are taught of God have the answer of a good Conscience professedly they would have a Right to the Ordinance of Baptism but this Logick will never pass the Schools My Child shall be heir to my Inheritannce ergo he is capable of understanding the signing and sealing of it at eight days old had you said he had been capable of understanding the sealing this Estate over unto him at One and Twenty it had carried more of Truth and Reason in it Why are Children denyed the Lords supper if fit for baptism what are Children believers and kept from the Lord's Table do we ever read it was denied to a true Believer what are Children New Creatures Regenerated Born again and deny them the Elements of Bread and Wine Oh! hard Father of Infants Men as wise as your self gave Infants the Eucharist for several hundred years from some of your own Topicks and will you deny it them all your long harangue about Infants being capable of one Ordinance and not of another is but wind will you say in the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper there must be inherent Grace and also Grace exercised but a state of Grace tho not exercised say you is sufficient for Baptism But how doth this Gentleman know Infants are in a state of Grace to qualifie them for Baptism the word doth not help him here and if he conclude so from Charity then there is the same reason to have the same Charity for Children of Unbelievers and more too some times because the Believers Child often falls from a pretended Covenant State Faith Inherent Holiness New Birth Regeneration when the Unbelievers Child abides in all Truly But how comes this Gentleman so bold as to Assert and Print That Actual Grace is not necessary to Baptism Did not Philip call for Actual Grace of the Eunuch before Baptism If thou Believest thou mayest How then can Persons be wholly Passive in Baptism Did the Eunuch go down into the Water and come up out of the Water Did Christ go almost Forty Miles to be Baptised and did it as an Act of Righteousness and yet wholly Passive If you can shew me another Bible where Christ since hath said Persons need not Actual Faith and are wholly Passive in Baptism I may change my mind Whereas he doth Magnify the Lord's Supper so much above Baptism I do Assert what ever is Sealed to a Believer in one Ordinance is Sealed to him in another nay there is more particular words of Incouragement added unto Baptism than to the other 'T is true 't is all comprehended in this This is my Body broken for you and my Blood shed for the Remission of your Sins but for Baptism in Acts 2. you have the promise of Remission of Sins and gift of the Holy Ghost In Acts 22. 't is said to Wash away Sins Symbolically Mark 16. Salvation is annexed unto Faith and Baptism the Lord's Supper was never so Dignified as Baptism by the Procession of the Holy Ghost and it is a Symbol of Regeneration and Justification Rom. 6. Do I see my Sins Pardoned my Person Justified God Reconciled my Person Sanctified Heaven assured at the Lord's Supper I behold the same in Baptism there I see my Sins Buried in his Grave as in the other Nailed to his Cross here I behold my Soul Washed in his Blood Justified by his Righteousness Saved by his Death and is not this a Marriage Feast And ought I not to have the Wedding Garment now as at the Table of the Lord BUT this Gentleman tells me I have Written several strange Positions I am not ashamed the World should see them You must know one of the first Arguments of the Church of Rome for Infants Baptism is That it Washt away Origional Sin Now because I say in opposition to that we know a better way to Wash away Original Sin namely The Imputation of Christ's Righteousness This is one of my strange Positions But pray which is most strange this or the applying all those Texts which speak of Regenerated Men and Women unto little Infants and what they speak of the necessity of Faith in them to apply it unto Babes who neither know Good nor Evil. 2dly ANOTHER strange Position is because I say That as Circumcision was the Door into the Jewish Church which was National so Baptism is the Door into the Gospel Church which is Congregational Now this being true in his own Opinion why should it be a strange Position Why Because I will not allow it came in the room of Circumcision Cannot I make two Doors to my House but one must be a Type of another Or rather Cannot I pull down my Old House and Build a New but my Door of my First House must be a Type of the Door of my last The Door of God's Gospel-House is larger than the Door of his Legal House that Door was only large enough for the Jews and few poor Proselyted Gentiles but the Gospel Door entertains all commers Jews Gentiles Barbarians Sythians So that the First Door could not be an Exemplar or Type of the Last Then only Males were Circumcised now Males and Females Believing may be Baptised therefore Circumcision could not be the shadow of Baptism the Subjects that enter the Door are not the same one are Ignorant Infants the other Persons of Understanding Under the Law the Subjects were wholly Passive but now Church Members must be Active in the Operations and Acts of Repentance and Faith not only those called Conformists but the Non-Conformists also have lost the Door and the