rule that we receive from God which is to baptize all Nations and teach them the successe is of God and the account of faith must be given to God we can take some account of some workes to wit those that are externall but of faith and of such workes as are imminent the thoughts of the heart we can say nothing to them Now the communion that is between Christ and us is set downe in Scripture by Christs being or dwelling in us and we in him we must first be in Christ before he can be in us we were in Christ by election before the foundation of the world and therefore may bee received into Christ before we can have faith nay we are said to be baptized into Christ Rom. 6.3 so many of you are baptized into Christ Jesus and the grace of baptisme is said to be wrought by the Spirit by the Spirit ye are baptized into one body 1 Cor. 12.13 and Gal. 3.27 As many as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ Christ is never said to be conveyed into us by baptisme but by faith Ephes 3.17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith what is instrumentally ours by faith is sacramentally ours by the Lords supper he therefore that eateh Christ in the Lords supper Christ is in him Iohn 6.56 Hee that eateth my flesh dwelleth in me and I in him but Christ is never laid to be in us by baptisme but we are baptised into Christ he is not baptized into us but he is communicated into us in the Lords supper for which faith is required as a preparation and the habitation of Christ in us is ascribed to faith as a meanes as before that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith but our birth in Christ or regeneraion is not at all ascribed to faith but to the Spirit and water John 3.5 Except a man be born by water and the Spirit and to the Word 1 Cor. 4.15 I have begotten you through the Word but never are we said either to be born or begotten by faith the acts of faith are growth life and fruits of sanctification Joh. 6.35 Those that believe and come to Christ are said to eat and drink Christ For he that cometh unto Christ is promised he shall never hunger and he that believeth in him shall never thirst And this vertue is ascribed to the body and blood of Christ from whence Divines do justly gather that he that believeth doth eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ but no intimation in Scripture from whence any man can collect that he that believeth is baptized unlesse it be à posteriori For he that doth believe must first be baptized by the Spirit before he can believe and thus are the graces offered in the sacraments kept distinct which otherwise would be the same that the grace of baptisme is initiall that of the Lords supper is perfective which may further be manisted thus our calling hath two parts the proffer of grace and the acceptance of grace proffered The first is by the Word the Spirit and Baptisme the other is by the Word Spirit Faith and the Lords supper I have here added faith because the Scripture doth so making faith an instrument by which we receive Christ but Christ must be proffered to us by his Spirit and Word before we can receive him which is expressed in the word calling as distinct from justification and goeth before justification in which we have the first act of faith Rom. 8.30 Whom he predestinateth them he also called whom he called them he also justified we are not called by faith but we are justified by faith Rom. 2.28 and 5.1 Baptisme is the seal and sacrament of Gods work in us which had need to be most cleerly manifested and confirmed unto us as having most of God and least of us that we might submit to it wherunto we are most averse therefore what hath most of us in it that pleaseth us best as works better then faith and faith as we look on it in our selves as a qualification is more delightfull to us then as it is in its own nature working humiliation teaching us to deny our selves and rest on God men do use to magnifie faith but too many under a false apprehension even of secrecie and liberty before 〈◊〉 faith is not a boasting quality nor to be pleaded before men but God and this 〈◊〉 cap. 2. doth handle at large shewing that men are very inclinable to 〈◊〉 â—â—oâ—st of faith before men and rely on works before God and herein the deceitfulnesse of our hearts is very great when we conceive we deal with an 〈◊〉 power then we finde the things of faith apprehended
most weakly of any thing we can please our selves better in the opinion of our works then of faith but when we come to deal with man we are sure we treat of colours before blind men there we can boldly talk we may speak as freely as travellers we cannot be disproved whereby it cometh to passe often times that heart that is least upright is most bold faith is indeed in time of need very heroick in her exploits in that she acteth by the power of God but ascribeth little of her best actions to her self she is alwayes conversant with God and therefore cannot but be conscious of much weaknesse and infirmity faith is so always loaden with difficulties that she hath very little to say of her self there must be great preparation on Gods part before there can be any sense or feeling in man of the things of faith there must be the mighty operation of the Word and Spirit and God is pleased to adde baptism too for faith to work upon these things are of mighty operation and so they had need considering the sloth of heart that is in us to believe it is well if after the Word and sacrament of baptisme faith do come God layeth it as a ground and foundation for faith to work upon and accordingly all the arguments of Scripture are to raise us to walk worthy of amendment of life and to rise with Christ Rom. 6. as if it should be said God hath offered you grace in baptisme therefore accept of it ye are born anew in baptisme let it appear in your conversation Argum. 