T. that if it were so manifest as you speak you should find nothing in Eusebius for Infant-baptisme nor in Ignatius nor in Clemen Alexandrinus nor in Athanasius nor in Epiphanius Animadvers We answer 1. Mr. T. brings but one place out of one Origen to prove as he pretends that Infant-baptisme is but a tradition We bring foure for the contrary Justin Martyr Irenaeus Origen and Nazianzen and yet these are not sufficient with him unlesse we hear Ignatius Clemens Alexandrinus c. say so too 2 A non dicto and non factum not valet consequentia Many things have been done in the Church which those Authors may not mention 3 They may speak of Infant-baptisme in some of their works which long since were lost 4 Mr. T. saith that YOV should find nothing in Eusebius Ignatius c. for Infant-baptisme And we say it is wonder Mr. T. did find nothing in them to the contrary in his 7 or 8 moneths time to write his EXAMEN which we not having much above 8 weeks for our Answer and so have not time to ransack every book But fiftly CLEM. ALEXAN li. 3. Strâ—m p. 461. He flourished about the yeer of Christ 193. Buchol Helvic this we cast our eye upon in Clem. Alexand which makes me think somewhat might be found in him towards Infant-baptism if we had time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Neither doth Gods divine providence now likewise command 〈◊〉 of old that he that hath risen from the conjugall bed should be washed For the Lord doth not necessarily take off from procreation of children those that are believers whom he hath by one Baptisme washed in all respects according to his wont who by one baptisme comprehends all the Baptismes of Moses Therefore the Law of God by carnall generation foretelling our regeneration did for the seminall facultie of generation hold forth baptisme Vide Graecum textum not loathing humane generation Thus Clem. Alex. with much more which for haste we cannot stand to translate Give us leave to adde a note or two 1. Let me observe with Hervet Aurelianus that this place relates to Levit. 15 16 17 18. If any mans seed of copulation shall go out from him then he shall wash all his flesh in water and be unclean untill the evening And every garment and every skin whereon is the seed of copulation shall be washed with water and be unclean untill the Even The woman also with whom the man shall lye with seed of copulation they shall both bathe themselves in water and be unclean untill the even This is the LAW and these are the BAPTISMES of MOSES of which Clem. Alexandrinus speaks here HESYCHIVS 2. Take the note of ancient and learned Hesychius * He flourished about 402d yeer after Christ Helvic on this place which is this The Lord himself saith he sheweth that mankinde must have the necessary regeneration of baptisme saying Vnlesse a man be born again of water and the holy Spirit he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven Joh. 3. The untowardnasse of which filth in us was transfused from Adam Whence David saith he was born in iniquity and conceived in sin Psal 51. not accusing his mother but intimating his sinfulnesse which ran down from his progenitors And now the Law-maker commanded him out of whom proceedeth the seed of copulation that is â—e that hath effused his seed for procreation of children yea also the woman that hath received it to wash the body because she hath received it by which is described this whole temple of ours that is the whole man consisting of soul and body In that Adam was made filthy by disobedience he made his seed to be filthy and so necessarily the body to be filthy which is of the seed in which he is unclean untill the Even that is the end of the time wherein Christ coming shews the water whereby our generation should be cleansed And that till then we remained unclean is proved from thence that they also that had not yet sinned actually that is were in their tender age have necessarily the seal of baptisme lest by death preventing they dye unclean c. Thus Hesychius with much more Thirdly If it pleaseth Mr. T. he may read Gentinus Hervetâ—â— Aurelianus his note on the place of Clem. Alexandrinus who is carefull to set forth the sence of Clemens though we heed not all his owne excursions Therefore Clem. Alexandrinus saith Gent. Hervet Anrel intimateth that many were the Baptismes of Moses anciently which were figures of our regeneration by Baptisme by which originall sin is washed which one onely Baptisme indeed is necessary for by it it is that the seed is no more uncleane though after to be further cleansed So Gent. Herv with much more Thus you have a touch out of one of Mr. T. his five Gr. Authors which he saith have nothing of Infant-Baptisme Wee will give you another touch out of another of his silent Authors as