but that a representation of a death and resurrection is fit to be made in the manner of baptizing and that the Church of England hath prescribed that it shall be done in such a manner as may be tanta mount thereto viz. by dipping unlesse of necessity thâ—…ough the infants sicknesse it be done otherwise yet notwithstanding that prescription of the Church which of you priests did ever do any other then sprinkle the healthiest infants but because the subject of your baptism in England being an infant is too tender at all times to be dipt or buried in water where note that your false subject of necessity ingages you to forgo the true way of baptizing which your selves prescribe unlesse necessity forbid it because I say the child cannot conveniently be buried with Christ in baptism into death in his own person therefore ecce signum this visible death burial and resurrection with Christ must be all transacted for him per altum i. e. by the ministers hand that is dipped into water and brought out again as it were instead of the child And this is even very suitable to all the rest for all the rest of your service in the point of baptism is done by representatives as little as it represents what is malnly to be represented by it and one part would mock the other is this should not be done so too t is true all is done in the childs name and in the childs stead but nothing done that of right ought to be done either by or to the child himself The infant indeed is askt dost thou believe in God dost thou forsake tho divel wil thou be baptized c but others must answer and promise and professe assent to and vow all these for him others mouthes must speak his mind and there 's the profession again he is spoken to by the minister saying to him I baptize thee i e. dip or bury thee with Christ in baptism into death for so t is in a little plainer English and true sense and intent of the service but alas it s nothing but the ministers hand that is dipt buried raised again with the drips that hang upon which the infant is onely rantized and there is the resemblance of the death burial and resurrection but I trust Sirs you will understand at last that when Paul saies to the Romans and Colossians that they were buried and raised in baptism he doth not mean that the dispensers hands but that their bodies were put under water and brought out again in respect of which they were said to be buried into death and are raised again i. e. not spiritually onely and really in respect of the soules dying to sinne and living to righreousnesse but outwardly visibly bodily in water also and this significatively and representatively of the other and this is my third argument for total dipping Rantist Significatively I grant if you will but not representatively I know no necessity that in every sign there is to be aresemblance of the thing signified thereby Baptist. If that be granted you will not easily withstand the other yet that is granted by the most and must be granted by all whether they will or no as for Mr. Cook and Mr. Blake themselves they neither of them seem to me to deny but that such a thing as a death and resurrection are signified in baptism yea Mr. Cook affirms it yea who questions saith he p. 19. but our justification and sanctification or remission of sins together with mortification and vivification are signified by baptism and he saies right for none can and I think none doth deny it but Dr. Featley of all Divines that I know of yea Calvin and Zanchee both assert it in their several expositions upon these very places Rom. 6. 4. Coloss. 2. 12. This participation in death saith Calvin is principally to he respected in baptism for not onely purgation but also mortification and the dying of the old man is proposed there c. And of spiritual circumcision Paul maketh two parts saith Zanchee the first he calleth buriall with Christ the other resurrection with him and of both these he maketh baptism the sign c. Neverthelesse our above named opposers will at no hand give way that there should be any representation or resemblance made in baptism of these two things which are the prime significations of it by putting under water and plucking out again yea they seem to chide with their several Ant agonists A. R. and C. B. for offering once to urge that the outward sign ought to hold analogy or proportion with the thing signified in that particular A proportion between the sign and these things signified viz. a death burial and resurrection Mr. Blake grants there is in our way of baptism by dipping but that there need be or should be so by institution this he heares not of with patience no nor Mr. Cook neither But if it please you to have patience with me so long sith those two are the maine men that beside the Doctor whose repulse is not worth a rush so mainly oppose our Argument from Rom. 6. Col. 2. He take the paines to transcribe their several replies and then see what strength there is in all that they say to the contrary Mr. Cooks defence is as followes What you go about to gather saith he from Col. 2. 12. Rom. 6. 4. l know not unlesse this that as Christ was buried abâ—…de in the grave three daies and then rose again So your party baptized must be put under the water abide there some considerable time and then come up again for if you presse a similitude of Christs death in going down into the water and of his resurrection or comming up out of the water why not also of his abode three daies by abiding three daies or some considerable time under the water which will make bad work neither can any such thing be gathered from those Scriptures I would demand two Questions saith he 1. How you gather from these places a dipping of the whole man over head and under water and that a similitude of Christs death burial and rising again to be represented by dipping in water is signified here these Scriptures shew indeed that the end of our baptism is to seal our communion with him in his death and resurrection by which we are dead to sin and raised again to holinesse but if you will presse hence a resurrection by our descending into abiding in and comming up out of the water take heed least you be one of those which adde to Gods word least he reprove you as a lyar and adde unto you the plagues written in his book for I know no word of God wherein this representation is necessarily implyed much lesse expressed Besides if you urge death and resurrection to be resembled by deseension into and ascension out of the water you must urge also burial which is principally there expressed by the biding of the whole maâ—…
