THE PLEA OF THE CHILDREN OF BELIEVING-PARENTS for their Interest in Abraham 's Covenant their Right to Church-Member-ship with their Parents and consequently their Title to BAPTISM The Cause of publishing this Discourse after so many Learned Men have laboured in this Province is declared in the Preface to the Reader Baptizandos esse paruulos nemo dubitet quando nec illi hinc dubitant qui ex parte aliqua Contradicunt August de verbis Apostoli Serm. 14. It will surely be rewarded by Christ at the latter day as a work of more then ordinary Charity to have pleaded and maintained the Right of these poor Members of his who want a Tongue to speak for themselves Dr. Tho. Goodwin in his Preface to Mr. Cotton of Infant-Baptism By GILES FIRMIN 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your Children Vnclean but now they are Holy LONDON Printed for Tho. Simons at the Princes Arms in Ludgate-Street near Ludgate 1683. THE PREFACE TO THE READER IF the Reader demands a reason why after so many Books written by other Men far more able then my self upon this Subject that now I should appear my answer is ready I had as few thoughts of writing as any Man could have of reading any thing of mine upon the Subject But hearing of a Book against Infant-Baptism very much cryed up and observing some discourse about Anabaptism this Spring more in the Town then ever I heard before I sent to borrow the Book I took a brief view of it and the Book was sent for again To spend the Lord's-Day so much as one Exercise upon any Controversie I did much dislike it yet I thought I was bound to say something to it and did borrow a little time before I went on my other course About 〈◊〉 Weâ—ks after I had done comeâ— down an Anâ—â—aptist from London to a Town Seven 〈…〉 Miles distant from me and writes me â— Letter informing me That he was one that â—â—d walk in Gospel-Communion with Col. Danvers sometimes he stiles him Esq Danvers then writes to me thus You have cast the Odium of Falshood and Fergery upon his Book to your Auditory If it was to deter your Hearers from reading his Book it doth demonstrate the badness of your Cause in that you are not willing it should be inspected If you design thereby to degrade the Gentleman as infamous though unknown you have therein greatly erred therefore I request you on the behalf of Col. Danvers that you be pleased to do him the common Justice as to publish to the World in Print what you have spoken in your more private Meetings by way of detection of his Forgery and not only to Print what you have traduced him with but also any other new things you have Preached that will lend any assistance to your Infant-Baptism that this Gentleman doth endeavour to throw down as a spurious thing several of your own Party have written against him but he with others have so answered them that they have set down silent under The Collonel hath a better Character than you give of him he hath a large Portion of this Worlds goods c. Thus he runs on in commendation of the Collonel and ends it in such a way that neither I nor others that read the Letter could understand his meaning As to this Letter the Reader may please to understand the Book which I borrowed had in the Title Page only H.D. I could not tell whither D. stood for Den whose name I had seen or Dell or Danvars of whose name only I had heard but never saw any thing of his but whoever was the Author I found fault with him 1. For his Falshood in the Historical part which if my Memory fails me not took up above half his Book 2ly His fraudulent dealing 3ly His raising a dust upon the Scriptures he quotes to trouble his Reader 4ly For his Logick But for any other Opinions or any thing concerning his Conversation I speak not one word for how could I when I knew nothing of him and only heard three times as I remember there was one Collonel Danvers an Anabaptist and that was all nor was I certain the Book was his It was never my intent to answer every particular in his Book partly because I would not spend the Lord's Day in Controversies and partly because Catechizing was the thing I intended being far more necessary so that I did grudge the time I spent about this Book out of which I only wrote the most material things and the Book was sent for away For the new things this Epistoler would have me publish Doth he mean new Scriptures or new Arguments or both 1st Why new since the old are not yet answered it is one thing to write against Men another to answer them 2ly Why new since my Author borrows so much old out of Mr. Tombes's Book which I look upon as instar omnium and is the only Anabaptist Book I have 3ly Why new since my Author opposes old Texts and I must take the part of a