expresly written in the Word of God Therefore womenâ— receiving the Lord's Supper family-prayer morning and evening c. are not of God but of Satan You have now brought your Pigs to a fair market But if by the word WRITTEN you mean Consequentially written Then your Minor is false For Infant-baptism is so written in the Word of God i. e. Consequentially as hath been abundantly k) Sâ—e M Marshallâ— Defence p. 209 c. shewed out of Mat. 28.19 Acts 2.38 39. c. Where there are Consequentiall commands for Infant-baptism As by your own confession p. 12. Family-prayer c. is written in 1 Tim. 2.8 c. So that hence I conculde Infant-baptism is written in the Word of God and therefore of God and not of Satan as you blasphemously speak and write SECT 14. H. H. In your 5 Position you tell the people that if any have taken up this pâ—nion and have not read and studied Mr. Cobbet and Mr. Church and other chief Books and been able to confute them they have but discovered a seared conscience which either dare venture on sin without fear or else do count error no sin To all which I answer How now Mr. B. are you grown to this height what must not men obey what they find written in the holy Scripture till they have asked M. Cobbet and M. Churches counsel I pray you where learned you this Divinity at Rome I thought all this while the holy Scriptures had been able to make us wise to salvation but it seems they are not If you say True but we must be beholding to M. Cobbet and M. Church Reply 1. The greatest part of M. B. 5 Position you pass by in silence as being it seems unable to answer it and the piece you catch at you curtail also as the intelligent Reader may quickly observe 2. What you seem to answer to is in a Magisteriall Prelatical and scornfull way e. g. How now M. B are you grown to this height what must not men obey c. till they have asked M. Cobbets and M. Churches counsell I pray where learned you this Divinity at Rome I am very sorry that you are grown to that height as to fit in the seat of the scornfull l) Psal 1.1 3. The Scriptures I acknowledge is able to make us wise to salvation and yet we may and must read other Books for all that m) 1 Tim 4.14 with Eccl. 12.12 give attendance to reading I believe you speak this out of the height of your bitternesse and malice against all humane learning which shall be defended in its place 4. What a poor and pitifull reason do you give Mr. Cobbets and Mr. Churches Books must not be read because the Scripture is able to make us wise to salvation n) Foundation p. 15. to 21. Why then did M. Haggar read if he hath read those Books mentioned in pag. 15. which make up three whole leaves Are not the Scriptures able to make M. Haggar wise to salvation without them Nay why have you printed this Book of yours if not to be read and yet for all that the Scripture is able to make us wise to salvation through Faith in Christ SECT 15. H. H. p. 36 But I pray how did men before M. Cobbets and M. Church's Bâ—oks were writen and how do those â—ow who cannot come by their Books or never heard of them If it be as you say you may do well to send some men up and down the Country to sell them But I believe this is but one of your scare-Crows with which you use to affright silly souls that set their Faith in your wisedom and not in the power of God but your folly is a making manifest and light and freedom is breaking forth to them which you have kept in darkness and bondage Reply 1. Pehaps you might as well ask how did men before the Scriptures were written But 2. You speak in the language of ignorant superstitious Popish and prophane persons what are become of our Ancestors c How did our Forefathers before there were so much preaching c The same plaister may be applied to both sores viz. They stand and fall to their Master Where much is given much is required that little measure of light might be saving to them which will not be to us But M. Baxter tells you p. 6. If any of you have taken up this opinion without reading M. Cobbets c. and being able to confute them at least to himself which words you have left out you have discovered a seared conscience c. To which you answer not a word 3. Your scoffing scorning and censuring are unworthy of any reply only it seems as yet you have not made M. B. folly manifest for you say His folly is a making manifest and I am confident that that light and freedom you talk of will be found in the event darkness and Thraldome 4. Consider in your cold blood whether you do not keep your Proselytes in darknesse and bondage by keeping them from the publick Ministry By the light whereof your errors are discovered under the odious terms of Antichristian c. one of your Scare-Crows with which you use to affright silly souls And by keeping them to your Ministry or to some private gifted-brother as he is called what is this but to be kept in bondage or set in the stocks SECT 16. H. H. same p In your sixth Position you say you will discover a most frequent cause of mens falling into errors viz. All men in the beginning do receive many truths upon weak and fals grounds and so hold them a while till they are beaten out of their old Arguments and then presently they suspect the cause it self and you are perswaded that it is Mr. Tomb's case Answ As for Mr. Tombs he is of age and able to answer for himself I never knew any receive Infant-baptism upon any ground at all weak or strong neither can they being uncapable of understanding what they do Therefore you may well say they are or may be quickly beaten off it again c. Reply 1. What you say of M. Tombs I may more truly say of M. Baxter he is of age and able to answer for himself If that be true of which I make no question which is said of M. Baxter o) J. G. Catabap A man as fit and able as any I know to make straight a crooked age 2. M. Baxter doth not say as you represent him but you being deceived would deceive the simple partly by leaving out the word ALMOST For he saith Almost all men do receive many truths on weak and false grounds and partly by not distinguishing between the receiving of Infant-baptism and the doctrine of Infant-baptism The Jewish Infants received Circumcision even when and while they could not receive the doctrine of it Your reason therefore concludes as strongly against Circumcision then as against Infant-baptisme now SECT 17. H. H. same
liberty to swerve from these primitive practices c. 4. The custome of the Churches in baptizing Infantâ— is of that weight with the Paedobaptists that you must bâ—ing more convincing Arguments then you have yet done to take them off from that custom As for the manner of Baptizing Mr. Cradock to whom Mr. Baxter referrs you tells you * Gospel-liberty p. 2â— 4. I hat Christ hath not made Baptism such an Ordinance as that in all Climates and Countries-and Regions they must go over head and ears in a River c. SECT 22. H. H. You say that you can prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles as there be many sufficient Histories extant inform us and that the deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery upon Popish or Heretical grounds Answ Oh Sir have I now sound you out Truly seeing I have I must not conceal your wickedness least I become guilty with you of the blood of souls And therefore I do by this declare to all men that you are both a Deceiver and a Blasphemer The which charge I now come to prove Reply 1. Nay stay a while and consider what you say or do you triumph before the victory If you have but now found out Mr. Baxter It teems you have missed of him all this while 2. Though I have found you out before yet I must not conceal your weakness wickedness and audaciousness least I communicate with you in â—our sin and here I do declare to all men hereby that Henry Haggar is both an Imposter and a Blasphemer the which charge I come now to prove but first let us see how you prove the charge SECT 23. H. H. p. 3.38 1. It 's evident you are a Deceiver in that you have intituled your Book Plain Scripture proof for Infant 's Church-membership and Baptism when indeed there is no such thing in all the Bible but you confess that your proof is from some histories extant which you judge sufficient c. Reply 1. You notoriously abuse Mr. Baxter he doth not say that proof for Infant-baptism from Histories are sufficient in his judgment u) see Mr. Baxt. Position 9. p. 7. but in opposition to Mr. T. pretences among the simple he saith he shall easily prove that Infant-baptism was used in the Church as high as to the Apostles daies as there is any sufficient history extant to inform us And if this proves Mr. Baxter to be a deceiver then blessed v) see the foregoing Chap. 5. sect 14. Inst 3.4 c. 16. s 8. Calvin is one and many other burning and shining lights in the Churches of Christ But your charge is indeed from an Eldern-gun and is no Musket-shot it makes a noise but God be thanked hurts not 2. Besides the humane testimonies for Infant-baptism in matter of fact M. Baxter brings abundance of plain Scriptures to prove it De jure And if you see them not it is because you are wilfully blind and obstinate It 's an easie matter for you with impudence to say there is no such thing but it's hard for you to disprove those Texts of Scripture alledged by him Therefore you have cunningly waved all saving two or three in comparison 3. Your Proposition implied is false viz. He that intitles his Book so and yet brings antient histories to prove the usage of Infant-baptism as high as the Apostles daies is a Deceiver you will never set this crooked legg straight while the world stands 4. To set the Saddle as they say on the right horse and to prove you a Deceiver I thus argue He that intiâ—uleth his Book Plain Scripture-proof for the baptizing of men and women when they believe in Rivers and Fountains as a Standing Ordinance in the Church of Christ is a Deceiver But H. H. so intituseth his Book therefore H H. is a Deceiver Theâ—e is no doubt of the Minor and the Major is as clear because those words viz. A Standing Ordinance are no where written in the Scripture of truth and with Mr. Haggar express and plain Scripture proof are all one SECT 24. H. H. 2. You are a Blasphemer for you say deferring of Baptism came in with the rest of Popery Answ But Sir do you not know that our glorious Lord Jesus Christ deferred his baptism till he was thirty years of age Luke 3.21 22 23. And yet he was the child of believing Parents I think you dare not deny Reply 1. If this example be binding none ought to be baptized till they are thirty years old which I perswade myself is against your judgment and practice 2. Luke saith not that Christ deferr'd his Baptism till he was thirty years of age This is your inference not his Assertion He doth not say Christ was thirty years of age before or when he was baptized much less tha the Deferr'd his Baptism till then but thus * Luke 2.23 Jesus himself began to be About thirty years of age c. 3. Christ was not till then baptized partly to answer the Types x) Numb 4.3 35 39 43 47. and chiefly to receive that Testimony from Heaven in the midst of such a great confluence of people that came to John to be baptized which is hinted by Mat. 3.5 6 13 Then and held forth by Luke c. 3.21 22. Therefore this was not properly a deferring * see Diodat on 2 Pet. 3 9. unless perhaps in the judgment of the Flesh as Hab. 2. vers 3.2 Pet. 3.9 SECT 25. H. H. p. ibid. Again doth not the Commission of Christ defer Baptism till believing Mark 16.15 16. and Philip also Acts 8 36 37. shewing by these words plainly that if he did not believe it was to be deferred c. Reply 1. In Mark and in the Acts cited there is not one word of deferring till believing you manifest your own folly and delude poor souls c. 2. You are now for Consequences when you think they will serve your turn Mr. Baxter hath brought more plain Scripture-proof for Infant Church-membership and Baptism then you have done for deferring Baptism 3. I am mistaken if you are not guilty of a plain contradictions For in your pag. 26. in your exhortation you do more then implie that Baptisme is not to be deferred saying Let us not delay the time with a woful misapplication of Scripture y) â—sal 119.60 but here in this page Baptism is to be deferred as you plead 4. The rest of this page contains nothing but an idle Repetition or abominable Censuring with horrible abuse of Scripture and therefore shall have no other answer but what is made already SECT 26. H. H. pag. 39. The summe of which is that Rev 19.20 and 13.16 17. are most properly applied to you the sign of the Cross being a mark of the Beast on the childs forehead when it was baptized or rather rantized Here is a looking-glass for you but the Gospel is our looking-glass Acts
say Here is fulfilled Clap your hands and leap for joy and say with the Philosopher in another case o) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have found I have found viz. the Font in Jeremy though I cannot find it in all the holy Scriptures 3. Can you say without blushing Here the words of the Prophet are fulfilled Did the Spirit of God ever intend here Baptismal Fonts and if not intended how is this text now fulfilled In what words are Fonts implied in the word Fountain the Knight indeed saith Fonts or Fountains p) Pag. 8. out the term is appropriated by the Lord to himself They have forsaken me the Fountain c. No man that I know of holds our Fonts to be Fountains of living waters and your self declines at when you make the forsaking of baptizing men and women c. Parallel with the peoples forsaking God the fountain c. Or in the word Câ—stern in which it seems you have found Fonts but the text saith Those Cisterns are broken Cisterns that can hold no water which you have cunningly left out lest your disciples should espie your foul mistake but our Fonts could and did hold water Sir I must tell you had not your brain been cracked you had never imagined our Fonts to be broken Cisterns Therefore let the Reader observe how grosly you abuse this Scripture and consider seriously whether that Scripture be not fulfilled in you being one of those that are unlearned and unstable who q) 2 Pet. 3.16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As torturers Put a man on the rack and make him speak that he never thought so these set the Scripture on a rack and draw ouâ— a sense which was never intended Leigh Crit. Sacr. wrest the Scriptures I pray God it be not to your own destruction 4. For the rest cited in your p. 9. and part of the 10. I say no more but this Is the Knights testimony so valid that it must be largely transcribed when it seems to make against us And must it be so sleighted when it seems to make against you as about the Terms Tythe and Church To the first answer shall be returned towards the end of the book And to the second Why may not the publick place of worship be called a Church because the Church meets there as well as it is called the Synagogue because the Congregation of the Jewes met there to perform publick worship CHAP. V. Of the Rise of Infant-Baptism SECT 1. H. H. p. 10. Wee must have the Rise of Infant-baptisme from those Rabbies that did practise it or else not at all because the Scripture is silent in it as they themselves confess So Mr. Hall r) Font guaâ—ded p. 30. literally syllabically terminis terminantibus in expresse terms Infant-baptism is not commanded nor a thousand