Christs death buriall and resurrectiby our descending into abiding in and comming up out of the water take heed least you be of those that adde to Gods word least he reprove you as a lyar and adde unto you the plagues written in his book for I know not any Word of God wherein this representation is necessarily implyed much lesse expressed Thus whereas he saies elsewhere as I have shewed above that the end of baptism was to represent the spiriual grace as well as signify it and that the spiritual grace or thing signified and to be cleerly represented is mortification and vivification or communion with Christs death and resurrection which things t is strange he should say against the word of God for he protests it to be against the word when we say it and if there be any word expressing or implying a representation which himself so much talks on I am sure there is none like those two which we produce viz. Rom. 6. Cot. 2. which most lively shew it as I shall shew anon and undeniably declare yet here in the passage last cited he that talks of this representation and resemblance of Christs death and resurrection and ours with him as needful to be made in baptism is a lyar with him and an adder to the word which warrants no where to presse a resemblance of the thing signified in the dispensation of the outward sign no not so much as in those Scriprures Rom 6. Col. 2. So this representation in baptism is with him it seems a matter that must be and yet must not be and yet must be And yet for all this which is the wonder of me and will be of many more but specially of every wise man that hath his wits about him and would have bin of Mr Woodcock too who without taking notice of any weaknesse in it extoll'd the Book in the beginning of it and put it forth to Sir Iohn Burgoines patronage had he well weighed these passages of it Mr. Cook wheeles about once again and will needes have a representation and resemblance of the thing signified by baptism in the manner of administration of it and argues stiffely for it to but the representation must be of what he pleases among the things signified and not of the main thing signifyed in baptism it must be of sanctification as t is called a washing a cleansing a purging a pouring of the spirit on us a sprinkling of the blood of Christ on us and so be done by sprinkling water but not as it stands divided into its two parts mortification and vivification a death and resurrection or else if there must be a resemblance of this death and resurrection in baptism then by an As for example fetcht from the old world that was drowned dead buried by an infusion of water not an immersion and from the Ark which was rained upon only and not overwhelmed this death and resurrection must needs and may better be resembled by an infusion and sprinkling then by total immersion or dipping in water for if we urge to have the death and resurrection resembled by dipping i. e. a descension into the water and ascention out of the water which we all know was the way of Christs and the Eunuchs baptism we must urge also burial which is principally expressed Rom. 6. Col. 2. to be resembled too by biding of the whole man under the water for some time answerable to Christs three daies biding in the bowels of the Earth which cannot be without danger quoth he yea certainty of drowning and if sprinkling should not so fitly resemble as dipping and plunging yet the Scripture no where requires the washing of the whole body to all which I answer Resp. 1. which thing of his called sprinkling of water on the face for all he saies it may as well or better sith so many were of old killed and buried by sprinkling or raining on them in the daies of Noah serve to resemble our death and burial then dipping does yet in truth resembles a death burial and resurrection little more then a knock o' th' pate Secondly which drowning of the old world as it would make not a jot for such a purpose as he pleads for had it been by such a way as he dreames it was by viz. sprinkling raining on them by infusion and not immersion yet in very deed and so hee l see when he is awake and his eyes are open was by immersion immediately and not infusion for it might have rained long enough upon the earth before the men that had houses to shelter themselves in from that would have bin killed and buried under water if the waters had not prevailed by a flood so high over the earth as to overwhelm the men under it and plunge them ore head and ears and if he call that sprinkling and infusion let him sprinkle or infuse water in such abundance till the water sprinkled or infused become of such depth about the parties he is about to sprinkle as to swell ore their heads and to swill them wholly under it and I shall own such infusion for right baptism yet none of Christs ordinance neither unlesse dispenst to a right subject i. e. babes or beginners in the faith Thirdly which elegant allusion of his to the ark as that on which water was onely powred or sprinkled whence he seemes to argue thus viz. that it rained onely on the Ark or water was onely powred or sprinkled upon the Ark which Ark was a type of baptism Ergo baptism must be dispenst by sprinkling is as simple a delusion as ever was devised for if he intend that for an argument to prove that baptism is to be done by sprinkling and if not what does it there it does rather conclude that baptism must be sprinkled as the Ark was for reduce his matter into the form of a syllogism and see how sillily it concludes viz. thus The Ark was a Type of baptism But the Ark was only sprinkled with the rain not dipt Ergo baptism its antitype is to be dispenst by sprinkling He concludes more then he can possibly squeeze out from those premises and another thing then what is asserted of the Ark in his minor whereas in right form it should run thus The Ark typified baptism But the Ark was rained on baptized or wetted by infusion onely Ergo baptism must be rained on baptized or wetted by infusion onely But then what simple stuff were this what a logical lump of artificial non-sense Besides if it would follow that because the Ark which was a type of baptism was sprinkled therefore the way of baptism is sprinkling it would more truly follow that because the Ark was half dipt and half sprinkled one part of it being under the water another sprinkled with rain aboue the water therefore the way of baptism is to dip one half of the person and to sprinkle the other half but alas the Ark was a type of baptism as t