Respondent 4ly Why new my Epistoler should tell me what Controversies are there which have been handled so long by very able Divines as this hath been that he that comes last hath wrote all new 5ly To conclude then as to these new things I am forced to take up the old Texts because of my Author 's opposing them I do but touch other Texts and not insist upon them where others have been before me for other Mens Arguments I borrow but one from Mr. Baxter and tell you whose it is and improve it my way If I have hit upon other Mens notions it is unknown to me as I see I have upon Mr. Wills in answer to the old Britains but I had given the answer in the Congregation and wrote it in my Coppy before I saw Mr. Wills For his crying Victoria telling me our Divines sit silent under the Answers the Collonel and his Party have given them If this Epistoler read Mr. Baxter's Second Defence of Infants c. he may read a full answer to this and the reason of their silence p. 211. We may allow some Honour to a Collonel but why do they sit silent not because the Collonel or any other Anabaptist have put them to silence by Arguments from Scripture by Truth in History or Strength of Learning the contrary appears to judicious Readers but who will care for dealing with unreasonable Men They have other work to do of higher concernment Let the Anabaptists indulge themselves in their Opinions and Practises Redgness 24. August 1682. if they please I have performed that common Justice my Epistoler requires of me only for brevities sake I left out several things I would have added if this may do the Church of Christ any service I shall have my end and bless God G. FIRMIN THE PLEA OF THE CHILDREN OF Beleiving-Parents c. THE Right of the Children of Beleiving-Parents to Church-Membership with their Parents and consequently to
Observing how my Author and Mrs. Tombs insulted over Mr. Baxter and he that gave me the Challenge to Print telling me All my Party were silent and I living in a Country small Town and not hearing what Books came forth I could not tell what to think of it but when I wrote my Copy for the Press I left here a space till I wrote to Mr. Baxter to know whether he had met with any Arguments to change his thought I thank him he sent me down his Book in answer to them both Then one lent me Mr. Wills I heard also of Mr. Whitston but I saw none of these Authors till my Copy was written but I see they have answered Mr. Danvers to purpose discovered his gross falshood and forgery Another Divine I met with that knows Mr. Danvers though he hath not written against him yet he hath so traced him that he told me never did Jesuites abuse Authors in their Quotations more than he hath done That the Jesuites practice lies this way we may see in Bellarmine who quotes Ten of the Fathers to justifie his Doctrine of Christs preaching to the Spirits in prison 1 Pet. 3.19 when as Six of them I may say Eight of them give that Interpretation of the Text which Bellarmine himself condemns See saith that pious and learned Reignolds With what Conscience these Jesuites handle the Controversies of Religion which may well be applyed to Mr. Danvers abusing so many Authors as he hath done Reignold Praelec 86. de lib. Apochr p. 1044. See him again p. 1083. SECTION III. Leaving then the Historieal part by which Infant-baptism is much confirmed Let us come to the holy Scriptures out of which our Divines who have laboured in this Controversie have produced so many that I know not how more can be well added where therefore others have been large I will be brief One man I knew though I had no inward acquaintance with him about fifty years since a Mechanick and Head of a separate Company in those days he had none but his Mother-tongue but a very good head in Polemical Divinity This Doctrine of Anti-paedobaptism then being propounded to him he rejected though he had other Arguments against it yet I took notice of this I observe saith he ever since God had a people upon the earth he made a difference between the families of his servants and of wicked men even before the flood Gen. 6.2 There is not only truth but strength in it what-ever the Anabaptists scribble against it Two Texts especially my Author pitch upon because he thinks we build much upon them Gen. 17.7 1 Cor. 7.14 and so we do these he labours to take from us That the children of the Jews were Church-members with their Parents the Anabaptists acknowledge Then they were made so by this Covenant of God with Abraham and with his Seed and the Commandment to Circumcise them here then we must begin From the 17. Gen. 7. I lay the Argument thus A gracious Covenant made signed and sealed by God with a believing Person and his Seed and