4. That which maketh the admission into the Church meerly arbitrary that is a false doctrine but the doctrine of Anabaptists maketh admission into the Church meerly arbitrary Ergo the major is plain for that nothing is more directly contrary to the service of God then will-worship but denying any that are tendred according to the mind of Christ in the Word and requiring such disposition in the party to be baptized as the Minister pleaseth without any rule from Gods Word is to make the publike service of God or at least a great part of it wholly arbytrary and this doth appear to flow from their doctrine not yet any man durst affirm what was the measure of faith to be required how much he must believe that must be baptized by means whereof the whole matter dependeth on the will of the Baptizer a thing most contrary to the nature of Religion it cannot be imagined that the Holy Ghost would have been so silent in giving rules for the Ministers to walk by in the triall of the faith of the person to be baptized if any such charge had lain upon his office He must baptize believers only saith Mr. Tombes and the Anabaptists but no Scripture directeth what or how much he must believe must it be as much as the Minister shall think fit then some Ministers will baptize with very small triall others will be very hardly satisfied some will baptize as soon as the childe can be taught to say he believeth in Christ others not till ten or twelve others twenty yeers of age wherein no man can either satisfie his own conscience or any reasonable man for that he walketh without rules neither doth this difficulty from this doctrine come from accidental misconstructions or phansies but inevitable necessity from the doctrine it self that the Minister must baptize none but believers yet cannot tell how much or what he must believe before he be fit for baptisme unlesse he walk by rules of mans making without any intimation from Scripture 5. That doctrine that giveth man that power which is divine that doctrine is blasphemous and false but the doctrine of the Anabaptists giveth man that power which is divine therefore the doctrine of Anabaptists is blasphemous and false That doctrine that giveth man power to judge of faith in another that doctrine giveth man that power that is divine but the Anabaptist giveth men power to judge of faith in another therefore the Anabaptist that power that is divine Faith is in the heart with the heart man beleeveth to righteousnesse and with the mouth he confesseth to salvation Rom. 10.10 He therefore that judgeth of faith must judge the heart which is proper to God I the Lord try the heart Jer. 17.10 Neither will it serve his turne to say that he judgeth by rules of charity if this charge lay upon his office to judge charitably it is one thing another to judge ex officio for the judgement of charity can never pronounce the person so judged to be such as he is judged by charity to be judgements of charity are not alwaies true if it be possible we have warrant enough to judge it so by charity if children may possibly be such as the Kingdome of heaven doe belong too wee may in charity judge them such but if we are tyed by our office to baptize none but beleevers it will not serve turne to say we judge them such by charity to prove that we must baptize none but such as are beleevers seeing we may by charity judge many beleevers which yet are not beleevers againe judgement of faith is denied to belong to the Apostles themselves not that we have dominion of your faith 2 Cor. 1.24 If God had appointed Ministers to have judged of mens faith before they had baptized them he would have given them some rules by which they should have been able to walke which he hath not done he hath annexed baptisme to the Ministers calling to let men know that the grace of baptisme commeth immediatly from Christ therefore he sent the seale of it by that calling that came immediately from him but hath promised those officers of his no speciall qualifications whereby they shall have abilities to discern the faith of men more then other men have the judgement of charity is not a Ministeriall qualification that belongeth to every man and is no Ministeriall qualification 6. That doctrine that denieth the interpretation of the promise made to Abraham which S. Paul maketh that is a false doctrine but the doctrine of Anabaptists denieth the interpretation of the promise made to Abraham wch St. Paul maketh therfore the doctrine of the Anabaptists is false Those that deny the blessing of Abraham and in him of all the Nations of the earth to be the Gospel preached to Abraham in reference to the Gentiles after their call deny the interpretation that S. Paul maketh of the promise made to Abraham but the Anabaptists deny the blessing of Abraham and in him of all the Nations of the earth to be the Gospell preached to Abraham in reference to the Gentiles after their call therefore the Anabaptists deny the interpretation made to Abraham which S. Paul maketh the words of S. Paul are plain Gal. 3.8 the Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith preached before the Gospel unto Abraham saying In thee shall all Nations be