dies Christ shews all mens labour in their religion is lost by reason of it in vain do they worship me teaching for doctrine the traditions of men the Apostle shuts heaven against it 5. Gal. and twice over denounces cursing to any yea angels from heaven that preach any other then what they preached and I am sure they never preached infant sprinkling yea whoever is an heretick vel dandi vel auferendi saâ—… in either excesse or defect by adding or taking away from the word God will add the plagues upon him that are written in that book and take away his name out of the book of life Saint Austin saith of Arrius how true that saying is I say not but t is an argument Adhominem a good item however for every one that is any other way Antichristianus that his paines are increased in hell as oft as any one thorough his hereâ—…e is seduces from the faith therefore va vobis Scribae Sacerdotes c. 〈◊〉 of all to mourn for the calamities of the true Church which hath for this 1600 yeares been spoiled and under clouds and partly by the Roman Empire Heathen partly by the Roman Empire Christian been trod under the feet of tyrannical truth treaders the losse of souls the Scandal of true Religion which is and hath been every where spoken against houses and lands wives and children goods and liberties when lost consumed destroyed are lamented by us should not Châ—…ists losâ—…s be more dear and how much more the losse of Christ himself who as he told of that ecclipse of that primitive entercourse which he had with his people then by the interposition and comming of the prince of this world between him and them so hath now of a long time been a great stranger in all Christendome Oh What comfort had it been to have had the Son of God walkiâ—…g with us may the Christian world say in the midst of the flames that have devoured and wasted in all corners of it but specially the third part of Christian men which hath been killed by the fire and by the smoak and by the brimstone which issued out of the mouths of the four Angels that were bound before in the great River Euphrates i. e. the four cruel Territories of the Turkish Empire united all under one head viz. Ottoman the Great some 390 years ago and from thenceforth getting ground on this side Euphrates to no lesse then a third part of Christendome as being indeed prepared for an hour a day a month a year i. e. 391. years to slay the third part of nominall Christians with most inhumane mercilessenesse and cruelty Rev. 9 12. ad finem I say what comfort would it have been to have had not onely the name but the spiritual presence of Christ preserving for those that were consumed in that divellish devastation but alas the Herestes Blasphemyes and abominable idolatries of the Christian nations have made him depart and leave the men that meerly by name are Christians to utter distress and darknesse without either succour or support under such bloudy sufferings those sins where not so much suffered in civil States for that may be as set up and stablished as the onely Christianity to be allowed of as they have been by the national Antichristian Christian Churches so that true Christianity is suppressed and suffers for the sake out and for nonconformity thereunto are ever and ever will be the forerunners of the removal of his Candlestick and of the destruction of the very denomination of Church at last among that people that have a name to live and are dead However let us O ye that are the true Christian Churches Mourn for our own sins those sins which have provoked God so much to wrath against his true Churches in former times are beginning to be too rise among us therefore why may he not justly if we lay it not to heart in time deal so with us as of old with them so as to dischurch us so as to lay open our senceâ—… tread down our hedge break down our â—…ower and expose his vine to every beast of the Forrest let us be zealous and repent and in secret let our souls weep for the abominations done in the midst of Sion let horror take hold on us and rivers of tears run down our eyes because men keep not Christs law le ts mend what we can and mourn for what we cannot mend and whilest as the Ranter and his Rout laughs our weak works to scorn on the one hand so the CCClergy and their Clients on the other puff at our Mechanick buildings as Sanballat scoffed at the Iewes Neh. 4. 1 2 3 saying in malice and mockage What do these feeble folk will they fortify themselves against our Orthodox Dâ—…vines will they sacrifice without a Priest among them will they make â—…n end in a day to reform which is many a years work for a learned Synod will they revive the stones even the dead bones of old Hereticks out of the heaps of â—…bish that are burnt that which they build if a fox go up he shall even break down their stone wall le ts not be discouraged nor afraid to proceed in the way and work of the Lord let them laugh but let us weep for them as well as not spare to reprove them so far as we have any hope to reform them let them curse but let us blesse yea let us fast and pray not with Wednesday and good Fryday fasts and Lent'n Letanies nor with the Pharisees twice a week fasts who paid â—…th and refused to submit to Christs baptism nor yet with Jezebells fasts who set honest Naboath on high and accused him of blasphemy on that day with so much the greater advantage and finer pretence as if the Clergy did not when they obtained fasts against hereticks t will not repent them so much another time as some think it may yet of those repentances nor yet with the Jews fasts that fasted for strife and debate and to smite with the fist of wickednesse that hung down their heads for a day like a bulrush and thought God was half beholding to them for it because they spread sackcloath and ashes under them though they neither loosed the bands of wickednesse nor let the oppressed go free nor undid heavy burdens nor broak every yoak nor dealt their bread to the hungrie nor brought the poor that were cast to their houses nor coveted the naked when they saw them but rather hid themselves from their own flesh and hardned their hearts against the poor and heaped up riches for themselves and oppressed full as much and it may be much more then before shall we call these fasts and acceptable daies to the Lord Isa. 58 they are all abominable rather thenacceptable Therefore let us fast as well from as for iniquity and what ever others do let us serve the Lord let us call for justice and plead for truth let us not defile