never repealed by God that Covenant remaineth in force and is to be signed and sealed unto his Seed But that Covenant of God with Abraham to be his God and the God of his Seed was such a Covenant and never repealed Therefore This we premise There is a great difference between the outward Administration of an Ordinance and the inward Efficacy This is clear in the Lords Supper preaching the Word and so in Baptism the Scripture is plain for this and the Anabaptists cannot deny it Or if you please to take Mr. Tho. Hooker's distinction There is an Inward and an Outward Covenant Cov. of Grace p. 2.3 Inward standing in a spiritual Institution of it between God and man When God calls a people and with his Call gives them Faith to answer his Call So that now he is indeed their God becomes theirs by Faith and they who are thus in Covenant with him shall never fall 2ly The outward Covenant is more large The Dispensation of this God gives on his part to Christians and their Engagements on their part is Faith in him subjection to him He doth engage himself to them and if they answer the outward Priviledge he will make them a choice people Exod. 19.5 Deut. 26.17 18 c. too long to transcribe By vertue of this Covenant God was said To know them above all the Nations in the world Amos 3.2 God set up his Tabernacle amongst them and dwelt amongst them Exod. 25.8 Psal 135.1 Chose Israel for his peculiar treasure Psal 135.4 Gave them his Ordinances Psal 147.19 20. God wrought for them wonderfully and though they provoked him exceedingly yet he bare with them and did not for Abraham 's sake cast them out of his presence as yet 2 King 13.23 Thus was he a God to them the whole visible Church of the Jews by it God gave them a great advantage to lay hold upon God to become their God in an outward Covenant in Efficacy as well as in outward Administration This I say by vertue of this Covenant with Abraham till they dealt most wickedly with God in Covenant rejecting Christ the promised Seed in Abraham's Covenant in whom they should be blessed then God brake Covenant with them and cast them off Zech. 11.10 14. As a people may besaid to be Gods people so God their God 1. When they acknowledge God to be the onely true God and their God 2. When they worship him with his own Worship onely 3. When they profess his Truths Doctrines and take his Word for their Rule 4. When they do Covenant and engage themselves to God Yet among these may be many Hypocrites and but formal Christians as Branches are said to be in Christ John 15.2 My Author moves six Questions here to raise a dust and trouble the Reader when things are plain he might have reduced them to Three what is considerable in the rest I shall touch First I call it a Gracious Covenant We read of several Promises God made to Abraham Gen. 12.2 3 7. and Chap. 13 14 15 16. and Chap. 15.1 4 5. But the word Covenant we read not of till this 17th Chapter here we have it several times and this Covenant between Abraham and his Seed being the last branch of the Covenant for Canaan in the next Verse was promised three times before God now adds a Sign verse 11. which the Apostle calls a Seal Rom. 4.11 So that now all the former Promises God binds them up and seals them up in a Covenant The great Promise of all Chap. 12.3 In thy Seed shall all the Nations be blessed is not mentioned in this Chapter since God began to speak of a Covenant but this was a part of the Covenant the Apostle Peter tells the Jews Acts 3.25 Ye are the Children of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers saying to Abrabam And in thy Seed shall all the Kindreds
Baptism was never so strongly opposed nor better defended than it hath been within these forty yearts in this English Nation I think there is enough Written to satisfie the minds of sober Christians but the Enemy of the Church is not yet quiet nor will be till the Church Militant becomes Triumphant A difference we may observe between Christians now and those in former times in England since I can remember How wary were they then what Doctrines they received Tho' they would not pin their Faith upon any Mans Sleeve yet they would consider what Persons they were for soundest of Faith and Holiness in Conversation from whom they would receive any Doctrine which hath made me wonder many times how this Doctrine of Anti-Pado Baptism which was first hatch'd in the Brain of that Notorious Heretick for so upon search I find him Auxentius Chereshed by Pelagius and afterwards revived by Men of corrupt Minds and lewd Conversations as that Learned and Pious Martyr Mr. Philpot tells his Fellow Prisoner in Newgate That this wretched Doctrine as Mr. Thomas Hooker calls it should fiâ—â— entertainment