Subject that should enter the Door for here are they wholly Passive when they should be Active so that the very Essence of the Ordinance is lost here is neither right Form nor right Subject and what are they that enter not in by the Door but climb up and come in some other way into the House READER consider whether this saying of mine be so strange as his which he hath put in two Mercuries shewing I was not the Author of his Book which I would not have been for the World He tells the People I was never guilty in Writing nor Preaching of any such Extensive Evangelical Truths Is not this a piece of Arrogance with a witness How hath he exposed his Profession and Name to the World besides he knows not what my Preaching is nor hath Read I suppose a third of what is written so that he speaks in the dark And whereas he saith I never was guilty of Writing or Preaching such things I hope I never shall Again Is not that a strange Position of his page 25. Because I say John Baptist required Matt. 3. of the Pharises and Sadduces Repentance from dead Works in order to qualifie them for Baptism and Gospel Church Membership every Tree saith the Text that brings not forth good Fruit is hewen down and cast into the Fire HE from hence concludes and tells the World that my judgment is That little Infants because
cannot help it It is either because he could not or would not Not because he would not for that would argue little warmth for his own way yea a kind of betraying his Cause I will conclude he is more true to his own Principle therefore some say Ergo in the Negative he could not but if he can the Press is yet open for him or any other and if he be conscious to himself he cannot respond to it let him fall in with the Counsel therein given AS for the Eight Queries they are reducible to Five because the 4th 7th and 8th are all of one import As for the major part of those Queries they affect not us only he makes a Man of Straw and fights with it or his own shadow 'T is certainly an Argument of profound Confidence for a man to pretend to the World the discovery of the Errors of a People whose Principles he knows no more comparatively than I know Vtopia or else why doth he begin with this question Whether it be possible for children dying in their Infancy to be saved But if it be not from Ignorance then it is from a worse Root for it 's apparent enough that he labours to insinuate unto the world as if we imagined no Infants dying in their Infancy unbaptized could be saved but if his Book were well considered he rather deserves Austin's Title the hard Father of Infants Now tho I know none of another mind but that Children must stand in the Day of Judgment before God's Tribunal yet his Topicks and Mediums I think are not sound to prove it by He quotes a Text which tells us That every person shall be judged according to his Works This Text cannot affect little Infants which have no Works good nor bad Was the Scripture written for the sake of Infants or the Adult Was not this written to the end Men should look to their Works that they might give a good Account It is well this Man is not the Peoples Eyes for if he were I fear they would be all quickly with him in the Ditch of Error What! because Rev. 20.12 saith I saw the dead small and great stand before God that therefore the Small here are little Infants The latter is exegetical of the former every one being judged according to his Works argues That the small are either the poor opposed to the rich in the world or those not come to the perfection of Men in opposition to them which were yet knew good and evil so were judged every one according to his Works Those in this Text are judged according to their Works but little Infants have no Works good nor bad therefore they cannot be here intended THE second Query is Whether Infants are saved by any other way than by Faith in the Imputed Righteousness of Christ In page 5. he asserts Infants are saved by Habitual Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ That Infants are saved by Christ we have asserted because we know of no other Name but Jesus but that they are saved by Faith Habitual Faith in Christ I must confess I never read it in all the Book of God I wish he could shew me the Chapter where Christ said any such thing That Infants are Saved by Habitual Faith What! would this Man make a New Bible have a new Rule to tell us of things never heard of Had he the Notion by Inspiration he should have told us so Now I do not wonder the man is so well pleased with an unscriptural Baptism when he asserts an unscriptural way of saving Infants and yet this Gentleman will adventure to prove this in such a way and by such Topicks and Mediums that both the Universities could hardly ever think of for he brings to make good this Thesis all those Scriptures which speak of the absolute necessity of the Adult of Men and Womens Regeneration and believing and applies them all unto little Infants as that in Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned We have not left out the latter part of the Words now for I remember the false charge But to this Text in Mark when Christ gave a Commission to his Apostles to go into all the World to preach the Gospel and to inform them If they believed and were