things more A wretched lye for it 's an hard thing for Mr. Hall to prove that God requireth of the sons of men a thousand or half a thousand things no where commanded Reply 1. To passe by your scornful terms Rabbies c. you are guilty of falshood in saying We confesse the Scripture is silent in it I know not any one that makes such a Confession if you do you might have named him or them But this you passe by in silence in hope your falshood should not be discovered but in vain a general accusation is as good as silence 2. Admit the Scripture were silent herein it makes nothing against us For it is a common and true rule as before a Negative Argument from Authority proves nothing Nay I confesse the Scripture is silent in Mr. Hall's sense i. e. It speaketh nothing of Infant-baptism in expresse terms by way of command but it is not silent in another sense for it speaks implicitly of it E. gr Ministers maintenance is not expresly mentioned in those words Å¿) Deut. 25.4 Thou shalt not muzzle the Oxe when he treadeth out the corn yet it is implied in those words if you will believe the Apostle s) 1 Tim. 5.17.18 for the Scripture saith Thou shalt not muzzle c. And again t) 1 Cor. 9.9 For it is written in the Law of Moses Thou shalt not muzzle c. Now Sir Riddle me riddle me what 's this The Scripture is silent and yet Saith It is Written in the Law of Moses And yet not one word concerning Ministers maintenance written expresly in Deut. quoted u) p 12. Yea to take your own instance A man may pray in his Family because he may pray every where according to 1 Tim. 2.8 Where Family-praier is implied and so the Scripture is not silent in it but not expressed and so it is silent Many more instances may be given but these may suffice without the imputation of a wretched lye 3. Suppose the Scriptures were altogether silent about Infant-baptism it rather proves that Infants were baptized to any unbyassed judgment because we read not of any Controversie about a complaint against Infant-baptism as we do concerning the Widows that were neglected v) Acts 6.1 a businesse of an inferiour alloy in comparison of this in hand 4. What a wretched man are you in saying a wretched lie on the account mentioned by Mr. Hall you shew your self as rude in Ethicks as unskilful in Rhetorick x) Hyperbole so much used in Scripture specially in this case e. gr Cities walled up to heaven y) Deut. 1.28 i. e. very high now because this was spoken by the Spies who might tell a lie therefore compare this text with another viz. Deut. 9.1 Cities great and fenced up to heaven which certainly were the words of Moses So Mat. 23.24 Yee blind guides who strain at a Gnat and swallow a Camel i. e. strain at things of small moment and swallow things of greater concernment So Joh. 21.25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did the which if they should be written every one I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books that should be written Abundance of more instances which if you can read with Latine eies you may find in Alsted z) Praecognita Theologiae pag. 157 158. l. 2. But if you can look onely with English eies see Diodat on John forenamed I hope you will not give the Wretched Lie to Moses Christ John c. as you do to Mr. Hall who by those thousand things means according to your usual expression a certain number for uncertain i. e very many or a great number as 1 Cor. 4.15 Ten thousand Instructers in Christ. 5. It 's well you say It 's an Hard thing for Mr. Hall to prove that God requires a thousand things of us not commanded It seems you dare not say it 's impossible onely it's Hard. And what if he prove an hundred or half an hundred which is easie to do they are too many for you to answer SECT 2. H. H. There is no express command saith Mr. Hall in the
Nations and in compassing the Camp of the Saints will not bee after the full glorifying of the Saints in the highest heavens 2. If these things are too hard for Mr. C. to understand though a Scholar are they easie to you why then do you hold the Light under a Bushel But he that hath but half an eye may see the impertinency of the Scriptures a) Luk. 20.21 with 1 Cor. 2.8 9 10. alledged by you SECT 7. H. H. You say from Rev. 21.24 that the Nations of them that are saved That walk in the light of the New Jerusalem I answer That 's granted but that New Jerusalem is not yet here below for drunkards and wicked persons to walk by but Paul saith b) Gal. 4.26 that it 's above and is free and is the Mother of all the Saints Reply 1. To what purpose do you mention drunkards c. when Mr. C. according to the text Rev. 21.24 expresly mentions them that are saved 2. Paul doth not say expresly neither do you undertake to prove that this New Jerusalem in the Revelation is the Mother of all the Saints That 's your glosse and not the Apostles words But whether by this New Jerusalem is meant the Church Triumphant in heaven which is improbable because it 's said c) Rev. 21.2 to descend from heaven and expresly The Kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it which you cunningly left out or 2. The Church of truly sanctified ones on earth which are hid in the visible Church as the Wheat in the chaffe or 3. of a Future glorious Church on earth at the Jews conversion Iâ— holds forth that National Churches are nâ—t to be accounted absurd to those who are acquainted with the Scriptures For they that are saved are Churches or members of Churches but Nations are saved Therefore Churches or members of Churches 3. The Apostle saith not the Mother of all the Saints as you cite him but of us all as you truly cite it p 56. I believe you have a mind to canonize all the Anabaptists for Saints and I doubt not but there are some reall Saints among them but if there be not drunkards and wicked persons members of your Church you are foully belied Such surely are of Agar SECT 8. H. H p. 29. Lastly you say If a company of believers in one house have been called a Church Domestical then a multitude of believers in a Nation maâ— be called a National Church I answer That 's granted if they be all believers as you said at first but little babes are not believers c. Râ—ply 1. Sir review your Answers from p. 27. to this 29. and you grant seven times at â—east what Mr. C. proves viz. a Nationall Church in a Gospel-time which was the end of citeing the forenamed Scriptures d) See Font uncovered p. 2 to shew that there is no cause of being ashamed of the Title of a National Church nor of your accounting it odious and absurd Now blessing on you I hope you and Mr. C. will shake hands and be friends But yet 2. You curtell Mr. C. Arguments and Scriptures That immediately precedent and this present citation of the words of that Book witness specially this last where you have not only left out ten parts for one very material to clear the consequence but so cited here and there a word as to make it speak little better then non-sense which I refer to the judgment of those that will read the Book and mark how you have abused both it and him 3. If there were some babes in those housholds which could not actually believe and some adult too who did not professedly much lesse sincerely believe the like must be granted concerning National Churches viz. Though every particular person therein doth not actually believe or professe Faith yet the major or better part may give the Denomination e. g. The Infancy of some the wickedness of others hindred not but the Jews might be warrantably called a Nationall Church 4. Though you quite and clean mistake Mr. C. who by the by proves a National Church and here meddles not with Infants yet if little babes be no believers not so much as virtually c. as Mr. C. saith how e) Mar. 16.16 shall ye escape damnation CHAP. VIII Of Affirming a Negative and teaching the Law SECT 1. H. H. You say in your 6 p. we affirm a Negative viz. that the Baptism or sprinkling of Infants is not the Baptism of Christ c. And here you follow us on to purpose and tell us we are such as the Apostle speaks of f) 1 Tim. 1.5.6.7 understanding not what they say nor whereof they affirm Here you think you hit us home I must confesse now you have catched us out of our own element and in your own for we know you are Scholars and have learned to contend about words to no profit c. Reply 1. There is no cause of making this din of being pursued to purpose c. For in that Book there are very few lines spâ—nâ— about this your absurdity But you have bestowed almost two pages in pleading for it with more absurdities Nay this is not the only ground as you untruly relate of your charge there but one among those verall grosse mistakes which may give just cause to judge that you are such as the Apostle saith know not what they say nor whereof they affirm 2. What vanity and audaciousness did you then discover in urging for disputes when you confesse the terms of Art which are needfull to be known in all regular dispuâ—ings are things out of your element To dispute without Legick and to reason in points of learning without Scholarship is as wise as to undertake to judge of colours without sight and light or to challenge to run a race without leggs SECT 2. H. H. Seeing we erred in saying we affirm a Negative we will either confess our errour or shew you a president which may justifie our practice Paul saith g) Kom 3.12 There is none that doth good no not one Here Paul affirmeth a Negative for there is an Affirmative c. Reply 1. It had been far better for you ingeniously to have confessed your error or to have passed it by in silence as you have done many more materiall things in Mr. Br. and Mr. C. Books for you are like to a beast in a Quagmire the more you stir the deeper you sink What intollerable impudency is this instead or confessing your error and resolving to keep within your own element to go about to justifie your self of fathering your folly on the Scripture 2. In that proposition of the Apostle the negative particle is in the h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 originall set before the Verb so that according to your interpretation it would be rather a denying of an Affirmative then affirming a Negative They that understand know that where the predicate is affirmed
Mr. B. said 3. You would make Mr. Baxter odious by saying He takes the Divels part c. But Sir you know the proverb A man must give the Divel his due Surely those godly Ministers do not take the Divel's part when they tell sinneâ—s that many times they be-lye the Divel in fathering their sins on him rather then on themselvs Mat. 15.19 Out of the hâ—art proceeds evil thoughts c. Jam. 1.14 Every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust 2 Pet. 1. ver 4. Corruption is in the world through lust 4. I fear that fault charged on Mr. Baxter will bee found within your own girdle before I leave you Though you say you will now make it appear It seems then you failed in making it to appear as you said in the foregoing page But just so you have learned the Divels deceit in adding to Scripture E. g Baptism is to be deferred til a man can believe which is not written in the Bible but in Mr. Haggars book p. 38. and you say p. 61. God hath one way to save men and women and another way to save little children which is no where written in the holy Scriptures Again in the same page you say Infants dying in their infancy are saved by virtue of Christ's death without actual Fâ—ith which is no where written c. who now writes after the Divels copie Who takes the Divels part SECT 34. H. H. p. 43. The Divel said to Christ If you be the Son of God cast thy self down which is no where written as the Lord saith but the contrary viz. Thou shalt not tempt the Lord c. So do you say if you be the children of God Baptize your children which is no where written but the contrary Mat. 28.29 Mar. 15 16. Acts 2.38 41. 8.37.12.37 But you know there is no children in the Text neither can they do any thing of those things notwithstanding all this you do the works of Satan Reply 1. Though what is said in the foregoing Sect. is a sufficient reply as to this also yet I am sure Christ proves two things contrary to you 1. The lawfulness of arguing from Scripture by Consequences 2. That is Scripture which is contained though not expressed therein e. g. Christ must not cast himself down for it is written in Deut. 6. ver 16. Thus. If the Lord must not be tempted then I must not cast my self down But the Lord must not be tempted Therefore 2. You bewray your ignorance in saying contrary for the baptizing of Infidels converted to the Faith and Infants also of one or both Christian parents are not contrary but subordinate k) Subordinate non pugnant there is a consistency of both 3. The Scriptures you cite in Mat. and Mark and the Acts have been answered before you do but trouble your self and tire the Reader with vain Repetitions Yet to your last I say Children are expresly mentioned in Acts 2. ver 39. which you have cunningly left out as if to use your own expression you meant to take the Divels part and so to do his work Beside your allegations are as strong against Circumcision as against infant-baptism for you know they could not repent nor believe with all their hearts c. and yet were circumcised But let us see how Mr. B. or we do the works of Satan SECT 35. H. H. As he tempted Christ to cast himself down before God's time was come to send his Angels to take him down and to that end would have applied a promise falsly Psal 91.11 12 leaving out In all thy waies So do you tempt men and women to baptize their children before God's time is come to beget them by his Word Joh. 3.5 James 1.18 That they might be born again nor onely of water but of the Spirit And to that end you tell them It is written They are disciples and Church-members and they were circumcised under the Law therefore they must be baptized under the Gospel c. Reply 1. You drive on the Popish design handsomly for here you open a wide door for unwritten Traditions What Scripture have you that saith expresly of the coming of God's time to send his Angels to take down Christ 2. Here is a very spiteful parallel What likenesse between Casting thy self down and baptizing Children 3. We have another unwritten Tradition viz. We tempt men and women to baptize their Children before God's time is come 4. You cannot deny but God doth beget some Infants by his Spirit without the Word else they are none of his Rom. 8.9 5. Your Gloss on John 3.5 smells too strongly of the Popish Cask most Orthodox Divines understand by Water and Spirit one and the same thing the latter being exegetical to the former as Mat. 3.11 to be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with Fire is all one which you distinguish as different in saying not onely of Water but also of the Spirit 6. What a strange piece of Non-sense have we here God doth beget us by his Word that we might be born again when God's begetting of us and our being born again in Scripture are all one l) 1 Joh 4.18 He that is born of God sinneth not but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself c. See also verse 1. 7. These Arguments to prove Infant-baptism drawn from Circumcision Church-membership Discipleship c. you cannot answer but by railing which shall have no other Reply from me but Silence and Patience SECT 36. H. H. p. 44. You tell us that if we have the meaning and reason we have enough for evidence for words are but to express sense Answ Then it seems the meanings and reasons you talk of without the Word are without sense by your own confession And thus you see or may see that God by weak instruments can take you wise ones in your own craftiness But again are not the words of the Scripture as good and better sens and reason then any you can speak or give Reply 1. It is not Mr. Baxter's confession but Mr. Haggar's profession to wrest M. Baxter's words as well as Scripture Let any 〈…〉 of judiciousness read M. Baxter's 10. Position and he will quickly 〈◊〉 Baxter's plainness and M. Haggar's craftiness 2. It 's granted that the words of the Scripture in Hebrew and Greek were given by the inspiration of the Spirit but our English words into which they are translated are not we may without blasphemy say If you deny this I must needs conclude you are so far from being high-flown that with the Serpent you creep on the ground and pave the way for making the Vulgar Translation Authentical as you would the English SECT 37. H. H. You say further Would it not make a man pity such sensless ignorant wretches that will call for express words of Scripture when they have evident Consequences Is Scripture-reason no reason Answ Sir me thinks you are very pitiful but you are a