in the Hearts of any truly Godly as it hath done in England of late At this as I said I have wondered For this was not the frame of the Right Old English Puritans they would have abhorred the Doctrine for the Authors sake Good Mr. Jessey I knew between 50 and 60 years since but then I heard of no Inclination this way and one I have met with truly Pious sound in all other Points humble made no noise of his Opinion whither Re-baptised I cannot tell with him we held Communion in the Holy Supper To me it seems strange and so strange that I will never believe it That Christ should Promise his Spirit to his Church and that good Spirit should suffer both his Martyrs and choice People to err in such a Point if it be an Error from the Apostles days to this day Since the Reformation I believe England Scotland and Ireland have through Gods Rich Grace afforded as many Holy Heavenly Gracious and Learned Men as any Nations under the Sun As smart Enemies to Mystical Babylon of which the Anabaptists tells us Infant-Baptism is a Relique as any Anabaptists can be and have done more against that Babylon than all the Anabaptists that ever were or shall be have done or can do and till of late years I never heard of one what others have done I know not that did approve but did detest this Doctrine till our unhappy Wars in which time and since that time this Doctrine is much spread May I have leave to inquire what should occasion the spreading of this Opinion in this Nation besides the Soveraign pleasure of God who for wise ends may suffer a Gracious Man to err in some particular I have thought of these Causes First The first and chief Reason was even good Men did not improve their Father-Abrahams-Covenant nor their Infant-Baptism Covenant as they ought Hence not improving these they did not experience the goodness of God in them and our advantage by them Then no wonder tho' Men in times of Dispute and Temptations be at a loss and come at last to deny that which others who have improved and experienced have found to be a greater priviledge advantage and support to their Souls under their fears and other temptations Experiences you say unless well grounded upon Scriptures are but deluding Fancies I know it very well therefore the grounds have been well weighed On the other side tho' the Scriptures be plain yet the Gospel and things apprehended only by Faith are such and Temptations about them especially in some Men so strong that if a Man hath not attained to some experience of what he doth believe if his Faith hath not brought in some Spiritual Sense in the Hurricanes of long and strong Temptations a Mans Faith will be terribly shaken in the very Gospel it self The wind having blown at that Door before I could not but take special notice of what the worthy Author of the Book Intituled The fulfilling of Scriptures hath told us concerning that Holy Man and Eminent Servant of Christ Mr. Bruce telling his People I think it to be a greater matter to believe there is a God than people judge p. 430. The same Author speaking about Experience from his own Experience I doubt not how it helps to Witness that great Truth of Godhead p. 111. in the next Page 112. speaks thus It is not the Contemplation of Nature in its highest flight can answer such an Assault of the Devil which may try the most Established Christian Adult in the being of a God c. but then he shews how Experience of God helps the Soul Whether these be not Truths I leave it to those who have been long exercised with these Temptations now if in that Point as to the being of a God than much more as to Gospel Truths that no wonder the Apostle Prays that Beleivers may abound in all Knowledge and Sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Phil. 9. we read Judgment but the Greek word and so the Margent tells you is Sense The Arabick word is very significant Grotius and Gomarus understand by Sense Experience Hemmingius and Zanchie opens the word excellently Some Men are exercised with Temptations exceedingly more than others and God is pleased to be more Dark or exceeding Dark to some over he is to others which hath made me often think and say It is only Divine Teaching and the experimental Sense of what is taught that can make a sound Christian bear up and hold to the Word in the time of long and sore Temptations I could here give a very sad but true Story the like scarce ever heard before pertinent to the Point in hand but I fear the Devil would make ill use of it among tempted Christians and therefore I will not commit it to Writing To return to the Head I am upon If the Anabaptists say How can a Man improve a Nullity and get Experience of it Abrahams Covenant with the Seed of