blessed where ye see plainly S. Paul affirmeth the promise to Abraham to be the Gospel and the Nations to be converted Gentiles and that in the promise made to Abraham there was a Prophesie of the conversion of the Gentiles and the Gentiles under the Gospell had Abrahams blessing that is a blessing to them and their seed as Abraham had to him and his seed so that it is apparent that those which deny the blessing to the seed of the Gentiles the blessing of the promise deny Abrahams blessing to the Gentiles which is directly to deny the interpretation of St. Paul concerning Abrahams blessing and to deny that the blessing to Abraham was the Gospell or that the promise was a Prophesie of the conversion of the Gentiles under the Gospell all which things are plainly affirmed by St. Paul 7. That doctrine that denieth the benefit or grace of circumcision to be offered in baptisme that doctrine is false but the doctrine of Anabaptists is a doctrine that denieth the benefit and grace of circumcision to be offered in baptisme therefore the doctrine of the Anabaptists is false That doctrine which denieth what St. Paul affirmeth is a false doctrine but that doctrine that denieth the benefit or grace of circumcision to be offered in baptisme that doctrine denieth what St. Paul affirmeth therefore that doctrine denieth the benefit and grace of circumcision to be offered in baptisme is a false doctrine The place wherein St. Paul doth affirme that we have the benefit of circumcision by baptisme is Colloss 2.11 12. Let the argument be weighed I have spoken to it in my answer to Mr. Tombes In the which verse St. Paul affirmeth they were circumcised that was not literally true therefore he affirmeth in a figurative or metonymicall sense signi pro signato the thing signified by circumcision and he further sheweth how the benefit they were partakers of had resemblance with circumcision circumcision did cut off the body by a synecdoche part for the whole but they put off the whole body but it was the body of sin Now this is done by the circumcision of Christ it was this circumcision of Christ that made the circumcision of our fathers of any vertue this had been as true of the Patriarches that they were circumcised in putting off the body of the sinnes of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ whereof their legall circumcision was but a type and Christs circumcision did put an end to that circumcision yet the Collossians were circumcised in Christ how could that be the text plainly saith they put off the body of the sinnes of the flesh and that was their circumcision in the circumcision of Christ it was the benefit of circumcision to the Jewes which they had though they wanted the ceremony Now all this benefit commeth unto you by being in Christ get but into Christ and all is done to put off the body is to dye Christ dyed if ye be in him all that he did you did he was circumcised ye are circumcised he died ye die if in him thus were your fathers in Christ by circumcision so are ye in Christ by baptisme buried with him in baptisme nothing can be plainer then the grace and benefit of circumcision was offered to the Colossians in baptisme That doctrine that refuseth to hear and obey the rationall and manly phrase of the doctrine of the Gospell and reduce all to the sensitive and childish delivery of the Law that is an unfaithfull and disobedient doctrine but the doctrine of Anabaptists refuseth to heare and obey the rationall and manly phrase of the doctrine of the Gospell and reduce all to the sensitive and childish delivery of the Law therefore the doctrine of the Anabaptists is an unfaithfull and disobedient doctrine God was pleased to deliver the service which consisted in ceremonies and outward performances in such manner that every externall was directed to them the length heighth of their Temple and of every thing that was contained therein to shew that God would be the author of all things in his worship The colour length of the curtains of their altars and every carved thing were directed immediatly by God the place where the Temple should stand If we should rigorously look for particular rules in this kinde as those Anabaptists do in point of baptisme look for the like direction for administration of baptisme as of circumcision and for want thereof to neglect what the Holy Ghost hath said concerning the nature of baptisme and giving direction to have it administred to all nations thereby leaving the precept or duty of baptisme without any lawfull use for want of such sensitive and particular direction as they had under the Law we might be condemned for will-worship for building Churches without a pattern and direction from God how high or how long they should be together with many things of the like nature refuse to pray publikely or meet to serve God because he had appointed no place the truth is what they say against baptizing of Infants doth conclude against any baptizing at all For if the particular assignation of the persons to be baptized must be dinstiguished by any qualification for want of any such direction we shall be enforced to leave all unbaptized Baptize all nations saith Christ and Acts 2.41 three thousand souls were added Act. 8.12 men and women these may comprehend all male and female without necessary inference that they were grown men and women Now if we leave this sensitive and childish way and walk by the reasonable sense of Scripture how cleerly doth the Scripture give satisfaction in this point I pray you observe First Christ doth command to baptize all nations Secondly he telleth that the promise belonging to any doth entitle him to baptisme Acts 2.39 Thirdly that the promise is the same to Abraham and the Gospel preached to the Gentiles Gal. 3.8 that the promise was to Abraham and his seed that baptisme doth circumcise us by ingrafting us into Christ Col. 2.11 12. By what rational excuses can we excuse our selves for disobediences to the commands of Christ commanding us to baptize all nations if we refuse any that by a nationall covenant are brought unto us 8. That doctrine which under pretence of walking by Scripture support all their doctrine by falacies and false arguments that doctrine is erroneous and false but the doctrine of Anabaptists is such I do challenge all the Anabaptists and in particular Mr. Tombes to produce any argument against Infants baptisme from Scripture or sound reason that shall reasonably conclude from the words without any addition or substraction or may agree with the sense and argument of the words produced then I shall account Mr. Tombes his sceptiques more tolerable in the mean time I wish he might receive satisfaction and spend his time in confirmation of his weaker brethern FINIS