to the ordinances under the Law and so cutting of a Moity of the Christian world from the Church which stood members of it before do streiten the Gospel and make it worse and of less extent the Law I answer first That the Meliority of the Gospel covenant spoken of in Heb. 8. 6. lies in the Meliority of the promises of it above the others which Meliority we affirm but you deny in saying the promises of both Covenants are one and the same therefore it is your selves however and not we that by your tenets make the Gospel Covenant at least no better than the Law contrarily to that of the Apostle Heb. 8. 6. and so your opinions and not ours are false and wicked by your own Argument Bvt secondly if it be in very deed to make the Gospell covenant worse than the Laws as you say it is to hold infants no capable subjects of Gospel ordinances some of which were capable subjects of the ordinances of the law I shall first disprove your charge of us togeâ—…her with your proof of it in that particular Secondly prove that if notwithstanding all that I shall say toward the clearing of our selves we must needs be held guilty of lessening the grace of God under the Gospel in comparison of what it was under the law because we deny the ordinances thereof to infants to whom the ordinances of the law were dispensed then you that judge us condemn your selves also as being in the same kind guilty of the same to this purpose le ts see what you bring in proof of your Minor in the last Syllogism and how punctually it concludes to your present purpose thus you argue Disputation Under the Law the seal of the Gospel Covenant was by Gods appointment set to little infants viz. circumcision which was the seal of the righteousnesse of faith which is the Gospell covenant and therefore is called by God an everlasting covenant and that I my self confesse it to be the seal of the Gospell Covenant and that even Ishmael onely because born in Abrahams house had right to it and received it Ergo this opinion denying the seal of the Gospell Covenant which the defenders acknowledge baptism to be to little infants makes the covenant of the Gospel worser to the spiritual seed of Abraham then it was to the carnall seed under the Lax. Disproof How often shall I adjure you the next time you write to write no more then truth at least in matter of fact if you will needs utter falsehood in matter of Doctrine do not your selves bear me witness before all the world not above two pages behind that I denyed circumcision to be a seal of the righteousness of faith to any but Abrahams person only and avouched it to be no such thing to his posterity and yet how quickly have you forgotten your selves so far as to the contradicting of your selves as well as the truth to represent it here as if I had confessed it and having began to faulter and falsifie things for your own ends how easily do you multiply misreport and run from ore shooes as the Proverb is to ore boots too for no less than a pair of pretty ones are here recorded for how be it my declared judgement then was now is and I believe ever will be for ought you can say to clear the contrary that circumcision though a seal to Abraham to honor the greatness of that faith he had and to notify him to be the father of the faithful as it is plainly exprest Rom. 4. 11. was not set as a seal in any sense at all to any other but as a bare sign and token in their flesh to mind them upon sight thereof immediately of the Covenant that then was remotely as a type as every other thing under the law did of something in the Gospel Covenant viz. circumcision of the heart and that baptism it self is no seal at all but a bare sign of the Gospel Covenant and is not so much as a sign or any thing else but a meer nullity to little infants yet the world is here belied into the belief of it that I confesse both that circumcision was a seal of the Gospel Covenant and that under such a notion as a seal of that Covenant Ishmael himself had right to it and received it for so you expresse it p. 7. and that baptism is the seal of the Gospel Covenant even to little infants themselves as well as others I do therefore in answer to this last piece of yours and in order to your better understanding of me for the future and of the truth too as it is in Jesus at present professe against two things herein First your forgeries and misrepresentations of my opinion to the world which was not so darkly declared at that time as that you must needs mistake it Secondly against the falsities and mistakes that are in your own opinion in this point viz. in stiling both circumcision as dispensd to Abrahams fleshly posterity and baptism also as dispensed not to others onely but even to infants by the name of seals of the Covenant of grace As for circumcision that it was not so though I might adde much more to what hath been before spoken in proof hereof in my animadversion of your account yet I le save my self that labor and refer you for fuller understanding what circumcision was and was not to a certain book that is extant of one Mr. Iackson once of Bidenden in Kent stiled 19. Arguments proving circumcision to be no seal of the Covenant of grace whereunto is annexed the unlawfulnesse of Infant baptism upon that ground of which book I must needs give testimony thus far to the world that it being brought to me whilst it was but a manuscript and my self a Presbyter of your high places in some confidence that I could answer it how easily I might have shufled it off had I set my self so to do I will not say but I could not answer it solidly nor salvâ consciencia and therefore I let it alone for a time till considering further of it and of other things I was stirrd up to the study of by it I was at last converted to the truth whereupon as the best answer I was capable to give I signed it in such wise as I find Luther once signed another book in the like case viz. memorandum that taking this book in hand at first to confute it I was at last convinced by it Which 19. proofs of circumcision to be no seal of the Covenant of Grace if they be weak and invalid such a multitude as you are have time enough among you to disprove them but if you yield to them be silent and say nothing As for baptism I confesse it to be truly and properly a sign and that of the Covenant of Grace remission of sins by Christ his death and resurrection which are both not onely signified but also lively represented and resembled in