Believers now is Null Infant-Baptism is Null True I do not know how a Man can improve a Nullity But I doubt not there are many Anabaptists in England who lived several years before they drank in this Opinion of Anabaptism and in that time did not think Abrahams Covenant nor their Infant-Baptism to be Null many of them also had Parents not only visible but real Christians I appeal to their Consciences did you in that time before you drank in this Opinion improve the Covenant and your Infant-Baptism did you mind these did you meditate well upon them did you believe them upon these Meditations and Faith did you follow God close and earnestly in Prayer for the benefits of them and tho' you met with Temptations yet did you hold on and what did God give you in nothing no support no relief no comfort from these did you find no advantage to your Souls
Infant-Baptism though herein as in other things charged upon him by his railing Popish Adversary who took them up by Report from others he confesseth it is thought he is abused makes great use of neutrum enim sine alteo salvat and tells us Not one of these alone doth save but joyntly not Baptism without our own proper Faith nor our own proper Faith without Baptism is able to do any thing neither of them without the other saveth Therefore though Infants be baptized by you yet because by the hinderance of their they cannot believe by no means are they saved With other strange Tenets not worthy the Transcribing If my Author be not of the same Opinion with this De Bran if he be not abused why doth he so much glory of him in his Book and in his Title-page And if this be true That sound Faith in Christ cannot save without persons be of age and Dowzed over Head and Ears no wonder though they who believe it yield to Dipping I intend not to meddle with the Opinion only this I say They who do believe Jesus Christ to be God-man in one Person truly Immanuel do reverence the Institution of Christ and do acknowledge a necessity of the Ordinance both a Necessitas modii praecepti nor dare we omit it Yea some of the Socinians which I note because of the Quaquers some of which I know to be rather worse than Socinians as to the Person of Christ and deny Baptism altogether as also the Lord's Supper and no wonder do acknowledge Baptism not to be a thing indifferent but necessary as Martin Crechonicius and a means of Salvation as Schlichtingius That no man is to be esteemed a Member of the Church of Christ without Baptism as Ostorodus Therefore he thinks and Socinus Socin Proflig de Baptis That Infants may be baptized All quoted with the Pages of their Books by Calonius and tells us also That in a Socinian Synod held Anno 1636. in Transilvania as I understand it was the Synod concluded for Water-bapism In the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost So that the Quaker as to Gospel Ordinances and other greatest Gospel-truths are the worst Enemies Christ hath among them who own the Gospel which they do after a fashion But though we own the Necessity of Baptism The necessity of Baptism both for the Adult and little children but not absolute nenessity yet we do not think a sound Believer in Christ dying without Baptism shall be damned Our Lord doth not say in the next words Mark 16.16 but he that believeth not nor is baptized shall be damned Sound Believers may be hindred from Baptism and have been so How the Hopes of spiritual advantage as to more Grace and sense of God's Love Upon the Suasions some Sectaries have used to draw honest persons into their way have prevailed and how miserably they have complained after of Disappointment I could give Instance The Learned Reignolds Praeter 3. de Lib. Apoc. doth assert with many others whom he mentions I can also instance one Woman reputed for a serious Christian who hearing an Anabaptist and after discoursing with him he told her she must unravel all again she wanted this Ordinance of Baptism put her into such a fright that the Woman could not be quiet in her mind till she was Dipped and then fell distracted and never recovered I had this from her own relation The Spaniards drive the Indians to Baptism and the Anabaptists scarâ—e sound Christians baptized to Anabaptism I wrote to an Acquaintance of mine in a Corporation where were many Anabaptists to certifie me about the Conversation of Anabaptists He answers me they are mouldered away to nothing most turn Quakers Two that lived the next door to him were the best he knew The Woman when Dipt thought she was in a state of Salvation as she said but threw off that all Ordinances and Prayer He a little before his Death slighted the Blood of Christ and both died Quakers yet by their carriage drew divers to