We would have Mr. Baxter and all men know that we take all the sayings of Christ to be as good Scripture and of as great authority as any part of the Bible Therefore now Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook 's folly and wickedness is manifest who would insinuate into peoples minds that Christ did not bring Scripture to prove the Resurrection of the Dead but they must help him by their Consequences But their deceit lies in this that because Christ did not bring some other Scripture to prove the Resurrection therefore they conclude he proved it by consequence never minding that what he said was Scripture and what he approved of is approved and ought to be of all without murmurings and disputings Reply 1. Do you take all the sayings of Christ to be as good Scripture and of as great authority as any part of the Bible If you understand it of Christ's sayings left upon Record in holy Writ I am of the same belief but because you speak so largely and indistinctly I imagine without breach of charity your design is to open a wide door for unwritten Traditions to come in and be received as the Council of Trent hath determined pari pietatis affectu * Vide primuâ—â— Dâ—cretum qua tae sessionis Comcilii Tridentiâ—â— Pet. Suar. l. 2. p. 127. i. e. with the like affection of piety as any part of the Bible And this is not a groundless imagination for both your tenents and practices speak a promoting of the Catholick cause as it is so called for which it's strongly suspected and rumor'd that you are an Agent I pray call to mind the Jesuit who pretended to be a Jew and converted and was admitted a member of an Anabaptistical Congregation at Hexham in the North. 2. Your silly evasion a Cole wort more then twice sodden is as apparent now as the detection of that Jesuit and needs no further reply 3. It 's a notorious slander that Mr. Baxter and M. Cook c. would insinuate into peoples minds that Christ did not bring Scripture to prove the Resurrection of the Dead For they say plainly u) Mr. Cooks Font uncovered p. 24. that Christ proves the doctrine of the Resurrection against the Sadduces by Consequence from that Scripture I am the God of Abraham c. you are one of those men as Mr. Baxter saith p 8. who have reported abroad That Christ was not able to confute the Sadduces or to bring any Scripture for his Doctrine What say you now for you say nothing in this page to Mr. Baxter's motion Will you allow of such an Argument for Infant-baptism as Christ here brings for the Resurrection Will you confess it to be a sufficient Scripture proof 4. If what Christ approved of is and ought to be approved of all and it 's certain that Christ approves this way of arguing from Scripture by Consequence as you cannot deny then do you approve it without murmurings or disputings This was Christ's usual way E. g also he proves the lawfulness of his Disciples v) Mat. 12.3 â— 5 6 7. pulling the ears of corn and eating them on the Sabbath day by consequence from Scripture viz. from David's eating of the Shew-bread 2. From the Priest's sacrificing on the Sabbath And 3. From that Expression in Hos 6.6 I will have mercy and not sacrifice To conclude this I see you are like a bird in a net the more you stir the faster you are held notwithstanding your fluttering SECT 49. H H. p. 48. But now to make their folly manifest I will reason with them another way and if they prove as plainly that Infants are to be baptized as Christ did there prove that the dead should rise they shall have it and I will confess my self in an error And now to the matter Reply 1. Here is another confession of yours that Christ plainly proves there the Resurrection of the Dead now either it is Expresly or by Consequence x not Expresly for there is not one word of the Resurrection in Exodus 3 6. Therefore by Consequence will you now confess your error and say That some doctrine is contained plainly in Scripture which is not expresly written therein 2. You will Now make their folly manifest You had said but a little before in the same page that it is now manifest Surely you have manifested your own folly in indeavoring to do that now which you said was done before 3. It seems all this while you came not to the matter but fell short or beside the mark for you say And now to the matter SECT 50. H. H. Mark 12.25 When they shall rise from the dead they neither marry Now do you shew a Scripture that saith And when they shall baptize little children they shall c. Reply 1. This is but the same answer in another form 2. When you bring a Scripture that saith When they shall dipp actual believers or visible Saints they shall c. we will shew you then a Scripture that saith as you say SECT 51. H. H. vers 26. As touching the dead that they rise have you not read c. Now do you produce such a Scripture if you can that saith As touching little children that they may be baptized have you not read c. Bring you but Striptures that come but thus near the matter and we will grant you Infant-baptism but till then you are unreasonable in your reasoning Reply 1. Produce you a Scripture out of Exodus that saith The dead shall rise and then you shall have such a Scripture That children shall be baptized 2. You say and unsay Even now you approved of arguing by Consequence from Scripture and now nothing will serve turn but Express Scripture 3. You would make the people believe that we deny the Resurrection of the Dead God forbid We hold Christ proves the Resurrection by Consequence which you cannot deny 4. When you cannot answer then you fall a railing you accuse and condemn your self nay Christ as well as us as unreasonable in our reasoning SECT 52. H. H. pag. 49. Some will object that I tye Mr. Baxter and Mr. Cook to plain Scripture but I my self have written many words in this book that are not plain Scripture Answ It 's one thing for a man to use words to express himself to those that will not believe the Scriptures as they are written and another thing to bring the Scriptures to shew men a rule to walk by and what their duty is in matters of faith and obedience The former we allow but not the latter either to our selves or others c. Reply 1. You take to your self that liberty which you deny to others who may not without a check from you use the word Sacrament p. 14. nor Negative p. 29. c. 2. The phrase of not believing the Scriptures as they are written is dark and doubtful you had need of an Expositor yet I know not who those are that will
thanks at Meals to pray in Families c. I hope you will not eat your own words i) P. 12 13 14. And I say such a trust forementioned is our duty contained in the Word though not expressed as 1 Pet. 2.6 with Isa 28.16 where the Apostle saith It is contained in the Scripture c. and yet those words elect and not confounded are not expressed in Isa 28.16 Querie 3. Whether the Saints have any ground to believe the Resurrection from the Dead and eternal life in glory but as it is recorded in Scripture Answ The Sadduces had ground to believe the Resurrection as it is recorded i. e. contained in Exod. 3.6 and the Saints too as it is expresly written in Scripture elswhere Qu. 4. Whether if a man believe and obey all the known precepts and promises contained in the Word of God as much as in him lieth will God condemn and punish him at that great day because he hath believed and done no more Answ A captious Interrogatory looking towards Quakerism that new-refined Papism about absolute perfection or freedome from sin in this life or toward Arminianism about the salvation of the moral Heathens yet I say God may condemn a man for the least sin of ignorance without Christ k) Levit. 4 2 3 13 22 37. with Luk. 12.48 and for the least defect in duty Nehem. 14.22 with Rom. 6.23 Qu. 5. If the Scriptures ought to be believed and obeied as they are written then how dare some deny faith in and obedience to some part of them and impose things not written in the Scriptures to be obeied in stead of the Ordinances of Christ Answ That phrase as they are written is ambiguous Were your meaning clear answer should be returned however I know none that deny such faith and obedience much less who impose things not written i. e. not contained in the Scriptures as Qu. 2. to be obeied in stead of Christ's Ordinances your Qu. implies a malitious calumniation and so let it pass Querie 7. If the Scriptures be not a perfect rule of faith and obedience without the help of any man's inventions what is Or who may we trust or at whose mouth must we seek wisdom Answ The Scripture is a rule Eccl. 12.10 with Gal. 6. ver 16. and a perfect rule Psal 19.7 and that of faith and manners as Austin doth phrase it God we may and must trust 2 Chron. 20.20 with Isa 7.9 at God's mouth must we seek wisdom Isa 8. ver 20. with Acts 17. ver 11. Qu. 7. Whether there be any sin or corruption incident to man that the Scriptures doth not reprove or make manifest in express terms Answ l) Indeed you answer your self p. 69. Yes 1. Original fin Gen. 5.3 Job 14.4 and 15.14 Psal 51.5 Eph. 2.3 Rom. 5.12 2ly Some actual sins as Incest Buggery Sodomie Polygamie of which last you have cause to examine yourself and many more 3ly There are many Errors and Heresies which in the general are called works of the flesh Gal. 5. ver 19 20. Egr. Euty chianism Ernomianism Nestorianism Arrianism Arminianism Papism with others more without number which surely are corruptions incident to man to use your own phrase and yet which the Scriptures doth not reprove and make manifest in express terms Qu. 8. Whether there be any virtue or praise in any thing that the best of men ever did but what is expresly commanded or commended in the Scripture of truth Answ Yes there was some virtue or praise in the Disciples eating some ears of Corn on the Sabbath-day yet not expresly commanded or commended in 1 Sam. 21.6 To which our Saviour doth refer the Pharisees to whom he said Have you not read what David did c. Mat. 12.3 4. yea you your self imagine at least there is virtue and praise in Dipping in a Meer or Marle-pit or Horse-pool c. and yet no where expresly commanded or commended in Scripture Querie 9. I appeal to every man's conscience in the sight of God whether their consciences do not condemn them when they walk contrary to what is written in Scripture Answ If by what is written you mean as in your seventh and tenth Querie I say yes unlesse the conscience be blind seared or asleep as I fear yours is for your frequent if not constant railing and reviling to name no more is contrary to what is written expresly in Scripture Qu. 10. Whether every man's conscience doth not justifie him when he walks according to what is contained in the Word Answ The answer immediately foregoing will serve here also without more ado SECT 6. H. H. p. 54. If all these Queries be granted as they are stated to be true then those that teach and perswade men to do any thing in matter of justification or salvation more or lesse then is plainly written and expressed in the Word of God are such as add to and take from the Word of God and are guilty of those plagues Rev. 22.18 19. But Infant-baptism is no where written nor expressed in all the Scriptures as Mr. Hall Mr. B. Mr. C. confess Therefore Reply 1. Some of your Queries are stated sillily e. g. 1 3 4 5 6. as is obvious to any 2. How can you suppose all to be granted when some are granted some denied and some in several respects being doubtfully propounded may be granted or denied 3. What a wide door do you open again here to Popery against justification by Faith onely For you say to do A N Y thing in matter of justification more then is expressed in the Word is an adding to the Word this is one of your dictates we must take your bare word without any offer of proof for it but if you make this out both you and I must fling up a great part of our Religion 4. As you pass again that dreadful doom on your self as well as on us so you be-lie in plain English those three Worthies who no where confess in their books that I can find that Infant-baptism is No where written in Scripture though they say It is no where expressed in Scripture which you miserably confound for want of wit or grace to distinguish SECT 7. H. H. Thus I have answered to Mr. Baxters Ten Positions which saith he p. 3. must be necessarily understood before we can understand the point in hand So that if these Positions are not true then the rest of his book cannot be true by his own confession Now if I have fully answered the one I need say but little to the other c. Reply 1. How this comes in by head and shoulders I know not Thus after a long digression he closeth The Reader must not blame me in following the Wild-goose-chase I must follow my leader except into an hors-pool 2. Whereas you say if you have sully answered these Positions you need say but little to the rest of Mr. Baxter's Book I assume But you have not fully answered these