Mr. T. intimates and so dismisse the rest as not having all the Authors nor time to go looke after them EPIPHANIVS contra Haeres 30. p. 52. Epiphanius in his second Booke 2. Tom. contr Haeres speaking before of the Circumcision of Christ that he was circumcised to dissolve or abrogate that Circumcision to bring in a greater And that the Circumcision injoyned Abraham was not perfect but a signe of grace given and for the instruction of them in future times and thence wisheth Ebion not to imitate Christ in Circumcision of himself or others at last he speaks in these very words For the Lord saith Epiphanius hath removed the time of this Circumcision For he came and fulfilled it having given the perfect Circumcision of his mysteries and that not in one member onely but in the whole body sealed and circumcised from sinnes and saving not one onely part of the people that is men only but also all the people of Christians indeed signing or sealing men and women and liberally for the inheritance of the Kingdome of Heaven and not in exhibiting the seale defectively to one ranck or state virorum of men in the time of their imbecility but to all the people c. Thus far Epiphanius writes there of Infant-Baptisme and I am confident more might bee found in other places touching it had we time to seek though Epiphanius sayes nothing of it as Mr. T. weakly objects in lib. 2. Haeres 46. vel 47. in his disputation for Infants inheriting Heaven against the Hieracites We are not to teach other learned men what to speake nor when to speak nor to say they speake not at all of such a point if they do not speak where and when we expect 2. Mr. T. objects against the Greek Fathers alleadged by us EXAMEN Sect. 6. and in them against the custome of the Greek Churches touching Infant-Baptisme thus But besides the continuance of the questions to baptized persons and answered
thus Exercit. Sect. 3. If baptisme be not granted to the infants of beleevers then the grace of God will be more restrained in the new Testament then in the old But this is not to be affirmed therefore baptisme is to be granted to infants of beleevers These are all the forms of argument from Gen. Animadvers 17.7 c. as Mr. T. reports but he reports not all the forms nor the all of those forms he reports For with great injurie to these three arguments some materiall thing is left out of every one of them by Mr. T. as we shall plainly declare when we come to animadvert upon his answers to them Mean while let us tell the Reader that there are other forms of argument drawn from Gen. 17.7 c. and long since in print See Mr. Ainsworths Answer to the Anabaptists and those to our apprehension very considerable and to be put in the first place in this dispute according to order of method if not of nature too Therefore let the Reader that ingenuously reads to know and not to quarrell that he may not know patiently give us leave to set them down and briefly urge the vigour of them and then we will lay aside all to give him those short notes we have to Mr. T. his Exercitation Our first form of argument from Gen. 17.7 c. is this urged by Mr. Ainsw in his book against the Anabaptists Where there is a command for a thing never remanded or contramanded there the thing is still in force But there is a command for signeing the Infants of a believer with the signe of the Covenant of grace Gen. 17.7.9 never yet remanded or contramanded therefore the signing Believers children with the signe of the Covenant of grace namely Baptisme now is still in force So he For the confirmation of the Minor If any where there is any Institution of baptizing only men of ripe yeares then in Matth. 28. But not there as we shall see more after meane while the Argument hence against baptizing of Believers Infants lyes not 1 In the order of words for the order is inverted and contrary Mar. 1.4 2 Not in the affirmativenesse one affirmative without a determinating word expressed doth not take off another affirmative 3 The universal terme cannot note the subject of Baptisme viz. All Nations For then all are to be baptised And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 would answer in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 observe that Nations here mentioned well answer to Nations Gen. 17. explained Rom. 4. Gal. 3. That as Infants of believing Abraham were to be circumcised so the Infants of believing Gentiles to be baptised 4 Not the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if that must needs signifie make Disciples For 1 Its unlikely that so great a controversie as the Anabap make of the Subject of Baptisme should have no clearer an Institution then a Gr. criticisme of taking one sence of a word that is taken divers wayes For Significat docere in Mat. 28. Legh Crit. S. Novar in Mat. 28.20 Aliquando est verbum transit pro docere ut Mat. 28. Whitak Descript The great Arias renders it onely Docete teach So the renowned Vatablus so the Syr◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Arab. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So many others which for brevity we omit 2 As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in v. 19. so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 20. therfore most likely in v. 19. it signifies only a generall teaching And so the great Critick learned men in Gr. tongue That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to teach them that are strangers to Doctrine that they may become Disciples 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to teach them that are Disciples So that here in v. 19. is not meant an exact compleat platforme of Christs commission to the Apostles For here is no mention of the holy Supper but only the naming of the two more usuall things viz. teaching and baptizing and not the matter of subject of the administration of Baptisme 3 The holy Ghost renders this text Mar. 16.15 by plaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preach the Gospel 4 If the Greek word should be taken in that peculiar sense then the sentence would run thus therefore make all Nations disciples which for these 1600 yeers was never done in any nation 5 Nor can the gender in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answering to the neuter gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie that the children of beleevers ought not to be baptized For if we stick so precisely to the gender then women are not to be baptized If we keep to the gender as to relate to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then the children of beleevers are called disciples Act. 15. 10. They upon whose necks the false teachers would put the yoke of circumcision are called disciples But the yoke of circumcision was put upon children as well as men and according to their institution upon children of eight dayes old Gen. 17.12 and so to continue unlesse in some great impediment as in the wildernesse And therefore out of doubt those false teachers that urged here that the grown disciples should be circumcised urged that their children should be circumcised also Therefore children are called disciples For which two Reasons 1 The children are reckned with the parents in all ordinances communicable to both by warrant of Scripture As till the Jews were broken off Rom. 11. Till the vineyard was let out Luke 20. Circumcision went along with the parents to children when parents lost it the children lost it When Ishmael was cast out of the Church his posteritie was not circumcised that we read of By the same proportion baptisme goes along from parents to children 2 There is a double preaching and a double Sacrament A preaching to the heart and to the eare An innitiating and a corroborating Sacrament God can preach to the heart when not to the eare He a Spirit can preach to a spirit without sentences and so to children This preaching is most sutable to infants because thus man is altogether passive so the innitiating Sacrament is fit for infants because in that they can be but passive The soul of an infant is out of the body all one with an Angel And therfore one defines a soul An Angel in a body If the body cannot act yet God can act without the body As we see great revelations visions c. were given when the body was asleep and unusefull See the Patriarches c. And Paul saw a most glorious vision when he had no use of his body 2 Cor. 12. To make the inward worke of grace to depend on the body is like the Pelagians and Arminians yea worse to make a worke depend not only on reason but on sence 2 Forme of Argum. from Gen. 17. is this to whom the Covenant in force runs in the same tenor in the
to be baptized who is not washed in the Baptisme wherewith sinnes are washed away Thus was the Tenet of De Bruis as it is in Mr T. his Cluniacensis Whence observe 1. That De Bruis did hold That no Infants while Infants can have any faith Contrary to that That Iohn the Baptist was filled with the holy Ghost from his mothers womb which filling or in being in a sanctifying manner is by the fruits of the Spirit Love joy faith Gal. 5. As it is said Rom. 5. The love of God that is as part of the meaning the apprehension of the love of God is shed into our hearts BY HIS SPIRIT The little children Mar. 10. had grace because Christ confirmes their grace And all graces go together 2. De Bruis did hold That all whether beleevers Infants or beleevers of ripe yeares dying unbaptized are damned And so condemnes many of the Martyrs to hell 3. By this opinion of De Bruis he falsifies