be Quakers SECT II. As to the Book it self who ever was the Author I charged it with falshood in the Historical part When I sent to borrow it again a second Edition was sent me then I saw the Letter was true which assured me Colonel Danvers was the Author and abundance of Authors more added than were in the first A whole Regiment is drawn up to the admiration of the Ignorant Anabaptists that now cry Victoria if he doth not abuse his Authors and the Anabaptists too which he hath most grosly For the ancient Fathers several of them I had read and knew them to be contrary to his Opinion But to follow Authors in particular I thought it a vain thing on the Lords-Day and that in a Country Congregation His quoting of the old Britains and the Waldenses as being Enemies to Infant-Baptism I took notice of answered that and no more Of which a little afterwards As to the numerous company of Authors he hath quoted I shall say but two things First I desire my Author to tell us if amongst them all he can find who was the Author of Infant-Baptism if it be an Errour as we can tell him who first opposed Infant-Baptism Hereticks not of the lower rank The Lord Brooks is a person whom the Anabaptists would perswade us was one of their Sect because of some Lines of his with which I accord But he tells us what prevailed with him on the contrary his words are these For ought I could ever learn it was the constant custom of the purest and most primitive Church mark Sir not mystical Babylon then to baptize the Infants of believing Parents For I could never find the beginning and first Rise of this Practice where as it is very easie to tract Heresies to their first rising up and seting foot in the Church This agrees with what I am upon why then do you quote him as if he were yours As for what he saith about Schismaticks Sir you are the Schismatick for I have kept Communion with a godly Anabaptist but one tells me that he desired Communion with one of your Churches but they would not admit him to Communion because he would not be dipped I see my Author hath named Master D. Rogers as if he did favour his Opinion when as living in the next Town to him and having intimate acquaintance with him I knew him to be a smart Enemy to the Anabaptists 2. The second thing I would say to them is this That ancient Father pious humble and learned Austin flourished above twelve hundred years before my Author or any Anabaptist in England was born then he lived so many years nearer the Primitive Churches than my Author or any of our Anabaptists Whether then B. Austin or those Anabaptists should best know the practice of the Primitive Churches as to Baptizing of Infants let any sober man judge He being a person so learned and so famous
no question had all those Authors which my Author quotes that wrote before him if not many more which we have not And did not that learned pious Father understand them as well as my Author or any Anabaptist now in England And though he was no Christian himself yet was not he acquainted with the practice of the Greek Churches in his time better than our Anabaptists Now he saith the practice of Infant-baptism was so universal in the Church Austin l. 1. de peccat mer. renis c. 26. De baptis contra Denat l. 2. c. 7. l. 4. c. 24. that it could not but come from the Apostles Ecclesia semper habuit c. The Church ever heard it saith he Had not Austin spoke true there was one did watch him Pelagius who would have told him of it to purpose for that Practice stood in Pelagius's way but Pelagius did not deny it And whereas my Author doth not regard the Writers as to this Controversie that wrote after the Third Centuary I am very confident there is no Author that wrote in the three first Centuaries that have any thing in them to oppose the baptizing of the Infants of believing Parents but on the contrary some of them speak for it They that read the most ancient Writers next the Apostles may see the subject matter they treated upon did not give them any occasion to speak of Infant-Baptism they had other Points in hand As to the old Britains I was a little startled to read them brought against Infant-Baptism the Proof my Author brings out of Fabianus I did read in him but I much question the truth of Fabianus because Mr. Fox giving us an account what Austin the Monk required of the British Bishops when he came into England tells us He required that they should Preach the Gospel to the English-men and that they should among themselves reform certain Rites and usages in their Church specially for keeping Eastertide and Baptizing after the manner of Rome Mr. Fox quotes several Authors besides Fabianus for this But that passage That they should give Christendom