baptized they should be saved but if they believed not they should be damned were they to preach this to little Infants That they were to believe upon the penalty of Damnation I do not say baptized upon the penalty of Damnation tho you have unwarily asserted some of us are like the Jews in Judea who asserted no Circumcision no Salvation so no Baptism no Salvation But to our business it seems Ministers are bound to go into the World and preach to Infants as well as the Adult that they believe upon the penalty of Damnation for this is the great Text brought once and again for Infants Baptism because they have faith but how came they by it was it by hearing the word preached according to the Commission in that place No no saith the good man 't is habitual Faith inspired Why then doth he bring this Text because he is almost at his Wits end and famished for want of Arguments and so will catch at any thing PRAY take one argument to think on before we go further If none are here intended in Mark 16. but Men and Women Capable to Hear and actually to Believe the Gospel of Christ then Infant Habitual Faith is not here intended but the former is true therefore the Latter you see the mans great Bullwark is thrown down at once It is a wonder to me that a man who hath been so long a profest Christian should be so long ignorant of the word of God what was the Scripture Calculated and written for to be preached 〈…〉 why then did he not carry his children when Infants to 〈…〉 saith no the Gospel was not written for Infants why then doth he bring that Text that hath no manner of relation to Infants but only to the Adult You are in the pound Sir get out if you can Then he comes with a home question But may some say how shall we know that Infants have habitual faith How shall we know it indeed for my part I cannot tell how I wish this Gentleman could ell me for he hath oftentimes asserted no Faith no Salvation neither for Old or Young But how do you think he Answers this question by asking another and as weakly answering it How do we know any children saith he are saved but by the Judgment of charity and some Scriptural Intimations Ah poor man this had been better in then out by some Scriptural Intimations pray give us some Scriptual Intimations that Infants have faith and we will say no more Your bringing a Prophecy of Christ out of the 22 Psalm 9 10. will not do it and though I give you all you can desire that it
THE ANTIDOTE Proved A COUNTERFEIT OR ERROR DETECTED AND Believers Baptism VINDICATED Containing An Answer to a Nameless Author's Book Entituled An Antidote to prevent the Prevalency of Anabaptism By HERCVLES COLLINS of Wappin LONDON Printed for William Marshall at the Bible in Newgate-Street where is to be Sold Mr Knowles's Exposition on the whole book of the Revelation price bound 2 s. 6 d. And Mr. Bunyan's Works in Folio price bound 14 s. And Mr. Claridges Looking Glass for Princes price bound 6 d And likewise most of Dr. Owen's and Mr. Beverley's Works MDCXCIII THE Preface to the Unbyas'd Reader WE live in a divided and opinionative Age and mens sentiments of things for the most part being as various as their Complexions Books have their Dooms according to the different apprehensions of their Readers Some Tracts have been applauded more for the Name of the Writers or Opinion they espouse than for any substantial Worth to be found in them Other are too often rejected and decry'd because their Authors are not of their Perswasion tho they have Plain Scripture the most Authentick Evidence for any Gospel-Doctrine or Practise to plead for them Some are the better treated for their Learned and Polite Styles tho they want that which should give them just recommendation namely Truth while Other which have it on their side meet with hard usage and that which is to be lamented from Good Men too because not set off with those Artificial Embellishments which gain so fast upon a Fanciful Generation that Rhetorical Paint passeth for true Beauty But if thou art such an One as the Preface calls thee an Unbyast Reader One who art fully and solely for God not regarding the Names or Writings of Men any further than they accord with the Revealed word of God if thou art free to receive Truth for its own sake and resolvest to hearken only to him that speaketh from Heaven then may it he hoped this Vindication of Believers Baptism will find a cordial Welcome with thee Thou canst not if thou hast read any thing be wholly a stranger to the Controversy about the Proper Subjects and Right Administration of Baptism between those that are for Sprinkling or Pouring of Water upon Infants and those that Dip or Plunge under Water the whole Body of Professing Believers only I do confess on the one hand 't is sad to consider what strife there is for Victory but on the other I rejoyce to see Christ and his Truth Triumph as they do in Believers Baptism Great has been the Opposition made against this Holy Ordinance but greater has been the Defence of it Every Age hath afforded some Testimonies for this Truth but now we are incompassed with a Cloud of VVitnesses Never was any Point more fully prov'd or better clear'd than this has been That one would think our Opposites should either alter their mistaken Practice or