the Text he quotes For though it be sayd in the affirmative joyntly He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved yet it is not said joyntly in the negative that unlesse One de both beleeve and also be Baptized he shall be damned but onely singlely he that beleeveth not shall be damned 4. De Bruis holds that God the principall agent cannot work or doth not work he wants power or will to worke the work of mans Salvation without the Instrument Baptisme So that God is stript of his Prerogative and tyed to meanes 5. That if a man be baptized at ripe years and that by De Bruis or his companion Heinricus they conceiving him to be a beleever yet if it prove after he was not a beleever at that baptisme he is not to be said to have been baptized So that if after indeed that he beleeves he be baptized that is no re-baptizing because his former baptism was nothing By this the Intelligent Reader may see 1. That ill might Mr T. alleadge De Bruis for the Antipaedobaptisme he contends for 2. That well might De Bruis refuse not onely the Fathers but all Orthodox Writers for this is such an Opinion as he knew he must stand alone without company And therefore his best course was to professe it as a singularity 2. M. T. tells us that Cluniacensis saith of De Bruis that he did reject the authority of the Latin Doctors being himselfe a Latine ignorant of the Greek To this I Answer That I have run over with mine eye De Bruis his proposition of Antipaedobaptisme and Cluniacensis his answer and proof but finde not that sentence nor sence that De Bruis was a Latin ignorant of the Greek This I finde that Cluniacensis confesseth of himselfe he was a Latine and not skilled in Greek as we shall shew by and by See ☞ in the Margin a little after in our translation of Cluniacensis and at our third particular in our answer to Mr T. his fourth particular viz. his Observation 3. Mr T. saith that Cluniacensis saying of De Bruis that he did run to the Scriptures Cluniacensis alleadgeth against De Bruis the examples in the New Testament of Christs curing of persons at the request of others to prove Infant baptisme by To this we Answer that the naked truth is this 1. That one of Cluniacensis his businesses was to prove That children were counted neerer to Salvation by the faith of the Parents and so a fortiori urgeth as from the non parentall-kin to the beleeving Parent from the curing of the body to the curing of the soul that Christ cured the bodies of some upon the faith of them that were no Parents that brought them 2. Another of Cluniacensis his businesses was to prove That infants might be saved while Infants and accordingly alleadgeth 1. That as in the first Adam children whiles children dyed spiritually so children whiles childrend might be made alive spiritually in the second Adam Christ 3. That there was not an absolute necessity of a joynt concurrence of baptisme with faith in all that should be saved or else no Salvation For if Cluniacensis had not spoken to this he had for saken the termes and state of the question And therefore urgeth some of the Martyrs and that saying of Christ He that confesseth me before men him will I confesse before my Father in heaven and many other things that some are saved without baptisme that Martyrdome goes for baptisme His fourth businesse was to prove that children might be baptized and for that urgeth Mat. 19. Mar. 10. Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not c. 4. Mr T. makes an observation upon the former passages as he himselfe hath represented them From these passages faith Mr T. I gather that as Petrus Cluniacensis urged for Paedobaptisme the authority of Augustine and the Latine Doctors so Peter de Bruis and Heinricus appealed to the Scriptures and the Greek Church We answer Here Mr T. makes a great treble intimation 1. That Cluniacensis urged Latin Doctors 2. That therefore Augustines Authority was then in the great esteem to carry the question of Infant Baptism 3. That De Bruis did appeal to the Greek Church as if that were for him against Infant Baptisme But I can finde neither of these in Cluniacensis This onely I finde which I suppose is that Mr T. alludes to that Cluniacensis speaks to De Bruis and Heinricus the Apostle as he is called and De Bruis too thus Ad Vestram c. * Ad vestram brutamhaeresin refellendam innumera mihi doctorum Ecclesiasticorumtestimonia suffragantur Sed vestra authoritas sapientia tanta est ut cos coram producere non praesumam maxime cum didicerim Hilarium Ambrosium Augustinum Hieronymum Leonem Gregorium c. judicio majestatis vestrae esse damnatos Cumque Latinos omnes a regno caelorum excluscritis nescio si Gracis vel alterius linguae hominibus peperceritis Quod si forte vel illi sobrietate vestri