found so much strength that after you had cast a squib you run away like a coward â—ut for all that he hath reached you such a back-blow which you cannot claw off SECT 3. H. H. p. 88. Nay to give him his Argument again Infant Baptism is utterly inconsistent with the obedience to Christ's rule First because there is neither precept nor practise for it as he grants Secondly because by their Rantizing or sprinkling of babes they make the command of Christ of none effect Mat. 7.7 8 9. and Mat. 15.8 9. Thus they bind two sins together and in the one they shall not go unpunished Reply 1. If giving be granting you do well to give it him 2. The first reason of your retortion is but the Cuckoes song M. Baxter hath been so far from granting it that he hath abundantly shewed you both precept and example but you are so wilfully blind that you cannot see wood for trees 3. Your Third is both a meer Calumniation and a miserable begging the Question Infant-Baptism is neither a Tradition in your sense nor a making of Christ's Command of none effect in our sense as hath been shewed But I may not nauseate the Reader with vain repetitions as you do 4. If we shall go unpunished in the one I believe in the other too SECT 4. H. H. Whereas M. Baxter would make us offendors for nothing i. e. for not baptizing children in their Non-age I Answer First he can never make it a sin till he shew us what Command we have broken c. Secondly There is both precept and practice for baptizing men and women when they believe Mar. 16.16 Act. 8.12 and 10.48 Reply 1. Then it seems a swarving from an example in Scripture is no sin What if women should never Break Bread or receiv the Lords Supper is it not a sin since there is no expresse command for it and no example but by consequence Your Scriptures shall be spoke to anon if not heretofore 2. It hath been proved that you utterly mistake those Commands and examples for baptizing men and women at years of discretion unless you will make the parties parallel i. e. meer Heathens newly converted c. But I must not fall into the same crime with you of idle and senselesse Repetitions onlâ— let the Reader observ That I have orderly digested this page of yours which you had confusedly set down for the building of your Tower of Babel SECT 5. H. H. p. 89. His Third Argument is because the practise of baptizing children of Christians at age goes upon meer uncertainties hath no Scripture rule to guide it Therefore it 's not according to the will of Christ Answer Though this is the same in substance with the two former yet First our practise is guided by Scripture rule from the Command of Christ and examples of the Apostles Mark 16.16 Acts 2.41 and 8.12 37. Naâ— say 〈◊〉 your practise of Baptizing little babes goes upon meer uncertainties having no Scripture-rule to guide it c. Reply 1. I had thought to have said nothing to your charge on M. Baxter's chopping one Argument into so many pieces to multiply words Therefore I did not transcribe them yet I shall say this It seems you had surfeited of the other two Arguments And now your stomack turnes at the naming of this If you had no mind to multiply words you might have spared this Cavilling Preface Crums of truth are too precious to be lost and therefore since you will not understand the Loaves which have satisfied some Thousands Mr. B. did well to put his fragments into the basket d) part i. c. â— p. 150. by sending the Reader back to what went before 2. Though the Texts alledged by you have been Replyed to yet here your answer is both wide and weak If you mean of a Church to be constituted that 's nothing to the purpose Mr. Baxter's assertion is still true though that be granted and so your answer is wide If of a Church constituted and if you understand christians children at age then your instances out of those Scriptures prove no such thing because they were not the children of Christian parents and so your answer is weak 3. As your answer is impertinent so your return of M. Baxter's Argument is insufficient To deal roundly I deny your Minor viz. There is Scripture rule for Baptizing babes notwithstanding your impudent denying it as may be easily discerned by any who seriously and impartially peruse Mr. Baxter's Book or this Reply neither do you bring any Scriptures to prove your Minor but only this I SAY What arrogancy is this in you to obtrude an opinion on the world upon your bare word Could you perswade me that Pythagoras was a Dipper and that his soul had transmigrated into your body I would allow the Haggarens as well as the Pythagoreans an IPSE DIXIT he hath said it and that 's enough Do you think to carry your cause against the evidence of Scripture practice of Antiquity consent of Fathers continued custom of the Churches strength of reason upon such a pitifull proof as this is I SAY How long is it since your confidence hath amounted to an Infallibility I therefore must make bold your premisses being thus routed to alter your conclusion Infant Baptisme is according to the mind of Christ notwithstanding Mr. Haggars I SAY 4. Because I would not have Mr. B. to be in your debt for the return of his Argument I return you an Argument from one of your Scriptures e) Mar. 16.16 cited and from your own principles For although you are not so rigid to damne Infants and exclude them from Heaven yet you excommunicate them out of the Church cast them out of the Covenant c. Here I argue They who may be saved without actuall Faith may be Baptized without actuall faith But Infants specially of believing parents may be saved without actuall faith therefore they may be Baptized without actuall faith The Minor you grant The Major I prove thus If faith be as necessary to salvation as it is to Baptisme then they that may be saved without faith may be Baptised without Faith But the former is true Therefore the latter The consequence of the Major is evident from the words of the text f) Mark 16.16 where the same stresse is laid upon faith to salvation as to Baptisme And the Minor cannot be denied unlesse you will have admission to Baptism on Earth more difficult then to blessedness in Heaven and make it an harder matter to be Baptized then to be Saved I leave you to unty not to cut this knot SECT 6. H. H p. 89. 90. His sourth Argument is Because the practice of Baptizing Christians Children at age necessarily fills the Church with perpetuall contentions as being about a matter that cannot be determined by any known rule Answer But the Baptizing of men and women when they believe is a matter that can be and is
them which cannot be understood and improved without skill in Rhetotorick specially the knowledge of Tropes and Figures is necessary least men affixâ— monsters on the Scriptures as the Anthrapomorphits Transubstantiaries and Consubstantiaries do There is the strongest reasoning and arguing therein and excellent method which cannot be rightly discerned without skill in Logick In a word there are none of the Liberal Arts no part of genuine Philosophie but may be useful and helpful for the more clear and solid understanding of the Scriptures Indeed these Arts and Sciences the Scriptures do not professedly teach but presuppose in those who will be expert in the word of righteousness 6. Must not those gallant Monuments of Learning and piety antient and modern lie without use as to us and be utterly lost as some of you have burnt all your books save the Bible if we have not Learning Indeed you may think it no loss but scorn us for using them though in our private studies yet sure it is great unthankfulness to God and those his instruments pride and sloth in our selvs and injury to the Church if we should wave such helps for the understanding of the Scripture and the state of the Church in several ages and places And tell me what do you think of this your book whether learned or unlearned let others judg Is it worthy to be read or no If no To what purpose was all this waste if yea how can it bee read and understood without humane Learning Though there are a thousand of books besides more worthy to be read then yours Nay the blessed Bible it self is wrested by them that are Vnlearned 2 Pet. 3.16 7. How could you have attained to any knowledge of the Scriptures of which you boast with the Jews Rom. 2.17 18 c. without the help of Humane Learning or have read them translated without it or heard them read as some of you know not one letter in an English Bible without it For I pray is not the learning of the A B C a point of humane learning And yet I am sure you cannot read the Bible without the knowledge of the Letters And if to be able to read and write English be a good gift of God though a small piece of humane learning sure much more to be able to read and understand the Scriptures in some good measure in the Original Languages Nay how could you hear of Jesus Christ and know the meaning of those learned words without humane learning The one being an Hebrew i) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word signifying a Saviour the other a Greek word k signifying Anointed 8. Doth not this inveighing against Humane Learning proceed from a three-fold spring Dominus noster Jesus qui liberat nos à peccatis morte inferno Schind Pentaglot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. From Carnal Lusts Jesuites and Satan 1. From Carnal Lusts as 1. Pride which as it is usually accompanied with and cherished by ignorance for such as are proud know nothing 1 Tim. 6.4 but doat about questions and the most knowing the most humble Psal 19.13 1 Cor. 13.12 so who insult over Learning and Learned men more then the ignorant and unlearned Oh how sweet is it to proud Diabolical natures to sit in the Throne and make Learning stand Acts 25.16 as arraigned condemned and presently drawn to execution at their command Though this bee done but in your fancy yet it mightily pleaseth them But because Pride is scarce counted a Lust of the the flesh what say you of ease and sensuality They who have tasted Learning to purpose have found by experience that much study is weariness to the flesh Eccl. 12 13. and the work of the Ministry a painful work when men must give attendance to reading exhortation and doctrine meditate on these things give themselvs wholly unto them c. 1 Tim. 4.13 14 15 16. Now what an easie pleasant life have these who count humane learning so needless that they judg it dangerous and execrable You need take little or no pains for the instruction of the people Nay Mr. Haggar is not ashamed to say Take away humane learning and all men may preach as well as we nay better Is not this the singing of a Requiem But the lust of Covetousness and desire of filthy Lucre is another bitter root of this opinion and practice Though you have the cunning to cite Whore first who knows not that mean Artificers Day-laborers and broken Tradesmen who usually have large Parishes or rather Diocesses who say Sirs you know that by this craft we have our wealth Acts 19. ver 25. have got more by unlearned preaching or railing against Learning then by their Callings and if they follow them too they have two strings to their bow however they need not lay out their moneys on Books on their supposal Secondly from the Jesuits those Emissaries of the Prince of Darkness If the hand of Joab be not yet the head and hand of a Jesuits is in this though not discerned by all Jesuites and Pâ—â—â—â—s know well enough what deadly blows their Kingdom and cause hath received by the sword of the Spirit wiâ—â—â—d by Learned Arms I mean the tongues and pens of 〈◊〉 Learned as well as pious Champions which our Lord Christ â—â—th made usâ— of again and again to rout the Antichristian forces But in decrying Learning and Universiâ—ies you carry on the Jesuites design *) See Jus Divinum Ministerii Evangelii by the Provincial Assembly of London p. 62. c. Adam Conizen a politick Jesuite in his Politicks among other things prescribed for the reducing of Popery this is one To banish Learning out of the Common-wealth and that at once if it can conveniently be if not insensibly and by degrees And if you have not learned this subtilty of the Jesuite I pity you if you have borrowed it from Julian r) Speed's History p. 168. Primum vetuit ne Gaâ—iâ—ae sic Christianos â—umcupabat Poericam Rhetoricam aut Philosophiam discorent Theatot l. 3. c. 7. the Apostate who among other designs to root out Christianity forbad Christians the publick Schools and study of the Arts and Tongues Thirdly from Satan who hath a principal hand in this which I think needs no proof beside what hath been said but this His great design is to hinder the glory of God the Kingdom of Christ and the salvation of men he knows all this is done by keeping people from Christ that is done by keeping them from Faith that is done by keeping them from Scripture and the right knowledg of it This will be certainly done if prople be deprived of right Translations and Interpretations of Scripture which must needs be wanting if there be no Learning nor Learned men For it is as possible for people to see the letters and words wherein Scripture was written without open eies or to hear the sound of them without open ears as to understand the
AN ANTIDOTE Against HEN. HAGGAR'S Poysonous PAMPHLET ENTITULED The Foundation of the FONT DISCOVERED OR A REPLY Wherein his Audaciousness in perverting holy Scriptures and humane writings is discovered his Sophistry in Arguing against Infant-Baptism Discipleship Church membership c. is detected his Contradictions demonstrated his Cavils against M. Cook M. Baxter and M. Hall Answered his Raylings Rebuked and his Folly Manifested By Aylmar Houghton Minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Teacher to the Congregation of Prees in the County of Salop. 2 Tim. 3.6 7 8 9. Of this sort are they which creep into houses and lead captive silly women laden with sins led away with diverse lusts ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the TRVTH Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses so do THESE also resist the TRVTH men of corrupt minds reprobate concerning the Faith But THEY shall proceed no further for their FOLLY shall be manifest to all men as THEIRS also was Meritò debet esse nobis suspectum uicquid ab ANABAPTISTARUM officinâ prodiâ—rit quae tot portenta Fabricata est quotidiè Fabricatur Calv. Psychopannychia p. 476. LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhust and are to be sold at his shop over-against the great Conduit at the lower end of Cheapside 1653. To the truly honoured and his indeared friend the worshipfull THOMAS HUNT Esq Major of the Corporation of Salop. A praise-worthy Patriot and professed Patron of piety without respect of persons even of all that love the truth in Sincerity Whorthy SIR YOu may censure me for over-much boldness to set to you or use your name in this insuing Treatise for Patronage without your leave or licence but that is Plea sufficient that you did not know it if any danger or disgrace should befall it or it miscarry But the truth of Christ needs no defence for Christ himself will grace his own truth in and for his Saints that love it if they should hold their peace Sir I desire io know no man after the Flesh but after the Spirit and am determined not to know any thing here below but Jesus Christ and him crucified and with that spirituall eye do I desire to look upon you and love you and is the onely motive moving me to make thus bold with you Sir It is the Politick practice of impostors like cunning crafty masking mummers to hide their faces and rattle a boxful of Counters instead of good Gold Silver So these men wind in their erroneous doctrines and counterfeit opinions and then perswade poor silly people it is the pure truth of Jesus Christ And thus have they done with some of my people and by this means brought me upon this unpleasing work constraining mee to shape an Answer to a wrangler and that only for the satisfaction of some of my people and reducing if possible some who are seduced and to confirm the rest in the truth of Christ they have been taught and the rather also because M. Haggar's Book was brought me by one of my own peopl but now a seduced Backslider who left it with me for this very purpose In which Book I find many absurdities falsities impertinencies and Scuâ—â—ilities of and against men better then himself but the Lord rebuke him It may be Sir you have heard of that Noble Moralizers Fable of Amphialus who was challenged to combate with Argalus a Knight of the Sun who when he was prepared with all his Military