persons that did then believe whose children yet for all that promise to them and their children you so talk of out of Act. the 2. 39. came all to nought through unbelief for else indeed the promise even after Christ crucified was to them as also to all others so sure in case of faith that that causelesse curse of their parents wishing the blood of Christ to be on them and their children should never have hurt any but them that wished it In further illustration of which yet I mean that personal faith onely not 〈◊〉 gives a standing in the Church now because I write to a generation of men that have more time to read then I to write I hope I may be bold to trouble my self and you with the transcription of at least a page out of a little treatise termed a confutation of infant-baptism by Thomas Lamb very plain and pregnant to this purpose and the rather because I fear you will not search the book it self soundly if I should send you to it onely by telling you t is worth your reading in this point though at your request I have all-to-be-read Dr. Featley in the 12. and 13 pages of which book of Thomas Lamb he writes as follows So then when Christ the true promised seed was come the seed in the flesh that lead to Christ ceased for the natural relation ceased at the death of Christ and not before at which time the distinction or different holinesse between Iew and Gentile ceased Act. 10. 28. Eph. 2. 13. 15. In Rom. 11. 20. it is said through unbelief they are broken off now t is manifest they were the true Church till the death of Christ and then broken off through unbelief why were not the Iews in the sin of unbelief before yes no doubt why then were they not broken off before and why then the reason is because the time of faith was come and therefore now they were broken off through unbelief the seed was come therefore the natural seed ceased Christ was come therefore the law ceased As long as the law lasted they did remain in the Church by being circumcised and observing the rites and ceremonies of the Law though they did remain in unbelief but when the time of faith was come Gal. 3. 25. then they were no longer in the Covenant and Church by observing the rites and Ceremonies of the Law which they entered into by circumcision but now they were broken off through unbelief which notes out unto us that the standing in that Church before Christ in time of the Law and the standing in this Church since Christ in time of the Gospel is upon different grounds for the standing in that Church was by being circumcised and observing the rites and ceremonies of the Law but the standing in this Church is by faith and being baptized into the same faith Act. 2. 38. 41. Joh. 4. 1. Gal. 3. 26 27. Rom 11. 20. And it is to be noted that the Iewes the same people that were circumcised and in covenant with Abraham according to the flesh and thereby members of the Iewish Church could not be the visible church according to the Gospell unless they did manifest faith and so be in covenant with Abraham according to the spirit and baptized into the same faith Whereas if the Covenant now under Christ were the same that was before Christ with Abraham and his posterity in the flesh then by the same right they possessed circumcision and the Iewish Church state they must possesse this since Christ which they could not do therefore it is not the same It is true therefore that the Covenant of God makes the Church both in time of the Law and Gospel too for the Church is nothing else but a people in covenant with God now look how the covenant differs so the Church and people differs which is made by it and which enter into it Now the Covenant whereby God took a people outwardly to be his people then was that whereby they did being circumcised participate of all those outward meanes which led to Christ which was to come Psal. 149. 19. 20. But the Covenant whereby he takes a people outwardly to be his people now whereby they are admitted to be baptized is that profession they make of faith in Christ Acts 8. 12. 37. Mat 3. 6. Whereby they have true and spirituall conjunction with God and are his people Heb. 3. 6. Indeed it is true that Christ is and ever was the Mediator and Means of salvation and also that all those that were saved were saved through faith in him both before and since his comming But yet because the outward means of making Christ known doth differently depend upon his being yet to come aâ—… upon his being come in the flesh the one being more dark the other more plain the one more carnall the other more spirituall therefore the participation of these meanes doth make the state of the participants to differ Thus far are his words and then noting certain differences to the number of seven or eight between the Old Testament and the New which is 1. Established upon better promises 2. After the power of an endless life 3. In Christ. 4. And liberty of the spirit 5. A Celestial Jerusalem 6. A State of faith He very truly concludes that such onely as are in the New Covenant in Christ in faith of the promises born from above and partakers of the spirit and the power of that endless life or of the world to come a re suitable to be admitted to Gospel Church priviledges In the time therefore before Christ saith he such as would circumcise themselves and their males and observe the Law in the rites and ceremonies therof together with their children by generation were the seed and in covenant with that Church but now since Christ only such as believe in Christ and are thereby children by regeneration are the seed and in câ—…nant with this Church and this he proves further yet First Because None of the Natural seed of Abraham are in the Covenant by vertue of any natural relation though they did remain in the Iewish Church till the death of Christ and as that Church then ceased so their being in the Church by an natural relation ceased also Act. 10. 28. Rom. 9. 8. Gal. 5. 28. 31 3. 7 8 9. 14. 16. 19. 26. 28 29. Secondly The Gentiles have no natural relation to become Abrahams seed by therefore a believers child cannot become the seed of Abraham by being the seed of a believer unless such children do believe themselves and cannot otherwise in no respect be participants in the covenant made with Abraham p. 14 15. And again p. 18. No Gentile saith he is Abrahams seed at all but by believing the righteousnesse of faith allthough he be the child of believing parents Now therefore because you tell us not only First that believers children in infancy are Abrahams children though they yet do not