examinis peremptoriam sententiam evadere potuerunt Mihi quid quantum ad praesens negotium spectat aut parum aut nihil prodest Cum homo tantum Latinus peregrinae linguae quam ignoro testimoniis quibus vos aut convertere possim aut convincere uti non valeam Quia sanctis Ecclesiae Doctoribus fidem praebere dedignamini ad puritlimum rivulorum omnium fontem mihi reverteudum est de Evangelicis Apostolicis seu propheticis dictis testimonia si tamen vel illa suscipitis sunt proferenda That is to refell your brutish heresie innumerable testimonies of the Ecclesiasticall learned Drs give me their Votes But your Authority and wisdome is so great that I may not presume to produce them especially seeing I have understood that you have cast off or excluded Hilary Ambrose Augustine Hierom Leo Gregory c. from the chair of the learned Doctors and from the kingdome of heaven I know not whether you will
thy body with Oile 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then the chiefe Minister baptizeth him hee means dippeth him three times and at every dipping of him down and pulling him up again he calls upon the essence of the Godhead Likewise he quotes divers other h Scham Panstr Tom. 4. lib. 5. cap. 3. § 7. c. As the Apostolick Canons as they are called If the Bishop or Presbyter doth not make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 three Baptismes he means dippings of one innitiating c. let him be deposed Zonaras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Three immersions or dippings in our innitiation that is in our Baptisme Gregory the first Ep. 41. lib. 1. Nosautem c. That is That we dip three times we signifie the mystery of Christs buriall three days I have given you a touch being necessitated by M. T. but have no mind of my self therefore I rake no further into this dunghill though I might find abundance more of invention Oile Salt c. Thus of human-inventions Secondly of Errours occasioned by or wayting upon Anabaptists adult baptisme 1 Let me tell you mine own experience that some of them and particularly M. Ta. formerly a Preacher and a considerable Scholar having as this weeke laid downe this position that nothing may be admitted into the New-Testament worship but upon an expresse command in the New-Testament the next weeke or thereabout came to me and told me Now Sir sayd he I doubt of the Lords day And M. Tombes himselfe sayth he will suspend his judgement about the quot a pars temporis how often there should be a Sabbath day c Examen Sect. 8. p. 28. l. 32. which in my opinion enervates all M. T. seems to speak for the Lords day 2 Epiphanius a Epiphan l. 6. Anaceph p. 408 Edit Lat. Basil relates that from Aetius a Deacon under George the Bishop of the Arians at Alexandria were the Actians called also Anomaeans that is unequall of some they are called Ennomians from one Eunomius the Disciple of Aetius who is yet alive With these were Eudoxius Arianissans that is Eudoxius Arianizing but through feare of Constantine hee severed himselfe and onely Aetius was cast out or banished But Eudoxius notwithstanding continued Arianizing that is to be and act as an Arian that denies Christ to be God but not with Aetius These Anomaeans and Aetians poenitus ab alienant do utterly alienate or separate Christ and the holy Spirit from God affirming him to be created And say there is no similitude between them For they affirme God the Father by Aristotelian and Geometricall syllogismes and by this means Christ cannot be of God But the Eunomians so called from him rebaptize all that come to them So Epiphanius There are other most abominable things there mentioned by Epiphamus which I have no delight to once name 3. Tertullian b Tertul. contra Marcion tells us of the Marcionites that were so curious in baptizing those of ripe years that they would not baptise married persons but single persons virgins widdows and divorced persons 4 Pontanus Osiander Bullinger and M. Aynsworth give us this list of the errors of the Anabaptists 1. That Christ did not assume his slesh and bloud from the Virgin Mary 2 That Christ is not God but indued with more gifts then other men 3 That our righteousnesse depends not on faith in Christ but upon the works of charity and affliction 4 That there is no originall sin 5 That man hath free will in spirituall things 5 John Cloppenburge c In his Gangren of Anabaptisticall Theology Professor of Divity at Franequer Printed 1645. gives us a great Catalogue of the Errors of the Anabaptists to the number of about 48. 