accoutrements to meet his enemie The wife of Argalus dress'd her self in her Husbands Armour and gave the onset to Amphialus and gave the first charge whom he encounters valiantly and overthrows with a mortall wound in the body But when he opened the Armour viewed his conquest and saw it was the wife of his enemy he could have no comfort of the day because it became not a man so to ruine a woman Such is my case in this work in hand The love of peace is glorious in the Church even among those that differ in opinion But if they wil pâ—â— on the arms of an enemy because they wilfully will be enemies with whom I am challenged to combate for the truth of Christ I cannot help it if they meet with a blow though I glory not in it But I am truly sorry that there should bee any such cause It is not for any evill to their persons but to give a mortal wound to their damnable errors Plutarch tells of Archidamus who being once chosen Arbitrator in a difference betwixt two persons brought them to the Temple of Minerva and there decreed that they should not depart thence till they were agreed I could desire that M. Haggar and his party would agree to come into the Temple of God and bee tryed by the holy Scriptures faithfully explicated and applyed In the mean time I leave it to your charitable censure and pray the favourable acceptation of this testimony of love and thankfulness that I owe and am not able to pay but in prayers for you and all yours who am Your humble servant in the Faith once given to the Saints AYLMAR HOUGHTON Prees From my Study July 12 1658. To the READER I Thought it meet if not my duty to give some account of these ensuing particulars 1. Why M. Cook 's and M. Baxter's Treatises have not been Vindicated before this time sith M. Haggar's Answer such as it is hath been extant and they therein challenged some years since These following considerations might sufficiently justifie their silence 1. The impotency and scurrility of that Answer as is manifest to all iâ—telligent Readers might be a sufficient confutation of it and render it unworthy of any Reply but silence When Rabshakeh rayled blasphemed threatned and boasted The people held their peace and answered them not a word for the King's Commandement was saying Answer him not Isa 36.21 2ly The littleness and almost nothingness of that Answer to those Treatises as will easily appear to the peruser though his work did lye here viz. fully to answer these Treatises which specially M. Cook 's by his Goliah-like challenges he had provoked to come forth to Vindicate the truth against him yet he vainly braggs in his Epistle and in the end of his Book that he hath answered both the one consisting of seven sheets and the other of sixty in eighteen sheets When yet I believe it will appear that not so much as is written in halfe a sheet of M. Cook 's Book hath been taken notice off much less answered to who could judge such a vapour as this a sufficient call to undertake a reply 3ly M. Cook and M. Baxter did not apprehend any of their respective Flock in danger to receive any hurt by M. Haggar's Answer which might be a call to appear against it nor indeed of any other till of late 4ly Their employment through God's mercy hath been so full in the work of the Lord although the Answerer charges all Ministers
Scriptures What horrible confusion and contradiction is this in you If the name of the Font be not once mentioned in all the Scriptures how is that Scripture fulfilled But of that a little more anoâ— 3. How dare you call the Font an abominable Idoll Where doth the Scripture so brand it if the namâ— be not once mentioned in Scripture 4. What a loud and lewd slander is this to say our children are sacâ—ificed to the Font as Israels babes were to Moloch Assurâ—dly Sir wee no more sacrifice our babes to the Font or Bason then you do your Proselites to a Marle-pit or Horse-pool wherein some of them have been dipt 5. I cannot imagine what should be the ground of such an absurd comparison unlesse it be to render us odious which I hope will never be to any sober judicious and unprejudiced Christian or to pave the way he being a Factor for Rome for some bloody or at least unbloody sacrifice SECT 2. H. H. Now seeing there is no Foundation for the Font in all the word of God we must if we will discover it seek for it somewhere else the which I confesse is not worth the doing were it not to discover and make manifest the folly of them that uncover it and guard it for Infants baptism and to that end I shall do it Reply 1. What no Foundation for the Font in all the word of God then you are much mistaken in saying i) Page 8 9. Here is the words of the Prophet Jeremy fulfilled 2. Since you confesse the discovering of the Foundation of it or seeking for it else where is not worth the doing your allegation I believe will not be worth the answering why then will you spend your time and labour about that which is like Jeremiahs Girdle nothing worth k) Jer. 13.7 3. Your secret gird at M. Cook and M. Hall is born with patience but this I must tell you your discovering of that Foundation will be but a discovering of your own folly 4. What need all this stir to what purpose is this waste Though my Reverend and Godly brethrens books have Font in the Title ye the main drift is not for the continuance of Fonts but of infant-baptism SECT 3. H. H. Look into a book intituled A view of the Civill and Ecclesiâ—sticall law written by Sr. Thomas Ridley Knight and Doctor of the civill law c. Who though an enemy to us yet confesseth p. 176. The Rites of baptism in the primitive times were performed in rivers and fountains Reply Here I earnestly desire the Reader to peruse M. Haggars quotation p. 8 9 10. or the Authour from whence he brings his quotation for either of them are too long to transcribe yet I shall not passe this tedious testimony without some brief Animadversions 1. Whether the Knight was an enemy to you it s more then I know or whether he was a friend to us is more then I am assured of only it 's well known men of that profession have been friends more to the Prelates then to the Presbyterians 2. You say where the persons baptized received that Sacrament but the Knight saith where the persons to be baptized stood up and received that Sacrament and prov'd it out of the Syriack Arabick and Hebrew languages which you very cunningly left out because your manner of Baptizing is apparently different from theiâ—e 3. You say and that truly Christ was baptized of John in the river of Jordan but the Knight saith our Sabaptized John in Jordan A foul mistake I conceived it was the Printers fault and I lookt into the Errata's but it 's not to be found there Now if the Knight did so grosly mistake here why not in the rest or most 4. You say nascentes ibi ecclesiae but the Knight saith Nascentis I lookt among your Errata's but find none printed it may be because all or most of your books is a bundle of Errata's 5. You say this custome of baptizing in Rivers c. being discontinued or left off Fonts were erected in private houses But the Knight saith discontinued those words or left off are of your own foisting in Therefore a man may say of H. H. l) Psal 36.3 he hath left off to be wise to be sure to be honest in setting down those words in the same character with the Authors as if they were the Knights And notwithstanding there is no great difference between discontinued and left off though circumcision was discontinued forty years in the wilderness yet not properly left off and an University man may discontinue there yet not leave it off and a mans ministry may be discontinued through sicknesse c. and yet not properly left off yet had you meant honestly you might have faithfully transcribed the Knights words without chopping and changing But perhaps you intended to set a fair glosse on your following observations SECT 4. H. H. pag. 8. Hence let the Reader observe 1. He saith the primitive practice was to baptize in rivers and fountains which the Antient Churches received from the example of our Saviour Mat. 3.13 14 15 16.2 He saith that was left off observe they left off the example of Christ 3. They erected Fonts in their own private houses Reply 1. The Knight doth not say the antient Churches but Church let the Reader observe your own transcript a little before in the same page 2. How Christ is said to be baptized in Jordan shall be scann'd hereafter 3. The Knight I tell you doth not say That was left off So that in stead of your observation the Reader may observe that you have not left off to mis-recite and pervert the writings not onely of men but of God himself as followeth SECT 5. H. H. Observe Here is the words of the Prophet Jeremiah fulfilled Jer. 2.12 13. Be astonished O heavens at this c. for my people have committed two evils They have forsaken me the fountain of living waters and they have hewen them out Cisterns broken Cisterns that can hold no water Even so these people did forsake baptizing men and women that did believe in rivers and fountains according to the example of Christ and Christians in the primitive times and builded them Cisterns which they call Fonts in their private houses to baptize babes c. Reply 1. You have professed your self to be ignorant of Greek and all that have any schollarship may discern your little skill in Latine m) Nascentes p. 8. and we look for exactness in the English but observe here Is not are the words of the Prophet Learn to write and speak better English 2. How miserably do you contradict your self you said but a little before n) Pag. 7. not a word found in all the holy Scriptures about baptizing in a Font nay not so much as the name of a Font once mentioned in all the holy Scriptures but it seems the name and thing is found and mentioned here how else can you
love not bitterly to retort 3. The rest who are Orthodox say no more then what you say that that your Adversaries generally confesse viz. There is no command nor Example literally Syllabically in express terms for Infant-baptism which is no advantage to your cause nor disadvantage to ours no more then there is for womens receiving the Lords Supper Family prayer c. before spoken to 4. You have dealt with some of their writings as Sathan did with the Scripture leaving out b) Mal. 4.6 with Psal 91.11 that which makes against you as he did what might make against him e. gr Calvin bringing in that objection that it s no where found that any one Infant was baptized by the hand of the Apostles answers c) Calv. Inst. l 4. c. 16. sect 8. That though the Evangelists do not expresly mention it yet infants are not excluded where mention is made of baptizing whole Families Acts 16.15.32 33. Ergo. Who but a mad man would conclude that they were not baptized If such Arguments were valid women in like manner should be debarred from the Lords Supper to which we do not READ that they were admitted in the time of the Apostles yet considering the scope and nature of those Ordinances it is evident that as women are to receive the Lords Supper So Infants aswell as grown persons are to bee baptized Eo itaque privari nequeant quin Dei Authoris voluntati fraus manifesta fiat i. e. They therefore cannot bee deprived of it but MANIFEST FRAVD or affront is made to the will of God the Authour Now M. Haggar do you and your party make a wise use of this Testimony you cannot but know that Calvin in the chap. fore-cited and elsewhere d) Inst Advers Anabap. Articl 1. proveth Infant Baptism from many Scripture grounds Again though Beza saith as you cite him yet a little after e) Beza in Mat. 3.11 he gives the reason why he translates not in water buâ— with water as we do and Luk. 3.16 with out the Preposition In least any should think there is some force in thiâ— particle as they do who are perswaded children are not rightly baptized except they be altogether dipt in the wâ—ter Where the Reader may observe that though John did baptize such as did confesse their sins c. Yet that makes nothing against Infant-Baptism And again more plainly f) Beza in mar â— 4 in Mark. though the place be not named by you where he saith seeing the Sacraments are seals Doctrine or instruction is to go before sealing He ads which you have left out There is no reason that the Anabaptists should catch at this against Infant-baptism for John had to do with grown persons and even then when Infants are baptized the word is not severed from the sign in the Church of God The Reader by this taste may guesse how M. Haggar hath dealt with the rest whom for brevity sake I passe by ex ungua Leonem So that now setting aside those that were challenged of Mr. Haggars Grand-Jury of 22 there are not left so many as will make a petty Jury of 12. unlesse you allow some of them to have three votes a piece as Luther and Bucer and some four as Zuinglius which is not reasonable SECT 15. H. H. pag. 17. Thus much out of those teachers own writings which observe and use childrens baptism from whence the Reader may take notice of the unsoundnesse of your principles and what little ground 1. There is for it in the word of God as they themsâ—lvs confesse 2. Therefore what great cause have we to search the Scriptures for better information let the sober minded judg Reply 1. I verily believe you never read the writings of those Teachers 2. I observe you mince the matter here and dare not call them g) as p. 15. our Poets but those Teachers c. 3. The Judicious Reader cannot infer from thence the unsoundnesse of your principles by any reasonable reasoning 4. A little before yea often you said we have no ground in the word of God for infant-baptism you now grant we have a little you begin to yield a little ground well done M. Haggar SECT 16. H. H. pag. 18. Moreover I shall further prove out of their own writings that infant-baptism is a ceremony and Ordinance of man brought into the Church by Teachers after the Apostles times and instituted and commanded by Councills Popes and Emperours Reply 1. Calvin in the place alleaged by you h) Calv. inst l. 4. c. 16. sect 8. saith that whereas the Anabaptists spread it among the simple vulgar that Infant-baptism was not known or practiced till very many years after Christs Resurrection in that i) Foedissimè◠mentiuntur they lye most filthily for there is not one antient writer that doth not for CERTAIN refer the originall of it to the Apostles times Sure your evidence must be clear to overthrow the confident Testimony of this pious and learned man and to prove it was brought into the Church after the Apostles times 2. You empanell here another Jury of 21. I desire again for brevity sake that the Reader would peruse them in your book I shall take if you will not allow the liberty in challenging as before First Erasmus is again challenged on the former account Though his words are They are not to be condemned that doubt whether the baptism of Infants were ordained by the Apostles which words evidently imply that it was their weaknesse to doubt and that it seems hee had other thoughts of those who did not only doubt of it but did refuse and oppose it 2. Are you not ashamed to call Pope Gregory the fourth Ecchius Cassander c. Our own Poets as p. 20 If this be not Poetical licentiousness I know not what is Nay from that Pope c. to conclude it is a Tradition of the Fathers according to our own confession 3. You begin with Origen k Hom 8. in Levit. who calleth baptism of children a ceremony and tradition of the Church It 's your unhappinesse to stumble in the threshold you had perhaps a mind to favour your dear Mother the Church of Rome For you might as well prove out of her 1. The obscurity of the Scriptures 2. The Canonicalness of the History of Susanna 3. Auricular confession 4. Purgatory c. Certainly l vide censuram quorundam Scriptorum veterum à Rob. Coco p. 71. m Pâ—oinde Homilias illas non esse magnae Authoritatis Bellarm de verb. Dei l. 4. c. 11. those Homilies are bastard writings And undoubtedly there is more ingenuity in your dear brother Bellarmine then in you who denies them to bee Cyrills as some were of opinion and dares not affirm them to be Origens but leavs it with a Nescio cujus m who every where destroyes the letter and frames out of his head mysticall senses and so concludes wherefore those Homilies are of no great