linkes whereof if one happen to prove unsound and t is a chance but a flaw may be found in some of them that have been trailed for many hundreds of years together through the hands of that Apostaticall harlot the intaile is clear cut of your pedigree and descent from the Apostles as a ministry perishes is spilt upon the ground and can never be tact on again any more for ever you have hitherto owned your ordination as handed by an uninterrupted lineal succession from the Pope to the present Presbytery and if we put the question to the veriest novice or youngling among you who ordained you and who ordained those that ordained you and who them and who them and who them you can find your function flowing in a continual stream from the Primitive fountain no other way but through that stinking sink and corrupt channel of the holy chaire Pope Gregory the great gave power of ordination to Austin the Monk when he sent him over into England about a thousand years since he to the Popish Bishops they to the Protestant Bishops they to the Presbyters and the Presbyters to their present Preachers thus what Ministeriall power you have â—…angs upon the Protestant Bishops theirs upon Austin Austins upon the Pope the Popes upon Peter you came i. e. descended from the Pope the Pope came i. e. departed from the Apostles and thus from the Apostles you came all but thither you must go again letting go your sweet succession and from their words which are the same now as then begin your businesse again before you can be â—…ight or know any thing cleerly where you are for if he whom your selves call Antichrist made you a ministery of Christ you may be the Ministry of the Church of England if you will which if it be vere Ecclesia a true Church at all yâ—…t is such a one as had its parochial posture from whence you had your power and therefore fit enough each for the other but of the Church in England which is vera Ecclesia the true Church indeed you shall never be the Ministry for me till you repent and be baptized As for my self whom you deem to be no Minister of the Gospel I must not lead you so far from the other work in hand as to stand upon the proof of that now having transgressed as some will think too far already though else it were no impossible thing to prove it and therefore I say this only in short that whether I am now a true Minister of the Gospel or no t is now my utmost aim to preach and promote the truth of it as t is in Jesus but as for the time in which I was owned a Minister of the Gospel I was at that time no true one at all yea though I have obtained mercy and such mercy as to be made a Minister thereof since because I did what I did ignorantly yet so far was I then from a Minister of the Gospell that I rather rejected the counsell of God against my self being not baptized of them that preached it and disputed much against it as well as you And now as unto your third quaery viz. what Commission have any to baptize in that manner that is by dipping which you stile such an irrational and undiscreet way t is that which I have resolved you in so satisfactorily before that unlesse you have more to say against it then to miscal it as you do before you have proved it to be so base as you are pleased to stile it I shall rejoice in Christ Jesus that hath chosen such foolish and base things as dipping in water is in the account of men however excellent in it self and in proof of its warrantableness unles it be occasionally add no more Rantist I have referred you already where you shall find exception against all you have said before as concerning the truth of the way of baptism and I desire that you would find your self work a little therewith I mean the forenamed books that are extant specially that of Mr. Baxter whom I know to be a very able and godly man who hath in mine and I think in all discerning mens Apprehensions so sollidly disproved and clearly confuted your way of dipping that few or none of those that see what he saies in that point will be of your mind and follow your fashion therein for whereas you say that dipping was the custome in the first times and therefore go about to seduce men into the belief of it because it s said that the Eunuch went down into the water and that John baptized in Aenon because there was much water there he replies that is a thing never proved by any and that the Jaylor was baptized in the night in his own house and therefore not likely over head in that Countrey where water was so scarce and that the Eunuch might well be said to go down into the water for the Country was mountanous and the brooks in the bottoms and that even the River Aenon it self where Iohn baptized because there was much water is found by Travellers to be a small brook which a man might almost step over and much more that gainsaies much of what you have said is in the 135. page of his book which I shall expect your answer to but if you please le ts see what you can say to this first Baptist. I shall very freely speak to any thing which hath not yet been spoken to in particular and to Mr. Baxters exceptions in that particular rather then any other because he is most noted in those parts were he lives and also in the examination of his Exceptions I shall have the more hint to take notice of such reliques and broken pieces as remain yet unspoken to as the gainsayings of the rest in this point for he seems to me to have gathered them up there and to have epitomized those mens matter as iâ—… were into a fardel of fewer words excepting the two last grand Arguments of Mr. Cook against dipping one of which Doctor Featley affronts us with in the title page and both of which are more sparingly spoke to yet covertly touched and tacitly touched upon by Mr. Cook and those Mr. Baxter rather comments on at large and makes I cannot say a fairer but a fouler a falser and far more miserable improvement of then any of the rest do This he professes to be the businesse of his book p. 13. viz. To use the proofs that others make use of in some newer kind of way confessing that few have improved their Arguments as they might have done nor mannaged them in the most forcible way and not to medle much with those arguments that others have fully mannaged Yet by his leave he meddles so much with the Arguments that others almost every one makes use of that he makes some of them the worse again he â—…ars many a one with his mendall Mannagement It is not to use