1 That the true God is not called in Scripture by names that signifie his eternall increated essence and so are proper to him but by names that signifie onely Gods dominion or power which names are common to Moses and other Governours 2 That there is not an immediate omnipresence of the divine essence wherein they hold sayth J. Cloppenburge with Socinus and Vorstius And consequently they deny one of the Attributes of God namely his immensitie 3 God did not in the Old Testament command any thing of the Jews but externall acts not reaching with his word to the purification of the heart Nor did he make any promise of spirituall things in the Covenant in the Old Testament Nor ought we to interpret any of them but of temporall things That the old ministery of the Ceremoniall Law was not instituted to convince consciences of their spirituall uncleannesse and typically to seale the true attonement or expiation 4 That the Scripture doth no where cleerely testifie neither doth it seeme to be according to such reason as is consentaneous to truth that the soules of believers going out of the body are presently taken up to Christ their head to partake of celestiall joy And Christians may state the Question without any dammage to piety that likewise the soules of the wicked after death doe not immediately taste of the infernall torments in hell 5 That John the baptist was not in the least the Minister of the New Testament or Doctor and teacher of Evangelicall righteousnesse but of legall Note then how fit Johns Baptisme is in the opinion of the Anabaptists to be the ground of their forme and rule of baptisme which they so oft alleage 6 That the one onely per son of the Father was understood and acknowledged in the Old Testament And thus John Cloppenburge D.D. and Professor at the University of Franequer goes through the body of Divinity in publike disputations and quotes out of the Anabaptists own writings the severall dangerous errours they hold against the main heads of Religion to the sum of about 48. But I delight to name no more But that M. T. by his impertinent yet importunate way of disputation in his later arguments forced me to cleare our selves that we are not the onely originalists of by-opinions and to discover the weaknesse of this way of argument used by M. T. I had not mentioned any at all Thus for error 3 Some faults in Discipline have been occasioned by the way of baptisme among the Anabaptists 1 That a particular Church is constituted by Baptisme and formally united So Mr. K. d In his Answer to Dr. B. and M. T. in the close of his sixth argument Exercit. § 19. By baptisme sayth M. T. a person is exhibited a member of Christ and the Church But what Church doth M. T. mean If he means of the universall Church I yeeld That he is exhibited a visible Christian But if he means a member of any particular rightly constituted Church according to the platform of those in the New Testament and ancient antiquity I altogether deny it for these reasons 1 Those baptised Mat. 3. were in no particular Christian Church there being none gathered till a good while after that Christ had given
Episcopos Papales coetum sceleratorum Ecclesiam Pontificiam coetum infernorum esse In hac propositione non multum à vero aberraverunt Matrimonia damnabant promiscuos concubitus cosquenefarios sanctos ducebant Hic est furor Satanicus Corporum resurrectionem negant Mortuos vivorum beneficiis nonâ— juvari Haec propositio non est haeretica Animas defunctorum hominum transire per diversa corpora etiam animalium serpentum si malè vixerint sin benè in Principis aut alterìus illustris personae corpus Carnem comedi prohibent Tribuitur illis à quibusdam quòd Evangelion urina conspersum de muro in hostes multis additis convitiis projecerint Christum non esse Deum nec assumpsisse carnem de Virgine sed è Coelo carnemâ— duxisse Quòd Christus non fuerit verus homo nec verè comederit quòd non verè passus sit in cruce nec resurrexerit nec in coelum ascenderit Mundum semper fuisse semper futurum Quòd Moses fuerit malus Quòd Adam non fuerit à Deo Ecclesiam non posse aliquid possidere nisi incommuni nec debere persequi malos Usuram non esse prohibitam necablata restituenda c. Hae propositiones cù partim sint absurdae impiae haereticae partim etiam in Politia tolerari non possent praesertim promiscuae libidines abolitio matrimonii cùm Albingenses admonitiones non admitterent sed in erroribus sceleribus persisterent adhortante Pontifice Romano Magistratus politicus collecto exercitu duabus vicibus aliquot millia Albin gensium trucidarunt multi etiam capitibus truncati cremati leguntur qui hinc inde sunt deprehensi fuit enim Albingensis furor Anabaptisticus qualis Anno 1534. nostro seculo Anabaptistarum Monasteriensium crat THere arose and in progresse of time gat strength the heresie of the Albingenses or Albienses or Albians in France whom some think to be so called from their Author others from a place in France That heresie is said to take begining first