putting on Christ be a profession Then some Infants may professe Christ and so be baptized For if they be saved by Christ as you say surely they put on Christ as a garment i e. passively and so Beza renders it u) Christo induti fuisâ—is Bein Gal. 3.27 have been cloathed with Christ Now by your comparison little children may professe by wearing those garments to all spectators wherewith they are dressed by their mothers or nurses unlesse a little child is not a man contrary to Gen. 4.1 as before 2. What an evil surmise is this That we will own Mr. Baxters Doctrine though we cavil with the Scriptures For cavilling with and wresting the Scripture I leave them to you who are old-excellent that way Mr. Baxter I acknowledge to be a pious and learned Minister yet I own his Doctrine here and elswhere no further then it is agreeable to Scripture and I believe Mr. Baxter would not have it otherwise 3. It 's not evident either out of Mr. Cook 's mouth or yours that baptism doth constitute a Church or Church-member The eleven Apostles did put on Christ and yet we read not one word of their being baptized SECT 9. H. H. p. 25. You say that Baptism is a sign or pledge of peoples admission into the Church Well Then it follows that they are not in before to any man's sight and if not in the Church much less constituted and established Church-members Reply 1. That follows not e. g. The Sheep which a man hath bought may be known to be his before he set on them his mark which may further signifie their relation to him and his owning of them but that doth not constitute his right to them A Servant may be truly hired before he receive an earnest which yet doth not constitute him such a man's servant Abraham was in Covenant with God and known to be so before he was circumcised The Lord's Supper is a sign and pledge of peoples admission into the Church and yet were in it before which sufficiently declares the vanity of your Argument 2. In that you take Constituted for Established it appears pears you neither know what is meant by Constitution in its proper signification nor indeed what you your self means I thought at fiâ—st you meant by constituting a Church the giving of its first being but here you take it for Establishing Surely you might with better reason say That Chuâ—ches are constituted by the Lord's Supper for this more properly is a sign and seal of Establishment in the Church then Baptism is SECT 10. H. H. You say The Thief on the Cross was saved without Baptism I Answer We deny it not For he declared openly his Faith in Christ and owned him when he was disowned almost of all which shews he would have been baptized had he been at liberty Therefore the Lord accepting the will for the deed v) 2 Cor. 8.12 saith to him This day thou shall be with me c. But what makes this for the baptizing of Infants c. It proves that little babes might be saved though unbaptized for they can profess no Faitg nor confess no sin neither hath Christ required them to obey any command before they understand and believe the Gospel * Rom. 14.23 For whatsoever is not of Faith is sin But you say we do not rightly apply that Scripture and why Because it spoils your practice But doth not the word Whatsoever include all matters and duties wee owe to God Cannot the Scriptures be in quiet for you But because this offends you we will give you another x) Heb. 11.6 Without Faith it is impossible to please God Reply 1. In that you grant the penitent Thief was a Church-member and that visibly though unbaptized you clearly yield the cause viz. That Baptism doth not constitute a Church-member For what doth constitute a Church-member is necessary to the being of a Church-member But Baptism is not necessary to the being of a Church-member Therefore it doth not constitute The Major is clear by the nature and Definition of that which constitutes any thing the Minor you grant in the instance of the Thief and I hope you will not deny the Conclusion any more 2. You shew what a miserable Disputant you are in saying What makes this for the baptizing of Infants The question is not here about Infant-baptism but about constitution of Churches which you assert to be done by Baptism and that y) Font uncovered p. 1. book denies and brings this very instance which you deny not and therefore was very pertinent to the by question of constituting Church-members 3. M. Cook hath dealt more honestly with this Text then you have done with Jerem. 2.12 13. p. 8. and many more For hence we prove against Papists and others who hold an absolute necessity of Baptism to Church-membership and salvation that even Infants may be saved and must be owned members of the Church being born of Church-members though they die in their Infancy without baptism Thus you and they being of the same judgment are confuted together by this instance of the Thief 4. Seeing you grant that Infants by this example may be saved without Baptism I pray you consider whether it will not follow unanswerably To whom salvation belongs now to them the sign and seal of salvation belongs But to Infants you grant salvation belongs now therefore baptism also the sign and seal of salvation For it 's said z) 1 Pet. 3.21 Baptism saveth Again as the Thief on the Cross being in a state of salvation had a right to baptism so Infants of believing parents being in a state of salvation as you grant have right to baptism 5. Those Scriptures alleged by you are impertinent you do but still more pitifully intangle your self and abuse the Scriptures but not at all spoil our practice or judgment For though the word whatsoever a) As the word All is to be restrained to the matter treated of 1 Cor. 6.12 so is the word Whatsoever Mat. 7.12 and here also may be taken so as to include all sinful matters which cannot be done in Faith and so are sins and all external duties which though conjoined for the matter yet not done in Faith become sins in the doer yet the Apostle in Rom. 14.23 speaks most properly of things in their own nature indifferent which God hath neither commanded nor forbidden and expresly of meats yea such kind of meats as God hath left free to be eaten or forborn Now mark the vanity of your own reasoning Infants must not bee baptized because they want Faith for whatsoever is not of Faith is sin and without Faith it 's impossible to please God Like this Infants must not be fed because they want Faith for whatsoever is not of Faith is sin and without Faith it 's impossible to please God 2 The latter sentence in Heb. 11.6 is spoken of Enoch who lived long before Abraham and makes as
2.13 14 15. Tit. 3.1 1 Tim. 2.1 2. Rom. 13. Is not the Scripture full of these things and yet you do call for Scriptures Surely you read so many other books that you forget to read the Scriptures c. Reply 1. Mr. Baxter said The new Testament speaks sparingly of an Oath before a Magistrate War Sabbath c. not as if he held it made no mention at all of them as you would make others believe For if it speak sparingly it 's not a total silence 2. It seems you are not gotten yet into the highest Forme of the old Anabaptists s) Sleid. Comment lib. 10. Docent non licere Christianis foâ—o contendere non gereâ—e Magistratum nonjusâ—urandum dicere non habe c quod proprium sed omnia debere esse omnibus communia who denied a Christian Magistracy 〈◊〉 Mr. Baxter saith and you make no Apologie for them and an Oath before a Magistrate concerning which that place in the Hebrews speaks nothing and the lawfulness of War too I am glad you are not so high flown but how soon you may be the Lord knows t) 2 Tim. 3.13 for evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse 3. I appeal to your own conscience whether Peter or Paul when they wrote spâ—ke of Christian Magistrates in the places cited by you though we are bound to those rules since the Lord hath blessed us with Christian Magigrates 4. You bring us no Scripture in the New Testament for the Sabbath as you did for the other particulars mentioned by Mr. Baxter I might therefore draw â—s â—igid a conclusion against you as you do in other things against Mr. Cook Mr. Baxter c. but I had rather be a pattern of Christian charity then of groundlesse jealousie In this then either you subscribe to the main of Mr. Baxter's position or else you have said enough as to the Sabbath in your p. 13. as peradventure you imagine 4. As for the charge upon Mr. B. that he forgets to read the Scripture in reading so many other books and your counsel to lay them aside c. they are both unworthy of any answer The one savoring of Pride and uncharitableness the other of ingratitude at least for the labors of the Learned Onely Sir before I part I pray tell me if you had never read any book but the English Bible how could you have empanell'd two Grand Juries v) Chap. 5. sect 14. 16. consisting the one of 22 and the other of 21 as hath been said to serve your ends or have confuted as you think Mr. C. Mr. B. M. Hall c. And to what purpose was your book written if we must give our selvs wholly to read and â—â—â—dy the Scriptureâ— SECT 6. H. H. In your Second Position you say That the great difficulties of a point is no proof that it is not truth and a thing is not therefore to be rejected as not of God because it is not easie to understand You affirm also that multitudes of silly Ignorants do the same In all which I shall not oppose you Reply 1. I am glad that Mr. Baxter and you can hi◠〈◊〉 in any thing Here it seems you can shake hands and 〈◊〉 friends It 's well if it be not like Joah's â—iss 2. Will not any sober judicious Christian conclude from hence without breach of charity that you are one of thâ—se â—â—â—y ignâ—rants whom Mr. Baxter 〈…〉 or four lines following For because 〈…〉 noâ— spoken plainly in your sense of Infant-baptism therefore you neither believe it nor practise it SECT 7. H. H. You say If a subtil Pagan should come amongst the people and dispute that your Scriptuâ—e is not the Word of God and that Christ Jesus is not the Son of God he would silence them more â—hen the Anabaptists can do Answer Here Mr. Baxter rather siâ—â—th with Pagans and Atheists that deny both God and Christ and the Holy Scriptures then with those which are faâ—sly called Anabaptists Though we honestly owâ— God and Christ and the Scriptures and desire to plead nothing else for our practice for which cause he crieth out against us in his â—enth Position calling us bruit beasts and nothing 〈◊〉 because we call to him for Scripture to prove his practice yet now hee makes as if Atheists and Pagans had more to say for themselvs then we All which I leave to God and the impartial Reader to judge Reply 1. How dare you say without blushing that you are fâ—â—sly called Anabaptists if you truly say that you are baptized again p. 24. If you speak truly in one place you speak falsly in the other u) Chap. 6. sect 3. but this hath been hinted before 2. If you did honestly own the Scriptures you would not so dishonestly wrest them as Jer. 2.12 13. p. 8. nor so dishonestly play with them as Rom. 3.12 Isa 45.5 Joh. 1.20 p. 29. to say nothing of the Scriptures abused by you in this very 32 p. and many other in your book 3. It 's an unchristian charge that Mr. B. rather sides with Atheists then Anabaptists now truly so called When he pities or reproves with pity a multitude of silly ignorant Christians who are less able to answer a subtil Pagan about the authority of the Scripture and Deity of Christ then an Anabaptist about rebaptizing Are not those more difficult points then these present under debate What siding is imaginable in this Must Christ be said to side * Mat. 11.10 21 22 23 24. with Tyre and Sidon and Sodom rather then with Corazin Bethsaida and Capernaum because he tells them it shall be more tollerable for the former then for the latter in the day of judgment what blasphemy would this be 4. It 's a notorious untruth that Mr. B. calls you bruit beasts onely because you call for Scripture to prove his practice No but for renouncing reason or evident consequences drawn from Scripture which you do in the present case All which I also leave to God and the impartial Reader to judge SECT 8. H. H. pag. 33. Mr. B. speaks great swelling words of vanity viz. He will hazard all the reputation of his understanding on it that there is ten times more to be said for Free-will then can be said against Infant baptism yea it is twenty times more difficult and yet you offer to dispute it with any man and must it therefore be true Answ 1. As for the reputation of your understanding I will not say what I judge what it 's worth 2. If you had said There is ten times more to be said for Free will then for Infant baptism you had hit it right Lastly whereas you say Free-will is such a difficult point I am not of your judgment in that For I believ it 's easie to them that will understand to know that no man in or of himself without God hath any free will or power to think or do that which