it utterly overthrowes his hopes by the halves of infants for it is both a good ground and as good a ground whereon to hope the redemption from wrath to come of every dying infant as of any one And lastly to conclude my answer to this 22 Argument of Mr. B. which I have insisted the longer on in much hope of helping him to a better hope of all dying infants that neither are nor are to be added to the visible church whereas I was once set upon by a Gentleman with this objection who if ever this book came to his hands and this passage to his eye will remember it though I forbear to name him Viz. Obâ—… If we may be assured of the salvation of all our dying infants we may then in love to them knock them on the head in their infancy and so be sure to prevent their perâ—…shing by condemnation I intreat that Gentleman to beware oâ—… so much as saying that we may do such gross â—…vil that so great good may come thereof least his damnation for it be just and then what little benefit will accrue to him all men may judge that to save his infant damnes himself There 's but four Arguments of M. Bs. behind brought in proof of the right of membership to infants whereof two viz. his â—…4th and 26th are the one from 1 Cor. 7. 14. the other from Mark 10. 13. 14. 15. Two Scriptures that I have talkt on so much in the book above and given the genuine sense of that I shall but tautologize to speak particularly to them again seeing I see nothing new taken notice of in them by Mr B. but what is abundantly answered in effect above where I have shewed the abrâ—…gation in Christ of that birth holinesse he means and the uncleannesse consequently opposite thereunto so that there 's no man however born though a barbarian can be called in opposition to others as by birth holy by nature a sinner in that ceremonial sense from Act 10. Gal. 2. yea M. B. confesses p. 8â—… the Commoâ—… sâ—…se of holinesse was one and the same in all i. e. Priests and Levites under the Law c. Temple Altar Sacrifices children of believers and believing yoak fellowes viz. a separation to God so then if that holinesse of Priests Temple c. was ceremonial so this is and if that holinesse is abolished in all other things why abiding onely the seed I have also proved that the other place where it is not evident that the infants brought to Christ were ever baptized by his disâ—…iples or any other doth more deeply disprove infanâ—…s-baptism and membership then all the places ever brought by Mr. B. are capable to prove or make good eiâ—…her Yea as good a man might have said as send me to those two places for infant-baptism you may find it if you lâ—…ok in the bible I le say no more therefore to them His other two viz. the 23th and 25â—…h are both as he conâ—…esses but probable and and by and by will appear not to be so much His fiâ—…st is this If an Infant were head of the Church then infants may be members But Christ an infant was head of the Church Ergo. That cannot be half so much as a probable Argument whose premises are neither of them true yet such is the syllogism here brought by Mr. B. both the propositions of which I deny his consequence is true indeed that infants may be members if an infant were the head i. e. are capable oâ—…t supposing Gods will that it should be so now in the Gospel which a man may suppose if he will but shall never find to be so in his word nor does his curious crotchet out of Irenaeus that Christ went through every age to sancâ—…ify it unto us prove the other to be a truth for there 's no truth at all in it self yea t is falsum peâ—… falsius for Christ did not passe through every age of man that he might sanctâ—…fy that age for he lived not to any old age here though now he that was dead is alive again for evermore for his life was soon cut off from the earth And as concerning his headship in his infancy I admire a man of wisedome should assert it for to say nothing how little this agrees with that above page 62. where he saies â—…is disputable whether ever Christ was a Churchmember properly or no as if the head because the principal that rules the rest were no member at all of the body t is evident to me that as man be had not any of his Prerogaâ—…ives settled actually upon him till after he had purchased them by his death he was perfect first through sufferings Heb. 5. 9. and after his death and resurrection he was made Lord and Christ Acts. 2. And exalted highly above all Phil. 2. and set faâ—… above all principality and given to be head over all things to his Church which is his body Ephe. 1. ult Moreover to me there is as much force in it if Christ had been head of the Church in his infancy and much more then in Mr. Bâ—… to argue thus if Christ the head of the Church that was circumcised in his infancy yet was not baptized till he came to years then though under the Law the circumcised were circumcised in theiâ—… infancy yet under the Gospel none are to be baptized till they come to years His 25th runs thus If the Scripture frequently and plainly tell us of the ceasing of circumeision but never at all of the Churchmembership of infants then though circumcision be ceased yet we are not to judge their membership to be ceased but c. Therefore This is so far from a demonstration that it s not a Topical but Sophistical Syllogâ—… in which there is fallacia homonomiae or ambiguity in the middle term viz. tâ—…e Scripâ—…ure tells us which may be taken for an expresse or for an implicit telling or having a word for a thing yet one of his propositions will be false let him understand it how he will for if by the Scripture telling us and having a word for it he means an expresse telling of the cessation of membership in totidem verbis a Syllabical word given out of that particular by name then his consequence is false for it follows not because there is not an expresse particular prohibition in the New Testament for the cessation of things that were under the old therefore they are not ceased for so we shall make most of the types and ceremonies among which infant membership was one as I have shewed to remain in force still as well as that as the dedication of the first born and many others the cessation of which is not so syllabically spoken of But if he mean an implicit prohibition or word for the cessation of Churchmembershâ—…p of infants which is enough then there is prohibition enough yea the very command for the cessation of circumcision of infants any more Act.