at Rome then it was dispersed far wide in the county of Tholouse and that among men of rank more over they write that it entred England The opinions attributed to them are these That there are two Principles or beginnings namely the good God and the Evill that is the Devill who createth all bodies The good God creates souls That the body of Christ is no otherwise in the bread then in other things They throw away Baptisme That it profits nothing to go into Churches or to pray in them That the Papall Bishops were a company of infernall spirits In this proposition they did not much erre from the truth They condemned all matrimony or mariages Promiscuous or mingled and wicked copulations they accounted holy This is a Satanicall fury They deny the Resurrection of the dead They say that the dead are not helped by any kindnesses from the living This Proposition is not hereticall The souls of the dead if they lived wickedly passe through divers bodies even of Animals Serpents If they lived well then they passe into the body of some Prince or some such noble person They forbid the eating of slesh It is attributed to them by some that they threw down the books of the Gospel sprinkled with pisse from the wall upon the enemies with addition of many reproches That Christ is not God neither took hee flesh of the Virgin but brought downe his flesh with him from heaven That Christ was not true man nor did he truly eat that hee did not truly suffer on the crosse nor ascend into heaven That the world hath been and shall be eternall That Moses was wicked That Adam was not from God That the Church can possesse nothing but in common Neither ought it to persecute the wicked That usury is not forbidden nor are things taken away to be restored c. These propositions being partly absurd wicked and hereticall partly intolerable in a Common-wealth especially promiscuous lusts and the abolishing of matrimony when the Albingenses would receive no admonition but persisted in their impieties the civill Magistrate the Bishop of Rome exhorting him thereunto having gathered an Army two severall times slew some thousands of them many also were beheaded and many burnt as we read being taken here and there For Albingensis was an Anabaptisticall fury such as was that in the yeer 1534 in our age Of the Monasterian Anabaptists Thus far out of the Chapter M. Tombes quoted out of Osiander alleaging the Albingenses against us for an instance that the same men that opposed Infant-baptisme opposed Popish superstitions How you have heard out of Master Tombes his quoted Authour To M. T. his fourth particular of those places of Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen Tertull. p. 120. Greg. Nazian p. 139. I have abundantly answered severall times afore Chap. 13 and 14 of our Animadversions and elswhere CHAP. XXI MAster Tombes his eleventh argument against Infant baptism is Exercit. § 22. because the assertors of Infant baptisme little agree among themselves upon what foundation they may build Infant-baptisme Cyprian and others of the Ancients draw it from the universality of grace and the necessity of baptisme to salvation Augustine Bernard c. bring the faith of the Church as the reason of baptizing infants The Catechisme in the English Liturgie puts the promise of the sureties The Lutherans the faith of infants Others the holinesse of a believing Nation Others the faith of the next parent and others the faith of the next parent in Covenant in a gathered Church We answer 1 In generall Multaloqueris pauc a dicis Animad Here is much spoken little proved We have but one quotation and that is out of the English Masse-book the Episcopall Liturgie 2 More particularly 1 By way of retort 2 By way of reply 1 We retort The Anabaptists also much differ in their foundation of their Anabaptisme some build it on bare confession of sins what ere the man be in point of manifestation of grace So some of the Arians c. See Epiphan afore quoted in the 15 Chap. And of late the Author of the book called the Marke or Character of the Beast Some on profession of farth So many of them at this day Some on signes of grace So M.T. Some on making them Disciples So M.D. and others Yet M.T. sayth in the next argument that a man is shewed to be a Disciple by baptisme and we have proved before believers children are reckoned Disciples Some build their Anabaptisme upon I know not what Master S.M. sayth that by baptizing in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not meant baptisme with water And those Anabaptists in Germanie now mentioned in Cloppenburgius and by Spanhemius at the end of Clâ—ppenburgius where you have the history of them say John Baptist was a Minister of the Law not of the Gospel See before in our 15 Chap. 2 By