miserable Comforter for when you have done you fall a railing on us calling us Sensless ignorant wretches that will call for express Scripture when we have your Consequences But I have told you already we dare not trust your Consequences Indeed Scripture-reason is good reason and it 's that we would have from you for which you call us ignorant sensless wretches Reply 1. It seems a just reproving in pity is a railing with you If so you are far-gone and very high-flown indeed 2. It 's your subtil sophistry to call evident Consequences drawn from Scripture Our Consequences 3. If Mr. Baxter say true and you do not disprove him that evident Consequences drawn from Scripture are as true proof as the very express words of a Text which you cannot but grant p. 12 13 14 you may trust them better then or as well as your own Consequences which you often bring SECT 38. H. H. p. 45. We call Scripture-reason written reason now if you would shew us where your reason is written in the Book of God the holy Writings the Controversie were at an end but till then you have done nothing But you might do well to inform the ignorant wretches that the holy Scriptures in English are holy writings And thus the people would know what you mean by Scripture-reasons i. e. written reasons Reply 1. If I mistake not here is a pure Socinian Principle viz. Nothing is written in Scripture but what is exprest in so many words Then farewell the doctrine of the Trinity justification by Faith onely trusting in Christ's satisfaction c. All which and many more particulars are not written in your sense in the book of God but written in our sense therein because drawn by evident consequence from thence 2. Christ saith Joh. 5.46 That Moses wrote of him m) Gen. 3.15 Deut. 18.15 which is true in our sense but Truth if self must have the Lye given him in your sense For there is not one expresse written word of Christ in all the book of Moses I mean the person of Christ God-man 3. We do inform the ignorant wretches as you advize us nay we have done it before you advized us and they do or may know that Infant-baptism is written in the Book of God as plainly as womens Receiving the Lord's Supper and those particulars mentioned in your pag. 12 13 14. Will you now stand to your word and say with Mr. Saltmarsh in another case An end of a Controversie SECT 39. H. H. You say we disdain reason and therefore not to be reasoned with and if we once renounce reason we are bruit-beasts and who will go to plead with a beast It 's reason that differeth a man from a beast c. Answ You put me in mind how lâ—ke one of your forefathers you are for to my best remembrance you speak his very words and I question not but if you had an opportunity you would do his deeds viz. Doctor Story to Mr. Philpot see Fox Martyr p. 1972. Reply 1. Mr. Haggar brings in a long story of Dr. Story his conference with Mr. Philpot the Martyr I desire the Reader to view either Mr. Haggar or Mr. Fox which for brevity take I cannot transcribe Yet I say truly that a Liaâ— had need have a good memory Mr. Baxter doth not speak Dr. Stories words This Doctor called Philpot a beast simply and absolutely M. Baxter calls you so hypothetically and conditionally if reason be renounced nay he includes himself as wel as Anabaptists on that supposition as you transcribe him IF WEE SECT 40. H. H. pag. 46. See how like your forefather Dr. Story you speak and behave you self or would do if you had but liberty You are children of one father whose works you do Joh. 8. ver â—4 Reply 1. No more like then an Apple is like an Oyster as they say the parallel is not right for beside the forementioned difference Dr. Story was a Papist M. Baxter a Protestant Henry Haggar an Anabaptist and railer Mr. Philpot neither but a meek Martyr That learned and godly Mr Philpot was no Anabaptist it's plain n) Sâ—e Fox vol. 3. p. 600. c. Anno 1555. for in a Letter to a fellow-prisâ—ner thus he writes The Apostles of Christ dâ—d baptizâ— Children And in another The Apostles baptized Infants since Baptism is in place of Circumcision In a thiâ—d The Apostles did baptize Infants and not onely men of lawful age And again Why do not these rebellious Anabaptists obey the Commandement of the Lord Mark 10.13 14 15 16 Now let the Reader consider whether you or Mr. Baxter is most like to that blessed Martyr and whether you are more like to Dr. Story if you had libertie o) Sleid. l. 10. your predecessors at Munster shew of what spirit you are 2. Guilt of Conscience make you fearful of punishment and uncharitably censorious of your betters who without vanity may say p) Mat. 23.9 One is our Father which is in heaven SECT 41. H. H. Where as you say we disclaim reason I Answer It 's but one of your false accusations we own all things written in the Scripture c. Reply 1. You disclaim the plainest and clearest reason deduced out of Scripture and so it 's no false accusation 2. If you did own all things written in the Scripture the Controversie were at an end as you say p. 45. 3. What perversness and partiality is this that you can own Women's Discipleship and their Receiving the Lord's Supper c. aâ— p. 14. as things written in Scripture and yet disclaim some Infant 's Discipleship Church-membership and Baptism which are written in the Scriptures of truth as well as the former and many other instances which might be given SECT 42. H. H. pag. 47. Mr. Baxter saith Do you think the Lord Jesus knew a good Argument or the right way of Disâ—uting Why how did he prove the Resurrection to the Sadduces from that text I am the God of Abraham c. Answ The Lord Jesus knew a good Argument and the right way of Disputing better then Mr. Baxter or my self or any man else I humbly confess to his praise and therefore I desire to make use of his words that he hath already spoken knowing that he hath reasoned and proved all things better then I can Reply 1. Then you grant that there can be no arguing from Scripture but by deduction for in all Arguments there must be a Medium and a Conclusion a Proposition and an Inference as appears by your own Arguments p. 63 c. 2. You grant as much as is desired that to argue by evident Consequence from Scripture is a right way of disputing as Christ's was Humbly confess this also to Christ's praise and join hands and hearts also with Mr. Baxter and say I shall think it no weak arguning which is like to Christ's nor shall I take my self to be out of the way while I follow him SECT 43.
as you use c. Nay 3ly you are hereby challenged to prove even by good consequence from Scripture that you have a regular call to preach and baptize I have not heard of any neither do I know that you ever undertook to clear it If your Call be extraordinary as Apostles Prophets Evangelists a proof from Scripture grounds is required of you and we shall own you for such If Ordinary as Pastors Teachers make it to appear according to Scripture-rule c) Acts 14.23 1 Tim. 3 to 8. Tit. 1.5 6 7 8 9. 1 Tim. 4.11 12 13 14 15 16. 1 Pet 5.1 2. and we shall rejoice therein If you cannot prove such a Call What boldness is it in you to cry down our Ministrie c. But they who will bring in a false Ministrie c. have held it their policie to crie out against the true SECT 2. H. H. p. 51. Mr. Hall saith p. 91. That the Scriptures are the chiefest strong holds of the Anabaptists and being pursued hither we run for refuge c. Answ It 's well they do so they are then sure and safe For Psal 119.89 Joh. 8.31 c. Reply 1. Let the Reader take notice that those Scriptures alleged by Mr. Hag. in the middle of this p. have been answered already I forbear therefore the transcribing and answering them least I be guilty of his usual crime Tautologie 2. It makes for the dignity and authority of the Scriptures that men of all perswasions who have owned the Scriptures for a rule have fled to them for shelter yet Hereticks and Schismaticks who have done so were neither sure nor safe but were found faulty even at the horns of the Altar as Joab was 1 King 2.28 3. Mr. Hall doth not blame you simply for running to the Scriptures for refuge d) See Mr. Hall's Font Guarded p. 91 92. but for mis-understanding and mis-applying them and so your running to them is in vain not onely as he saith but sheweth also by six Reasons which you take no notice of and the reason is because you could not frame a reasonable answer to them SECT 3. H. H. p. 52. Mr. Hall hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism as he himself confesseth p. 30. in his fifth Argument in express terms Infant-baptism is not commanded c. Reply 1. Heaven and earth may be astonished at your impudent charge viz. Mr. Hall confesseth he hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism 2. Lay your Argument right and it 's your absurd conclusion from his candid confession Thus He that confesseth Infant-baptism is not commanded expresly in Scripture hath never a word to run to for Infant-baptism But Mr. Hall confesseth so Therefore Sir your Major is false which may appear thus to the meanest capacity out of your own mouth The Christian Sabbath and Family-praier twice a day c. are not expresly commanded in the Scripture If I therefore should conclude Mr. Haggar hath never a word to run to for the Sabbath and such praier c. he would crie out that I wrong him For as Mr. Haggar brings Scriptures in his p. 12 13 14. to prove the same by Consequence so doth Mr. Hall prove Infant-baptism SECT 4. H. H. I shall now conclude with shewing ten undeniable Reasons why the Word of God must be understood and obeied as it is written without adding to or taking from I. Because God never without words made known his mind to men Heb. 1. ver 12. Reply 1. Your Reasons may be called undeniable as the Spanish Armado in 88. was called Invincible 2. If all these Reasons were granted yet none of them prove what you undertake viz. The Word of God must be understood and obeied as it is written 3. They conclude as strongly against you as against us who prove many points of Religion by Consequence from Scripture as well as we 4. They are impertinent to the main business and therefore not meet to be replied to but least you should crow I will give you a taste how easily they may be answered To your first If you mean of words written or else you say nothing it's false though it should be Heb. 1. ver 1 2. For God made known his mind to the Patriarchs long before his will was committed to writing e) Gen. 37 41. E. gr To Joseph read the Catechism with the Exposition you mention pag. 96. and you will find God made known his mind diverse waies without words To the third Were not those Scriptures the five Books of Moses wherein the doctrine of the Resurrection was written and might have been read by the Sadduces To the 9th it should be 2 Tim. 4.1.2 compare this with the beginning of your answer pag. 49. and here is another contradiction of yours To the tenth Shall the Heathen be judged by those words they never heard nor read I trow not Rom. 2.12 yet you say Christ will judg All Men by his words which terms All Men are not in Joh. 12.48 Do not you therefore passe that dreadful doom f) Rev. 22.18 19. on your self for adding to the Word SECT 5. H. H. p. 53. Lastly I shall propound these ten following Queries with a desire to have them answered by any who will or can Reply 1. You said pag. 52. I shall now conclude and here you come with your Lastly 2. These Ten following Queries are as impertinent as your ten precedent Reasons though according to the proverb a fool may ask more questions then a wise-man can answer yet I may warrantably g) Prov. 26.5 answer a fool according â—o his folly least he be wise in his own conceit and by the assistance of the Lord I shall answer briefly upon the former account Querie 1. Whether God doth require the sons of men to believe any thing in point of Justification that is not recorded in the holy Scriptures of truth Answ If by the sons of men you understand Infants you answer your self pag. 25. Christ hath no where required them to obey any command before they can understand c. Therefore not to believe But if you mean grown persons I answer If by recorded which yet is no Scripture word you mean contained in the Scripture as in your second and fourth Querie I say No. For the Scripture is the full adequate object oâ— Faith Therefore could the h) Rom. 10.9 word of Faith if you mean expresly written as in the eighth Querie I say Yes And I think you dare not deny that God requires of us to trust in the merits and satisfaction of Christ alone for Justification which is not expresly written in Scripture This instance may suffice among many Qu. 2. Whether God doth require or command us to obey any thing after believing which is not contain'd in the Word of truth Answ 1. If by contained you mean as in the seventh Querie in express terms you answer your self God doth command us after believing to give
persons you name in the next p. remained Anabaptists though they retained their errors in judgment or practice or both 3. Your citation of Luke is impertinent for it doth not appear that Christ spoke those words to his disciples or converted ones as Mr. Baxter is SECT 42. H. H. p. 109. But I suppose M. Baxter would make the world believe that the Anabaptists are all so now after they become Anabaptists and would make that the cause of it and would perswade the world that it is our principle and judgment But if M. Baxter had known any such in fellowship with us when he wrote his Book he should have done well to have named them Saltmarsh Hobson Williams are not in fellowship with us Eâ—bery c. are apostatized and cast out long since and returned to you again Dennis a penitent before his death it 's likely if ye had lived in Christ's days you would have cryed down him and his ways For one of his Disciples was a Traytor another a Liar and perjured The Corinthians after denâ—ed the Resurrection and were incestuous persons 1 Cor. 15.12 after Peter and others dissented c. Galatians 2. ver 11.12 Reply 1. M. Baxter's challenge remains for all this unanswered viz. Name one Anabaptist that is not blemished with some of these wickednesses lying treachery perjury disobedience sedition idleness desertion of their wives filthinesse As in nature the form gives the esse to the creature so in humanity the principles give a morall being to a man A man is what his principles are This being granted I argue thus They that are of seditious treacherous unclean lying c. Principles are guilty every one of them of some of these wickednesses But the Anabaptists are of such principles y) Dr. Featly his Dippers dipt p. 28 29 30. Therefore 2. Here is a poor shift of yours M. Baxter names more then you have set down and yet you say they are not in fellowship with you It may be there were differences among them and I partly believe it but were they not Anabaptists and maintained that opinion when guilty of those wickednesses M. Baxter charges them with 3. It 's a sensless thing to imagine M. Baxter should personally know these men whose principles which lead to such wicked practices he may and doth know by reading their Books 4. It will not follow there are none such because hee doth not name them are there no Cut-purses in London because hee cannot particularize them or perhaps not one of them A man may write knowingly of the nature of a Spaniell though he cannot tell how he is called An Anabaptist is idle seditious c. though I do not particularize the person How few of the Pharisees and Scribes did Christ nominate or of the Romans Paul Rom 1.26 to 32. Christ saith Ye shall know them by their fruits Mat. 7.16 not their names as you acknowledge p. 120. 5. It 's a very uncharitable inconsequence to say wee would have cryed down Christ and his ways had we lived then because we decry yours there is a vast difference 'twixt Christ's ways and yours We do not stumble at Peter's denial nor at Judas his treason c. we know tares may be among the wheat and grace mingled with corruption you would fain be creeping into sheeps cloathing but your paws still discover you I say your case is not Christ's nor his Disciples nor the Church of Corinths All Christ's Disciples did not deny nor betray their Master All the Church of Corinth were not incestuous persons though you were pleased to say there were more the Apostle mentions but of one 1 Corinth 5.2.13 neither were all the Corinthians Sadduces the Apostle speaks but of some 1 Corinth 15.34 35. But what is objected against you is not against one particular or some few persons but against ALL there is none of you but are guilty of some of those sins your principles lead you to them And therefore it was not blindnesse in M. B. to conclude your way none of God's way 6. Let the Reader Observe that you say you have cast out those mentioned and they are returned to us again The former shews they were of your Church the latter is a notorious untruth But M. Haggar comes from Vindicating his own pretended Innocency to sing the Cuckow 's song viz. To answer a fool according to his folly SECT 43. H. H. p. 110. I wonder that M. Baxter and M. Hall should reason thus against the Anabaptists when none are more deeply under the same condemnation then thewselves It 's strange they should complain of others for lying and are so notorious in it themselves for the very title of M. Baxter's Book is a ly Plain Scripture proof for c. and brings not one Scripture to prove either Reply 1. Bravely done M. Haggar you now again confute M. Baxter as he did Bellarmine as was said before Robin Bellarmine thou lyest But do not you lye when you say hee hath not brought one Scripture to prove Infants-Church-membership and Baptism I think I should bee justly accused of Lying If I should say M. Haggar hath not brought one Scripture to prove womans receiving the Lord's Supper Family-prayer giving thanks at meals c. 2. If here bee not a tacite confession that Anabaptists are Lyars I professe I cannot spell nor understand English only forsooth M. B. and M. Hall must be deeper in the bog then they 3. You do not make the least offer of proof that M. Hall is a Lyar and that charge against Mr. Baxter might have been spared if you had listned to that voyce Physician heal thy self Matth. 