to children which Fabianus reports he doth not mention To Baptize after the manner of Rome to use their Ceremonies in Baptism and to baptize Children differ much I searched what Ceremonies were then used in Rome in Gregory's time and no wonder though the British Bishops rejected them But that the old Britains were against Infant-Baptism is very false which I thus prove What year God first sent the Gospel into England the Learned do not agree there seem to be strong grounds to believe that it was before King Lucius sent to Eleutherius B. of Rome some say it was An. 156 others 169 others 170 others 180. The Contest between Austin and Pelagius was about 417 in the 63 year of Austins life as Bucolcerus gathers Pelagius denied Original Sin upon that denied Infant-Baptism as being superfluous not because Infants cannot believe which is the sole Argument of our Anabaptists Pelagius a learned man would have slighted such an Argument as this Austin proves Infants to be guilty of Original Sin from the universal practice of the Church to take away Original Sin they did baptize Infants Now this Infant-baptism saith Austin The Church ever had it ever held it De verb. Apo. Ser. 10. they received this from the faith of their Ancestors and this will it keep with perseverance to the end Let Pelagius who was a Britain answer this Britany had received the Gospel 240 years before this Contest Pelagius knew the practice of his own Country and if it had been true that the old Britains did not baptize Infants as my Author saith why did not Pelagius Confute Austin charge him with falshood the Britains do not baptize Infants ergo it is not the practice of the Universal Church This being an Argument Austin did so urge and put so much stress upon it Pelagius would have removed it if he could But so far was Pelagius and his followers from denying what Austin affirmed that Celestius a Pelagian in a Book which he put â—orth at Rome hath these words which Austin quotes out of it We do confess that Infants ought to be baptized for remission of sins according to the rule of the Vniversal Church and according to the sentence of the Gospel â—hough Caelestius do not mention the Text â—et by the following words we may plainâ—y see he means John 3.5 Except a man be â—orn again of Water and of the Spirit So that according to this Pelagian here is Scripture ground and the Rule of the Vniversal Church for Infant-Baptism So then for the old Britains they were not against Infant-baptism Now then for the Waldenses were I to charge any Opinion or practice upon other Churches I should first look to the Confession of their Faith then I may boldly charge them or not As we have a few Anabaptistical Writers in England should their Books a hundred years hence fall into the hands of Anabaptists in foreign parts should they then assirm that the Church of England or the Churches in England were Anabaptists would not this be false and take it as a wrong done unto us View the Confession of Faith of the Church of England of the Assembly of Divines of the Independents in England in New England all their Confessions declare for Infant-baptism Thus should my Author have done if he would deal honestly with the Waldenses produce their Confession of Faith and the Article in which they condemn Infant-baptism In the Articles which I have read over I find no such thing but that Baptism ought to be Administred only with pure Water without any mixture of hallowed Oyl The Ministers in the Vallies of Piemont in the year 1532 when the Anabaptists in Germany were risen up in the 17th Article of their Confession declare for Infant-baptism The Churches in those Vallies kept chaste to Christ from the Apostles times and were long before the Waldenses were named they were called Waldenses but this was a Nick-name put upon them by their Adversaries to make the World believe that their Religion was but a Novelty Morland p. 12. In the Confession of the Faith of the Waldenses in Bohemia so Vergerius three times calls them the 12th Article Declares for Infant-baptism Anno 1535. As the Anabaptists rose up so the Churches drew up their Confessions against them The Ministers in their Preface to their Confession write That some malicious Spirits because they would cast all the Odium upon them that they could did reckon them amongst the Anabaptists But they answer Nos ex factione Anabaptistarum non esse nemini ignotum est All men know they were none of that Faction nor had any thing to do with the Anabaptists The Doctrine they confessed in their Churches they held and owned before the name of the Anabaptists was so much as heard of So that my Author hath plainly abused both the old Britains and the Waldenses