be wholly silent But since they still go on in their Error and cease not to argue against this Ordinance 't is necessary it should be guarded from the Attempts of its Assailants The worthy Author of the ensuing Discourse has Travelled formerly with good success in this Field of Controversy and now with no less against him who calls his Book An Antidote to prevent the Prevalency of Anabaptism c. Here thou hast the Cavils and Objections of the Adversary answer'd Infants or little Children prov'd to have no Habitual Faith the dissolution of the Old Covenant-State demonstrated and the Infants of Believers to have no Right as the Seed of such to Holy Baptism In a word the Antidote is throughly examined and proved to be a Counterfeit I shall add no more but my hearty recommendation of this Book to thy Reading desiring of the Lord that thou mayst so Read as to Understand and so Understand that thou mayst Practice London 20th of the 5th Month 1693. Thy Souls well wisher in the Lord our Righteousness Richard Claridge A Plain and Impartial Inquiry into the Antidote and upon Examination found a Counterfeit COULD any have expected less then that this Gentleman's Book in the Body of it should have answered the Title-Page namely Infant-Baptism Vindicated which indeed proves nothing but a Bravado and flourish for if it be Vindicated it must be either because Christ commanded it or some of his Apostles practised it some commended for its Observation or others reproved for its Neglect but not one word of all this appears in his whole Discourse Then how can Infant-Baptism be Vindicated Also he comes as short in the other part of the Title An Antidote to prevent the spreading of Anabaptism he means Believers Baptism Can he stop the course of the Sun the ebbing and flowing of the Water Can he number the Clouds and Stars or weigh the Wind and the Fire or the great Mountains Then he may answer his Title What! is this Man resolved to set himself in a posture of War against God and his Word Doth he think in this to prosper Will he endeavour to prevent the spreading of that which our Lord Jesus Christ hath given his Ministers in Commission to spread He seems to be grieved at our Translation of a Book concerning Baptism from English into Welch but if this be to be Vile we shall be more Vile What can be expected when a Man shall be an Advocate against the Truth HE tel's us of some few Reflections upon some remarkable Passages in a Book of H. C. of Wapping What should be the Reason this Gentleman did not answer that Book He hath not said any thing to the Argument of it but pickt a little here and a little there which he thought he could deal withal but the Argument of the Book is untoucht He calls them a few Reflections he may well call them a few for in 139 Pages he hath not spoken to as much Matter as Three Pages contain As for Argument in his Book it is so little that I was dead to the answering of it a long time not fearing his making many Proselytes to Pedo-baptism nor hinder the spreading of the Truth tho he did his Endeavour but the Book being so full of Scurrility base and abusive Language and he being as it is to be feared blinded with Prejudice when he wrote it could not see his Evil therefore these few Lines are intended in the room of an Oculist to open his Eyes to behold his Error in Judgment and Practice before he leaves the World I have in my Book laid down several Arguments to prove the right Mode or Manner of the Administration of Baptism to be by Dipping not Sprinkling and that the Subjects are to be Vnderstanding Believers not Ignorant Infants I have spoken to above 20 Objections but he doth not pretend to give the least Answer to either what should be the Reason that he did not take Paragraph by Paragraph and answer it fairly like a man of Sence and Reason Some are ready to argue thus and they
they cannot bring forth good Fruit must be cut down by the Ax of Divine Wrath and cast into Eternal Fire and saith I and my party are for saving Infants by and for good Works Did ever man speak more impertinently and wrong his Antagonist more unreasonably What cannot I speak to the Adult and say Vnless you Repent you shall all perish but I must intend Infants who are not capable of it and except you believe you shall be damned And when I say He that sows to the flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption but must intend Infants Surely the Doctrine of the Gospel was never Calculated for Infants these Lines of his must be Written through Ignorance Inadvertency or worse however it was he ought to do his Neighbour right by a publick Recantation and also of that in page 24. where he saith I smell rank of Rome Popery and Free Will because in my Book I give a reproof to the Seekers who put a slight upon the Blessed Ordinances See page 60 61 62. I little thought he would have been an Advocate for them As to my Judgment about Justifying Faith it is well known both from the Pulpit and from the Press but this is like the rest of his Writing who labours all he can to blacken the ways of God and render the Professors of it as odious as possible or else he would never have raked into the Grave of one Godly Minister who hath been Dead almost twenty Years He mentions several who have