9. Do not you intitle your Book An Answer to M. Cook M. Baxter and M. Hall's when you have not answered any thing to most of their Arguments nor to any satisfactorily To say nothing of the former part of your title viz. The baptizing of men and women and prove to bee a standing Ordinance of Christ c. when there is not one Scripture to prove it SECT 44. H. H. Now for treachery let them remember M. Love who was beheaded for a Traitour and for Perjury it 's easie to prove most of the Priests of England perjured in renouncing the Bishops in their orders which once they took an Oath to bee true to and for sedition it 's manifest to all that hear them praying or preaching and for Idleness they know not how to work c. Reply 1. When you were on the Kings party I believ you would not have call'd M. Love a traitor I am sure those London Ministers who set forth som of L. books since his death have a better opinion of him then you have here If you were not partiall your Apology for M. Dennis in your p. preceding might more fitly and truly serve here 2. For Perjury to say nothing of your scornful terms when you have proved the Bishops calling and their Orders to be lawfull according to the Word wee will
confess our perjury till then you might have forborn this Calumny an unlawfull oath is voyd ipso facto it being a sin to make it it must needs be a greater to keep it It had been better for Herod to have broken then to have kept his Oath No Oath is the bond of iniquity And it 's false that our orders are renounced except by such as you are it 's maintained as a reall truth that Bishops did Ordain not as Bishops but as preaching Presbyters and though we have renounced Episcopacy yet not our Orders we see no need 3. For sedition the witnesses you produce for you are neither eye-witnesse nor ear-witnesse can prove you an accuser of the brethren Rev. 12.10 We do not use to shoot wild-fire from our Pulpits The Anabaptists are the sons of Bichri that blow the trumpet of Sedition How many seditious Pamphlets have of late been printed by them against the Lord Protector and present Government Is not their way of thriving by setting Church and State on a flame as if Salamander-like they delight to live In the fire their proper element What an Incendiary was John of Leyden This miserably divided Church can sadly witness what stirs they have made 4. For Idleness I wonder you are not ashamed to call us idle is there no calling but mechanicall no labour but Digging threshing c. Did the Apostle mean a trade when he said he laboured more abundantly then they all 1 Cor. 15.10 Or doth he mean carting and plowing or any handy-craft or civill imployment when he saith specially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine 1 Tim. 5.17 All are not idle that work not with their hands and if it be because the Ministerâ— live by Tithes of which anon by this Argument all the Priests of the Old Law must be Idle Drones SECT 45. H. H. p. same That the Anabaptists deserted their wives is a lye among the rest If you know any such why do you not prosecute them according to Law as you do your own Church-members But your tongues are no slanders and that I hope all men will shortly see Reply 1. It seems you cannot choose but breath out incivilities it becomes not you to give M. B. the lye but under favour it is no lye I will not instance again in John of Leyden If you have deserted her who was your wife then the charge is no lye if she be your wife still then you have more then one 2. If as you say our tongues are no slanders then their testimony as to this is truth and no lye Indeed our tongues do not slander you but your principles and practises justly accuse you And if you dare not act according to your principles the Law of the Nation curbing you yet we know not how soon you may be that in act which you are in judgment when you please A Lyon is a Lyon though in chains SECT 46. H. H. p. 111. Are not all the whores and thievs c. that are hang'd at every Assizes of your Church Did not you baptize them into it in their Infancy do you not give to the condemned the Sacrament on Sunday and one Church-member hang up another on Munday morning and yet are you so audacious as to say the Churches of the Anabaptists cannot be of God because they have corrupt members among them May I not say with Christ Mat. 7.3 4 5 Reply 1. I care not to throw a proverb on you They who are born to be hang'd will never be drown'd Some of you who have escaped the one when they have been dipped have met with the other at the Gallows h) See John Goodwiâ— catabâ—pt Admon to the sheep 〈◊〉 All then that are hanged are not of our Church And it 's observable that at the time of his execution for murther he confessed that from the time of his dipping he sensibly found God departing from him 2. Suppose all were of our Church Church-membership doth not exemt from civill government and therefore if some in our Churches fall into murder robbery whoredom c. why should they not be punished Indeed it is an Anabaptisticall i) Dr. â—â—atly p. 29 in Dippers dipt principle that malefactors should not be put to death and your words imply so much p. 27. But me thinks you should rather for this commend our Justice then condemn our Religion and Church your Arguing proves as much against the Religion and Church of the Jews when they were a Nation in Covenant with God 3. It 's false that they are baptized into our Church in their Infancy unless as our Church is a member of the visible Church into which properly they were baptized But suppose they were baptized into our Church in their InfaÌ„cy that is no such fault if they do not walk answerably to that solemn engagemeÌ„t the crime is theirs not that they were baptized Now to use your own Argument oft in your Book where there is no Law there is no transgression now there is not one syllable of a Law forbidding Infant-Baptism Therefore Infant Baptism is no sin 4. Let those who Administer the Sacrament to the condemned stand up and plead for it I know no such practice though I think it 's justifiable The penitent Thief might nay you say would have been baptized and why may not any other penitent malefactor receive the other Sacrament why should we reject them whom God hath received 5. We are not audacious in saying as you charge us but we are bold to say that it is not dis-proved by you that there is not one Anabaptist but is guilty of som of the fore-mentioned wickednesses you are therefore too bold in using or rather abusing the words of the Lord Christ for the beams remain in your eyes c. Matth. 7. ver 3 4 5. SECT 47. H. H. p. 111. to 117. To pass by the people le ts come to their Teachers for which end I refer you to a Book printed by Order of Parlament and Intituled The first Century of Scandalous and Malignant Priests c. among whom twelve are particularly named But I say with the Apostle in another case I have but acted a fools part in laying open their nakedness but M. Baxter and M. Hall have compelled mee accusing us of things which they cannot prove as Ananias and Tertullus did with Paul Act. 24. ver 1 2 3 4 5 6. with 13. Reply 1. All this and more is granted that there were more vile Ministers the shame of the Gospell then are named in that Book what doth this make against us Though Elies Sons were wicked yet the Israelites were the Children of God and if they were sequestred and according to your phrase cast out might they not upon their hearty repentance testified by som signall evidence be received again as well as your M. Dennis page 111 And if they be yet alive and have seen your Book there may be some hopes of their Reformation for
have them void of all humane learning Truly when I see the boldness and confidence of Mr. Haggar and perceiv that he is an unlearned and ignorant man I cannot but marvel 5. Thus all men to be sure judicious may see whether the Priests of this Nation as M Hag. scornfully calls them do walk contrary to Christ and his Discipes SECT 5. H. H. same p. Object Christ was able to teach them all wisedom and did give them extraordinary gifts for the perfecting of his work but now there is none such Therefore men must get abilities by humane learning Answer This is a gross mistake for we have nothing else to do but to believe and obey that Word which was by them preached when they were so endued with those gists aforesaid And now if any man preach he must preach that Word 2 Tim. 4.2.3 4. For that is able to do all the work of conversion and sanctification and to make us wise to Salvation c. 2 Tim. 3.15 16 17. See whom the Apostle accurseth Gal. 1.8 9. Therefore we are commanded 2 Thes 2.15 and Christ prayeth Joh. 17.20 Therefore they are the preachers by whom 〈◊〉 do believe and the Word is already preached that I must believe and obey Therefore no need of a little dirty humane learning to make a man a preacher of that which is so plainly preached already but every Englishman man declare it to his native Country-men and so may men in all Nations Reply 1. Here we have again some ropes of sand if that word must be preached which is able to convert sanctifie and save Then the preacher hath no need of Humane Learning 2. They are accursed that preach any other Gospel c. Therefore no need of Humane Learning 3. We must stand fast and hold the traditions we have been taught 4. Christ prays for all those that shall believe in him c. Therefore no need of Humane Learning Are you not ashamed of such absurd Arguings If you will not serve and Apprenticeship at either of our Universities I will give you twice so many years to prove the consequence you may delude your unlearned ignorant Proselytes but not us who can distinguish between a Syllogism and a Paralogism 2. What nothing else to do but to believe and obey that word which was by them preached must not I read and meditate on that word And must not you work at your calling in the week day or ride up and down the Country to make a Proselyte May not any man preach and declare the Word by your doctrine Nay why did you write print and publish this Book if you had nothing else to do but to believe and obey that Word c. If any of the particulars be expressed or implyed in that Word I would fain know how without Humane Learning the Scriptures could have been translated out of their Originalls into known tongues Suppose English or how you could have read and preached in English without Humane Learning but enough of this before 3. Me thinks I see you in Hieram's temper p) 1 K 9.13 who called the Land that Solomon gave him Cabul which word in the Phaenician Language q) Jun. Tremel Bercho of Humane learning saith justi â—ecipiunt docti respiciunt stulti despiciunt signifies displeasing and by some of the Jews it signifies Dirty So that Humane Learning which Christ greater then Solomon hath given to some of his Ministers is displeasing to you and therefore you call it DIRTY Learning in scorn and indignation No marvel it makes your folly manifest 4. Whereas you say any English man may declare the Word to his Country men and so may men in all Nations either you lispe in the language of the Quakers who cal even the holy Scriptures but a Declaration or if by declaring you mean preaching as in your page 64. women may preach or declare the mind of God to others then least women should want tongues by your doctrine men in ALL Nations may preach by virtue of M. Haggar's Ordination or Approbation CHAP. XVIII Of Infant-Baptism H. H. Secondly your Rantizing or Cozening of poor babes in their Cradles take away that and you have no Church But others who have Faithfully preached the Gospell and converted souls to the Faith and baptized them too in the name of Jesus Christ have a far greater Reply 1. How many crude Allegations do you here assert without any proof at all as that we Rantize babes nay cozen them nay in their Cradles c. all which are as truly denied by us as they are confidently yet barely affirmed by you 2. If baptism according to your Doctrines confuted be essentiall to constitute a Church then take away that and we have no Church but the Antecedent is false and therefore the Consequent 3. If by others you mean the Anabaptists I deny that you or they have faithfully preached the Gospell witnessed the many errours vented by them and discovered to be such in this book or that you have converted souls to the faith I never heard of an ignorant profane person wrought upon by your Ministry only you build on our foundation and gather where you never scattered subverting simple and unstable souls 4. How pitifully do you again contradict your self For if you have a far greater Church then we how is it that we have no Church If Goliah be a greater man then David doth that hold out that David is no man 5. I suppose you mean that Infant-Baptism is one of our pillars on which our Church stands The answer to the first may suffice here But whether Infant Baptism be according to the will of Christ hath been the main subject of this debate And therefore let the Reader compare your Answer and this Reply together and judge accordingly Only I will close with this This Pillar remains unshaken or is more settled by being shaken CHAP. XIX Of Tithes SECT 1. H. H. p. 123. Thirdly Your Tithes or forced maintenance The wages of unrighteousness 2 Pet 2.15 after which you all go astray take away that and wee may preach who will for all you By which it appeareth you are all Hirelings and will labour no longer then you are payd for it neither do you care for the Flock any longer then you are paid for it by all which you make that old Papisticall Proverb good upon your selves viz. No penny no Pater Noster So say you all in effect no mony no preaching c. Reply 1. If our Tithes be the wages of unrighteousness in the place cited by your corrupt gloss r) Numb 23.23 and 24. with Josh 13.22 a Soath-sayer or Magician The Prayers of them must be Balak's the receivers of them must be Balaam's then preaching must be cursing of God's people and what then must H. H. be who speaking with man's voyce Å¿) 1 Pet. 2.16 rebukes But 2. Our Tythes are not wages of unrighteousness neither doth the Holy Ghost call