2. 12 1 Cor. 12. 7. Eph. 4. 11. Eph. 4. 30. a Eph. 1. 13. b Act. 2. 39. 40. c Prov. 1. 23. Joh. 7. 38 39. Luke 11. 13. Act 5. 35. * Iohn did no miracle but all the the things which Iohn spake of this man are see true Joh. 10. 41. Iohn 7. 48 〈◊〉 ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe Iohn 20. 29. Thomas because thou hast seen thou hast believed but blessed are they that have not seen and yet believed Herod hoped to have seen some miracle done by Christ but he would not so much as answer him Luke 23. 8. 9. He did not many mighty work there because of their unbelief Mat. 13. 5. Lord why could not we cast him out Iesus said because of your unbelief Job 1. 16. â—…f his fulâ—…es we have â—…ll received grace for grace Iohn 16. 7. 13. 2. Cor. 13. 14. the communion of the spirit be with you all Gal. 5. 22. 2 Cor. 5. 5. God who hath given us the earnest of his spirit Ephes. 1. 33. 14. in whom after ye believed ye were sealed with the holy spirit of promise which is the earnest of our inheritance c. whereby you are sealed to the day of redemption Ephes. 4. 30. * if any doubt it as some do and say prophesy is a gift of speaking infallibly by revelation from God as t is spoken of 1 Cor. 14. 1. the 2. 3. 4. 5. verses of the same chapter confute him where prophecy as it is determined to be a far more eminent and profitable gift and greater and more desirable then tongues which is so talkt on so it is defined to be no other then speaking to exhorration edisication and comfort and also v. 31. 32. 33. where its said you may all prophecy one by one and the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets which shewes t was no gift of speaking infallibly but only preaching because it s supposed that they may be out and erre in their prophecy and must submit to correction in case they do from the other prophets Obj. Ans. Ob. Ans. * which I much marvel at sith this objection supposes a continuation or resurrection of that same ordinance of laying on of hands in the last daies after a whiles waiting for administrators but the questions subscribed to are all or most of them such as suppose the Enquirers to be much in the dark and in doubt about it what kind of laying on of hands that is that 's called a doctrine of Christ Heb. 6. 1. whether ever such a thing was or is ever to be dispensed to all baptized believers c. as if they could not tell almost whether there be at least appointed by Christ such a manner of administration * viz. Seeing we are denied communion by some of those Churches or by some members thereof who hold the necessity of all baptized believers to practise submit to or come under the laying on of hands Therefore we desire them to acquaint us what we are commanded to say or do that we may be found faithful in that point or otherwise to be discovered disobedient unto a command by the Word of God which is the onely director here and that which shall be our judge at the last day * which is the wise query of some also and as learned a question as if one should ask whether at the supper we must put the elements to our mouths with the right hand or the left or in baptism ask how the baptizer must handle the person baptized and where he must take hold on him when he dips him and if he have not expresse Scripture concerning such nicities and trifles as these suspend the dispensation of both the supper baptism because Christ is som what short in his word not expressing punctually enough how his ordinances shall be dispensed nor what is to be said and done by persons at the doing of them so distinctly as they would have him But foolish and unlearned questions avoid knowing that they do gender strifes 2 Tim. 2. 23. p Vâ—… Seeing there be ma ny that do desire bapti zed believers to require that hands should be laid on them Therefore we desire of them to shew us some place of Scripture if they know of any that doth expresse such a behaviour either of the administrator or the person on whom hands were laid * for such a behaviour as to reprove their backwardnesse and summon men to shew their forwardnesse to own Christs wayes may become any administrator whatsoever Act. 23. 16. * Viz. Seeing many plead â—…aying on of hands to be practised or submitted unto as a foundation principle or a beginning doctrine that by all baptized believers Therefore we desire to know if any of them can inform us which of all these layings on of hands forementioned is calleâ—… by Christ or his Apostles the foundation principle or beginning doctrine by some text in Scripture * iâ—… it be not somewhat an improper phrase to stile wicked men in their wrathful and cruel handlings of the Saints Administrators oâ—… any doctrine of Christ that is stiled imposition of hands as to me it seems to be unlesse weâ—…l allow the name of an Administrator also to the devil himself when he tempts the Saints and puts forth his hands against them to smiâ—…e them with any mischâ—…efs in either body oâ—… spâ—…it as by Gods permission he did Job Job 1. 12. Job 2. 6. 7. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 * Viz Seeing that Hâ—…b 6. 2. 〈◊〉 of the laying on of hands as plâ—…al as the dâ—…ctrine of 〈◊〉 and doth not speak of any one laying on of hands sore mentioned particularly nor of any otheâ—… by distinction neither of any end purpose or eveâ—… Therefore we desire to know what safety it is for any man tâ—… conclude that Heb. 6. 2. is meant buâ—… of one of them onely †See Mr Blackwoods last book newly extant even whilâ—…st I am writing to you on this subjâ—…ct sâ—…iled 〈◊〉 soul searching catechism p. 58 in p. 54. 55 56. 57. 58. 59. of which he treats totally of this 〈◊〉 * Viz. Mr. Coâ—…on Dr. Holms who as is shewed above in the 139 140 141. pages of this very voluâ—…e I am yet in hand with borrowes Coâ—…ons and Calvins reading out of Antiquity concerning the practise of imposition of hands to all grown persons before admission to Church-â—…ellowship wher by to prove infant-baptism which thereby he 〈◊〉 breaks the nâ—…ck of * consisting of 3 sorts of Christ'n creatures under a 3soldCCClergy viz. papal prelatical presbyterian * yet some Ranters are not ashamed to say they are Christ and God and there is no other God then they and what 's in them and such like blasphemies whe reby they declare themselves to be that generation that are to rise in the latter daies and make the man of sin even that wicked one that shall exalt himself above all that 's called God saying