Apostatized from the Truth Judas being one of them Accumulates the Errors of some in Principles and others in Practice and jumbles them all together to make the name of a Baptist Odious nay Publisheth one particular passage of a Faithful Minister of Christ wherein he supposed some Weakness tho there was none who is now Living and an Honourable Person in the Church of God whom he calls a Pastor of a Congregation page 49. And because we with hold from Infants what Christ would not have given them he tells the World we make no better of Infants than Dogs page 11. That we have Crafty Positions uncouth Glosses that we mince and limit the Fundamental Doctrine of Mans Salvation page 48. Doth he not acquire the name of an Exquisite Calumniator when he tells the World Some of them are Arminians some Socinians some gone back to Judaism others of them Gormandizers page 51. Now Courteous Reader consider what dreadful work should we make in the Church of God if we should Preach and Publish in Print the Errors of some of the Pedo-Baptists both in Principle and Practice but while we are Mourning under the Evil of others I hope we shall not fall into the same our selves He endeavours to make those Hearts sad God would not have made sad by Misrepresenting our Opinion to the World as if we held no Baptism no Salvation and that we account all Babylon and none of the New Jerusalem but them of our Opinion and very streight in our Love and Affection Is not this the Man David speaks of That Travelleth with Iniquity Conceived Mischief and brought forth Falshood Remember remember John Child whose chief cause of Desparation was his speaking and writing against those very People of God you now do NOW I come to your Challenge in your Book page 12. I Challenge all the Anabaptists in the World to produce but one plain Text of Scripture either in the Old or New Testament from Gen. 17. to the very last of the Revelations to prove that ever the Children of Believing Parents were cast out of Covenant by any Authority from God and then I will Submit unto them MY fear is this person is so prepossest that all a Man can say tho never so much to the purpose it will not be regarded however because he hath made so fair a promise we will try if we can make him submit but pray Sir do not Answer this Book and these Arguments as my first Book for I expect a full Answer if you Write YOUR demand is That we prove Infants In-covenanting and the priviledges Children once had with their Parents repealed THEREFORE that the Covenant of Peculiarity made to Abraham and his Natural Seed as such is Abolished I prove from these four or five Arguments following laid down in so many Enthymems Argum 1. THE Natural Branches are broken off Ergo Childrens visible Incovenanting is Repealed the Antecedent of this Enthymem is cleared from the Apostles Assertion Rom. 11.19 20 21. The Branches are broken off By the Natural Branches without Controversy is to be understood the Natural Seed of Abraham and the breaking off must either be meant from a Visible Church Membership and External Priviledges thereunto belonging or the everlasting Covenant of Grace it cannot be the latter because that Covenant is Immutable therefore it must be the former God shewed Zachariah the Prophet Chap 11.10 14. upon a Prospect of the Jews Unbelief in the Messiah and their putting him to Death that he would take his staff of Beauty and his staff of Bands and break it to signify he would break the Covenant he had made with Israel and Judah who until this time were accounted the only Visible People of God in the World tho now the Partition Wall is broken down and all the Gentile Nations in the World are with the Believing Jews all one in Christ Hear worthy Mr. Cotton on the Covenant page 15. John Baptist's Ministry saith he did burn like an Oven against all the Scribes and Pharises and left them neither the Root of Abraham's Covenant nor the Branches of their own good Works Matt. 3.9 In the Preface to Dr. Owen's True Nature of Gospel Church he saith God took that numerous Progeny which came from Abraham's Loyns to himself in one Visible Body and Visible Church Membership The whole Nation being the same Politick Ecclesiastical Body saith Mr. Tombes which Church state was only Carnal as their Ordinances were but saith the Preface when God had divorced that People Abolished their Mosaical Constitution by breaking their Staff of Beauty and Bands then he erects his Gospel Church calls in Disciples by his Ministry forms them into a Body and furnisheth them with Officers so that this Covenant is taken up by the Roots and the Natural Branches broken off none excepted but the Natural Branches which remain so by Faith in the Messiah and so they broken off may be Grafted in again but until then they remain broken off ergo the Visible Incovenanting of Infants is Repealed for they could not be broken off the Everlasting Covenant of Grace therefore it must be the Covenant of Pecularity made with Abraham Arg. 2. NONE are Christ's Disciples but such as take up his Cross and follow him ergo Infants are not Disciples and so no Visible Members of a Gospel Church The Antecedent is fully proved from our Saviours Assertion Luke 14.26 27. If any man come unto me and hate not his Father and